Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff was reportedly a key actor in crafting the compromise and he's to be congratulated on his role.

Under the compromise, existing illegal immigrants could stay in the country and apply for residence visas and eventual citizenship. Up to 400,000 immigrants could enter the country for temporary work but would have to leave after two years. A new point system for immigrants would come into effect that would favor educated, skilled English-speaking immigrants over family ties that have been the dominant factor in the past.

All of this would come into force once the United States imposes tough new border controls and cracks down on illegal workers. That means deploying 18,000 new Border Patrol agents, constructing 370 miles of fence, 200 miles of vehicle barriers and 70 radar and surveillance towers, all of it overseen by four unmanned aerial vehicles. Facilities for detaining 27,500 illegal immigrants a day would have to be arranged or built and employers would have to be given the means of identifying illegal immigrants.

Being a sensible and a well-crafted compromise, it has, of course, been immediately attacked by everyone on the extremes of the debate.

Hard-core conservatives believe that lawbreaking, which is what illegal immigrants have engaged in, needs to be punished. They’re right. However, their legalistic arguments are undercut by their lack of compassion for poor people seeking a better life and a strong strain of xenophobia, which, like the phantom pain that plagues an amputee, seems to be a kind of belated, misplaced hatred of terrorists and all foreigners. Their solution would create a permanent, persecuted, illegal underclass that they'd neither control nor be able to expel.

At the same time, liberals are complaining about the fines and the hardship on families--but would simply overlook mass lawbreaking. That's no solution either.

As much as Americans may not like to recognize it, the true genius of American governance resides in its encouragement to compromise. Indeed, the entire Constitution is a compromise and one that has worked well for two centuries. In this instance, both sides have come up with a compromise that is reasonable, fair and goes some way toward meeting each other's needs and principles. It deserves support in its initial form.

Speaking practically, though, that is not what is going to emerge from the legislative process. Whether it is amended beyond recognition remains to be seen. But it provides a small glimmer of hope that people on all sides of the political spectrum can even meet and talk about a middle ground and emerge with a proposal that earnestly tries to address all concerns equally. We haven't seen that in a long time.

Impact on homeland security

From a homeland security perspective the effects of this proposal appear to be immense.

Last August, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) did an estimate of the cost of S. 2611, the first immigration reform bill, and concluded that its provisions of a guest worker program would cost the United States $64 billion in direct spending over 10 years--not including its impact on taxes, entitlements, benefits and ancillary expenses to the country (To see the full text, go to http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=7501&type=1).

The current bill, with its strong enforcement provisions, would likely cost much more and we can expect to see a new CBO estimate sometime soon.

Clearly, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would require some major investments to keep up with the demands of hiring new Border Patrol agents, acquiring new technology, building new fences and constructing a whole series of new detention centers. Furthermore, the task of credentialing and verifying nearly 12 million illegal immigrants, applicants for guest worker visas and all the rest of the new bill's requirements would prove a tremendous challenge to industry--but would be full of opportunity as well.

Chertoff has stated that the changes in the bill could be in effect in 18 months and as a key player in crafting the compromise, one presumes he knows his department's capabilities. Some programs are already under way, for example the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) and its technological component, SBInet.

But looking at this from the outside gives one pause. Perhaps the procedural changes could be implemented in 18 months, but trying to rush the full program to completion in those 18 months - essentially, before the end of this administration - appears to be a formula for difficulty at best and disaster at worst. The potential for confusion, waste and chaos is as great as that which accompanied creation of DHS itself.

As one example, take the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC), which was to verify the identities of all transportation workers with access to sensitive facilities and which to this day has not been implemented for the past three years despite repeated pilot programs and steadily scaled back ambitions. There is still no comprehensive TWIC - and TWIC was nowhere near as ambitious a credentialing program as the guest worker program will be with its need to credential at least 400,000 people. What is more, TWIC applied to US citizens with documented identities who speak English. The guest worker program will have to verify and credential people with questionable documents who may not speak English.

This is not to say that the ambitions or the nature of the immigration reforms are bad or wrong. On the contrary they're laudable and sensible. But it would be a mistake to implement them in haste and then repent at leisure.

If this immigration compromise indeed passes, it should be solid enough to withstand management by several administrations, of whatever party, and be implemented in a sober, sensible and capable way - not rushed to completion to meet political timetables.