The hurricane season isn't over for President Bush. After facing Katrina, the Miers' nomination and mounting opposition to the Iraq war, another long-winding storm, immigration reform, is back in sight.

In a visit to Arizona and the Texas border this week, the President put his two-sided proposal, border security and guest workers, under the spotlight. The plan is a step in the right direction.

Despite the potential discontent on all sides, balancing principles and reality is necessary. And the plan comes close, tackling two prongs: law enforcement and economic benefits. The president has pledged "to work with members of Congress to create a program that will provide for our economy's labor needs without harming American workers, and without granting amnesty, and that will relieve pressure on our borders."

Tough law enforcement is absolutely essential to control illegal immigration. Without it, any plan would fall apart. Congressman Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., for instance, is right to emphasize law enforcement, but he's wrong in calling Bush's plan an "amnesty."

Illegal immigrants have broken U.S. law, and as such they should pay a penalty. In Bush's proposal, before changing legal status, immigrants will have to pay a fine. There is no sweeping free-ride "amnesty." Tancredo and company could argue, of course, that the punishment is not proportional to the crime. But this is quite different from claiming the plan grants a quick-fix, easy pass.

As expected, Bush's plan addresses border security. To this effect, he recently signed a bill allocating $7.5 billion for increasing border patrol and returning new illegal immigrants who make it through the border.

Often overlooked, however, is his attention to employers' compliance with the law. Since incentives for illegal aliens "to turn themselves in" are unlikely to work by themselves--11 million undocumented aliens won't simply come out, pay the fine and get at the end of the line--enforcing employment law compliance in the workplace is important.

But plain law enforcement by itself is not enough. Any immigration reform should be comprehensive for several reasons. Along with a problem to solve, there are benefits to reap.

On the one hand, the program will bring current illegal workers out of the shadows--a regulated work force is in the interest of everyone. On the other hand, it will represent a supply mechanism for the needs of business groups--including, for instance, California farmers.

The point of reform then is not simply that if we get rid of (mostly illegal) low-skilled workers, our current economy will fall apart. The issue is broader than that. While the net fiscal impact of illegal immigrants is extremely hard to estimate, and is sensitive to specific economic and demographic assumptions, industries and consumers in the country will benefit from guest workers.

Like the Bracero program in the '40s and '50s, which contributed to the growth of the rich agricultural industry, the guest-worker program will meet labor needs not met by other American citizens. And the gain is not only for the multibillion-dollar agricultural industry; the nation also benefits from lower consumer prices.

In the absence of low-cost immigrant workers, increasing wages will be necessary to make certain jobs more attractive to many Americans. The most likely effect: higher prices for services and products.

Guest workers would not only put veggies on our tables--and sometimes even cook them--but will also contribute to keeping them reasonable priced. In the process, they'll benefit from working in the United States and also consume--as part of a group that purchases $100 billion per year--becoming part of the economic engine.

Policy alternatives with regard to immigration reform will most likely require trade-offs. Although it can be improved, the president's guest-worker program has the right motivation, a comprehensive strategy and includes much of what's needed for enforcing the law and feeding the economy.

Reforming immigration won't be a breeze. But such is the nature of hurricanes.

José Idler and Mario Villarreal are National Research Initiative fellows at AEI.