Unrealistic plan on immigration

Re “Senators craft immigration compromise,” May 18

The compromise immigration legislation is doomed to fail. It’s financially unrealistic and logistically impractical and will be all but ignored by future waves of undocumented immigrants -- just like our current immigration laws are now. Many of the proposed laws are aimed at those who don’t have the means to pay “Z visa” fees. Those who could pay would likely decide not to return to the countries they escaped from in the first place.

All this does is give politicians and journalists another feel-good story without any practical way to solve anything. It does, however, offer immigrants more reasons to not follow the rules.

ERIK DERR

Palmdale

*

Our senators must not be listening to the majority of their constituents who say “No amnesty.” This compromise bill is a slap in the face to all those who respect our laws and wait their turn to enter our country legally.

Promises, promises -- let us give a path to citizenship to the current group of lawbreakers and we will really clamp down in the future. Deja vu, it’s 1986 again.

ROSEMARY HAGEROTT

Sierra Madre

*

The continuing debate on immigration has unfortunately devolved to a debate on race. There are, however, legitimate questions: Can our infrastructure support tens of millions more people clogging our roads, schools and hospitals? What are the effects of Balkanizing our culture with an increasing number of foreign, assimilation-resistant groups? Who will bear the economic costs of serving huge numbers of largely impoverished newcomers?

Overpopulation has diminished the quality of life in this country. The current move toward amnesty will not help.

L.J. PEEBLES

South Pasadena

*

Re “Bordering on real reform,” editorial, May 18

I share The Times’ approval for some portions of the proposed immigration bill in the Senate -- specifically, granting amnesty to illegal immigrants who were brought here as children, enabling immigrants with special skills and high levels of education to come to the U.S. more easily and creating a functional, workplace-based enforcement system. So why do these sensible reforms have to be tied to, and dragged down by, questionable and controversial policies like guest worker programs and mass legalization?

ANDERSON GANSNER

Chicago