Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

The deal on immigration

Much to like, but flawed

Published May 19, 2007 at midnight

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

If nearly everyone hates it, it may be OK. That's the reaction in some quarters to the immigration compromise hammered out by a handful of senators this week. Debate on the bill could open Monday.

On balance, there's actually much to like. It takes the realistic view that millions of current illegal immigrants should formally enter American society someday, and sets them along that path. And it begins to move U.S. policy from a "chain migration" system that allows naturalized citizens to bring in large numbers of relatives, regardless of their education, toward one that gives preference to immigrants with the skills America needs.

The bill could stand improvement, though. For one thing, it's unclear whether its guest-worker provision would best suit Colorado's tourism demands.

Current law grants H-2B work visas to thousands of seasonal laborers who staff our resorts during peak months each year and then return home. These visas may be folded into the guest-worker program; it would let temporary workers stay for no more than two years consecutively. At that point they must remain out of the country for a year.

The final bill should make sure that the H-2B visas remain, so that truly seasonal workers who don't want to become U.S. citizens are still welcome.

We're also not confident that the enforcement provisions have enough teeth. The so-called Z visas intended for any immigrant who came here illegally before Jan. 1 would supposedly not be issued until certain "triggers" are met relating to border security and workplace enforcement. The same is true of the guest-worker program. That's as it should be. Most Americans rightly believe that the borders should not be a sieve and are understandably leery after past pledges to crack down on crossings were never kept.

Unfortunately, the triggers in this bill could be fudged. The White House must only "certify" that they've been met, and the bill says that should take about 18 months.

It's possible that whoever's president at that time could declare the benchmarks have been reached even if they haven't.

Eighteen months seems way too fast to hire and train 18,000 new border guards; complete 370 miles of border fencing and another 200 miles of "vehicle barriers;" install 70 radio towers and deploy unmanned drones along the entirety of the border with Mexico; and implement tamper-proof employment IDs nationwide.

If the security provisions are not taken seriously, this nation could repeat the fiasco of the 1986 immigration law, which opened the floodgates to two decades of massive illegal border crossings.

Such failure would also stoke the public's growing disgust with the federal government's inept handling of immigration. So while the latest compromise appears to be the best comprehensive plan yet, and clearly has the makings of a good law, it still needs tweaking before it reaches President Bush's desk.