FederalRepublic.net

In the continuing immigration bill fiasco in Washington, the Senate has approved an amendment allowing a 370 mile, triple layer fence between the United States and Mexico on our southern border:

The Senate endorsed a chance at citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants Wednesday but also voted to build 370 miles of triple- layered fencing along the Mexican border in increasingly emotional debate over election-year immigration legislation.

Taken together, the votes gave fresh momentum to legislation that closely follows President Bush’s call for a major overhaul of the nation’s troubled immigration system.

The vote was 66-33 against a proposal that would have removed provisions giving illegal immigrants in the country more than two years an eventual chance at citizenship.

A few minutes earlier, the Senate had voted 83-16 in favor of construction of the fence and 500 miles of vehicle barriers, the first significant victory in two days for conservatives seeking to place their stamp on the measure.

Read the whole article

Powerline has more:

Senator Jeff Sessions’ amendment to the Senate’s immigration bill, which requires the construction of a fence and erection of vehicle barriers, passed the Senate this afternoon. The Associated Press’ report conveys a sense of the passions that were generated by the floor debate. The vote wasn’t close, however; the Sessions amendment passed 83-16. Which means that even most Democrats have figured out how serious Americans are on the issue of border security.

In a related note, Right Wing News is carrying a quote from Rush Limbaugh today communicating how the issue of immigration is affecting the conservative base:

“I’ll tell you what, this issue is causing more divisions in the Republican Party than any issue that I can recall in a long time, including the Dubai Ports deal. I can’t recall an issue. I’ve been doing this for 18 years. It will be 18 years in August, a big anniversary coming up. I can’t remember. I’m trying to think. There have been some, but I can’t think of any single issue which has Republicans, slash, conservatives more up in arms than this one — and particularly with the apparent lack of response at the highest levels of government, House, Senate, White House.

The House Bank was a big deal, and the House Post Office, and some of those corruption scandals that existed back in the late eighties and early nineties, but this is incredible.” - Rush Limbaugh

By Deb Reichman

President Bush signed a $70 billion tax-cut package Wednesday that Republicans hope will ingratiate them with voters as they head into midterm elections with worries about holding control of Congress.

“Our pro-growth policies stand in stark contrast to those in Washington who believe you grow your economy by raising taxes and centralizing power,” said Bush, who was joined at the signing ceremony by Vice President Dick Cheney. “They are wrong. Our pro-growth economic polices are working for all Americans.”

The GOP says the tax cuts, which were first enacted in 2003, have created millions of new jobs and bolstered tax revenue. Democrats overwhelmingly opposed the bill, saying the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends will flow mostly to rich Americans.

“The bill I sign today is a victory for the American taxpayers and is a strong lift for our economy,” Bush said.

The bill passed the Senate last Thursday by a 54-44 vote.

The legislation Bush signed provides a two-year extension of the reduced 15 percent tax rate for capital gains and dividends, which were set to expire at the close of 2008.

Link

An election goal fulfilled, President Bush signed a $70 billion tax cut to extend some of his 2003 taxcuts to 2010 and to provide relief for near 15 million families by taking away their eligibility for the AMT, or alternative minimum tax, a tax that was originally written and put into law for wealthy Americans.

I am very greatful Republicans in Congress and President Bush have created and signed this legislation into law. Not only will the tax cuts be able to help this country in the short term economically, but will help investors down the road and keep America fiscally healthy. I’m very excited what this will mean for the country over the next couple years.

In an effort to promote security enforcement at the border first and foremost, Senator Johnny Isakson of Georgia proposed an amendment to the pending immigration bill in the Senate that would demand the borders be certified as secure by the Department of Homeland Security before any guest worker provisions begin. However, the amendment was voted down:

Bill backers on Tuesday defeated two amendments that would have gutted the Senate bill. In votes that crossed party lines, the Senate rejected 55-40 a requirement that the border be secured before other immigration changes are made. They also voted 69-28 to scuttle a Democratic amendment to exclude foreigners and recent illegal immigrants from a new guest worker program.

Michelle Malkin is carrying the list of GOP Senators who have rejected this common-sense security amendment and sided with open border Democrats, including Sam Brownback, Lindsay Graham, and Chuck Hagel:

Bennett (UT)
Brownback (R-KS),
Chafee (RI),
Coleman (MN),
Collins (ME),
Craig (ID),
DeWine (OH),
Graham (SC),
Hagel (NE),
Lugar (IN),
Martinez (FL),
Murkowski (AK),
Shelby (AL),
Snow (ME),
Specter (PA),
Stevens (AK),
Voinovich (OH),
Warner (VA)

More at the Washington Times:

The Senate yesterday voted against securing the border before implementing provisions that would grant the right of citizenship to millions of illegal aliens and that would double the flow of legal immigration.
 
The amendment would have delayed the “amnesty” and guest-worker provisions in the Senate’s comprehensive immigration-reform bill until the border had been sewn up successfully. The majority of Democrats, 36 of 44, were joined by 18 Republicans and the chamber’s lone independent to kill the amendment on an 55-40 vote.

Read the whole thing

From the Associated Press

(AP) — A civilian border watch group considers President Bush’s crackdown plan on illegal immigration insufficient and is sticking to plans to start putting up a short border security fence on private land along the Mexican border.

-Snip-

Chris Simcox, the head of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, said last month that unless military reserves or the National Guard were deployed to the border and the White House endorsed more secure fencing, his group would begin constructing fencing on private land along the border.

Last week, the group said construction would begin May 27 because it was not anticipating any imminent effort to put troops on the border.

On Tuesday, Minuteman spokeswoman Connie Hair reiterated that position, despite the president’s announcement to have guardsmen fill in on some behind-the-lines Border Patrol jobs while that agency’s force is expanded by 6,000 by 2008.

“This is a token deployment of unarmed and grossly inadequate numbers of National Guardsmen to the border, placing them in the same demoralizing position as the Border Patrol … outmanned and outgunned against the international crime cartels,” Hair said.

Link

I agree with the Minutemen about the defense of our border. Before President Bush dreams of having his guest worker program implemented, the border must be secure. Both the Minutemen and the American people realize this. However, what seems to be a bid to win centrist and liberal support, the President has called for a comprehensive immigration bill instead of calling for a two tier approach - one bill for defense, another for citizenship or guest worker provisions.

The problem with a comprehensive bill is not the bill itself, but the legislative focus involved. The security of our border must be a priority and defensive plans must not get shuffled in and lost under a host of other non-priority immigration measures like the guest worker program or the so-called “path to citizenship.”

While I think the President has finally offered some strong leadership on immigration, an issue that many Americans tie to the War on Terror, I don’t think his focus is quite right. The defense and security of the border must come first. Afterall, if the border is not closed to new illegal aliens, what good does a comprehensive guest worker program do for our security? Absolutely nothing.

The following links are public responses and reactions from various sources to President Bush’s immigration plan:

Michelle Malkin: “Too little, too late.”

Captain’s Quarters Blog had this to say:

Will that translate to increased support for this administration? I doubt it. Anyone paying attention to Bush’s immigration policies already knew he was a centrist on this issue. He may get some grudging respect from centrists and liberals for not caving to his base, but that won’t translate into support for a president they already consider the Second Coming of Richard Nixon. The only cause Bush helped tonight was the policy he has consistently put forth on immigration — which once again shows Bush as a man who follows his own lights and beckons people to follow.

Powerline Blog’s reaction:

…and he blew it. He should have given the speech I told him to. As soon as he started talking about guest worker programs and the impossibility of deporting 11 million illegals, it was all over. President Bush keeps trying to find the middle ground, on this and many other issues. But sometimes, there isn’t a viable middle ground. This is one of those instances.

Right Wing News’ commentary:

This was not an impressive speech. He said he’d send the National Guard to the border for a year, where they wouldn’t be actually apprehending any illegals, but everything else is the same old, same old.

So, in my view, this isn’t even an olive branch to people who are serious about defending this border and dealing with illegal immigration.

Overall grade for the speech: F

Scott Ott at Scrappleface.com has written a great article articulating the speech conservatives wish they would of heard from the president tonight:

Good evening my fellow Americans, and those of you from other lands who are pursuing U.S. citizenship legally. Tonight I’ve come to praise immigration, not to bury it.

This nation was built through the blood and toil of restless refugees yearning to breathe free. Our canvas has been painted in a thousand shades of humanity. Our national language reverberates with the sweet song of innumerable accents. It’s a vibrant symphony that brings unity from diversity.

We are a nation of laws, not of men. That’s what sets us apart from the monarchies, dictatorships and democracies-in-name-only. Our Republic was founded to protect the weak from the strong, and to defend the rights of the individual in his person and property.

Americans remember where we came from, and so we’re a merciful people. America is the land of second chances.

And so, if you sneaked into our great country–like a thief in the night–to take for yourself the benefits of citizenship without bearing the burdens that come with that high position, I have a message for you tonight.

On behalf of all legal U.S. citizens past, present and future, let me say this: ‘Get off of our land. Get out of our country. We’re giving you a second chance to do the right thing.’

If you have difficulty locating the exits, just ask any legal U.S. citizen and he’ll show you the door. If you linger too long, you’ll get an armed escort.

Once you have returned to your country of origin, you may apply to re-enter the United States legally.

It’s inconvenient. It’s slow. It will cost you. But as millions of naturalized citizens will tell you, it’s worth the wait to wake up each morning, to take a deep breath of freedom, and to hold in your heart the meaning of that old song: “This is my country. Land of my choice.”

Read the whole thing at Scrappleface

In response to tonight’s prime time speech on illegal immigration given by President Bush, I offer my own critique of his so-called “plan” for immigration reform:

First, the United States must secure its borders. This is a basic responsibility of a sovereign nation. It is also an urgent requirement of our national security. Our objective is straightforward: The border should be open to trade and lawful immigration and shut to illegal immigrants, as well as criminals, drug dealers and terrorists.

It is imperative the United States secure its borders first and foremost. As a nation of laws, we must enforce the laws already on the books or create new laws to replace those entry laws that have become ineffective in stemming illegal aliens from crossing our border. As a sovereign nation, it is the duty of our government to provide for the defense of our citizenry. As the world becomes ever more dangerous, our government must secure what is our weakest link in our defense - the holes in our border. The government must prevent undocumented, illegal aliens from trespassing onto our soil, enslaving our citizenry with higher taxes, more crime, and the corruption of our justice system.

Training thousands of new Border Patrol agents and bringing the most advanced technology to the border will take time. Yet the need to secure our border is urgent. So I am announcing several immediate steps to strengthen border enforcement during this period of transition:

One way to help during this transition is to use the National Guard. So in coordination with governors, up to 6,000 Guard members will be deployed to our southern border. The Border Patrol will remain in the lead. The Guard will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance systems analyzing intelligence installing fences and vehicle barriers building patrol roads and providing training. Guard units will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities that duty will be done by the Border Patrol. This initial commitment of Guard members would last for a period of one year. After that, the number of Guard forces will be reduced as new Border Patrol agents and new technologies come online. It is important for Americans to know that we have enough Guard forces to win the war on terror, respond to natural disasters, and help secure our border.

While the deployment of near 6,000 National Guard troops is a welcome start to securing our open borders, the suggestion of National Guard helping with logistics and intel is only a bandaid to the real problem - our government not taking a strong stance to secure our border. Both the northern and southern border must be defended with the National Guard under the control of state governors and given law enforcement responsibility at both the northern and southern borders. We must give the Border Patrol the help they need, while striking a nerve with new illegals by providing state law enforcement support though use of the National Guard.

Second, to secure our border, we must create a temporary worker program. The reality is that there are many people on the other side of our border who will do anything to come to America to work and build a better life. They walk across miles of desert in the summer heat, or hide in the back of 18-wheelers to reach our country. This creates enormous pressure on our border that walls and patrols alone will not stop. To secure the border effectively, we must reduce the numbers of people trying to sneak across.

Therefore, I support a temporary worker program that would create a legal path for foreign workers to enter our country in an orderly way, for a limited period of time. This program would match willing foreign workers with willing American employers for jobs Americans are not doing. Every worker who applies for the program would be required to pass criminal background checks. And temporary workers must return to their home country at the conclusion of their stay.

While the reality is true that 12 millions illegal aliens cannot just be lifted out of our territories, it does not give Congress an excuse to propose or pass a buttoned-down, reformed version of amnesty. Illegal aliens must be punished harshly or deported if necessary, in order to quell new illegal aliens from coming into our country. It would be wise for the president to take a hard line on this matter and not reward illegal immigrants for their unlawful behavior. Allowing illegals to get in line behind immigrants who come here legally at the citizenship counter promotes an attitude of irresponsibility and unlawfulness. Knowing full well they will be rewarded with a path to citizenship upon arrival, immigrants will continue to offer an illegal unskilled labor force that drives up crime and dries taxpayer dollars.

While President Bush continues to push his guest worker program, the idea that immigrants will do the jobs Americans won’t do continues to be inherently false. There are true Americans everywhere who clean up pig feces, who straighten up hotel rooms, or do any number of low level labor jobs around the country. The fact is that Americans have always done what it took to become successful, a trait inherent to our society that values hard work, individual determination, and natural, God-given rights. To think otherwise is not only uneducated, but absurd.

Fourth, we must face the reality that millions of illegal immigrants are already here. They should not be given an automatic path to citizenship. This is amnesty, and I oppose it. Amnesty would be unfair to those who are here lawfully and it would invite further waves of illegal immigration.

The bottom line is that illegal aliens must be punished for breaking our immigration laws one way or another. One way is to massively fine illegal immigrats for breaking our entry laws or committing fraud by using someone else’s Social Security number to obtain a job. They should not be offered citizenship, but rather deported when found out.

Fifth, we must honor the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one Nation out of many peoples. The success of our country depends upon helping newcomers assimilate into our society, and embrace our common identity as Americans. Americans are bound together by our shared ideals, an appreciation of our history, respect for the flag we fly, and an ability to speak and write the English language. English is also the key to unlocking the opportunity of America. English allows newcomers to go from picking crops to opening a grocery from cleaning offices to running offices from a life of low- paying jobs to a diploma, a career, and a home of their own. When immigrants assimilate and advance in our society, they realize their dreams, they renew our spirit and they add to the unity of America.

President Bush is right, America is a melting pot. It is a melting pot rich in history and common virtue that allows us to take pride in our American heritage. However, by refusing to assimilate into our American culture by breaking our entry laws and refusing to learn English, illegal immigrants have struck at the foundation of Americanism. They have shown no respect for the American way of life, nor the capitalist economic system and constitution which have led the way to freedom for millions of other immigrants who have come into our country the legal way. I suggest Congress make English the official language of the United States, starting first by printing all federal signs and literature in English and promoting other English-language laws under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

While I can sit here and denounce the president’s immigration plan all day, the proposed plan is definately a start to promoting a secure border, while allowing immigrants to enjoy the promise of America. We must secure the border first and foremost, then create immigration laws that promote legal immigration and stem illegal border crossings.

Read the full text of the president’s speech here.

From the Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Republicans in Congress reached agreement Tuesday on a $70 billion measure to extend tax breaks for investors and prevent more middle-income families from being hit by a tax aimed at the wealthy.

The bill would hand President Bush one of his top tax priorities, a two-year extension of the reduced 15 percent tax rate for capital gains and dividends, currently set to expire at the end of 2008. Republicans credit the tax cuts, enacted in 2003, with boosting economic growth and creating many jobs.

The measure also would keep 15 million families from being hit this year with the alternative minimum tax, which was designed to make sure the wealthy paid taxes but is ensnaring more and more middle-income families because it is not indexed for inflation.

The accord paves the way for House approval of the measure as early as Wednesday. The Senate could clear the bill for Bush’s desk by week’s end.

“This is a responsible bill that protects families and small business owners from tax increases, while also providing investors with a bigger window of certainty — critical to continued economic growth,” said Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, R-Calif.

Link

In a show of strength and a return to conservative ideals, Congressional Republicans have finally reached a deal on the extention of the Bush tax cuts. If passed, this bill will help to extend economic growth throughout the United States and continue to give tax relief to millions of American families. However, this great tax bill is not enough. The Congress must cut spending and regulation in order to promote further long term growth.

Yet another show of defiant obstruction by the liberal left in Washington:

Senate Democrats today will try to make the case that Brett M. Kavanaugh is too much a conservative activist to deserve a federal appellate judgeship. In the process, they may experience some unsettling flashbacks to the Supreme Court confirmation of John G. Roberts Jr. — a big success for President Bush and Senate Republicans.

Like Roberts, Kavanaugh, 41, has spent most of his professional life in the service of conservative causes and bosses. Now White House staff secretary, Kavanaugh was deeply involved in Kenneth W. Starr’s investigations of President Bill Clinton regarding Whitewater and Monica S. Lewinsky.
 
Kavanaugh also is widely described as brilliant, affable and disarming, attributes that prevented Democrats from successfully demonizing Roberts. And as they did with the Roberts nomination, Democrats are focusing largely on what they do not know about the nominee, an approach that gained little traction in the chief justice’s confirmation debate.

Link

By Thomas Sowell

Amid all the hysteria among politicians and in the media over rising gasoline prices, and all the outraged indignation about oil company profits and their executives’ high pay and lavish perks, has anybody bothered to even estimate how much effect any of this actually has on the price we pay at the pump?

If the profit per gallon of gas were reduced to zero, would that be enough to reduce the price by even a dime? If the oil company executives were to work free of charge, would that be enough to reduce the price of gasoline by even a penny a gallon?

Surely media loudmouths making millions of dollars a year and the multibillion dollar TV networks they work for can afford to get some statistics and buy a pocket calculator to do the arithmetic before spouting off nationwide.

But this is the age of emotion, not analysis.

Mr. Sowell has a point. With the news media and government officials hyping the recent rise in gas prices, the American people (especially those who do not educate themselves on such matters) do not know what to think. Democrats continue to denounce Republicans with party rhetoric, while Republicans have picked up the no-results and often repeated Democratic strategy of investigating oil profits and price gouging.

Politicians are even more hypocritical. The government collects far more in taxes on every gallon of gasoline than the oil companies collect in profits. If oil company profits are “obscene,” as some politicians claim, are the government’s taxes PG-13?

The very politicians who have piled tax after tax on gasoline over the years, and voted to prohibit oil drilling offshore or in Alaska, and who have made it impossible to build a single oil refinery in decades, are all over the television screens denouncing the oil companies. In other words, those who supply oil are being denounced and demonized by those who have been blocking the supply of oil.

Given the vast amounts of gasoline sold across the length and breadth of this nation, and given the mega-billion dollars involved, whether or not some corporate executive has an inflated pay scale is unlikely to explain the price of gasoline.

Instead of worrying about creating an environment that promotes lower oil prices by increasing supply and reducing regulation, both Republicans and Democrats continue to denounce oil corporations and profits. The reality is that the increased demand of oil around the world has increased the profits of oil companies. Anyone with basic economic knowledge can realize this.

It may allow some people in the media to vent their emotions and some politicians to create a bogeyman, since they can’t play St. George without a dragon. But cheap demagoguery cannot explain expensive gas.

When the two most heavily populated nations on earth — China and India — have rapidly growing economies and rapidly escalating importations of oil, how could that not affect the world price of oil? After all, the price of oil is determined in the international markets, contrary to conspiracy theories that keep turning up whenever gas prices rise.

Those conspiracy theories have been investigated time and again, without uncovering anything. But it is still a clever political ploy to ask for more investigations when gas prices rise. If nothing else, it distracts attention from those who have been blocking all attempts to enable us to use our own oil.

Instead of doing things that achieve lower oil prices like opening up ANWR, reducing environmental regulations, or building more refinaries, officials continue to play the game of party rhetoric. This yields no positive results for the country, and in fact, does nothing to increase the supply of oil in our nation.

Nothing is easier, or more emotionally satisfying, than blaming high prices on those who charge them, rather than on those who cause them. The same thing happens when stores in high-crime neighborhoods charge higher prices than stores in safer neighborhoods.

Both crime and precautions against crime add to the cost of doing business and this adds to the prices. But seldom, if ever, do those who decry the high prices blame those prices on the crime, vandalism, and violence committed by local inhabitants.

Where the stores are owned by a different ethnic group, such as Asians in black ghettoes, it is virtually guaranteed that the store owners will be denounced for “gouging,” “discrimination” and whatever other political rhetoric will rouse the emotions.

People with no experience in business, no knowledge of history, and utterly ignorant of economics do not hesitate to leap from high prices to greedy profit-makers. Many of these ignorant people are on nationwide television and some are in Congress.

If Americans are to have cheaper gas prices, Congress must do something to increase the supply of oil like adopting a more liberal drilling policy (by opening up ANWR for drilling), reducing oil regulation, and building more refinaries. It could also reduce gas taxes to draw down the price, though the chance of that is likely zero. We must fight for results in Washington, instead of tolerating partisan rhetoric.

Read the whole article

The Heritage Foundation is carrying a great article concerning an absurd proposal by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist that cuts every appropriation in the emergency defense and Katrina supplemental recently passed by the Senate by 13% in order to bring the appropriations bill down to President Bush’s budget goal:

According to CQ Today, Frist’s top budget aide, William Hoagland has proposed an across-the-board cut in the supplemental spending to bring the bill’s total cost into line with the President’s initial request and veto threat. Just cut everything by the same amount, it seems, and the bill will slide right under the President’s cap. It’s an easy way out and, as Hoagland pitches it, an easy way for Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert to reach common ground. The entire difference between the Senate’s bill and the President’s request could be traversed by a 13-or-so percent across-the-board cut.

But easy and simple aren’t necessarily good. Relative to the President’s request for emergency spending, an across-the-board cut would reduce funding for defense in the supplemental–money for our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq to meet needs that are the very purpose of this legislation–by $9.6 billion. An across-the-board cut would also chop $2.6 billion from funding to respond to the actual emergency of Hurricane Katrina. This ploy just highlights the terrible trade-offs that pork-barrel spending leads lawmakers to make.

So where’s the money going if not to our troops and to hurricane victims? There’s billions in farm subsidies when the industry is roaring along. The bill has a bit over $1 billion for the fisheries and seafood industries–classic corporate pork. There’s highway spending, social program spending, and all other manner of non-emergency spending. None of this stacks up to the needs of U.S. troops abroad and our fellow citizens hit so hard by Hurricane Katrina.

Instead of doing the fiscally responsible thing and cutting the pork from the emergency funding bill, Frist and his aides are actually throwing around the idea of cutting everything in the bill by a proportional amount. This included cutting funding for the bill’s primary purpose - to support the troops fighting in the Middle East and provide funding for Gulf Coast hurricane recovery.

Instead of offering leadership when it comes to cutting the pork, Senator Frist has played into the hands of liberal interests and has betrayed the conservative cause.