More John Fund On The 48th CD Special Election

John Fund has more commentary on the 48th CD special election in today's Political Diary:

Deconstructing a Bellwether

Yesterday's posting on how Congress will react to news that Jim Gilchrist, founder of the Minuteman citizens' border patrol, won 25% of the vote in a special House election in Orange County drew a fair bit of attention.

My contention was that the anemic victory by John Campbell, the GOP state senator who won 44% of the vote (a Democrat winning most of the rest), will damage chances of Congress passing President Bush's plan for a guest-worker program to regularize the hiring of immigrant laborers. I support a well-designed guest-worker program, but I also recognize political reality. House Democrats have adopted a strategy of voting as a bloc against every significant Bush legislative proposal in hopes of creating gridlock and prompting voters to throw the GOP out of power next year. The Gilchrist showing in Orange County will lead many Republicans to vote against ANY guest-worker program for fear of being demagogued on the issue.

Some observers noted that polls continue to show only a small minority of voters are so focused on immigration that they vote solely on that basis. Turnouts in special elections are notoriously low and not a true reflection of public opinion. Orange County is a hotbed of concern over illegal immigration since it is only a two-hour drive from the Mexican border. That level of angst isn't found in most Congressional districts.

All of the above is true. But the fact remains that the Orange County results are already being viewed as a tipping point and will have an impact beyond the limited meaning of the actual numbers. Here, briefly, are my reasons:

The real shocker from the election is the fact that Mr. Gilchrist, the Minuteman activist, won the largest number of votes actually cast on Election Day. Mr. Campbell only won because of the hundreds of thousands of dollars he spent getting people to fill out absentee ballots and "banking" them. On Election Day, Mr. Campbell won only 30% of the vote, the Democratic candidate won 32% and Mr. Gilchrist won 35%. Mr. Gilchrist ran an abysmal campaign, spending his money on radio ads whose audience largely lived outside the district and ignoring absentee voters and grassroots targeting. Noting that a majority of the votes cast were absentee ballots, political consultant Chuck Muth observes that "the Gilchrist campaign simply didn't show up for the first half of the game."

The lesson from the Orange County results is that President Bush was wise to discuss combining better enforcement measures with a guest-worker program in his recent speeches along the border. The House is scheduled to vote today on a bill that would tighten employer sanctions and make it easier to deport criminal aliens. That will pass overwhelmingly. But the issue of illegal immigration will only be adequately dealt with when enforcement is combined with a workable guest-worker program.

There is a precedent for real progress on the border issue. The Bracero Program, which allowed foreign workers easier access to U.S. agriculture and construction employment in the 1950s and 1960s, worked. Arrests of illegal immigrants fell from 885,587 in 1953 to 45,336 in 1959 -- a 95% drop. Then, in 1964, President Lyndon Johnson bowed to labor union pressure and killed the Bracero Program. Arrests at the border promptly increased from 86,597 in 1964 to 875,915 in 1976, and have been inching up every year since.

The Bracero Program wasn't perfect. Some workers were exploited and there were abuses. But it demonstrated that when enforcement is combined with a legal path to work, problems at the border can be controlled. That's the message President Bush has to drive home. If he finds it necessary to take a broad guest-worker program off the table to avoid it being caught up in next year's overheated election rhetoric, so be it. It would be better to educate the public on the issue and try to pass a limited program affecting only agricultural workers than risk another major policy fumble such as Social Security. For the next year, too many members of Congress are going to be distracted by anti-immigration activists such as Jim Gilchrist and liberals who want to deny Mr. Bush any kind of legislative success.

Political Diary is a tremendous deal. For the monthly cost of a coffee at Starbucks, you get a daily dose of top-notch political news and analysis from across the country. I highly recommend subscribing.

Comments

Who is going to propose a bill that does not include guest workers? Tancredo won't get any support from the establishment or their minions. The Democrats get their districts' population to increase which helps in redistricting, the unions see a new source of members, the GOP business interests get cheap labor and pressure to limit wage increases, the GOP politicos hope for hispanic votes and those that have loaned money to Mexico see remittances as Mexico's major source of income (a close second to oil revenue).
Gilchrist did well but not good enough. I hope John Campbell keeps his commitments regarding this issue.

[Allan Bartlett]

Do you honestly think John Campbell will vote against the conference report? He's in hoc to Bush/Cheney for that 125k fundraiser two weeks before the election. Speaking of conference reports, did anyone else listen to Tom Tancredo on J&K yesterday on the White House strategery on this issue for next year? They don't want the House taking any votes on all the other immigration plans floating out there. They want an enforcement only bill from the House. The Senate will then pass the McKennedy amnesty bill. Then in conference the final bill to take shape will have an amnesty guest worker provision....Presto. Democrats all vote for final passage along with the White House peeling off twenty or so open border amnesty sell out Republicans. Thanks for playing. GOP base stays home in 2006 giving the Democrats back power.

Powder Blue Report