Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (16083)	3/26/2007 5:30:22 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

Minority Rule Mitch McConnell sets the agenda in the Senate. by Fred Barnes 04/02/2007, Volume 012, Issue 28 Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell has a theory about divided government. It's this: When one party holds the White House, and the other holds one or both houses of Congress, the chances of passing landmark legislation improve dramatically. McConnell cites two examples. The first is the passage in 1983 of a Social Security reform (and bailout) bill that brought President Reagan and Democratic House speaker Tip O'Neill together. The other came in 1996 when President Clinton signed a sweeping welfare reform bill drafted by a Republican Congress. A theory held by the leader of the minority party in Congress normally wouldn't be significant. But it is in McConnell's case because he has suddenly emerged as the king of Capitol Hill. Though Democrats control both the House and the Senate, McConnell has greater influence on what Congress passes and in what form than either House speaker Nancy Pelosi or Senate majority leader Harry Reid. So it matters that he believes the circumstances are ripe for reforming immigration and Social Security. Until McConnell became Senate minority leader, these two issues had been left to President Bush to promote. And it was a fair assumption that Democrats, having seized Congress, would take charge of the immigration issue while keeping Social Security reform off the congressional agenda altogether. But Democrats have dawdled. Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat and petulant chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, inadvertently cleared the way for McConnell on immigration. Leahy said it was up to Bush, not Democrats, to act first by offering a proposal. He implied the president was insincere in his support for comprehensive immigration reform, which the entire pro-immigration community and other Democratic senators know is untrue. McConnell stepped in. His goal on most issues is to maximize Republican power by unifying as many of the 49 Republican senators as possible behind a single position. This is necessary to block Democratic legislation because a successful filibuster requires 41 votes. On immigration, however, McConnell's "personal preference" is to pass reform legislation, not block it. And he is well on his way to producing a bill that would win the support of Republican senators from John Cornyn of Texas, a restrictionist, to John McCain, who cosponsored a liberal immigration bill last year with Democratic senator Edward Kennedy. This year Kennedy has complained that McCain is avoiding a discussion with him about immigration. At McConnell's instigation, Republican senators have been meeting for weeks to discuss immigration reform. The group includes Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Jon Kyl of Arizona, Mel Martinez of Florida, and Johnny Isakson of Georgia. Isakson is important because the Republican bill now taking shape is centered around his idea of staggering reform by doing border security first, then taking steps to deal with the illegal immigrants who are already here. The latter steps would be pursued once the Department of Homeland Security certified that five measures necessary to border security had been undertaken. These include the hiring of 14,000 new Border Patrol agents, authorizing the construction of 370 more miles of fence along the border with Mexico, deployment of unmanned aerial vehicles, deployment of ground radar, and the creation of a biometric ID card so employers can verify whether an immigrant worker is legally in the country. Certification would trigger a program to allow illegal immigrants to gain legal status, though not citizenship. But the bill is unfinished. Once drafted, it would be presented to Kennedy in hopes of reaching a compromise with Democrats. Kennedy is sure to demand at least one thing: a provision for guiding illegals in the United States toward becoming citizens. There's an incentive for both parties to reach agreement on immigration. Democrats would get credit for passing a major piece of reform legislation with something for restrictionists (beefed-up border security) and for pro-immigrant forces (some form of legalization). Republicans would get an issue that divides them bitterly off the table before the 2008 election. As for taking on Social Security, that's problematic. Some Democrats still boast about having thwarted President Bush's attempt to reform the system--or "privatize" it from the Democratic perspective--in 2005. And the expectation has been that Social Security would be left for the next president to grapple with. McConnell doesn't want to wait. He would like to set up a bipartisan procedure for reaching a compromise that probably would reject both a tax increase and the private investment accounts funded by payroll taxes that Bush and conservatives have championed. More likely, it would involve means-testing of benefits, which would trim increases for those in upper income brackets. Other possible changes include increases in the regular retirement age and the early retirement age. Social Security reform, however, may be out of reach and, for now anyway, McConnell has set his sights low. All he is seeking is what he calls "a process that could lead to a conclusion." The process would bring together Republicans and Democrats from the House and Senate, along with Bush administration officials. They would craft a reform measure to be sent to both houses under a procedure allowing no amendments, only an up or down vote, just as is done in the case of trade treaties. "It's a way to get a result," McConnell says. When Bush proposed Social Security reform and sought Democratic cosponsors, "we got nothing." McConnell's scheme may fail as well. "We haven't gotten to a process yet," he says. "I'm not optimistic we're going to get there." In three months as Senate Republican leader, McConnell has proved himself to be adept at foiling Democrats. That's his negative role. But he also envisions a positive role. "We need to do something on both these issues," immigration and Social Security, he says. "They are uniquely suited to being decided by divided government." On the other hand, "it's really easy to do nothing around here." Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD weeklystandard.com

To: KLP who wrote (16083)	4/10/2007 2:40:04 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Employer Enforcement Key to Addressing Illegal Immigration by Brian Bilbray Posted: 04/10/2007 In recent weeks, the Bush Administration has authorized numerous workplace raids targeting illegal immigrants and the employers who have hired them. After more than 10 years of inaction, the federal government is long overdue to make employer and interior enforcement a priority. The true test for this administration, however, will be measured in the policy proposals President Bush ultimately supports. If he continues to advocate for a policy that rewards illegal behavior, then the workplace raids that are being carried out will be nothing more than window-dressing for an administration attempting to appear tough on illegal immigration. There is a small window of opportunity for Congress and this White House to finally work together to produce legislation that can effectively and immediately impact the flow of illegal labor coming into our country. Instead of spending time trying to broker an impossible agreement between the House and Senate, we should pass legislation to address an area where both Republicans and Democrats in the House and Senate already have a consensus -- employer enforcement. Employer verification and employer enforcement have been instrumental parts of every legislative proposal that is being considered right now by Congress. The American people will no longer tolerate a policy of inaction. There is simply no excuse for failing to take action on interior enforcement. Ending the insane practice of rewarding illegal immigrants with jobs and giving employers the tools they need to verify employment eligibility is a responsible and common sense step Congress can immediately take to demonstrate their commitment to illegal immigration reform. Doing so will provide employers with the resources they need to identify who should be here and who should not. Document fraud has become a widespread problem as employers are ill-equipped to detect and authenticate workers’ identification documents. Currently, there are more than 30 types of identification employers can use to verify employment eligibility. By limiting the burden of documentation to just one, uniform card, employers will finally have the tools they need to comply with the law. We need to separate those who are egregiously violating the law and those who do not have the means to enforce and comply with the law. Since the United States Congress cannot agree on how to address the 12 million illegal immigrants who are currently living in our country, why not concentrate our efforts on something we do agree on in the first place? Republicans and Democrats in both the House and Senate agree that employment opportunities are a driving force behind illegal immigration. This unanimity can be a starting point for action that is sorely needed. Republicans lost control of the Congress because they failed to take action to address this problem when they had the opportunity to do so. Now, we have another window of opportunity to take action and to pass legislation that will do more than meet the political needs of lawmakers who, up to this point, have yet to demonstrate the will to do what needs to be done to address illegal immigration. Employer enforcement should be more than a benchmark; it should be the focal point of any illegal immigration plan. Some argue you have to do it all at the border, but the border is where the problem is originating, not where the effects are manifested. Border security provisions are window-dressing if you fail to adopt meaningful employer enforcement measures. In the coming weeks, I am hopeful that the Democrat majority and the White House will do more to reach out to House Republicans and to the Immigration Reform Caucus. We can all agree that talking about illegal immigration reform isn’t enough anymore. We need to increase the penalties against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants and prevent employers from exploiting those who are in pursuit of the American dream. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Congressman Brian Bilbray (R-Carlsbad) is the Chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus and represents the 50th District of California, a region that neighbors the busiest border in the world. humanevents.com