The most important part of President Bush's speech on immigration was the need for a broad reform package. Addressing all the key issues at once is the only way to ensure a lasting fix.

This, unfortunately, was not done during the last wave of immigration reform under President Reagan, and problems continued to multiply.

Fixating on any one aspect simply won't solve the problem. Securing the border alone does not help us deal with about 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country. This problem needs a holistic solution.

Like the story about the man asked to drain a pond, the first step is to cut off the sources feeding it. That is where border control comes in. Bush's proposal calls for putting 6,000 National Guard troops along the southern border to bolster the Border Patrol.

The question is whether it is legal to use U.S. troops in this role. The Posse Comitatus statute, enacted after the federal occupation of the South after the Civil War, prohibits the U.S. military from doing law enforcement. President Bush declared that they won't be doing direct enforcement, only supporting jobs, providing vehicles and surveillance, for example. The use of troops will doubtless be challenged in court.

Beyond the philosophical question is the practical matter of whether the National Guard can do the job. Can states spare 6,000 troops for border duty while supporting the Iraq war and still have a force that can respond to state emergencies? California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said that sending troops overseas and to the border would leave states with little, if anything for state needs.

We think this worry is misplaced, as 6,000 troops represent only a fraction of the available Guard force.

At any rate, reinforcing the border does not shut down the stream of illegal immigrants entering the country. The border is merely one source. Immigration groups estimate that between 50-65 percent of illegal immigrants entered the country with a legal visa, then overstayed. This group is not sneaking over the border, and even a million troops stationed there will not fix that problem.

It would make sense to put additional resources in immigration control to monitor visas and find those who are here on expired documents and send them back where they came from. This is not easy, but there will be a trail to many of them.

Once the inflow of new illegal immigrants is stopped, we must then deal with those who are already here. Deporting 11 million people is impractical. There are not enough immigration officials for such a monumental task. A mass roundup would take many years, and would likely not be successful anyway.

One can argue that many of these immigrants have become de facto citizens simply because America acceded to their presence for years, sometimes for generations. They have held down jobs and contributed to Social Security, Medicare and other programs through payroll deductions.

The Senate's approach to balance on this question is to allow those who have been here for two years or more to apply for citizenship, after paying a fine. In principle, it is a realistic approach, although the time period is far too short. Citizenship requires seven years of residency for a legal applicant. Why should the bar be lower for an illegal one? It shouldn't.

And the citizenship application of an illegal immigrant should be accompanied by a heavy fine. Paying a fine is not amnesty, but rather satisfying the demand of justice.

Perhaps illegal immigrants could also earn citizenship through national service. The government could say that if an immigrant serves two tours of duty with the military, or spends several years in a national service project such as Americorps, he or she could be granted U.S. citizenship. This is not a new concept. The Roman Empire granted citizenship to soldiers who served 20 years in the army. Such a program would solve some of the military's recruiting problems while demonstrating an immigrant's willingness to assimilate as an American. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, once a man has worn the uniform of the United States military, he cannot be denied citizenship.

But there also need to be other reforms, including a guest worker program and strict penalties for companies that knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

The one proposal we question is President Bush's suggestion of a tamper-proof identification card so employers know that the people they are hiring are legal residents or citizens. This sounds good if you don't look too closely. Once we did, we wondered how an identification card would provide meaningful screening unless every American was required to have one. After all, if a person can assert legal status with a real Social Security card, then another can assert legal status with a forged one. Tamper-proof cards issued only to immigrants would be moot, it seems.

The idea of a national I.D. card does not sit well with many Americans, though the nation may go along with the idea for the sake of stopping illegal immigration. After all, it may no longer be an issue given the many other avenues to our personal information that are already available to government -- driver's licenses, credit cards, tax returns, Social Security cards, etc. Big Brother can already identify us.

The bottom line is that illegal immigration is a tough problem that can only be solved through comprehensive legislation. Congress must immediately put aside the partisan rhetoric, the chest thumping and the bumper-sticker slogans and work on a package that addresses the entire spectrum of issues, not just certain parts.