No quick, sloppy immigration fix

It seems that the only supportive arguments for the "bipartisan compromise" bill on immigration are coming from the cabal of U.S. senators that crafted it, or their direct supporters.

Otherwise, opposition to the bill is enormous.

At hundreds of pages in length, the legislation is sold as a "comprehensive" reform package, yet it is incomprehensible. And therein lies the main problem: It is ripe for unintended consequences down the road.

The bill's backers repeatedly spell out what it's supposed to do, but the constantly growing chorus of critics are predicting what it's likely to do beyond giving 12 million illegal immigrants a legal "probationary" status in the United States. Most of those unintended consequences cost money, probably in the trillions of dollars.

Perhaps that's why this bill is so unpopular, or perhaps its because most Americans want effective border control as a priority. The bill throws some bones in that direction, but not enough.

For all the bipartisan support the legislation supposedly has, it seems there is also bipartisan opposition developing in the Senate.

Montana Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester, both Democrats, announced their opposition to the bill on Friday, joining the ranks of populist lawmakers such as Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va.

Baucus and Tester voted for a provision that would eliminate an entire section of the legislation granting "amnesty" to the 12 million illegal aliens.

"Amnesty is wrong because it's not good for Montana, and it's not good for America," Baucus said. "If folks want to immigrate to our great nation, and pursue the American dream, they need to go to the back of the line and do it the right way."

That's not far off from near unanimous protestations coming from the conservative right.

The issue here is not so much directed at illegal immigrants themselves. It is more a reflection of concerns about the U.S. government and its competence in enforcing existing immigration laws.

There is a deepening skepticism about the government's practical ability to handle layers of new processes and responsibilities that would be created by the compromise bill, when the behemoth Department of Homeland Security has been unable to uphold the responsibilities it already has.

Intuitively, most Americans know that if this bill passes, what comes next is the bill for an even bigger bureaucracy to implement it.

Among the supposedly brighter points of the bill is a point system for selecting eligible immigrants based on English proficiency, education and work skills. But this system won't take effect for eight years, and during those years, the bill gives priority to immigrants with family ties in the United States.

And even when it does take effect, family ties will also be part of the point system, with the potential to outweigh those other factors that could actually deliver the best and brightest possible immigrants.

Imagine that.

The point here is that the U.S. government should be determining who gets into the country, not people who choose to cross the border illegally.

Surely, the senators who are backing the bill just want to "do something" to solve the immigration problem and make it go away. But this bill won't make it go away.

It should be killed, and immigration should be a top issue for presidential candidates to address leading up to the 2008 elections.