WASHINGTON - While certain immigration barriers will rise under legislation set for final House approval Thursday, congressional negotiators softened some of the most emphatic provisions as they gave final agreement Tuesday to a bill now on the fast track to the White House.

"We happen to think it makes sense for a number of reasons," said Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Gold River, who formerly served as California's attorney general and helped write past immigration bills.

In broad terms, the bill will establish first-ever national standards deterring illegal immigrants from obtaining driver's licenses. It will make it harder for asylum seekers to win admission to the United States and ease construction of a 3.5-mile fence separating San Diego and Mexico.

"There ought to be enhanced credibility for basic documents like driver's licenses," Lungren said, and "there have been some suggestions that there have been abuses, or could be abuses, in the asylum procedures."

The bill also provides $635 million for increased border security and enforcement, including the hiring of 500 additional Border Patrol officers.

The immigration measures appear certain to become law because they are tacked onto an $82 billion spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan that negotiators officially presented to the House on Tuesday evening. The negotiations were, for the most part, a closely held secret.

"The Democrats were entirely cut out," said a frustrated Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who was technically a member of the negotiating committee. "The Republicans negotiated among themselves. This was a most unfortunate thing."

Feinstein and other Democratic senators had unsuccessfully sought to keep the House-passed REAL ID immigration package off the military spending bill. House Republican leaders, though, had insisted on including the get-tough measures that were the brainchild of the House Judiciary Committee chairman, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis.

Margita Thompson, spokeswoman for California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, said Tuesday night that the Governor's Office was still analyzing details in the legislation.

Still, with the addition and subtraction of a few key words, the immigration bill evolved as it took final form.

For instance, the original House-passed bill required the Homeland Security Department to waive all environmental laws that might otherwise regulate construction of the fence separating San Diego and Mexico. The original bill also blocked courts from reviewing that move.

The final bill permits the environmental laws to be waived but does not require it, and it also permits federal courts to review the Homeland Security Department's actions.

"It's a small, incremental improvement," said Sarah Christie, the California Coastal Commission's Sacramento-based legislative coordinator. "That gives the Department of Homeland Security a choice to make, and we strongly hope they will choose to comply with California's environmental laws."

While technical, some of the most important provisions cover asylum applications. More than 46,000 people applied for asylum in the United States in 2003, with nearly one-third of the applicants nationwide applying through San Francisco or Los Angeles.

About 15,000 asylum applications were granted in 2003.

The legislation, which President Bush is certain to sign, will give immigration judges more leeway in judging the credibility of the asylum applicants, who will have the burden of proof to show they face persecution in their home country. That worries groups like the American Immigration Lawyers Association, which warns the bill will make it "extremely difficult" for the persecuted.

"From a practical standpoint, it's already been difficult to obtain asylum," said Modesto immigration attorney Solange Altman, who has represented Central American asylum-seekers. "When people are fleeing persecution, they don't come with truckloads of documents."

The original House bill specified that there is no "presumption of credibility" when judges review asylum applications. This remains. However, the final bill also softens the blow by declaring that there may be a presumption of credibility during a subsequent appeal.

The legislation is to be voted on by the Senate next week.

    About the writer:

        * The Bee's Michael Doyle can be reached at (202) 383-0006 or mdoyle@mcclatchydc.com.