Bush's unwelcome welcome mat: divorced from reality on immigration.(Public Policy)

NEXT time President Bush explains his immigration policy, he should avoid the usual wonky details about "earned legalization" and non-amnesty amnesties, launching instead into a full-throated rendition of the opening number from Cabaret. It would entertain millions of people, soften his image, put some gay voters in play, and hit the mark. "Willkommen, Bienvenue, Welcome" expresses the Bush immigration policy far more crisply than any white paper could.

Most ordinary Americans, especially conservatives, have been slow to grasp this. In the campaign, when both candidates answered a question on immigration, Kerry outflanked Bush on the right. He attacked the president for failing to secure America's borders against illegal immigrants. Bush rather feebly maintained that the borders were secure--and was slapped down by the challenger. To anyone who followed the controversy over immigration, Kerry had scored a small and insincere but definite victory.

But most viewers (and even some pundits) read this wrong. Their preconceptions got in the way. Since Bush was known to be a fire-breathing conservative, they jumped to the conclusion that he could not possibly be defending lax border enforcement or praising illegal immigrants. They must have misheard him. And they readjusted their perceptions. Indeed, the GOP has benefited electorally from its reputation as the party least favorable to both law-breaking and immigration--even as it has winked at mass illegal immigration.

Since the election, however, this veil of ignorance has been torn asunder. Bush himself has repeated that he intends to liberalize immigration policy. And if a man repeatedly does something apparently out of character, his neighbors are bound eventually to revise their opinion of his character. The first post-election controversy was whether intelligence reform should include measures against illegal immigration. When the White House lobbied furiously to remove such controls from the bill, the lesson was driven home that the Bush administration was determined to make immigration easier and more abundant. Again, people inevitably noticed--including the increasingly alienated rank and file of the GOP.

In short, the great tectonic plates of elite support for mass immigration and popular resistance to it are beginning to grind against each other. A major earthquake seems to be in prospect. In these circumstances small changes can create large shocks. Just recently two publications--which a year ago might have passed relatively unnoticed--have jolted the political world.

The first is the illustrated guide, published by the Mexican government, for Mexicans intending to immigrate to the U.S. It begins quite piously by suggesting that the best way to emigrate to the U.S. is via a legal American visa. Then it gets to the point. It lays out guidelines for the best and safest way to cross into the U.S. illegally, suggesting for instance that would-be immigrants walk during times of low heat, add salt to water to avoid dehydration, cross rivers only in light clothing, and so on. This guide makes the Mexican government the accomplice of anyone seeking to enter the U.S. illegally.

Some politicians and journalists claim to be shocked that illegality is going on in the Mexican government. But this publication merely formalizes what everyone has long known: Mexico encourages its citizens to go north. Nor is there any mystery why. Illegal immigration allows the Mexican elite to reduce social and political unrest without reforming Mexico's economy by exporting its unemployed. Once in the U.S., these Mexican emigrants are encouraged to retain their citizenship, their language, their culture, their family links, and their national identity (even while becoming U.S. citizens legally). Again, the reason is simple. Mexican governments hope to build strong pressure groups for Mexico within the U.S. Illegal migration makes Mexican elites more secure at home and more influential abroad. Why should they ever renounce it?