GOP Triangulation on Immigration?

The Washington Times this morning reports that the President has forged an agreement with key Senators on the core provisions of a comprehensive immigration bill. The central element is an amnesty - or 'earned legalization' - whatever you want to call it:

Bush, senators agree on alien citizenship, shut out critics
By Stephen Dinan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published April 26, 2006

President Bush and a group of senators yesterday reached general agreement on an immigration bill that includes a pathway to citizenship for many illegal aliens.
But left out of the closed-door White House meeting were senators who oppose a path to citizenship. The meeting even snubbed two men who had been considered allies of Mr. Bush on immigration -- Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican and chairman of the immigration subcommittee, and Sen. Jon Kyl, Arizona Republican.
Mr. Bush in brief remarks to the press said there was agreement to get "a bill that does not grant automatic amnesty to people, but a bill that says, somebody who is working here on a legal basis has the right to get in line to become a citizen." But senators, speaking afterward, said Mr. Bush was far more specific in the meeting.
"There was a pretty good consensus that what we have put into the Hagel-Martinez proposal here is the right way to go," said Sen. Mel Martinez, Florida Republican. "I think he was very clear [on] pathway to citizenship, so long as it goes to the back of the line, and he even opened the door here for something we've haggled back and forth on, that you can shrink the time for people to become citizens by simply enlarging the number of green cards."

I have to say though, I still don't see anything like this becoming law. Much has been made of the President's falling poll numbers. A key effect of this is that Members of Congress feel more comfortable dissing the President. In the House, there are lots of Republicans who feel that their political standing is helped greatly by opposition to illegal immigration. Indeed - they feel that it may be the just about the only thing standing between them and minority status. They are not going to vote for an amnesty. John Boehner has clearly been hearing from them:

Even as Mr. Bush is moving in that direction, the House majority leader yesterday rejected it.
"This idea that was being kicked around the Senate about providing some sort of amnesty for those who have been here five years or more, I just think it was a very big mistake," House Majority Leader John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, said yesterday. "You are just inviting more people to come."

Now it's possible that House leadership will ultimately bring up a bill that many Republicans hate, and pass it with Democratic votes. I still don't think that will happen, but it's possible. It will be the only way to get this compromise enacted, I suspect. There are likely to be dozens of Republicans voting against any such compromise; I'll guess somewhere around 50. Significant Democratic support will be needed.

I'm starting to wonder whether we are going to see a period of a few months where the President and the Republican Congress start to almost run against one another on a few key issues. Certainly conservative Republicans can tell their base that they differ with the President in their opposition to illegal immigration, their commitment to increasing petroleum supply, and their opposition to pork-barrel spending. The President can say that he is pushing a recalcitrant Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform, that he wants to see a greater commitment to ending our addiction to oil, and that he's willing to veto spending bills if Congress cannot control their big-spending ways.

Can each side benefit from using the other as a foil? I'm not sure. But they are speaking to different audiences. The President merely wants to get the focus off of Iraq and gasoline, and to raise his standing with independent voters. Republicans in Congress want to give their conservative base a reason to turn out in November, and to support them. For that reason, they might both benefit from highlighting their differences to their respective target audiences.

I'm not sure that this is going to work, but I bet it's going to happen.

Back to the top.