Senator Eliot Shapleigh - El Paso, Texas

There's a possibility that momentum for Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reforms may get a boost under the administration of President-elect Barack Obama. However, some pro-reform activists should remember not to ask for too much too soon.

Like an electric stovetop that's been on for hours, it will take some time for the acrimonious debate over illegal immigration to cool down.

We bring this up because the Associated Press reported last week that some elected officials in El Paso are asking Obama to throw out federal plans to build hundreds of miles of fencing along the U.S. border with Mexico.

OK, that didn't strike us as unreasonable. We have argued and this newspaper has reported that it is unrealistic to seal the border with fencing. Some terrain along the border is too rugged for fencing and no wall can thwart the ingenuity of humans desperate to find a better way of life.

Also, building hundreds of miles of fencing ignores the fact that many illegal immigrants enter the country legally. They come in with valid visas and then simply don't go home.

However, the El Paso officials did not stop at asking for a halt in fence building. They also suggested that existing fencing, including several miles of decades-old barriers in El Paso, Nogales and San Diego should also be removed.

This is asking for too much too soon.

There might come a day when people can cross the U.S.-Mexican border as easily and hassle-free as they cross the U.S.-Canadian border. But that day isn't here yet.

Tearing down barriers would also be a tough political sell to many politicians and millions of voters who want tighter — not looser — border security.

Texas state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh told the AP that taking down the barriers would send "a message of friendship and a message of hope."

Shapleigh and like-minded activists need to remember that barriers in urban areas along the border aren't meant only to stop illegal immigrants, but drug smugglers and other criminals as well.

As long as drug trafficking from Mexico remains a problem, we believe keeping the barriers in urban areas is a good idea. They provide a level of security that a less-sturdy fence cannot and make it more difficult for smugglers to operate.

The El Paso officials might have been prompted to make their requests on the hope that Obama and a more Democratic Congress will be more likely to enact immigration reforms now that Republicans have lost some strength.

It also doesn't hurt that Obama has nominated Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano to head the Department of Homeland Security, which is responsible for monitoring the border. Napolitano is a moderate on the immigration issue and has criticized border fences in the past.

We have argued on these pages many times that border security plays an integral role in the debate over curbing illegal immigration. Where we agree with the pro-reform advocates and disagree with some members of Congress and Arizona's Legislature is that enforcement actions alone will not solve the problem of illegal immigration.

A comprehensive solution would include:

? A national guest-worker program that would let companies hire foreigners for jobs few Americans are willing to do. Such a system would allow foreign workers to come and go more freely.

? An improved system so that companies can verify the work eligibility of job applicants.

? A pathway to citizenship for the millions of illegal immigrants who are working, paying taxes and contributing to the fabric of the United States.

Border security is necessary and some barriers are prudent in populations centers along the border. But barriers alone have not proved to be a solution to the illegal-immigration problem.