Beware of immigration proposals promising all things to all people. Secure the U.S./Mexican border. Prevent terrorism. Deport terrorists.

A bill proposing it can do all of this unfortunately passed through the House recently, sponsored by Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis.

Dubbed the Real ID Act, Sensenbrenner’s bill seeks to change how states handle driver’s licenses, speed up the completion of a fence near San Diego and give immigration judges more discretion to keep out foreigners who fear persecution in their native lands.

Many of these topics have already been handled by Congress, or by policy changes since Sept. 11, 2001. The bill’s provisions will sound good to many people, but they are unnecessary.

Take driver’s licenses.

President Bush has already signed legislation ordering the Department of Transportation to develop minimum standards for all of the states’ driver’s licenses. Transportation officials have barely begun meeting to discuss integrating drivers’ data with new technology; making licenses instantly “readable” with machines.

They were given two years to get the new policies implemented.

Sensenbrenner hopes to derail that approved and sensible approach, shifting license policy to the Department of Homeland Security. He also wants to ensure illegal immigrants cannot get driver’s licenses. On the surface, it sounds reasonable that someone who is not legally in the country should not have a driver’s license.

That is, until you consider that people will drive anyway.

They drive, they get in wrecks. And they cause people with insurance to pay all the medical and car repair costs. Sensenbrenner’s proposal means states lose the control to force illegal immigrants to have insurance coverage.

It is important to note that all of the major police organizations support giving some sort of driver’s license to people who are here illegally. Police would rather know who they are dealing with. They know it is unrealistic to believe every illegal person can be deported and, they don’t want to support a black market for fake licenses.

One good idea floated by some states would allow some immigrants a license that looks distinctly different from the one offered legal residents and U.S. citizens.

That approach makes sense given that President Bush has clearly stated his desire to allow some people who are now illegally in the country the ability to live here legally temporarily if they can be matched with the right employer.

If Bush’s thinking becomes law, states will need to be able to give these workers driver’s licenses that will expire along with their three-year limit on working here.

Other aspects of Sensenbrenner’s bill would affect asylum seekers. These are people who fear persecution in their native land; they are the same as refugees, except refugees get the government’s OK before immigrating.

Since Sept. 11, major slowdowns have already occurred in the process to become a refugee or gain asylum. And unfortunately, there are still much easier routes for terrorists to slip into the country.

Putting yourself before a judge and being held in detention while your asylum case waits for a hearing is hardly an effective way for a terrorist to commit mayhem.

As for building fences faster at the border, cities like San Diego have been hard hit by migrants crossing into the United States. But the border is a long swath – nearly 2,000 miles crossing through many ecologically important areas. Seventy-five miles of the border is also sovereign land, owned by the Tohono O’odham Indian Nation.

Legitimate fears exist that Sensenbrenner’s proposal is too vague and will allow later environmental abuses, all to speed up the bureaucratically slow effort to fortify a 3.5 mile part near San Diego.

The Sensenbrenner bill is not much more than political grandstanding with the hopes of sounding tough on immigration. Sensenbrenner’s bill should be shoved aside so those intent on really addressing problems can get to work, a long and arduous process that needs no further complications than already exist.