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

The customary problem solving methods discussed in government revolve around calls for action. It sounds good. It may give the impression that those sounding the alarm have just been informed. It may be followed by an admission that they did not know of the problem. They may thank a group or individual for bringing the information forward and even offer some congratulatory sentiment to those responsible for enlightening them. This may be the case for Senator Mike Enzi. Form a commission or a panel. Review, study, contemplate. Do an analysis, comparison or evaluation. How about just fix it. That is as simplistic a solution as the methods you suggest. Rather than a call for action you should act first, get the information you need to provide the remedy and then announce it. The way you are doing it with this case, it sounds more like a campaign speech. Since you people spend most of your hard earned tax payer supplied salary campaigning, it is almost understandable.

Where has this man been to not know about the sad state of affairs regarding pensions? All he would need to do to enlighten himself is read the newspaper. That easily could have directed him to PBGC rather than a GAO report and subsequently the near meaningless bureaucracy known as the EBSA. It is like the FDA for pensions. And we all know how well that place works. They even use the same excuses. We don’t have enough employees to do the work. That’s a tired old line.

If Senator Enzi was aware of the existence of the PBGC, he may have paid attention when the airline pilots were last negotiating. In order to strike a deal, the pilots decided to let the airlines extinguish pensions and let PBGC pay for them. A simple visit to their website will show you all the pensions they are taking over from companies run by low life management. They are low lifes because they do not honor their obligations and the government is complicit for letting them.

Whatever you’re selling Senator, you’re the only buyer. Maybe you could do us all a favor and concentrate on something more time dependent, like the war, borders, terrorism, jobs, economy, healthcare, etc. If you read the two paragraphs from Enzi below, you may notice an error. That’s not our error. See if you can find it. He didn’t.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Enhanced Oversight Needed to Protect Private Pensions
February 21st, 2007
Posted by Wyo. GOP Sen. Mike Enzi at the Hill.com
(excerpt)

Effective oversight of the private pension industry’s management of retirement assets is critical to ensuring the economic security of millions of workers, retirees, and their families. But changes brought about by the “Pension Protection Act of 2006,” and its effect on the investment service industry, further highlight the need for EBSA to re-examine its operations to enhance its capability to protect private pension plans.The Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) must re-examine its operations to enhance its capability to protect private pension plans, and the Department of Labor should implement a series of recommendations outlined in a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, (GAO-07-22).

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 

Wage Hike Paired With Small Business Package Makes Sense

February 2nd, 2007 by Wyo. GOP Sen. Mike Enzi at the Hill’s Congress Blog
I would like to commend the Senate for overwhelmingly approving a fair and balanced minimum wage increase that supports working families and small businesses. Final passage of this package is a clear victory for the middle class, and I urge the House of Representatives to follow the Senate’s lead.

Senator Enzi has done it twice. In this piece he claims this is good for the middle class because the tax relief will also help the middle class employers. Hey Senator, if you force employers to provide a wage increase and then give them a tax break you are losing government revenue. Would you make that up by a tax increase later or increase the budget deficit to cover the shortfall. Oh ya, you could cut spending elsewhere. Right. Any way you slice it, the middle class shoulders the bulk of the burden.

Besides individual responsibility for moving beyond minimum wage, Congress should not encourage people to remain on minimum wage. It is one step above welfare. If you want to spend money you don’t have, spend it on increasing the skill sets of those currently earning minimum wage.

C. Harris
MoreWhat.com

Tax Package Is Key to Maintaining Economic Growth

February 2nd, 2007 by Wyo. GOP Sen. Mike Enzi at the Hill’s Congress Blog
The American economy created 111,000 new jobs in January, proof positive that the economy is continuing to grow and create new, better-paying jobs. I urge the House of Representatives to follow the Senate’s lead and pass a minimum wage bill that will relieve much of the tax and regulatory burden on small businesses, and allow them to remain the driving force behind economic growth.

Senator Enzi your math is flawed. With 7 million unemployed, the .1% increase in unemployment in one month translates to about 150,000 jobs. Someone must have convinced the Labor Dept to refer to that in percentage only and call it essentially unchanged. If you claim there are 110,000 “new” jobs and you lost 150,000 old jobs the net is a loss of 40,000 jobs. No wonder it is so difficult to get things done right in Washington.

The minimum wage increase is not a good idea but not for the reasons you have.

C. Harris
MoreWhat.com