I have been trying to write this post for days and every time I get to it there has been some additional speech or statement made on comprehensive immigration reform, but statements, speeches and sound bites don’t policy or practice changes make. Where do the recent statements come from different parts of the U.S. Government intersect and where do they differ and most importantly where do they accurately deal with the reality of the millions of undocumented?

Last week, More than 60,000 people joined a call & held more than 1,000 house parties across 45 states, to listen to 3 members of Congress including the headliner, Congressman Luis Gutierrez. Under the Reform Immigration For America campaign umbrella, tens of thousands people mobilized directly via a new cell phone action network.

The call was titled the Families, Freedom and Faith call. Peeps know la Mala isn’t a jump on the bandwagon type of chica until I learn more details. What families? Whose faith? Healthcare reform has shown us what and whom are the first to be sacrificed in the name of legislative compromise. Pero the intro to the new legislative champion of immigration reform, Luis Gutierrez, focused on his civil disobedience. Is the immigration reform movement ready for some direct street action? That remains to be seen. What Gutierrez did say was that he wants to have immigration reform bill ready in December and that he was going to make it happen on behalf of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. The focus of that bill will be to create a pathway to legalization for those who came here to work hard and help the United States, not harm it. Those that came to the U.S to seek a better life for themselves and their family would have an opportunity to EARN their legalization (emphasis mine). Part of earning status would mean background checks, paying taxes, and learning English. There would be a 21st Century approach to enforcement and the bill would be supportive of labor of all stripes and deal with future flow of workers in a real way, based on economics and labor needs and not a partisan political way. The bill would also include the DREAM Act.

Congressman Raul Grijalva from Arizona, who was also on the call specified that the focus needed to be on saving lives since people are dying crossing the border, dying in detention centers, dying while waiting for asylum. Grijalva also stated that part of the message that needs to be sent in this next phase is that Obama made a promise to deal with immigration and he needs to keep that promise.

Here’s what wasn’t mentioned in the call last week: 287(g), LGBT families, and the very fact that living in the shadows/living in fear, earning below a living wage, and dealing with xenophobia isn’t enough to prove worthiness.

So how is this different from other approaches to immigration reform already on the table, namely what Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said in her first press event focused on immigration, two weeks ago?

Napolitano offered the three-legged stool approach to immigration reform:

“Let me be clear: when I talk about “immigration reform,” I’m referring to what I call the “three-legged stool” that includes a commitment to serious and effective enforcement, improved legal flows for families and workers, and a firm but fair way to deal with those who are already here.”

As Secretary of Homeland Security it’s not surprising that the emphasis is on the enforcement leg of the stool. From the introduction of her as a speaker to the very end, enforcement with a capital E was the floor upon which the three-legged stool was placed. Separated families and the hardworking immigrant narrative is given a nod but the focus is protecting the country, not protecting lives.

We all know the story: A steady influx of undocumented workers, crossing our borders illegally in search of work and a better life. A market among employers willing to flout the law in order to hire cheap labor. And as a result, some 12 million people, here illegally, living in the shadows—a source of pain and conflict.

It is wrong. It’s an affront to every law-abiding citizen and every employer who plays by the rules.

Like the Administration’s other priorities, when it comes to immigration, we are addressing a status quo that is simply unacceptable. Everybody recognizes that our current system isn’t working and that our immigration laws need to change. America’s businesses, workers, and faith-based organizations are calling for reform. Law enforcement and government at every level are asking for reform. And at the Department of Homeland Security, we need reform to do our job of enforcing the law and keeping our country secure.

While Gutierrez and other members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus talk about the changes that have happened that make the time now for immigration reform they discuss the shift in Congress and in the executive, plus recent polls that show that the majority of voters in the U.S. want immigration reform. When Napolitano talks about the changes. she touts walls and border patrol growth.

I know a major shift when I see one, and what I have seen makes reform far more attainable this time around.

For starters, the security of the Southwest border has been transformed from where it was in 2007. The federal government has dedicated unprecedented resources to the Mexican border in terms of manpower, technology and infrastructure—and it’s made a real difference.

Last March, the Obama Administration announced a Southwest Border Initiative that has increased the resources the government is dedicating to combating drug cartels, and the smuggled cash and illegal weapons they thrive on. The Departments of Homeland Security, Justice and Defense have dedicated unprecedented resources to this initiative. This includes additional inspection and surveillance technology, as well as hundreds of personnel specializing in fields like inspection, intelligence and prosecutions. At DHS, we started screening 100 percent of southbound rail shipments for illegal weapons and cash—for the first time ever.

Compared to last year, seizures in all categories—drugs, smuggled cash, and illegal weapons—are up dramatically. For example, just looking at bulk cash, Customs and Border Protection has seized at the border more than $34 million in cash being smuggled southbound so far this year—more than four times as much as at this time last year.

Moreover, the immigration debate in 2007 happened during a period of historically high levels of illegal entry into the United States. Two years later, because of better enforcement and the current economic circumstances, those numbers have fallen sharply. The flow has reduced significantly – by more than half from the busiest years, proving we are in a much different environment than we were before.

These are major differences that should change the immigration conversation. In 2007, many members of Congress said that they could support immigration reform in the future, but only if we first made significant progress securing the border. This reflected the real concern of many Americans that the government was not serious about enforcing the law. Fast-forward to today, and many of the benchmarks these members of Congress set in 2007 have been met. For example, the Border Patrol has increased its forces to more than 20,000 officers, and DHS has built more than 600 miles of border fencing. Both of these milestones demonstrate that we have gotten Congress’ message.

Napolitano does mention 287(g) but instead of it being a problem, it’s seen as a victory.

We’ve revised and standardized our immigration-enforcement agreements with state and local law enforcement to make sure that these agencies are effective forcemultipliers in our efforts to apprehend dangerous criminal aliens. We’ve expanded the Secure Communities program, which identifies illegal aliens being booked into local jails. Yesterday, we marked the end of the first year for this program, which is being used by 95 jurisdictions and has identified more than 111,000 criminal aliens.

We are hearing two different approaches to immigration reform and are expected to believe that they will work together. In the absence of the bill from the Hispanic Congressional Caucus we won’t really know what will be negotiated out or rather who among the undocumented will be sold out or how. And I don’t mean this as a criticism of Gutierrez’s efforts. Ok well maybe I do, a little. What it reflects is how problematic it is looking for reform in the hands of a government system that doesn’t value the lives of Latinos and immigrants in general save on a surface level, enough to get votes.

In the meantime, the immigration system as it stands now looks more like Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s approach.