SAMUEL FRANCIS

What the election really tells us about immigration reform

FOR RELEASE Friday, November 19, 2004

The Bush administration has read the political tea leaves that this year's
election left at the bottom of the electoral cup and concluded that amnesty
for illegal aliens is the message they send. Since that was the message the
administration wanted to see, it's not surprising that's the message it
gets. But its tea-leaf readers need to look again to understand the
election's real message on immigration politics.

The administration apparently has embraced the increasingly dubious exit
polls that show President Bush winning 44 percent of the Hispanic vote
nationally, an increase of some 9 percent for him since 2000. Mr. Bush
pandered to Hispanics shamelessly and concocted a "temporary workers visas
program" that is tantamount to amnesty for illegal aliens; therefore, he won
Hispanic votes.

Therefore again, he and his courtiers reason, the way to lock Hispanics into
the Republican column is to keep on pandering, and that is why, no sooner
was the election over, the administration announced it would revive the
amnesty plan.

As political analyst Steve Sailer has argued on Vdare.com, there are strong
reasons to doubt that Mr. Bush really did win 44 percent of the Hispanic
vote nationally, and as I have argued myself, even if he did win that much,
there is absolutely no reason to think it was because of what the president
said or did about immigration or amnesty. But there's no reason either to
rehearse those arguments again. What's important is to look at the election
returns as they do relate to immigration and related issues.

In Arizona, Proposition 200 passed overwhelmingly with 56 percent of the
vote. Prop 200, denounced by the Open Borders lobby, condemned by both
Arizona's senators (Republican), its governor (Democrat), its congressional
delegation (mostly Republican but two Democrats), and its Chamber of
Commerce (any party it can buy), requires proof of eligibility to receive
state benefits or to vote.

The real purpose of Prop 200, of course, was to stop illegal aliens, who
lack such proof, from getting welfare and from voting. What sounds like an
oatmealish and meaningless ritual in fact contained a powerful message
against illegal immigration: You (illegals) are not part of our nation and
are not entitled to receive the benefits and privileges Americans are
entitled to receive. Go home. Prop 200 won the support of 47 percent of the
state's Hispanic citizens.

What that exit poll tells us is that pandering to Hispanics on immigration
and related issues is not necessarily the way to win their support. Every
opinion poll on immigration for the last generation or so has shown that
Hispanics oppose mass immigration almost as strongly as non-Hispanics do.
Why shouldn't they? As the Third World ships sink, why should those who make
it to the lifeboats welcome everybody else on board?

As for political figures closely associated with restricting immigration,
nobody can beat Colorado's Rep. Tom Tancredo, who has made immigration
reform and restriction his signature issue. So hostile was the Bush White
House to Mr. Tancredo that Karl Rove reportedly told him he was not welcome
there. This month Mr. Tancredo won re-election by a whopping 60 percent or
more -- against a heavily funded Democratic opponent. Mr. Bush, it might be
noted, won Colorado by a not-so-whopping 52 percent of the vote. It's not
Mr. Tancredo who shouldn't be welcome in the White House. It's Mr. Bush who
shouldn't be welcome in Mr. Tancredo's district.

What these two sets of exit polls from Arizona and Colorado tell us is not
what the tea leaves Mr. Bush is reading say. What these returns tell us is
that supp