After several years of hyperventilating about immigration, it seems politicians of various stripes are finally starting to understand that beating up on immigrants is not a winning strategy. We need look no further than the Republican presidential race, where those who advocated the hardest line against immigrants have fallen by the wayside. I am thankful for this, because in my opinion it could not have come soon enough.

In the immigration debate over the last several years, we have been forced to listen to thinly veiled xenophobia, nativism and outright racism disguising itself as mainstream law-and-order sentiment.

How many times have we heard that “it’s all about following the law,” but any action short of deportation is “amnesty”? It’s a strange exaggeration of the nature of the “crime” of coming to our nation in search of a better life.

A fanatical minority holds this and other extreme positions, like advocating the deportation of parents whose children are citizens. But until recent years, they were virtually voiceless. A few years ago, however, the media noticed the passions that this issue generated; and this extreme fringe was given a megaphone to blast their message across the nation.

Despite polls that held firm showing that the vast majority of Americans support a path to citizenship, the national debate has been distorted far from actual public opinion. Similarly, the congressional debate on immigration reform was twisted into an illogical immigrant-bashing exercise.

The first shift away from that style and tone came as the first presidential primary votes were cast. It rapidly became obvious that bashing immigrants was not a sufficient platform to boost a candidate’s ratings. The campaigns, both Republican and Democratic, clearly now know that harsh immigration stances will not win over voters.

There were warnings that this stance would be a non-starter for candidates much earlier than the primary season, however. In fact, a similar theme can be seen in the 2006 elections, where candidates running solely against immigrants lost in states across the country. But these lessons seemed lost on the zealots who kept hammering immigrants and the politicians fearful of being targeted by those same zealots.

So where is the immigration debate now? Though it is clear that it is not the much-feared third rail, it still is highly charged. Will a Democratic president be willing to touch this issue? Would a Republican?

I believe that neither party would be wise to shy away from this issue because they are fearful of an anti-immigrant backlash.

Instead leaders in both parties must work to create a path to citizenship. I subscribe to all the arguments about this being our nation’s historical policy, the belief that our economy depends on immigrants, and that as a matter of principle we must welcome immigrants. Clearly such a stand would be beneficial, if we judge by electoral results.

The experiences of anti-immigrant presidential candidates should be more than enough evidence for the leaders to see that there is very little to be gained from beating up on immigrants.

Regardless of Republican positions, however, Democrats must forcefully speak out in favor of immigrants. In doing so, we will preserve our historic role as the party of inclusion. We are the party of hope, compassion and opportunity.

Immigrants, who work every day amid great hardships to care for our children and our elderly, build our cities and pick our vegetables must be given the opportunity to become citizens of our great nation — and Democrats should lead the way. We must not be fearful of a small fringe, however loud their voices may be.

This backlash against immigrants is not new —previous waves of immigrants faced similar hatred and prejudice.

Despite the fears of some, they have always turned out to be a net benefit to our nation —becoming some of our best and brightest and contributing so much.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) often says that he’d “rather lose an election than lose a war.” I have a different take on that sentiment: I’d rather that we Democrats stood firm on our pro-immigrant principles and lose an election than pander and lose our political soul.

Serrano is a member of the House Appropriations Committee.