David Broder complained greatly about two things Congress did and did not do. The Senate did not pass immigration reform and the House scuttled GW's fast track authority on trade relations. David Broder whined that Congress caved to what "people want."
Isn't that exactly the definition of "representative government?" The time a so-called "journalist" complains that "the people's" wants and needs can actually be met by a representative government over and above the special interest groups they normally pay attention to; I'd have to say that "journalist" has gone over the deep end. Isn't a nation a people? Isn't what a people want what a nation needs? Not according to Broder. And implicit in Broder's editorial, the bottom line of the business interests is what the nation needs. Well now, maybe business interests need to get off their lazy butts and learn what it means to be competitive again. To invest in America that gave them the tools to earn profits. To invest in a labor force that is in fact their biggest customers. That is, instead of giving away our capacity for being leaders in technology and etc. to foreign countries. Surely, people who come here to be educated from foreign lands, can surely set up their own enterprises in their own countries. What makes us technological and etc. leaders is to remain on the cutting edge of invention, progress and innovation. Which won't happen as long as Singapore, China, Vietnam, etc. get the jobs. Broder makes it plain that he isn't thinking.
Now as to exploitable illegal immigration; had we enforced immigration laws since GW had been in office, and especially since 9/11/2001 and the dangers posed by truly open borders, would we be in need of "immigration reform?" No. But GW had never been interested in the enforcement of such laws even as Governor of Texas. Terrorism has most certainly been a fact since GW has in fact been a governor in Texas. The first attack on the Twin Towers in New York occurred while GW was getting ready to be a politician. Surely he should not have wished for open borders that would also open up real vulnerabilities to the dangers of terrorist activities. But yes, he did, both before 9/11/2001 and afterwards. Again, Broder is not thinking. As it is, exploitable illegal aliens are preferred because they can be regarded as practically the new slave labor class. Would GW's "reforms" have improved their situation as legal "guest workers?" If the "guest worker" programs currently on the books have enough loopholes now to drive a truck bomb through, there is no guarantee that "reforms" would be enforced as written in the future. Broder kisses GW's ass at every opportunity. When he finally gets his nose out of GW's butt, maybe he'll take a realistic view of the world.