Abroad at home.

THE most important part of President Bush's televised address to the nation on immigration was not his call for sending unarmed National Guardsmen to temporarily assist the Border Patrol. Rather, it was his formal embrace, for the first time, of citizenship for illegal aliens.

When he first laid out his view on a foreign-worker program two years ago, he was explicit that illegal aliens could sign up but that "this program expects temporary workers to return permanently to their home countries after their period of work in the United States has expired."

In his recent address, Bush rightly emphasized security and assimilation--while advocating a policy that would undermine both goals. He adopted the position of Senators Kennedy and McCain and other amnesty supporters, saying that illegal aliens who meet certain conditions should be able to apply for citizenship. He denied that this represented amnesty because "approval would not be automatic." But when have illegal immigrants ever received "automatic" citizenship? If that is the definition of amnesty, then there has never been one.

This administration's lack of credibility on immigration enforcement can't be reversed by adding a few references to the National Guard to its tired rhetoric of unmanned aerial vehicles and more detention beds. Only action can reverse the doubts. So far, even the positive actions the administration has taken are less than they appear. For instance, the president pledged (yet again) to end the practice of "catch and release" for non-Mexican illegals at the border. The immigration service has indeed made progress in adding detention space for such people and speeding their return home, but is still releasing captured illegals back into communities.

Likewise, the arrests several weeks ago of nearly 1,200 illegal aliens working for IFCO Systems were widely touted as heralding a new wave of legal action against crooked employers. But most of the illegal immigrants were released within hours of the raids. Finally, President Bush reassured an anxious Mexican president Vicente Fox that any deployment would be only temporary, and that the regular Army would not be involved. In other words: "Don't worry, Senor Presidente, it's just symbolism."

As for the Senate's compromise bill, the Heritage Foundation has released research that should torpedo it. Robert Rector, one of the nation's leading authorities on poverty and welfare, has estimated that the bill would admit at least a staggering 103 million people over the next two decades and represent "the largest expansion of the welfare state in 35 years." Supporters of the bill call their approach "comprehensive," and they are right: They are not content merely to deal with the current illegal population or to address a supposed shortage of unskilled labor, but want to effect a massive demographic reshuffling of America while they're at it.

The president has waited six years to start talking in earnest about enforcement. He argues that a guest-worker program is required to secure the border, which is another way of saying that the border cannot be secured. Why not try enforcement first--and let consideration of amnesty, a guest-worker plan, and massive increases in legal immigration wait until we see if it works? If Bush had reiterated his support for amnesty in theory, but conceded that enforcement had to come first, he would likely have won significant public approval and helped shape events in Congress. The speech he actually gave, on the other hand, is likely further to dispirit conservatives and harden opposition among House Republicans to the Senate amnesty proposal. President Bush's speech, contrary to its goal, probably ensures that no immigration bill will reach his desk this year. Given the options, that's probably a good thing.