Time for leadership

Immigration reform is a complex problem in need of innovative solutions. It is a problem in need of leadership.

So was welfare reform. By the late 1980s, federal welfare assistance was a broken and discredited program. Credible accounts of fraud, dependency and waste had eroded public confidence in what had been a well-intentioned social safety-net.

It was in this environment that Gov. Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin stepped forward to craft comprehensive reform for this ailing federal program.

By seeking appropriate waivers and latitude from the federal government, Wisconsin was able to experiment with "workfare" programs aimed at reducing dependency and fraud. Wisconsin's innovation became the Republican model for comprehensive welfare reform at the federal level that was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996.

Today, our nation's system for orderly immigration is in shambles. The violence at our country's southern border is alarming, as are the criminal networks that traffic in human lives, drugs, guns and false documents. Too many people of goodwill, who are seeking to improve their families' plight by working where there is a demand, are now caught up in abusive and shadowy activity.

Recently, many of Utah's community and civic leaders embraced a set of guiding principles to address the immigration problem known as the Utah Compact. The Utah Compact states prominently that immigration is first and foremost a federal policy issue. But it further urges "state leaders to adopt reasonable policies addressing immigrants in Utah."

Just as strong gubernatorial leadership in Wisconsin helped point the way toward path-breaking policy innovation that eventually provided nationwide reform in welfare, we believe that the moment is right for strong gubernatorial leadership in Utah to craft policy innovations that could provide a model for nationwide reform on immigration.

Gubernatorial leadership is required to capture what is best in the diversity of emerging approaches. Gubernatorial leadership is also necessary because, just as happened in welfare reform, meaningful innovation will require some negotiated latitude with federal rules. Such formal waivers would not eliminate a federal responsibility — they would formally acknowledge the federal role, seek proper approvals and create accountability on the part of the federal government that would have to sign-off on any plan. Because the governor would conduct such negotiations, the governor needs to be fully invested in the solution that emerges.