Currently, it appears that comprehensive immigration reform may die in the US House at the hands of the GOP.
It may be that the House will be unable to pass any form of reform, or will make the House version of immigration reform unacceptable to the Senate. However, the debate in the House may very well spell the end of the Republican Party as we know it.
The anti-reform stance found in the House GOP is one that is not shared by a majority of Republicans, nor is it shared by the Senate. In fact, it is a stance that is increasingly focused on pandering to the most extreme fringe of the Republican Party.
Republicans in the House not only represent many districts with small or non-existent numbers of minorities, but they must face the danger of being "primaried" by conservative groups that have made it known that they oppose any form of immigration reform.
Indeed, many of these individuals owe their current position to conservative groups. This has made it increasingly plain that House Speaker John Boehner has become incapable of leading the GOP in the House, making any deal he may attempt to forge irrelevant to the larger debate.
In the short term, this is a politically realistic, if self-centered policy. House Republicans have far more to fear from right-wing primary challenges than they have to gain by cooperating on immigration reform. However, in the long term, this course does not simply set the Republican Party at odds with demographic changes in the US, but betrays a deep pessimism among these individuals about the GOP's future.
The demographic changes are obvious: Even ignoring an influx of Hispanic voters due to immigration reform, non-white voters are becoming increasingly important in the electorate, and that trend will both continue and accelerate.
This would be harmful enough if the GOP's opposition to immigration reform was purely pragmatic, but many conservatives have used language that shows a racial hostility to Hispanics.
What is worse, however, are the outright statements on the part of many opponents of the bill that immigration reform represents "free votes" for the Democratic Party.
The fact that the path to citizenship conferred by any possible immigration reform would take years to come into effect makes one thing plain: Such fears represent a belief that the GOP will never be able to make inroads among Hispanic voters.
In many cases, this fear is dressed up in thinly veiled racist language, arguing that any new citizens will be "takers," wedded to government assistance and the Democratic Party. This helps make the prophecy a self-fulfilling one, as minorities are unlikely to vote for a party that so openly despises them.
It is the Republican Party that has played a major role in alienating Hispanic voters. Hispanic small business owners represent one of the fastest growing parts of the economy, while many Hispanics, especially new immigrants, come from socially conservative backgrounds.
To claim that these groups will forever more march in lock step with the Democratic Party is a deeply racist and foolish assertion.
Today, the GOP, especially in the House, is perceived as being completely under the thumb of is most radical and least representative members.
While blocking immigration reform may satisfy the House Republicans' local constituents, it will eventually spell the end of the Republican Party as a viable national alternative to the Democratic Party.
House Republicans must understand that their current stance is one that is incompatible, not simply with the long-term interests of the nation, but the long-term health of their own party.
Immigration reform reflects a fundamental question about the Republican Party's willingness to accept the existence of an increasingly diverse US.
In order to ensure their viability as an alternative to the Democratic Party, House Republicans must find the courage to accept this vital reform.
The author is a freelance writer based in Corona, California. charlesgray109@gmail.com