Alien amnesty dialectic.

One year ago, President Bush instigated a rush on our southern border by announcing an immigration "temporary worker" proposal that is tantamount to amnesty for millions of illegal aliens. Within days, Border Patrol agents noted a dramatic increase in the number of people crossing the border illegally, hoping to be in the U.S. when the amnesty took effect.

Even as it dismissed the Bush amnesty proposal as inadequate, the Mexican government also moved to capitalize on it. Last year the Mexican Foreign Ministry issued a 32-page booklet entitled Guia Del Migrante Mexicano (Guide for the Mexican Migrant), which offered detailed safety instructions to Mexicans seeking to enter the U.S. illegally.

Although the comic book-style pamphlet stated that "the secure way to enter another country is the previous acquisition of a passport," the document acknowledged that "we see many cases of Mexicans who intend to cross the northern border without the necessary papers...." Accordingly, the Guide provides useful information for those who make "the difficult decision to seek new employment opportunities outside your homeland."

Publication of the Guide provoked widespread outrage in the U.S., particularly in southwestern states that are being besieged--and bankrupted--by the illegal immigration invasion. "It is disgraceful that the Mexican government openly encourages its citizens to head north, not only breaking our immigration laws, but also trampling the spirit of citizenship and assimilation those laws were meant to foster," Congressman J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.) wrote in a January 5 letter to Mexican Ambassador Carlos de Icaza.

"The Mexican government has expressed support for an accountable guest-worker program," continued Rep. Hayworth. "However, such a program is not possible as long as the illegal invasion of America's borders continues with the active encouragement of the Mexican government. If the Mexican government wants to work constructively for immigration reform in general and a guest-worker system in particular, it needs to start becoming a partner in securing our border instead of an accomplice in overrunning it. Ending the distribution of the guide would be a good place to start."

Rep. Hayworth's letter actually represents another step toward a border-destroying amnesty plan, since it gives Mexico the option of withdrawing the Guide as a "good faith" gesture--and demanding a U.S. concession in return. Which was probably the entire purpose of producing the Guide in the first place.

Hayworth's subtle shift on this issue is particularly important, given that he is seen as a hard-liner on immigration reform--and thus could be depicted as representing the limits of "respectable" Republican dissent from the Bush administration's policy regarding amnesty. The congressman, noted the January 13 Washington Times, is "a friend and political ally of the president," and he believes that Mr. Bush shouldn't pursue amnesty at the expense of his larger legislative agenda. According to Hayworth, "this rush toward amnesty-light should not be one of [Mr. Bush's] priorities." Of course, this is a very different thing from saying that "amnesty-light" should be opposed under any circumstances.