The story uses a insitutional frame pointing to the Obama administration as the one to blame for a lack of progress in immigration reform. Obama has promised to increase security at the border, but has not been able to change the image of the border as a war zone. Community workers and advocacy groups continue to work hard to create a more progressive enforcement strategy and to improve the situation as a whole. The work they are doing is admirable, considering they are taking things into their own hands rather than waiting for our government.

Social capital is effectively promoted in this piece as it also shows the bonding of communities getting together for a cause. After seeing that immigration is probably not on the top of Obamas list, community workers and advocacy groups joined together to come up with solutions and strategies for reform. Delegates from four states met in San Diego to brainstorm and share ideas, the fact that they share the same values and have unmet expectations they are willing to fight for shows the civic engagement they are prepared to take. This advocacy group wants nothing more than comprehensive reform and they show it well by attempting to bridge both sides of the issue to agree on a common ground.

I think this story promote social capitalism because it tells its readers about many problems surrounding the border. It calls attention to this problem and promotes political participation to encourage the White House to fix it. It already explains the efforts of many groups to help this problem, and how they are still working for their cause.

In this news article, there is a clear bonding happening within the social capital. This article is about how people were deceived and thought when Obama became president that immigration issues would be more settled and that the border enforcement would not be so intensely looked upon. However, now the border control is even more strict and immigration is seemingly impossible. Civil Rights campaigners, community works, and advocacy groups came together because they all were on the same side of the matter and they were extremely against the anti-immigration law. This is social capital because it is bonding between these groups and they came together for civic engagement to let their voices be heard.