Bush push on immigration tests GOP base

WASHINGTON — President Bush's advocacy of an overhaul of immigration law and his attacks on critics of the plan are provoking a backlash from conservatives who form the bulwark of his remaining support.

The reaction by some of Bush's most stalwart congressional and grass-roots backers at times has exceeded anything seen previously between Bush and his supporters. They now view him as pursuing amnesty for foreign lawbreakers when he should be focusing on border security.

Postings on conservative Web sites have gone so far as to call for impeachment, and usually friendly radio hosts, commentators and congressional allies are warning that Bush stands to lose supporters at a time when he needs all the backing he can get on other vital matters.

"I think President Bush hurts himself every time he says it is not amnesty," said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., referring to the bill's legalization process for immigrants. "We are not all that stupid."

Last week, in discussing Bush's recent comments accusing conservative critics of the immigration legislation of fear-mongering, Rush Limbaugh told listeners: "I just wish he hadn't done it, because he's not going to lose me on Iraq, and he's not going to lose me on national security. But he might lose some of you."

Such sentiments have reverberated through talk radio, publications such as National Review, and Fox News. They also have appeared on Web sites, including RedState.com and FreeRepublic.com, where postings reflect a feeling that Bush is smiting his coalition and working in league with the likes of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., a co-author of the legislation.

The tensions, which have rippled through the Republican presidential field, are intensifying as the Senate prepares to begin debate on the bill this week. Opponents are seeking significant changes — or defeat of the legislation — and raising the specter of a filibuster.

In interviews last week, White House officials expressed frustration at what they described as ill-informed criticism that the bill provided amnesty when it in fact traded legal status for fines and fees — more than $6,000 for green-card holders. They also noted that a New York Times/CBS News poll showed 66 percent of Republicans supported its legalization provisions.

Karl Rove, Bush's top political adviser, said Friday he was confident that the White House would win over critics as it explained details of the bill and efforts to enforce existing border-control laws.

Rove said he did not think the party anger would affect support for the Iraq war and other national-security issues. "People are able to say, 'I don't need to agree with anyone 100 percent of the time to be with them on the most important issue facing America,' " he said.

That same day, however, Peggy Noonan, a Wall Street Journal opinion writer and former Reagan speech writer who has supported Bush, wrote, "What conservatives and Republicans must recognize is that the White House has broken with them."

Democrats also have serious differences on immigration, with many worried that the Senate plan is too punitive. Others closely allied with labor are fearful about the impact on job opportunities, and still others oppose any plan that allows illegal immigrants to earn citizenship. But those have been all but lost in the loud, volatile clashes among Republicans.

Reflecting the division between the business wing and the rest of the party, the editorial board of National Review, which opposes the legislation, issued a debate challenge to The Journal's business-minded editorial board, which is more supportive. National Review referred to an Internet video on The Journal's Web site of an editorial-board meeting in which editorial-page editor Paul Gigot referred to what he calls "the degree to which the base isn't even rational about this anymore." (Gigot dismissed the challenge, saying National Review writers had not accepted offers to appear on The Journal's program on Fox to discuss the matter.)

Opposition to Bush's immigration plan, which calls for a way to legalize illegal workers already in the country, has been stiff for years. But, when similar legislation was under debate last year, opponents were confident that Republican leaders who controlled Congress would not let it go forward. Bush, not wishing to intensify the fight in an election year, relented when the legislation died.

Not so this year. The criticism reflects a central tension between Bush's pursuit of a defining domestic-policy accomplishment and the party's concerns about its 2008 prospects when base voters are so angry about immigration.

Bush's comments to federal law-enforcement trainees in Georgia on Tuesday, in which he took the rare step of going after conservative critics in terms usually reserved for Democrats, has charged GOP ferment, specifically his suggestion that critics of the plan "don't want to do what's right for America."

Presidential aides said later that Bush did not mean to impugn anyone's patriotism, and that he had ad-libbed the line.

But Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn still seemed rankled days later. "I honestly don't know whether it was scripted or unscripted," he said. "But I think it was uncalled for."

The debate has bled into the Republican presidential campaign, with Arizona Sen. John McCain, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and other candidates staking out sharply divergent positions. Caught in the middle of the broader fight, the Republican National Committee has seemed to have taken less of a supporting role than on other White House initiatives, although Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., chairman of the committee and a strong backer of the compromise, said its support was unwavering.

Rove and Dan Bartlett, the White House counselor who announced his resignation Friday and said he would leave the West Wing by July 4, said officials would continue trying to persuade critics.

Bush's brother, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, and his 2004 campaign manager, Ken Mehlman, wrote an Op-Ed article in The Journal pleading the case for the bill, lamenting that the debate "has led many close personal and ideological friends — people we respect and whose criticism we take seriously — to oppose new rules governing how people enter this country and how we handle those who are here illegally. But we hope our friends reconsider."

New York Times reporter Jeff Zeleny contributed to this report.