Mixed Images Obscure the Key Points of Protests

When I see pictures of marchers waving big Mexican flags, my instant reaction is: Republican votes.

When the TV news videotapes young people storming freeway onramps and blocking traffic, I think: backfire.

When 40,000 kids skip class and become truants, I fear: There go the school bonds.

But when 500,000 people take to the streets in downtown L.A. to protest a congressional bill criminalizing illegal immigration -- criminalizing illegality, isn’t that redundant? -- this is impressive. I think: nicely done.

That’s real political power, potentially.

Except for the foreign flags, the commuter harassment, the school ditching, these have been inspiring protests.

Problem is, pictures convey the message.

They crowd out the intended message and blur the purpose of the demonstrations (besides serving as organizing tools for Latino, labor and Democratic groups): protesting legislation that deserves to be protested.

The disputed bill -- now virtually dead -- was passed by the House of Representatives in December. Sponsored by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), it calls for a 700-mile fence along the Mexican border. So far, OK. But the proposal would make it a felony to be in this country illegally, and there are 12 million such people. Anybody who helped one also could be prosecuted for a felony.

As U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) commented Thursday during a Senate floor debate over a more practical bill: “What should happen to the 12 million people who are living here in the shadows, undocumented? Many would say they are here illegally; they ought to go back. Well, they are not going to go back. They are going to remain living furtively ... subject to work abuse, exploitation, threats and blackmail.”

Feinstein is supporting a bill by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) that combines tougher border enforcement with a guest-worker program allowing illegal immigrants ultimately to become legal residents.

President Bush long has advocated a guest-worker program. On this issue, he’s on the side of most California Democrats, according to a recent Field poll.

Another new poll by the Survey and Policy Research Institute at San Jose State also shows that 55% of California voters favor allowing illegal immigrants to become legal residents.

The president, I suspect, couldn’t be more pleased with the L.A. protest and all the others that have erupted around the country. Suddenly, the discussion has shifted. There’s less talk about Iraq, Katrina, corruption and gas-gouging.

In California, the march was a boon for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. For a while, at least, the focus has moved away from his failures. He has the opportunity now to talk about something of genuine public interest, not just an eye-glazing embellishment of his record as he runs for reelection. He could show leadership on this issue from the unique perspective of an immigrant.

Schwarzenegger’s staff quickly whipped out a thoughtful opinion piece for The Times on Tuesday.

“I propose that we lower our voices and lift our sights,” the governor wrote. “We need a debate that attacks the issue without attacking the individuals....

“The first order of business for the federal government is to secure our borders.... [But] criminalizing immigrants for coming here is a slogan, not a solution.... I support efforts to ensure that our businesses have the workers they need and that immigrants are treated with the respect they deserve. We should pass a common-sense temporary worker program.”

It was the right tone: Moderate. Not demagogic, as some right-wingers in his party would prefer. But appealing to swing voters.

Indeed, what we’re now witnessing in the country is a hopeful sign: The previously timid political middle moving toward finding a much-needed solution to this vexing problem.

But those Mexican flags, the human traffic barricades, the school boycotts complicate the building of public support -- and politically could hurt supportive Democrats among moderate voters.

“Marchers who carried American flags got it right,” says Republican consultant Wayne Johnson. “They were saying, ‘We embrace the American dream.’ That was really smart. Marchers who carried Mexican flags, that was really dumb.”

Democrat consultant Darry Sragow puts it this way: “The Mexican flag visually says, ‘I’m not one of you. I’m from there.’ If you wave the American flag, you’re saying, ‘I’m one of you’ or ‘I aspire to be one of you. Please help me.’ The other message says, ‘I’m getting in your face.’ ”

Sragow adds: “It’s fine when students take to the streets to demonstrate. Truancy is not fine. We’re trying to provide our kids with a good education and it’s important that they uphold their end of the bargain. What’s especially not fine is breaking through the gates of the school and tying up traffic on a freeway.”

Politically, the veteran consultant adds, “Democrats have gotten in trouble over the last 40 years by appearing to condone rule-breaking.”

GOP consultant Richard Temple: “The more this issue becomes radicalized, the more Republicans benefit. They’re seen by voters as stronger on illegal immigration.”

Stronger on law and order, period. And that’s at the core of this issue: Law-breaking and what to do about it when we need the law-breakers’ labor. The practical solution: Legalize the labor.

To make that happen, it would help to furl the flags.

George Skelton writes Mondays and Thursdays. Reach him at george.skelton@latimes.com.