Exactly. That's obvious to anyone who's really studied the problem. It's not obvious to certain Freepers. One wonders if they have agendas that are not necessarily friendly to the pre-1965 existing population of the U.S.
The question we have to ask is if the government couldn't/wouldn't enforce immigration law after the 1985 amnesty, is anyone gullible enough to believe it will be enforced if the current proposal is enacted? I quit believing in the Tooth Fairy a long, long time ago.
There are three simple tests of the government's intent. Will it modify the 14th Amendment so children of illegals born in the U.S. no longer are automatic citizens? Will it eliminate the Family Unification Act so we no longer have endless chain immigration? Will it modify welfare programs so they operate for the benefit of those who are taxed to pay for them, not illegals? Anything less is smoke and mirrors.
The idea of Bush's proposal is to be able to differentiate between hard workers and criminals. Amnesty doesn't do that. This proposal calls for the guest workers stay to be limited and that they have a definite verifiable job, else they're out. It makes it easier on folks that love their maid to pallate the coming deportations.