One of the clearest arguments against "comprehensive immigration reform" (aka a massive amnesty) is that the new laws would be enforced in the same manner as the current laws: only when necessary and unwillingly so. This amnesty will fail in the same ways as the 1986 amnesty, and the same forces that oppose enforcement now will continue to oppose enforcement, and they'll have even more power as a result of the amnesty.

And, they're tipping their hand even before beginning to push for the amnesty. From "Democrats to 'revisit' law creating border fence":

Democrats will look again at the legislation mandating 698 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border and might seek to scrap the plan altogether when they take control of Congress next year.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, Mississippi Democrat, told reporters this week that he expected to "revisit" the issue when he becomes chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee in the 110th Congress.

Mr. Thompson said the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) new border enforcement program, known as the Secure Border Initiative or SBI Net -- which includes monitors, cameras and other integrated surveillance systems -- is a viable alternative to fencing.

"We might do away with it, or look at [integrating it into] SBI Net," he said. "A virtual fence rather than a real one."

President Bush and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff have voiced similar concerns about building the fence...

Thompson's immigration-related votes get an F-, and some of his votes are listed here.

However, from a May 4 article:

"Most blacks don't think migrant workers hurt their chances to get work, with the exception of a few industries -- most notably construction -- and they want to show solidarity with the immigrants," said Rep. Bennie Thompson, Mississippi Democrat.

But, he said, people are put off by the rhetoric used to support a guest-worker program for illegal aliens already in the U.S.

"The most insulting thing you hear is that [immigrants] are doing jobs that we won't do ... as if the idea is that if we won't do a back-breaking job for $5.15 an hour without protections -- health care, workers' compensation -- [it] means we are shiftless and lazy. That is simply an insult," Mr. Thompson said...