Is Focus on ‘Illegal’ or ‘Workers’?

The Bush administration’s increasingly tough talk on illegal immigration is scaring some business allies and trade groups as it seeks their support for a broad overhaul of immigration laws.

Uncertainty about President Bush’s intentions has caused start-up problems for a business coalition created at the White House’s request to help finance promotion of changes to immigration laws.

Anxiety could rise when Bush and other administration officials step up their rhetoric after Thanksgiving. Some officials are calling December “Border Security Month.”

When Bush first outlined his immigration proposals in early 2004, he called for a guest worker program that would grant temporary work visas to undocumented immigrants already here and to prospective workers abroad, a top objective of businesses that rely heavily on immigrant labor. The president also called for a renewed crackdown on border security, a priority of immigration “hawks,” who form a large part of the Republican base.

But recently, a perceived presidential emphasis on border security has left many businesses worried about how committed he is to a guest worker plan, which they consider essential to any reform legislation.

“Businesses have put a line in the sand, if you will,” said Laura Reiff, an immigration attorney who is co-chairwoman of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce-organized Essential Worker Immigration Coalition. “We want to make it clear we don’t think enforcement-only is the way to go. It has to be comprehensive.”

The president’s perceived shift in emphasis has caused problems for the coalition the White House organized this summer, Americans for Border and Economic Security.

The group started with a fundraising goal of $3 million to promote the president’s vision of immigration reform, aiming to sign up companies and trade groups for memberships costing $50,000 to $250,000. It got few takers and has since reduced the price of admission to a minimum of $25,000 and a maximum of $75,000, according to people who have been approached by the group.

Key leaders of Americans for Border and Economic Security are former Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie, former Rep. Cal Dooley (D-Calif.) and former House Republican leader Dick Armey of Texas. Initial organizing sessions, held in the Washington offices of Gillespie’s lobbying firm, Quinn Gillespie & Associates, were attended by representatives of Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Microsoft Corp., Tyson Foods Inc., the American Hospital Assn., and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, among others.

A spokeswoman for Microsoft would not say whether the firm had joined the coalition. Representatives of the other organizations said they declined to join or had not yet decided.

Several other firms and groups contacted in recent days, including the American Farm Bureau, American Health Care Assn. and American Nursery & Landscape Assn., said they had chosen not to participate.

Most of those contacted said they were reluctant to join Gillespie’s group because it was not clear how hard the president would push for comprehensive overhaul or how soon the House and Senate would enact broad legislation. A few said they were also deterred by the high cost of membership or were already participating in the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, the advocacy group organized by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Another worry for businesses has been the lack of clarity over what type of guest worker program the White House will ultimately endorse.

In recent congressional testimony, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao said Bush favored requiring workers to go back to their countries of origin after six years. That is more strict than business-backed proposals to let undocumented workers remain in America and apply for citizenship after paying fines for having entered the country illegally.

With an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants comprising roughly 5% of the U.S. workforce, many businesses believe that attempting to make them leave would disrupt the U.S. economy, devastate some agricultural sectors and labor-intensive industries, drain government resources and require one of the biggest mass migrations in history.

“If you don’t provide some kind of accommodation, these 11 million people are not going to come out of the shadows but are going to remain underground,” said Dooley, who heads the Food Products Assn. “The United States is now their home, by and large. The overwhelming majority are gainfully employed, have families here and are making positive contributions to our economy. It would not be in this country’s interest to force them to leave.”

John Gay, co-chairman of the Chamber-organized Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, said: “Business continues to be concerned that there is no clear position on some very, very important issues from the White House. It does not want to be locked into a group that would support a White House position regardless of what business’ position is.”

Terry Holt, a spokesman for Americans for Border and Economic Security, said his group had successfully recruited members since the summer, but he declined to identify any by name or to specify the number of dues-paying participants.

Holt said the organization was not just a mouthpiece for the White House, and it would faithfully represent the views of members on issues such as guest workers. Still, he acknowledged that his coalition saw its primary role as articulating the president’s version of immigration reform.

“In a nutshell, after the president gives a major speech on immigration, there needs to be an argument made about what that means and why people should care,” said Holt. “We want to be the organization that offers that.”

Although many advocates of immigration-law overhaul insist publicly that they remain united, several business lobbyists and White House allies acknowledged that immigration had split the conservative coalition.

On one side are backers of a “holistic” approach that would balance tougher border security and interior enforcement with a guest worker program providing 11 million undocumented workers with an eventual path to citizenship that would not necessarily require them to move back to their countries of origin. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and many businesses back legislative proposals that take this approach.

On the other side are activists who want to crack down on illegal border crossings and workplace violations before considering guest worker programs. Many of these activists also oppose guest worker proposals that let undocumented workers stay in this country, proposals they consider a form of amnesty. Some want to require guest workers to leave the country after several years of working legally in the country, but some back legislation that would force undocumented workers to return home before they could even apply to be a guest worker.

The competing interests have put Bush in a political bind. If he appears soft on border enforcement and undocumented workers, he risks alienating immigration hawks who are part of the Republican political base. If he moves too far to the right, he risks alienating many businesses, Wall Street and Latino voters, whom the party has been courting.

The House appears poised to take up border crackdown legislation in December, leaving aside the issue of guest workers, possibly until after the 2006 midterm elections.

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who heads a House caucus that backs stiffer border restrictions, said immigration hawks were heartened by the president’s emphasis on enforcement.

“I certainly see a shift; that is undeniable,” said Tancredo, who has sparred with the White House over immigration policy. “I think we’re going to see in the next month a big push on this, where members of the leadership or the president himself will go down to the border.”

*

Times staff writers Janet Hook and Mary Curtius contributed to this report.