Part One 877 words
The Recipe for Perfect Immigration Policy
Congress scattered the ingredients across several bills
We can register every illegal, secure our borders, reduce USCIS caseloads, and even fix Social Security, all without driving down wages, taking citizens' jobs, straining welfare, rolling up the welcome mat at the Statue of Liberty, or erasing "love thy neighbor as thyself" from the American character 
By Dave Leach (Dave Leach is listed in “Who’s Who in Media and Communications”. Contact:  HispanicHope@Saltshaker.US.
Translation into Spanish by Gabriela G. Buenrostro, former newspaper and magazine journalist and writer, and former host Zero Radio Show in Mexico City. (Write to her at Gabriela@Saltshaker.US)
The 2005-2006 Congress is beginning. Major immigration change is likely, pressured by the terrorist threat to national security. The change we get could be very good or very bad, depending on what we do with the opportunity.
The hope of positive reform is threatened by lawmakers' misunderstanding of the problems. But it is also threatened by the little details of well-intentioned bills which the public might never hear about, but which are very real to those who would become subject to the new law, and which could frustrate the law's purpose.
Congressmen will draw upon details of last year's immigration bills as they write new bills. We already have national discussion of the general problems: it is time for us to direct national attention to the potential details, and to offer solutions.
A CNN/Gallup/USA Today poll January 9 (USA Today, January 12, 2005) said 34% approve of President Bush's immigration plan, 54% disapprove, and 12% have no opinion. Actually that 34% approval percentage is over twice as high as the same poll measured it just one year earlier, when Bush's "Guest Worker" plan got only 16% approval.
But of which Guest Worker plan do people approve or disapprove? Several bills have proposed details which could contribute towards such a plan. Bush has not said which bill he supports. Details do make a difference, but most of the national discussion of immigration addresses none of them. How can anyone know they oppose Bush's plan, before anyone knows what it is?
Bush has only articulated general goals. Are we so smart that, without the necessity of studying any details proposed by any Congressman, we can conclude that no possible details in any law could meet Bush's goals, without causing disaster?
Proverbs 18:13 "He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him."
In that January, 2004 poll, 45% thought legal immigration should be reduced. By July 22, 2004, Americans who wanted immigration reduced had grown to 49%, although the perceived increase may be accounted for by the margin of error in the poll. Only 14% wanted immigration increased, but the remainder liked it where it was, prompting the Gallup website to characterize the results as "Americans...are now about evenly split over whether immigrations should be decreased, or maintained at the present level or increased."
A March 8-11 Gallup Poll actually focused on how much people worry! It said 84% worry about illegal immigration, and 37% worry a "great deal" about it.
But which aspect of the issue provokes worry? Is it that too many people are coming here? Or that people are coming here in a tragic way, hiding from the law, creating a shadowy ghetto? Would Americans still worry, if new laws, which we have the power to influence, could limit the flow to the number of jobs unfilled by citizens, bring all illegals out of hiding, and eliminate under-the-table work  all without crowding the land, bankrupting welfare, etc. etc.?
No one's first choice is another year of millions working illegally, knowing little English, working for substandard wages, not paying taxes but receiving taxpayer-funded services, with millions more crossing the border, providing great cover for drug runners and terrorists as they, together, dodge the USCIS. (The US Citizenship and Immigration Services is the new name for the INS since March 1, 2003, though some of their forms still say "Immigration and Naturalization Service"; see their website at uscis.gov.)
No one's first choice is the children of our largest demographic minority being raised by millions of parents with limited understanding of the principles of our freedom, and no experience participating in its preservation.
We can have what we all want. But it is up to us.
We must have enough hope that if we reach out to take what we want, together, we can.
We must have enough suspicion that if decent, sensible Americans reach too slowly, others less wise, less honorable, will grab first, leaving America with what no one wants.
We must have clear enough vision to tell which problems actually exist, so that our reach for solutions is not handicapped by myths that send critics barking up imaginary trees.
The political pressure is on. Terrorists threaten. President Bush appears about to begin a serious push for his Guest Worker plan. The theory that he genuinely believes this is the right thing to do is supported by the fact that he takes a lot of political heat for it, for no clear political advantage. Among his strongest opponents is prolife, family values Republican Congressman Steve King from Iowa, who got 35 other congressmen to sign his December 17, 2003 letter opposing Bush's plan.
Next week: President Bush Understands the Battle Ahead