Blog @ MoreWhat.com

We all know that political matters can rarely be taken at face value. The saga developing over S. 1348, a so-called bipartisan compromise bill claimed to be immigration reform, is proving to be the evidence that the White House and Congress are incapable of abandoning special interest or ignoring election politics. This senate bill is more accurately characterized the amnesty bill as those referred to as the ‘architects’ (Kyl, Graham, Kennedy and McCain) all seem to favor amnesty.

This is the first of what may be a series of reviews on this week’s amnesty battle. On Tuesday June 5, there was a vote on an amendment proposed by GOP Senator Wayne Allard of Colorado. If one takes the amendment at face value, it appears to be a fair request to not give preferential treatment to those who enter the US illegally. For the moment, this post will skip over the visa dilemma for now. Except to say there are plenty of flaws with how that item is treated also.

Senator Kyl tried to appear opposed to amnesty when the Senate took up this matter after the 2005 House vote which passed HR 4437. During the debate in the Senate then, Cornyn and Kyl were sending mixed signals. This time Kyl is given credit for spearheading this effort to provide amnesty. And he voted against this amendment. This would be an example of why things cannot be taken at face value. The big question mark on Kyl should be changed to calling him in favor of amnesty. And that would not be a good thing.

Below is the Allard amendment description. After that is the roll call results which tell much of the story.

Allard Amdt. No. 1189; To eliminate the preference given to people who entered the United States illegally over people seeking to enter the country legally in the merit-based evaluation system for visas.

Not Voting - 6

Brownback (R-KS)
Dodd (D-CT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
McCain (R-AZ)
Obama (D-IL)

Four Presidential candidates for 2008 again declined to vote on the issue of illegal immigration. Apparently for them, political considerations are more important than doing their jobs and going on the record. As much as one can find fault with Hillary Rodham Clinton and her support of amnesty, to be fair, at least she voted this time. The no vote list is next.

NAYs —62

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Domenici (R-NM)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Tester (D-MT)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

The usual suspects voted against the amendment that claims to remove preferential treatment for illegals. The most notorious or significant among the no votes are:
Bayh, Biden, Boxer, Chambliss, Clinton, Cochran, Coleman, Collins, Craig, Domenici, Feinstein, Graham, Hagel, Kennedy, Kerry, Kyl, Leahy, ….. all hell, they are all significant and notorious. These people do not have the best interest of American citizens in their agenda. Not like that is a big surprise but it should be pointed out again.

Now for the yes votes and what it may mean.

YEAs —31

Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Bond (R-MO)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Coburn (R-OK)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Landrieu (D-LA)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)

One item worth mentioning here is the Missouri Senators, Bond and McCaskill, are on the record as opposing amnesty and being strongly in favor of strong border security and control over illegal immigration. Yes, they are in the ‘yes’ column for this amendment. Cornyn is on this list whereas Kyl is on the ‘no’ vote side. What does that tell you? This list is something to consider when trying to separate the good guys from the bad guys. Stay tuned and keep contacting your elected reps on this issue.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

It may sound outragious to the casual observer or typical apathetic or bleeding heart version of American, but the laws against treason should have a section that addresses politicians who sell this country by accepting money from every special interest and who do their bidding regardless of the negative impact on this nation.

A report from Politico has it right and wrong. The report describes the power and influence, meaning political contributions, etc., of the ‘goliath’ supporting amnesty in immmigration legislation. Senate bill 1348 is the culmination of Harry Reid’s push via Kyl, Kennedy and others to circumvent existing legislation that has been rendered useless through the Bush Administration and others before them refusing to enforce immigration and border control.

Amnesty lobby is immigration Goliath

Nearly every major corporation, trade association, union and civil rights group has a dog in this fight — but most of them seek slightly different things. Companies and trade associations mainly seek reforms in the green card and visa process, while most unions want changes in the guest worker program; civil rights groups press for a path to citizenship above all. The challenge, lobbyists say, remains for these groups to band together to thwart anti-immigration groups like the Federation for American Immigration Reform, NumbersUSA and others trying to fan the flames of grass-roots angst against illegal — and legal — immigration.

The Politico report describes the ‘goliath’ push for easing unenforced immigration laws against what it called the grassroots angst against illegal and legal immigration. That part is wrong. It is not angst. And it is not against legal immigration.

There are seven immigration ‘reform’ bills on the active legislation list at the Senate. This is just a dog and pony show to mask the elimination of immigration and border control as ‘’immigration reform’. The middle class will pay for the crushing burden of opening the immigration flood gates while the politicians and corporate interests line their pockets with the profit from illegal immigration in the form of cheap labor and campaign contributions.

The result will include an increased risk in attack by terrorists that is being sanctioned by political and corporate wrongdoing that explains the ealier suggestion of expanding the laws against treason in this country to include this type of criminal behavior.

But the vast majority of Americans have not the vision to see what is being done to them and have developed such an iron clad shield of apathy they simply nod in agreement and continue to bend over and let it happen again. To which the powerful interests are unable to ignore the opportunity to abuse it again. The few individuals and ‘grassroots’ groups that continue to oppose such travesties are mostly ignored and the cycle repeats itself.

While some of us lobby our representatives and get involved in local, state or national efforts to thwart the open borders crowd and other threats to this nation, the rest of you sit idly by with a front row seat watching the ease with which special interest steals the country from under you.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

If the previous post does not show you that Senator Harry Reid is a contradction then understand he said they would not cut and run in Iraq or raise taxes. Right at the moment the tax thing is secondary. He said they would not cut and run. Senator Reid would you kindly explain the report below if you are not planning on cut and run?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

US Senate Democrats Draft Plan to Revise Military’s Iraq Mission
By VOA News
23 February 2007

Democratic Party leaders in the U.S. Senate are working on legislation that would effectively revoke the 2002 resolution authorizing military action against Iraq.

Senate Democratic aides say the proposal, which is not expected to be adopted, would limit the U.S. military’s mission to training Iraqi troops and police forces, securing the country’s borders and combating terrorist forces. Regular combat forces would be withdrawn by next year.

The proposal, drafted by Senator Carl Levin, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Joseph Biden, who chairs the Foreign Relations panel is set to be presented to other Democratic senators next week.

If accepted, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid would likely attach the proposal to an anti-terrorism bill. If passed by the Senate, which is not likely, the revised authorization would also have to be passed by the House and would be subject to a veto by President Bush.

Democrats and the independents aligned with them hold a slim 51 to 49 majority in the Senate, but hold a more comfortable majority in the House of Representatives.

The 2002 resolution gave President Bush authorization to take military action against Iraq, because of its alleged arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. In a speech last week, Biden said the original resolution is now irrelevant because the WMD program did not exist, and former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is “no longer there.”

The bill is the latest effort by Senate Democrats to challenge President Bush on his Iraq policy. A vote on a non-binding resolution criticizing Mr. Bush’s plan to deploy an additional 21,000 troops to Iraq failed in the Senate, but was passed in the House last week.

Meanwhile, Democrats in the House of Representatives are considering a proposal by lawmaker Jack Murtha that would link funding of the U.S. military mission in Iraq to strict conditions on troop readiness and training standards.

Some information for this report was provided by AP and Reuters.

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, The Right Nation, Leaning Straight Up, Maggie’s Notebook, and basil’s blog, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

So how did the United States Congress do in the first month of the 110th session? You be the judge. First, a little review of the fact that posts here have sometimes asked why we get so focused on what Congress does. After all, they legislate. That’s it. They legislate. The can pass laws. Whatever the House passes must be passed in the Senate also. So both Houses of Congress must pass the same version of a bill before it can become law. Then it goes to the President. He can sign it into law. He can veto it and send it back to Congress. He can pocket-veto at the end of the session. Or he can pretty much ignore it and it becomes law. All you expert legal types out there, feel free to refute this if you must.

Next, Congressional action is either a bill or resolution. Most of the time, resolutions are pretty much useless to the ordinary citizen. There is one example this past month that is not useless. It should not have to come to this but usually does. A joint resolution is similar to a bill. The one last month was for appropriations. You know, to keep the government operating until Congress and the President figure out what they’re doing.

So six bills and one joint resolution have the term “on passage” next to them in the voting record in the House. Being that it is joint and includes the Senate, that’s the only thing showing up on their completed list. Then there are the six bills. You’ll remember them from the daily reminder of the 100 hour agenda. Here’s a take on that.

On January 9, 2007, House of Representatives 1 or HR1 was passed.
This is to implement 9/11 Commission items.
On January 10, 2007, HR2 was passed.
This is for increasing minimum wage over 26 months.
On January 11, 2007, HR3 was passed.
This is to “enhance” stem cell research.
On January 12, 2007, HR4 was passed.
This allows government to negotiate medicare drug prices.
On January 17, 2007, HR5 was passed.
This lowers interest rates on government backed student loans
On January 18, 2007, HR6 was passed.
This is an act for alternative energy creation. That’s quite an act.
On January 19, 2007, HR475 was passed to revise the House Page Board.

The above items are what the House passed. The Senate passed the one joint resolution with the House. And one item became law that was posted here earlier. It is for renaming a National Recreation Area.

One law was passed to rename a park. And the other bills have many hurdles to cross before they can become law. Even if they become law there is no guarantee they will have any positive effects. No one, with any regularity, will follow up on them. So the Congress has done nothing for one month. They have solved nothing. There is only one item as law and it is not critical. 21 Senators are worried about 2008 due to re-election. Other Senators are worried about running for President. And the rest have passed one joint resolution and participated in renaming a park.

We would be better off paying more attention to the remainder of government. At the federal level at least, nothing productive is happening in the legislative branch. Ask anyone from the House or Senate if they care to dispute this. The new Democratic majority are developing disharmony among themselves as are the GOP members. If any of you still hold out optimism for the 110th Congress, good for you. Currently, the chances of Congress contributing to the overall good of the country are slim. That is unless they change their ways. And they will not.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Check the Beltway Traffic Jam 

There are already indications that the Democratic majority in
Congress will be no better than any of the previous impotent
legislatures residing in Washington. With terrorism, border
security, immigration, health care, social security, oversight,
ethics, campaign and general political corruption the current
partial list of significant issues to address, Pelosi and the other
Democrats do not seem prepared to offer solutions.

After their 100 hour agenda, Dems will attack tax cuts for the
wealthy and the Bush fast track for trade agreements. One tired
old argument designed to appeal to the most liberal among us
and an empty gesture for damage already done. On top of this
the Dems will proclaim all new spending must be paid for. Nice
idea but impossible. All spending to date has this country so far
in the red that no other spending can be paid for.



With Steny Hoyer being characterized by lobbyists as someone
you can talk to and Pelosi meeting with labor unions, reasonable
expectations of any changes in politics as usual in Washington
appear dead. Other rumors that Republicans will give President
Bush nothing throughout the lame duck session only serves to
confirm the likelihood of pure politics and no solutions.



After a gap in legislative matters due to “district work periods”,
a record breaking lack of workdays and the midterm elections.
the House has passed six resolutions and rejected one since Sept
30th, all in November after the midterms. The rejected item was
related to trade with Viet Nam. The following is what they passed
since September between November 13th and 15th:


HR 3085 to amend the National Trail System Act
S 819 Pactola Resevoir Reallocation Authorization Act
HR6314 Survivors and Dependents Educational Assistance
HR 864 Program to Prevent Underage Drinking
HR5585 Financial Netting Improvements Act
HR 1078 Congratulate winners of the Baseball World Series


The Senate pass/fail ratio is nearly the inverse of the House. They
passed two and rejected five. The Senate passed appropriations
for the military and an act to provide nuclear technology to India.
The following is what the Senate rejected most recently in their
short work year:


Sen Amdt 5174 to limit the President’s waiver authority
Sen Amdt 5178 in support of UN Resolution 1172
Sen Amdt 5181 to ensure IAEA eqp not used for espionage
Sen Amdt 5183 to dissuade India from nuclear weapons
Sen Amdt 5187 to limit Presdent’s waiver authority on India deal
all the above related to S 3709, modifying the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954 to allow the nuke deal with India.



With all the rhetoric suggesting terrorism, national security, border
security, immigration and foreign policy as primary issues, passing
legislation to supply India with nuclear power technology confirms
the President and Congress have lost their collective minds. Of all
the issues they could take action on, this is totally absurd. Outrage
expressed by countries not friendly to the United States is difficult to
defend against when the Federal government acts irresponsibly.



The Democratic majority offers little hope thus far. If minimum wage,
prescription drug prices, Big Oil tax breaks and student loan interest
are the 100 hour agenda of the Dems, we’re all screwed. The Dems
have an opportunity and they will blow it. The Republicans had an
opportunity and they blew it. And a term-limited President without
a default nominee for 2008 (the VP won’t run) leaves the American
public with a federal government that doesn’t give a damn.


If the American public does not bring to bear the only weapon we
have in response to this, nothing will change. Most of you will opt
to ignore it or merely dismiss public outcry as ineffective. Public
displeasure expressed in sufficient quantities and directed to elected
representatives is effective. Even if you do not get involved with an
organized effort to lobby your representative, your individual contact
to express a complaint or applaud a favorable action does matter. A
contact with your elected representatives gets translated into public
opinion. Enough public opinion is translated into votes and does get
the attention of politicians. How do you think the NEA or other well
known organizations get what they want? It’s not only contributions
to campaigns, it is votes represented by expressed public opinion.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

‘Old Bulls’ taking over House

The most powerful committees will soon be run by veteran
Democrats, perhaps mindful of fickle voters
BY MAURA REYNOLDS
LOS ANGELES TIMES

WASHINGTON — When Rep. John D. Dingell was new to Congress,
Buddy Holly ruled the charts, Rosa Parks refused to budge from her
seat on a segregated bus and Dwight D. Eisenhower occupied the
White House.

And on Capitol Hill, congressional committee chairmen ruled like feudal
lords over federal policy, pursuing pet causes and waging vendettas.

Not that age should matter all that much. Long resumes and history
within Congress may on its own be more important but the fact does
remain that these politicians will wield much more power beginning
with the 110th Congress. You have to ask yourself if that is a good
thing.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com