Degrees of separation

John DePetro of WRKO-AM referred to his recent show as ''Illegal Thursday," and much of the audience seemed to consider it exactly that.

The sometimes incendiary host was talking about immigration -- specifically the in-state tuition bill before the Legislature.

Among his guests who tried to make the case for the bill were Patricia and Andreas, two college-age immigrants who asked not to use their last names. They heard a polite earful from listeners, most of whom clearly don't like the idea. At least one caller suggested they go back where they came from and reenter the country again, legally this time.

Of course, that could take as much as a decade. And both came here as children, with little choice in the matter.

There's no question that immigration can be a hot-button issue -- just check out the recent headlines from France.

But the level of antagonism toward allowing undocumented immigrants to pay the same tuition at Mass. public colleges as citizens is puzzling. Higher education is good. We want people to go to college, get good jobs, pay taxes, become productive members of society. Not everyone, it seems, feels that way.

The proposal would apply to people who have been in the country for at least three years, who graduated from a Massachusetts high school, and who agree in writing to pursue citizenship. It is modeled after laws in place in nine states.

I asked Patricia yesterday if she understood why so many people oppose the idea. ''I think people don't understand," she said. ''They think this is a handout or something."

Patricia has lived in Massachusetts since she was 6. She graduated from Cambridge Rindge and Latin in 2003. She applied to a slew of public and private colleges, including UMass-Boston, UMass-Amherst, and Hofstra, before realizing she couldn't afford any of them. She says her first choice, Northeastern, considered her an international student, and that, as such, she would have to pay her first-year tuition before class started. She's working as a restaurant hostess.

''This is not about people crossing the border, or people not paying their taxes," Andreas said. ''We're not coming here to take benefits. Sure some people take advantage, but we're not all like that."

For both of them, lobbying for in-state tuition has become something of a job, complete with interviews, media appearances, and rallies at the State House.

Unfortunately, the sense of most observers is that the bill is probably on ice. Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey wrote an op-ed essay in the Globe condemning the bill as unfair and suggesting that the money it would cost would be better spent on English classes. This despite the fact that many of those who would take advantage -- such as Patricia and Andreas -- speak English perfectly well.

Lawmakers, with their usual aversion to conflict, have been slow to embrace a plainly unpopular cause. Given the avalanche of legislation competing for attention in the last days of a session, the prospects for action on an unpopular bill facing a near-certain veto are slim.

Despite what the lieutenant governor says, the opposition isn't about the $14.4 million the measure could cost over the next four years. The opposition has much more to so with the sense that undocumented immigrants don't deserve the benefits of citizenship. Within the State House, that is coupled with not wanting to open the door to the immigration issues that could follow, such as drivers' licenses for the undocumented.

The trouble with this argument is that immigration is a fact of life, and it isn't going anywhere. Children should not be punished for their parents' failures to pursue citizenship, and they should not be consigned to the bottom of the economic ladder -- exactly the effect of shutting them out of college. Someone who has lived in Massachusetts since she was 6 is, for all practical purposes, a resident.

Sooner or later, Massachusetts is going to have to face that reality.

Adrian Walker is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at walker@globe.com.