Early next year, the Senate will consider the various flavors of "comprehensive" immigration "reform", all of which are more or less amnesty schemes.

According to Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) in "Frist broadens Senate debate on border security":

"We're going to start with border security, but in the same time we're on the floor we're going to build on that and extend that to the enforcement issues and the issues of more comprehensive reform, and give guest-worker [plans] full consideration."

The interview he did with Hannity and Colmes reveals that semantics plays as large a role in this "debate" as ever.

...illegal immigrants have to be stopped, and they can be placed through a legal channel, which we need to develop and specify, and give them incentives to go through that legal channel... But there's a right way and a wrong way. And we're going to define that right way, and then we're going to enforce those laws... What we need to do is define legal and illegal, then enforce those laws aggressively...

Those terms are already defined, and politicians don't enforce them. If we redefine those terms, will politicians then suddenly enforce the new laws? Since politicians currently do what small but powerful pressure groups want and don't do what their constituents want, it would appear that those terms would have to be defined to satisfy those pressure groups. What we really need is political reform that would replace the current leaders with politicians who'll do what U.S. citizens want them to do instead of playing word games.

See also Frist's breathless "Breaking News On Border Security" in which he solicits comments on his blog. Instead, I'd suggest sending FAXes to him and other Senators suggesting they spend their time on enforcing our current laws rather than just trying to sell us a bill of goods.