Bush Hints at Broader Amnesty

President Bush said Thursday that the White House effort to confer legal status on millions of undocumented immigrants from Mexico might be extended to all others who are in the United States unlawfully.

“Well, we’ll consider all folks here,” Bush said in response to a reporter’s question. “Obviously, the Mexican issue is at the forefront. . . . But I’m open-minded. I’ll listen to all proposals that people have in mind.”

The president’s comments were his first on immigration reform since a high-level administration task force recently recommended that he consider ways to “regularize” the status of the 3 million to 4 million undocumented Mexican immigrants in this country.

Bush emphasized that he opposes a “blanket” amnesty--”The American people need to know that,” he said--while providing few details about who would qualify for new, legal status. Administration officials are considering several options for an immigration policy overhaul, including some sort of amnesty for undocumented immigrants and a new guest worker status that would legitimize many who entered the country unlawfully but which might stop short of granting full citizenship.

They have been negotiating with Mexican officials and would like to announce an agreement by the time Mexican President Vicente Fox visits Washington in early September.

The spotlight on Mexico has sparked broad concern among other groups who fear being left out of the plans. But White House aides said Thursday that the scope of the emerging plans was a matter still being considered.

“The president is considering various ideas about how to apply changes in the guest worker program and to whom those changes should apply,” said Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman.

Mexicans are believed to represent roughly half the U.S. population of illegal immigrants, which is estimated at 6 million to 8 million, and whose advocates are now gearing up for a political offensive on behalf of a broader amnesty. Some took heart Thursday at Bush’s remarks, which they saw as a significant step toward addressing the problems of all immigrants.

“To go beyond Mexicans and say there are other deserving immigrants who perhaps we should consider for some relief, this is a bold step,” said Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Assn.

A broader approach also has support on Capitol Hill, where many lawmakers now believe that the 1986 effort to overhaul immigration policy failed in its key objective of stopping illegal immigration. The flow of migrants has continued in large numbers despite employer sanctions that were supposed to stop it by eliminating the lure of a U.S. job.

When Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) earlier this month urged broader options to legalize immigrants from nations in addition to Mexico, his remarks sparked near pandemonium at the national conference of La Raza, the large Latino advocacy group.

“He went through a whole list of countries, and people rose to their feet cheering,” recalled Cecilia Munoz, the group’s vice president for policy. “As a practical matter as well as a substantive matter, it doesn’t make any sense to limit this to people of just one nationality.”

The administration task force, headed by Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, has been meeting with senior Mexican officials to develop a bilateral immigration reform plan for the summit between Bush and Fox.

White House aides stressed that no decisions have been made. Among the issues facing Bush are whether participants will be eligible for permanent residency and full workplace rights, including the ability to change jobs and join unions.

Bush said Thursday that, although he opposes blanket amnesty, “I do believe, though, that when we find willing employer and willing employee, we ought to match the two. We ought to make it easier for people who want to employ somebody, who are looking for workers, to be able to hire people who want to work.”

He added: “And I know we can do so in a humane way that treats people with respect.”

If adopted, the administration task force’s recommendations could be the biggest change in U.S. immigration policy in 15 years. But such an effort also could split the Republican Party, whose many conservatives are vehemently opposed to policies that they believe reward illegal immigration. And organized labor, a key Democratic constituency, has traditionally opposed amnesty for illegal immigrants, but the AFL-CIO last year dropped that long-held view.

The president left many questions unanswered Thursday, such as whether a guest worker program would lead to legal residency for all those affected; whether the immigrants would be given preferential treatment by worker specialty, family ties or some other criteria; and when he might act.

“We’re at the beginning of a long, complicated, contentious debate,” said Frank Sharry, head of the National Immigration Forum, an advocate for immigrants and refugees.

Immigration experts maintained Thursday that the emphasis on Mexican immigration in the debate is sensible for a variety of reasons. These include the reality that Mexicans make up by far the largest share of undocumented immigrants, the existence of the lengthy border between the United States and Mexico, the emergence of a democratically elected Mexican administration that is cooperating with the United States and the fact that both nations are members of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Indeed, the debate was sparked largely by the Mexicans, a point made earlier this week by Richard N. Haass, director of policy and planning at the State Department. Mexican officials want to strike a broad deal with the United States that, among other things, would legitimize undocumented Mexicans in this country and perhaps lead to new U.S. aid for impoverished regions.

But the emphasis on Mexican immigration is unleashing pressures to include other foreign nationals in programs of legalization. Immigrants from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Haiti and Liberia are among those demanding inclusion, said Sharry, who predicted that the pressures could spread more universally.

Limiting such benefits to Mexican immigrants “is likely to be politically untenable,” he maintained.

Such logic is precisely what concerns those on the other end of the debate who have little confidence that guest worker strategies would be temporary and that amnesty would be limited to a carefully chosen group. “It’s inevitable that once this gets rolling there’s going to be a snowball effect,” said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies.

*

Times staff writer Doyle McManus contributed to this story.