Bush Reaches Out, Falls Short

When then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush won nearly half of the Mexican American vote in his 1998 reelection bid, political analysts hailed his achievement as a victory for big-tent Republicanism. Less than two years later, when Bush swooped into July’s Republican Convention as the party’s presumptive presidential nominee, his campaign promised “un nuevo dia” in GOP relations with Latinos and other minorities. Once in office, his administration leaked word that the president might appoint White House legal counsel and Bush confidant Alberto R. Gonzales to the U.S. Supreme Court if a vacancy occurred. In 2001, Bush also declared that he would consider ways to legalize millions of Mexicans who had crossed the border illegally in search of a better life.

In the years leading up to this month’s immigration-reform proposal, Bush thus expressed an unprecedented willingness to broaden the base of his party. For that he deserves credit. But with a year left in his first term, it’s still unclear whether substance will replace symbolism.

The president’s immigration-reform principles were certainly aimed at increasing his Latino support. But they also offered something for the right and left. In proposing to allow undocumented workers to apply for temporary visas -- renewable one time before requiring workers to return home -- Bush played to the anti-immigrant crowd in his party. But in a wink to the left, he said the number of green cards available annually should be increased.

White House officials stressed that there was no “connectivity” between the two principles, which means the overall plan would not even begin to solve the nation’s problem of at least 8 million illegal immigrants living in its shadows. To do that, undocumented workers in the U.S. should be offered a way to earn permanent legal status -- after paying a penalty for illegal entry.

But bad policy doesn’t necessarily make for bad politics. Although angering the anti-immigrant right wing and disappointing the pro-immigrant left, Bush emerged as the compassionate conservative. His historic remarks acknowledging the positive contributions of Mexican immigrants, legal and illegal, may have helped to soften his -- and his party’s -- image among Mexican Americans. Furthermore, it will be up to Congress to take the vagueness out of the proposals. If the Democrats decide to cooperate with the president to create a workable bill, Bush will get the credit. If they don’t, the president can honestly say he tried.

Because there is room for improvement, it is tempting to say, as many have, that Bush’s immigration reform is a good start. And that would be true if any other Republican president had proposed it. Recall that in 1986 -- the same year the Immigration Reform and Control Act tightened border security and granted amnesty to 3 million undocumented immigrants -- President Reagan linked illegal immigration with the threat of foreign terrorism. In a televised address, he reminded Americans that “terrorists and subversives” in Nicaragua were “just two days’ driving time from [the border crossing at] Harlingen, Texas.”

Bush has admirably refrained from employing the time-tested GOP strategy of rallying the party’s base by stirring fear of the “other,” especially after Sept. 11, 2001. But he also hasn’t politically leveraged his national-security bona fides with his party’s right wing to make Republicans more appealing to minorities. By launching a debate on reform and including Mexicans in the nation’s immigrant mythology -- “They bring to America the values of faith in God, love of family, hard work and self reliance” -- Bush went further than any previous president. But given his history of outreach to Latinos and record of Mexican American support in Texas, which enabled him to credibly call himself a compassionate conservative in the first place, the president didn’t go far enough.

This doesn’t subtract from the importance of his remarks on Mexican Americans at this stage of their history. Mexican Americans are the battered spouses of American politics. Because they’re accustomed to being either ignored or maligned, it doesn’t take much to flatter them. A president praising the contributions of Mexicans to the United States encourages their desire to integrate and their acceptance by the mainstream.

Bush is no stranger to such rhetoric. As governor of Texas, he paid many visits to the border region -- which, in Texas politics, is synonymous with Mexican Americans -- and called it an asset rather than a liability. Relying on symbolism and his easy rapport with Mexican Americans, Bush became the first Texas Republican gubernatorial candidate to win El Paso County.

Bush’s success in courting Tejanos in 1998 helped garner him a remarkable amount of free press for his Latino outreach in his 2000 presidential campaign. In contrast to Vice President Al Gore’s tired appeal to ethnic grievance, Bush preached a message of opportunity and inclusion. He celebrated Latino gains and promised to work to add to them. As a result, Bush received 38% of the national Latino vote, two-thirds of which is Mexican American, a historic achievement for a Republican.

But what have Mexican Americans received in return for their support? In Texas, nothing of substance. Nationally, not one Mexican American in the Cabinet. And now comes the timid proposal for a guest-worker program and temporary legal status for undocumented workers. If a Supreme Court seat were to open up, and Gonzales’ name were not sent to the Senate, it would be hard to deny that Bush’s vaunted Latino strategy was little more than a big tease.

But like other American voter subgroups -- from women to Jews to born-again Christians -- Latinos consider ethnic outreach only one of many criteria used in deciding their votes. For example, a Pew Hispanic Center poll conducted before the president’s immigration proposal showed that Bush’s Latino support surged -- as did his overall approval ratings -- after the capture of Saddam Hussein. Still, for Bush to reach out to Latinos has the enormous benefit of helping to erase their memories of GOP sponsorship of racially charged anti-immigrant campaigns, which may enable more Latinos to vote Republican for reasons that have nothing to do with ethnicity.

But removing the tarnish of past political misjudgments and building a more ethnically inclusive party are two different things. Whenever a political party attempts to broaden its appeal, it runs the risk of offending its base of supporters. To date, Bush’s strategy has paid him dividends with Mexican Americans without his having to make any painful political choices. But if the president and the GOP want a permanent bump in their Latino support, they are going to have to move from rhetoric to results.