Will public back Bush on this emotional issue?

WASHINGTON — In recent months, President Bush seems to have been steadily losing the public on one of the sturdy pillars of his presidency: the benefit of the doubt.

On Monday, he asked for it again on the most contentious domestic issue: immigration. While his approach is centrist in some respects, he also peppered his speech with the tough talk that the administration hopes will appease the more conservative voices in the Republican Party.

Since Sept. 11, 2001, Bush has been able to bend much of the public to his will on any number of issues related to the war on terrorism by convincing a majority of Americans that he was protecting them.

That strategy worked initially when it came to detaining terrorism suspects while denying them constitutional protections, invading Iraq, eavesdropping on international calls and now collecting data on domestic ones.

"The United States must secure its borders," Bush said. "This is a basic responsibility of a sovereign nation. It is also an urgent requirement of our national security. Our objective is straightforward: The border should be open to trade and lawful immigration — and shut to illegal immigrants, as well as criminals, drug dealers and terrorists."

But the erosion of support for the president on nearly every issue, including his handling of terrorism and the Iraq war, has left him with Nixonian approval ratings while he has much less sand in the hourglass of his second term. And Bush's ratings have nothing to do with scandal or personal indiscretion; the numbers suggest a vote of no confidence on the core issue of competence.

So it appeared to be a rather odd time to be asking for more. Yet that is what Bush did on Monday night in his prime-time address from the Oval Office. He asked Americans to again trust him, this time to take the extraordinary step of deploying the National Guard to help protect the border.

Having the National Guard serve on the border is a move almost certain to engender anger among Guard families, many of them taxed by lengthy and dangerous stints in Iraq, a point made by several governors since the rough outlines of Bush's plan became known late last week. And it comes just as another hurricane season is to begin, which could strain the Guard even further.

The president tried to assure the nation that Guard forces were adequate for these varied tasks, and he emphasized that Guard members would not actually be patrolling the border.

But he also created his own cross currents. On one hand, he argued that the deployment was vital to stem the flow of those entering the U.S. illegally. But he also noted that the overall numbers of troops — about 6,000 — were relatively small, so the impact on Guard families in total would be relatively minor.

To those in Congress pushing for harsher treatment of illegal immigrants, the action might well be seen as inadequate. To those who would like to see an immigration bill including a path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants, the measure could be seen as unnecessarily punitive. Bush's calculation seemed to be that by emphasizing the policing of the border, he could win over the support of more conservative Republicans for a broad immigration bill they heretofore have opposed.

At a time when roughly seven in 10 Americans disapprove of the job the president is doing, the move seemed unlikely to start a reversal of fortune for Bush. Rather, it seemed almost defensive, designed to shore up support among the harder-line Republicans in the House, previously the foundation of congressional support throughout the Bush presidency. To be sure, he cannot afford to have that group defect in great numbers.

To appease them, however, the president risks alienating a long-standing ally in Mexico.

"It's an effort to show that he is serious about controlling the border, but it's a tough balance because a lot of Republicans are skeptical about a guest-worker program," said John Pitney, a professor of political science at Claremont McKenna College in California. "He is trying to appeal both to the people who want tougher border enforcement and those who want to admit more immigrants legally."

That kind of appeal had a better chance during the very early "I'm a uniter, not a divider" phase of Bush's presidency. Now he has Democrats emboldened to criticize him on many fronts. And, more important, he has those at the base of his party who think he isn't being tough enough on an issue that is critical to them.

At this stage in his presidency, he can't afford for his supporters to now be his doubters.