Bush mentioned early on in the State of the Union that immigration reform will be a high priority for his domestic agenda.
“America’s immigration system is also outdated — unsuited to the needs of our economy and to the values of our country…. It is time for an immigration policy that permits temporary guest workers to fill jobs Americans will not take, that rejects amnesty, that tells us who is entering and leaving our country, and that closes the border to drug dealers and terrorists.”
It was hardly the biggest applause line of the address. Dems believe Bush is on the right track, but his plan doesn’t go far enough. More importantly, a large portion of the Republicans caucus hates Bush’s approach. What’s amusing, however, is the White House’s tolerance for constructive criticism, or lack thereof.
Rep. Tom Tancredo was stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic on his way to the Capitol one Friday morning in April 2002 when his cell phone rang. Though the caller ID read unidentified, Tancredo had no trouble recognizing the voice on the other end of the line: it was White House adviser Karl Rove, and he was seething.
The congressman had been quoted in that morning’s Washington Times attacking George W. Bush’s immigration plan, which he warned could be an “open door” for illegal immigrants and a national-security risk. As Tancredo remembers it, Rove screamed at him for more than 20 minutes, accusing him of disloyalty to his party and the president in the wake of 9/11. The conversation grew so heated that Tancredo had to pull over. As the congressman recalls, Rove ended the call with a warning that Tancredo should “never darken the steps of the White House again.” (The White House disputes Rove’s comment.)
What do you suppose makes Rove more livid: the fact that Tancredo expressed his concerns about the Bush plan to a reporter, or that Tancredo has concerns at all?
Still, in a Rove v. Tancredo fight, it’s hard to know whom to root against more.
Tancredo is probably Congress’ most xenophobic demagogue while Rove is, well, Rove.
But in this case, Tancredo has something Rove may not be able to change: Republican votes.
Head of the 71-member Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus, Tancredo is backed by an increasingly restive band of House Republicans who view Bush’s plan as a backdoor amnesty scheme that would reward lawbreakers.
I suspect Bush’s relatively progressive take on immigration reform has more to do with wooing Hispanic votes into his “permanent GOP majority” than genuine concern. Nevertheless, like his drive to privatize Social Security, Bush, with his low approval ratings and “lame duck” status, may simply not have the votes to get what he wants.
“Nobody’s re-election hinges on passing [immigration reform],” says one Senate GOP aide. “Many fear they won’t be re-elected if they do pass it.”