President Bush argues his case for comprehensive immigration reform today in a Nebraska political plot tailor-made for Harry Potter. Or a leisurely cruise on the Poseidon.

We’re in a world of mystery and intrigue now where fantasy morphs into reality and everyone’s sitting in the wrong chair.

Moving parts are churning below the surface.  Are we sailing upside down yet?

Here comes the president to a state where he mauled John Kerry a year and a half ago, and three of its four Republican members of Congress are stiffing him on an explosive issue at a time when he badly needs a victory.

The only one standing at the president’s side is Sen. Chuck Hagel.

It is Hagel who long has been the target of less than friendly fire from Republicans annoyed — and, in some cases, outraged — by his independent criticism of the president’s policy in Iraq.

Nebraska’s three Republicans in the House find themselves standing next to Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson.

That alignment comes  at the beginning  of a 2006 Senate race in which Nelson’s challenger, GOP nominee Pete Ricketts, has lined up with Hagel and Bush.

All of this political turmoil reflects growing evidence of opposition in Nebraska to the Hagel-Bush approach offering a pathway for most of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants already living in the United States to earn legal status.

And the drama unfolds at a time when the president’s job approval ratings are in the tank, sinking in one recent survey below 50 percent even in dependable Nebraska.

|||

Gov. Dave Heineman and Republican State Chairman Mark Quandahl choose their words cautiously.

Not about to take sides.

“It’s a federal issue,” said the Republican governor, who was on hand to greet the president at Eppley Airfield Tuesday night and will attend Bush’s address this morning at Metropolitan Community College in south Omaha.

“I haven’t reviewed these proposals in any detail,” Heineman said.  “I try to keep my focus on state issues.

“But there’s no question immigration is of great concern to Nebraskans,” the governor said.

Quandahl dodged questions about the split among GOP officeholders and said “it’s yet to be determined” whether the party will take sides on immigration reform when it adopts its 2006 campaign platform at the Republican state convention in Grand Island later this month.

Democratic State Chairman Steve Achelpohl was not reluctant to weigh in.

“I believe, by and large, people in Nebraska believe we need to strengthen our borders,” he said.

“I think the opinion on what to do with undocumented people is mixed, but a majority would be against any guest worker or earned citizenship plan.”

Nelson is “right on the mark in political terms,” Achelpohl said.

|||

Congressional mail, e-mail accounts and telephone traffic appear to be delivering a strong message to the Nebraska delegation.

“About 100 to 1,” Nelson said last week, sizing up constituent sentiment in favor of securing the border first.

“Off the charts,” said Rep. Jeff Fortenberry.  Probably 95 percent in favor of securing the borders before considering more contentious issues.

At an Open Door meeting in Lincoln last Thursday, the congressman attracted one round of applause.  It came in response to this statement: “I do not support the Senate’s immigration bill.”

Rep. Tom Osborne got a taste of voter sentiment in the Republican gubernatorial primary election last month.

With five days to go before the election, Osborne left the campaign trail to rush back to Lincoln to tape a TV ad attempting to quell an uprising over his support for state legislation granting resident college tuition rates to the children of illegal immigrants.

Osborne, who supported the tough House bill focused on border security, reminded Nebraskans he had voted for “stronger borders and stiffer penalties for illegal immigrants.”

Meanwhile, Heineman trumpeted his veto of the tuition bill — enacted over his objections — in TV ads and direct mail that drew a contrast with Osborne’s position.

Five days later, the immigration  issue was cited by both camps as one factor that helped Heineman defeat the congressman, particularly in Osborne’s western and central Nebraska House district.

|||

Rep. Lee Terry opposes the Hagel-Bush approach, but believes there may be room for agreement between the House and the Senate.

“It will be hard to come to a compromise,” he said, “but it can be done.

“We’re on the same page on border security.  Granting 11 or 12 million people amnesty is where we separate,” Terry said.

“I think there’s a way to do a guest workers program that provides incentives for undocumented workers to go back to their home country without penalty and put them in line to legally return under a guest worker statute.”

Terry will not be in Omaha today to welcome Bush to his congressional district.  But he wants people to understand why.

If he left Washington to attend the event, Terry said, he’d miss perhaps as many as 15 votes on a critical homeland security appropriations bill.

“I’m very concerned about how (his absence from Omaha) will look,” he said.  “I don’t want anyone to interpret this as a protest because it isn’t.”

The House agenda will also keep Fortenberry in Washington.

Osborne, the only one of the House trio who won’t be on the November ballot, plans to join the president in Omaha.

Nelson said he can’t come because the Senate will be voting on a cloture motion this morning to end debate on a proposed constitutional amendment banning recognition of gay marriage.  

Nebraskans “don’t agree generally with (Bush’s)  amnesty program,” Nelson told a telephone news conference Tuesday.

“I hope the president hears that message loudly and clearly.”

|||

And what of Hagel?

With an eye on a possible bid for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, might it help him with the GOP base to be standing with the president in Omaha on a contentious issue when Bush needs an ally and a  political win?

But is this an issue where much, if not most, of the Republican base already has its feet planted on the other side of the issue?

None of that matters to him, Hagel said Tuesday.

“I have based every position I’ve taken since I’ve been in the Senate on what I think is right for my state and my country and what I believe,” he said.  “I don’t factor in political alignments.”

Hagel said he and the president agree on many issues, and sometimes they disagree.

“Sometimes there are disagrements with some of my Nebraska colleagues,” he said.

And sometimes he runs counter to public opinion.

“I know this issue evokes great passion and emotion,” Hagel said.

“The country would be in pretty sad shape if we all made decisions on poll numbers,” he said.

Three weeks ago, Hagel said, after a White House meeting on immigration reform, he invited the president to come to Omaha for the College World Series if both Nebraska and Texas were to meet in the championship game.

At the same time, he told Bush he thought Nebraska would be “a good state for you to stop and explain” his views on immigration reform.

Bush traveled to Nebraska earlier to push for major domestic initiatives like tax cuts and Social Security reform, Hagel said.  It’s a state in middle America “affected by illegal immigrants economically in every way.”

It’s also the home state of the senator who crafted — along with Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla — the portion of the Senate bill dealing with the illegal immigrants already living here.

“I think Bush is coming to town to pay some respect to Hagel for supporting the essentials of the president’s immigration plan,” said Achelpohl, the Democratic state chairman.

But recent polling and “the odd positioning” of Nebraska’s three Republican House members with the state’s Democratic senator and opposed to the Republican president raises a compelling question, John Hibbing said.

“Has Bush lost his clout in Nebraska?” the University of Nebraska-Lincoln political professor asked.

Reach Don Walton at 473-7248 or at dwalton@journalstar.com.