Immigration: What is "progressive?"

Over on DailyKos I posted a diary criticizing Gov. Eliot Spitzer's policy facilitating the issuance of drivers' licenses to undocumented immigrants. I argued that uncritical support for such policies and an unwillingness to take objections seriously exposed a liberal blind spot that might cost a non-Republican presidential candidate crucial votes for the 2008 election. Predictably, my viewpoint was challenged. One respondent in particular emphasized that supporting the undocumented was the "progressive" thing to do.

"Progressive" is one of those slippery words like "liberal." Its meaning changes over time, since it is really a label rather than a substantive term. Just the same, it's worth noting that, approximately 100 years ago, unconditional support for undocumented immigrants would not have been considered a "progressive" policy. At least it wouldn't have been considered Progressive with a capital P.

100 years ago, we were in what historians usually label the "Progressive Era." This label covers the administrations of Theodore Roosevelt (1901-9), William Howard Taft (1909-13) and Woodrow Wilson (1913-21), although only Roosevelt, seeking a return to power in 1912, declared himself a Progressive. Like Taft, Roosevelt was a Republican as President, while Wilson was a Democrat. "Progressivism" crossed party lines and usually describes a greater willingness to claim regulatory powers over business for the government. On the social-cultural level, it involved an attempt to more closely regulate people's private lives. This included more aggressive attempts to assimilate or Americanize immigrants, an imperative that Roosevelt emphasized forcefully.

The 1920s are considered the tail end of the Progressive Era. During those last years, the U.S. government took dramatic steps to limit the number of people who could enter the country, and established preferences for countries of origin. A quick survey of history resources on the Internet showed that historians credit these laws to the Progressive Era generally, even though the Progressive Party (which flourished only fitfully, racking up electoral votes in 1912 and 1924) had little, presumably, to do with the legislation. We can assume fairly safely, then, that as recently as 80 or 90 years ago, the "progressive" policy was restriction and assimilation.

We shouldn't take this point too far, however. As political conditions evolve, the concept of "progressive" policies will evolve as well. Common sense tells us that the Progressive position of 1912, for instance, wouldn't necessarily be "progressive" in 2008. On the other hand, we might wonder whether there's even an evolutionary continuity of any sort linking the policies of 1912 or 1924 to policies advocated as "progressive" today. The impression I get from reading DailyKos is that it's "progressive" to be compassionate toward the undocumented. That begs all manner of questions about the direction in which the nation is desired to progress. Merely to be "progressive" tells us nothing about the direction of proposed progress. Rather, to label oneself "progressive" is to insinuate that there is only one reasonable direction of progress, so obvious that that you don't have to describe it apart from saying that you want progress. This is all a labored way of suggesting that when someone tells you that they're a "progressive," capital P or not, that they've told you nothing, and that when they say that "amnesty" for the undocumented or unrestricted immigration is progressive, you shouldn't be impressed.