Recent statements delivered by the United States President Barack Obama to BBC indicated that the attitude towards the immigration policy of the United States of America has been substantially modified (Reiff, 2013). The Republicans are vigorously advocating the idea that the reform shall be passed in order to drive those illegally residing on the territories of the United States to their homelands, whereas the Democrats are fervently favoring the opinion that the moderate approach is to be followed.
Announcing his opinion and political course, Barack Obama has aspired to reach a compromise between the two diametrically opposite political opinions. Firstly, he assumes that highly skilled and professionally needed specialists shall be given United States citizenship, especially those contributing to the development and growth of the Silicon Valley. The families shall be also provided with the opportunity to remain on the sovereign US territories, as well as the political refugees( Borjas, 2009). However, individuals who transgressed the borders of the United States illegally shall be subjected to deportations. This compromise proposed by Obama is twofold in its nature. On the one hand it helps to curtail the costs incurred by the United States budget to finance the presence of all the illegal immigrants. On the other hand it helps to maintain the democracy standards and to give opportunities to those, who have been deprived thereof in their domestic jurisdictions (David, 2009).
Political and Social Issues of US Immigration Policies
Historically, the first attempts to introduce such immigration bills have been done under the administrations of Bill Clinton and George Walker Bush. The gravity of the problem was then well-perceived, but all the attempts faced fierce Republican opposition both in the senate and in the House of Representatives as well. Relatively tangible outcomes have been achieved in the second quarter of 2012, with the adoption of the immigration policy laws submitted by the US President’s Office to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Bureau.
The political aim of the discussed article is to attract the attention of the United States and international politically active community and to increase the public awareness thereof. Moreover, such an extensive media campaign has been launched with the clear intent to reconcile the opposing political parties and to achieve some practical results in this long-debated area of political relations. Moreover, the it is evident that the article has been composed with the intent to solidify the political stand of the United States Democratic Party. The need to accomplish this task is clearly delineated, especially in the context of the recent decline in public support to the administration of Obama and his associates.
The message of this article is ambivalent. First and foremost, it seeks to increase the awareness of the United States and international general public, especially in the light of the United States internal immigration crisis rapid growth. It is clear that Obama is craving eagerly to intensify public support of his initiatives and to convince the Republican part of the United States Congress that the targeted policy will be beneficial for the development and incremental growth of the United States business and cultural institutions as well. Secondly, the article is well-structured and replete of considerably persuasive arguments. In particular, statistical evidences are attached to it in order to highlight the economic lucrativeness of the outlined reforms. The objective of this strategy is clear as well. Using this highly intricate and sophisticated tactics Obama is attempting to split the positions of the Republicans and to entice the latent supporters of the bill into the camp of the Democrats.
As far as the bias aspect of the article is concerned, it seems reasonable to highlight the fact that the article in question is almost politically unbiased. The only deviation from the codes of public speaking and political ethics is excessively favorable presentation of the Democratic Party contribution to the drafting of the bill. However, the repercussions of this article publishing have demonstrated that this ethical omission does not affect the positions of Obama negatively. Moreover, this element of the bias has escalated the political message of the article, making it more provocative for the targeted readers and hereby increasing the audience.
The article is rather objective in its nature, since all the data provided has been verified and was found to conform to the reality with 100% accuracy. The article is not sensational, since the debates over this issues have been unceasing in the US political institutions during the latest decades.
With regard to the managerial review of such policies, it seems relevant to highlight the fact that they can be considered beneficial for technically oriented industries, since the support of Obama is based on the backup of the technological immigration workforce, predominantly originating from China, India, Pakistan and Eastern Europe countries. Those enterprises using manual labor are also benefiting from this policy, due to the fact that manual labor of the immigrants is considerably cheaper than the one of the US citizens.
Overall, having recapitulated the main findings of this report it can be stressed that the article is highly provocative and relevant nowadays (Reiff, 2013). Most importantly, it highlights the development of the US immigration policies and speculates over the possible consequences of the discussed bill implementation. It is evident, that the objectives formulated by Obama before the article was published have been accomplished, owing to the fact that the opinion encapsulated thereon has been published in multiple other sources, hereby increasing the awareness of the public community.