Bordering on the edge of interesting

While I will stand by my statement that American Independent Party candidate Jim Gilchrist has no chance of capturing former Rep. Chris Cox’s House seat, there’s no doubt that Gilchrist’s anti-illegal-immigration pitches are turning out to be strikes.

Check reaction Tuesday to statements made by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.

Chertoff told the Senate Judiciary Committee that his department is going to get tough on illegal immigration.

“Return every single illegal entrant -- no exceptions,” he said, while also promising to end a practice in which border agents have to let illegal immigrants go because they don’t have enough places to hold them.

Gilchrist expressed “cautious optimism,” according to a release from his campaign.

“It’s encouraging that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has said that the Senate will give priority to border security and immigration enforcement, and today Mr. Chertoff acknowledging that his department aims to a committed and comprehensive approach to regain control of our border,” Gilchrist said. “Now I am just waiting for the House Leadership to also take the serious matter of border security seriously in response to the clamors of the American public.”

Tough talk from the founder of the Minuteman Project, no?

Well hold on.

“This is a clear statement against amnesty and, by implication, against the Kennedy-McCain legislation that would reward illegal aliens for breaking our laws....

“The immediate construction of holding facilities is crucially important, and I intend to press Congress and the administration to move quickly to convert unused military bases and other federal property for the purpose of holding illegal aliens once they are apprehended.”

Who’s speaking? The Republican in the race, state Sen. John Campbell, in a release of his own.

Campbell goes on to say that “border security is a matter of national security,” sounding like a die-hard member of Gilchrist’s Minuteman Project -- or at least a member who doesn’t want to see Gilchrist have to give up his leadership role because, say, he’s becoming a congressman.

(And just so no one misses it, there’s a new front on the El Toro fight -- using the closed Marine Corps air station as a holding area for illegal immigrants. Is it possible, though, that this idea won’t prove popular even among those who are against the Great Park?)

Back in Washington, as those following news reports know, there’s a good bit of talk that our race to replace Cox is a test case for the traction of the anti-immigration issue. (Keep in mind, on Gilchrist’s campaign website there’s a link to “Immigration issues” and another to “Other issues.”)

It won’t quite prove to be that, when Campbell wins big, but it may give Republicans the idea that they can use immigration as an issue in races against Democrats.

And with the latest punditry suggesting that there might be more close House races than anyone would have thought six months ago, you can be sure Republicans will want to find every strong point they can before we enter the heat of 2006 elections.

Speaking of those 2006 elections, it’s probably best for readers in Newport Beach to begin preparing themselves for a lengthy and complicated ballot. At this point, we could have a ballot measure on the city’s general plan update, the city hall (which really will be about how the city finances projects but will be spun as a “no on the Taj Mah-City Hall” vote), Stephen Sutherland’s proposed resort at Marinapark and Greenlight II.

(Readers in Costa Mesa will have to content themselves with far too many candidates for City Council.)

The one good thing about such a looming election? It might actually get interesting, unlike the race to replace Cox, which remains a dud.

* S.J. CAHN is the managing editor. He may be reached at (714) 966-4607 or by e-mail at s.j.cahn@latimes.com.

20051020h2pqbwn1(LA)