The Democrats are uniting behind new messaging on immigration reform. Acknowledging that the right-wing restrictionists have bested them in the public and policy debates on immigration, the Democratic Party and its allies are desperately seeking to reframe the immigration crisis on their own terms.

With new language, they hope to win popular, bipartisan support for immigration reform in their own terms. This reframing is readily apparent in the party’s new immigration platform and in the recent pronouncements of pro-immigration organizations.

Framing that identifies and interprets the core reasons for the crisis while pointing to its solution is badly needed. But the new Democratic Party framing is contorted and compromised, conceding much ground to the law-and-order restrictionists while at the same attempting to expand party support within the expanding immigrant community.

It’s a messaging that is shaped by in-house polls and political calculation rather than by common sense, political vision, or a real understanding of citizen anxiety.

The party doesn’t back away from comprehensive immigration reform that includes legalization for illegal immigrants. But it has substantially toughened the language over the last two platforms of 2000 and 2004.

As if by rote, it includes the standard language about America being “a nation of immigrants.” But the party also strikes a harsher stance than in the past. Trying to please all tendencies, the Democrats say that immigration reform should be “tough, practical, and humane.”

Instead of offering an “earned path to citizenship,” as it has in the past, the party is now proclaiming that illegal immigrants will be required to obey the law-- with the emphasis on the verb “require.”

“For the millions living here illegally but otherwise playing by the rules, we must require them to come out of the shadows and get right with the law,” states the party’s platform. “We support a system that requires undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, pay taxes, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens.”

Several of the planks will surely please the pro-immigration forces, including:

“We must work together to pass immigration reform in a way that unites this country, not in a way that divides us by playing on our worst instincts and fears.”

“We need to crack down on employers who hire undocumented immigrants, especially those who pay their workers less than the minimum wage.”

We also need to do more to promote economic development in migrant-sending nations, to reduce incentives to come to the United States illegally.”

But there is also new enforcement language not seen in previous platforms. The platform states,” We need to secure our borders, and support additional personnel, infrastructure and technology on the border and at our ports of entry.” Similarly, “We need additional Customs and Border Protection agents equipped with better technology and real-time intelligence.”

And in a sign that universal employee verification is only a matter of time, the platform committee acknowledges that if employers are to be sanctioned for their hiring practices, then “employers need a method to verify whether their employees are legally eligible to work in the U.S., and will ensure that our system is accurate, fair to legal workers, safeguards people's privacy, and cannot be used to discriminate against workers.”

The Democratic Party is determined to gain the full support of the Latino community. It is sponsoring or supporting a massive voter-registration and voter-education campaigns among Latinos and especially the immigrant community. It is, therefore, unwilling to touch the politically sensitive issue of further limiting family reunification visas.

More immigrants mean more Democratic voters. As the platform committee states: “We should fix the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy that hampers family reunification, the cornerstone of our immigration policy for years. Given the importance of both keeping families together and supporting American businesses, we will increase the number of immigration visas for family members of people living here…”

While broadening family reunification certainly qualifies as “humane” and undoubtedly is politically beneficial in securing immigrant family votes, it appears to fall short of the party’s own criteria of being “tough.” It may be practical in terms of building a Democratic constituency. But at a time when calls for more limits on immigration are increasing, this family unification plank seems impractical in terms of winning broad support for a new immigration policy.

It’s a platform that is strikingly different than the 2000 and 2004 immigration platforms in its new “rule of law” posture, although it retains some of the immigrant-centered positions.

In 2004, in a nod to the then reigning security framework of the war on terrorism, the party promised as it worked to ensure that undocumented immigrants “have a path to earn full participation in America …we will work with our neighbors to strengthen our security so we are safer from those who would come here to harm us.”

In 2000, the party said, “Family reunification should continue to be the cornerstone of our legal immigration system.” And “we support restoration of basic due process protections, so that immigrants are no longer subject to deportation for minor offenses and are eligible to receive safety net services supported by their tax dollars.”