I've been thinking about why these issues haven't produced a winder backlash and have 2 theories. First, most Americans do not interact with the immigration system - including the adjudicative parts - in the same manner as they do with the health care, education, and tax ones
As a thought exercise, imagine if the financial problems plaguing USCIS hit the IRS. There's no doubt that the public and Congress would push to address the issue and examine why the agency went into deep debt because it would impact a broader swath of the American public
Given that the Americans who interact with the immigration system like spouses and employers form a small group, USCIS' financial woes have a limited impact on the public. As a result, it's harder to get the public to care about this issue, especially in the midst of the pandemic
I also think the public hasn't criticized this move revolves around the perceptions that the immigration system is broken. Although the public is correct in this regard, I think that it makes them more likely to look at this issue and assume it's part of a broken system
As a result, the public may want a broader change than small scale reforms, which our own polling has shown when examining this issue. So if the public wants change, it may be more likely that they're not interested in small scale changes like this bit.ly/2CVpRGJ
The reality is that USCIS needs funding now. We're not in a position to wait for CIR to address this problem. That said, I think efforts to highlight this funding shortage that links this problem to the experience and wellbeing of Americans who may not interact with it regularly
I that framing nicely complements the ones that emphasize how these issues impact the lives of immigrants and individuals pursuing a path to citizenship. But I also think that's a frame that we need to use when talking about immigration writ large, so that's where the work lies
