Times Says No

The New York Times's editorial yesterday against the immigration deal struck me as reasonably convincing, but I'm still not totally sure. It occurs to me that in a situation like this, it would actually be better if the paper didn't maintain a sharp divide between its reporting and editorial staffs. Lots of liberals who are in complete agreement about the immigration issue still disagree about the immigration bill because a lot of the disagreement is really about legislative tactics and alternatives. As Ed Kilgore says most of the impulse to reject this bill is driven by a sense that a better one could be achieved. But is that really true? It seems to me like it should be true, a priori, but I'd have a lot more confidence in the Times' editorial position if it was being informed by the Times's congressional correspondents who might be able to bring some additional information to bear.

This article available online at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2007/05/-em-times-em-says-no/40225/