The Prophetic Words of Dick Morris

I remember right after the November election that Dick Morris pointed out how difficult it was going to be for the Democratic Congress to govern. The problem, as he saw it, was the many competing factions that make up the Democratic party: The Blue Dogs, The Congressional Black Caucus, The Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and the group allied with Soros and the Nutroots. While all of these groups fall under the Democratic umbrella, they all have competing and varying agendas. As Morris predicted, the Democrats' problem all along has been getting all of them on the same page. This is the underlying story in their continued fumbling of the Iraq issue. The agenda of the Blue Dogs (called Bush Dogs by the Nutroots) is divergent from that of the Soros wing. Without everyone on the same page, the Democratic majority no longer functions like any sort of a majority.

Some if it has come to a head this week as Democrats are pointing fingers at each other for their lack of any coherent agenda.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) accuses Senate Democratic leaders of developing "Stockholm syndrome," showing sympathy to their Republican captors by caving in on legislation to provide middle-class tax cuts paid for with tax increases on the super-rich, tying war funding to troop withdrawal timelines, and mandating renewable energy quotas. If Republicans want to filibuster a bill, Rangel said, Reid should keep the bill on the Senate floor and force the Republicans to talk it to death.

Reid, in turn, has taken to the Senate floor to criticize what he called the speaker's "iron hand" style of governance.

Democrats in each chamber are now blaming their colleagues in the other for the mess in which they find themselves. The predicament caused the majority party yesterday surrender to President Bush on domestic spending levels, drop a cherished renewable-energy mandate and move toward leaving a raft of high-profile
legislation, from addressing the mortgage crisis to providing middle-class tax relief, undone or incomplete.

The real problem from the beginning is that much of the Democratic victory came in Republican districts and with many of the Democrats in those districts moving to the right of their counter parts. Their leadership, on the other hand, is almost exclusively made up of traditional Northeast or West Coast liberals. From Nancy Pelosi, Charlie Rangel, to Ted Kennedy, those are the leaders of the party. Their liberal traditional agenda is not something that will get the likes of the Blue Dog Democrats re elected.

On Iraq, this problem is most pronounced. There is a group of almost seventy Congressional Democrats that make up the Out of Iraq Caucus. They are almost exclusively Soros types. Therir goal is the immediate withdrawal of troops out of Iraq as soon as possible. This group willing to cut off funds if necessary, and they are so extreme in their views vis a vis Iraq that many times they are unwilling to support bills with a timeline if it isn't quick enough in their estimation.

On the opposite end of the ideological spectrum for the Democrats lie the Blue Dogs. This is a group of forty plus moderates who's position tends to match that of the Republicans. Here is how their position is described.

With Democrats in charge again, the Blue Dogs have played a key role in halting an emerging plan to place strict conditions on war funding. Their revolt helped beat back that proposal, by Pelosi ally John Murtha, D-Pa. Leaders are now considering a watered-down version.

Without unity from all these groups the Democrat's majority becomes a minority.

The Democrats face the same sort of problems on budget and tax issues. Whether it was Charlie Rangel's so called mother of all tax hikes, or any number of budget proposals from David Obey, the leadership has had difficulty getting the Blue Dogs on board with much of their liberal agenda. Where they have been able to get the Blue Dogs on board, they have then faced the threat of a veto from the President.

The Democrats have given nothing more than a token effort to any social issue besides federal funding of stem cell research. That's because on social issues the leadership's position is no more tennable.

Their ideas about marriage, abortion, and, to an extent, the death penalty, and
Gun Control are sometimes more compatible with the Republican way of thinking. This viewpoint is supported by the Pew Research Center and their study "Beyond Red Vs. Blue"

The Republicans, on the other hand, have become nearly unanimously united. They have almost entirely coalesced behind the surge strategy and have never wavered in their demand for so called clean spending bills.

On the budget, they haven't been quite as united however the President suddenly realized what a tool the veto is. As such, the Democrats haven't been able to get much of any budgetary agenda through. In the most recent battle over the budget, the Democrats have become so frustrated that they are now resorting to threats.

Instead, Obey said, he would rip up the compromise bill and devise a new one using the strict spending ceiling set by Mr. Bush - but would reach it by whacking GOP priorities and stripping the measure of billions of dollars in pet projects for lawmakers in both parties.

Obey's remarks to The Associated Press came two days after White House budget director Jim Nussle promised Mr. Bush would veto Democrats' omnibus spending bill for exceeding Mr. Bush's budget by $18 billion.

Nussle had accused Democrats of "trying to leverage troop-funding for more pork-barrel spending," but Obey said the opposite is true - that the White House was willing to relent just slightly on domestic spending in order to obtain up to $70 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

While the Democrats threaten, I am reminded of the last time a President took on Congress on the budget.

These showdowns were epitomized by the budget conflict with then-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich in 1995. Gingrich refused to pass Clinton's budget proposal, and the latter threatened to shut down the government as Reagan had done in the 1980s. Clinton did not back down, however, and eventually had his budget passed...

I suspect another President will also win this particular budget showdown. All in all, those words uttered by Dick Morris are quite prophetic.

The SAVE Act and My Favorite Yogi Berra Quote

Yogi Berra once said this...

in theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.

I get that feeling when breaking down the SAVE Act. There are frankly very few laws that sound bad in theory. That unfortunately is not true in the debate over illegal immigration. Most of the proposed laws to deal with illegal immigration weren't just bad in practice but in theory. Whether it is driver's licenses for illegals, the mass amnesty of last summer's comprehensive bill, or the mass amnesty of the DREAM Act, most of the bills that deal with illegal immigration are bad even in theory. Not so with the SAVE Act, this bill sounds absolutely wonderful in theory. Here are the particulars as enumerated by one of my readers.

8000 more Border Patrol agentsMore Judges, courts, and detention centers.Border fencing and vehicle barriers (where needed), and all-weather surveillance roads in conjunction with high tech surveillance equipment including satellite surveillance, infra red, and seismic detection. It requires construction along the border to take into account environmental and private land use needs.Requires development of a national strategy to secure the borders and all ports of entry to the United States by December 31, 2010.

This Bill even has accountable and transparent financing of the effort built into it giving power of oversight to the Comptroller and Inspector Generals to keep Congress appraised.This bill is going to receive some stiff opposition from organizations like LULAC and LaRaza, and incumbent Democrats beholding to the illegal immigrant population communities, and incumbent Republicans beholding to employers pressing for cheap illegal labor. They will try to fight this Bill. This SAVE Act offers the Independent voters in America the first real opportunity to flex their newfound muscle by supporting this Bill and pressing their representatives to vote for this legislation.

Here is how Numbers USA analyzed the most important part of the bill, the verification system of employees by employers.

provides employers with an inexpensive, quick, and accurate way to verify employee eligibility. E-Verify has already achieved tremendous success, but is currently voluntary and offers little incentive for employers to participate. This puts users at an economic disadvantage when it is only being used by a fraction of U.S. employers and competitors continue to hire illegal aliens.

All of this sounds great "in theory" however...

in theory there is no difference between theory and practice but in practice there is

Sure, it all sounds great that we will finally have a system where employers can verify the legal status of all of their employees. In practice that system will be done by a new government bureaucracy. In practice, most government bureaucracies fail in their mission and become counter productive. In theory, the DMV sounded like a great idea. In theory, Medicare was a great idea. In theory, social security was a good... all right that would be taking things too far. Still, the difference between whether or not most bills become good bills isn't theory but practice.

Yet, no one is asking the sort of critical questions necessary to figure out how to resolve all the potential nightmares that this bureaucracy may bring. Here is what Numbers USA says.

The SAVE Act will broaden and enhance border security and interior enforcement. With a number of border security Democrats and Republicans already agreeing to co-sponsor, this bipartisan effort may be Congress’s best chance to achieve substantial immigration reform this Congress.

Here is how Michelle Malkin sees the bill.

There are, believe it or not, a few Democrats who have their heads screwed on straight when it comes to immigration enforcement. Several were elected last fall; the open-borders lobby has conveniently ignored them.

Referring of course to Congressman Heath Shuler who is the main sponsor of the bill.

Here is the word from Tom Tancredo's PAC.

Well, now there is a bipartisan immigration bill that actually reforms our immigration system rather than just opening our borders and granting amnesty. We need to put the pressure on members of both parties to support this bill!

Even John Murtha showers this bill with nothing but fawning accolades.

This bipartisan bill will help our law enforcement agencies provide tighter border security and give our employers the resources they need to verify documented and undocumented workers,” noted Murtha.

No one is talking about exactly how this bill will be carried out. What will the new bureaucracy look like? How will it carry out its mission? How will this bureaucracy be any different than Social Security which was supposed to do the exact same thing? Everyone is just impressed how in vague theory it will secure our borders and help verify employees legal status. Just because it will do this in theory doesn't mean it will do it in practice.


No one is talking about any of these vital issues because we finally have a piece of legislation vis a vis illegal immigration that actually sounds good in concept. Most people take its goals at face without ever asking how the bill will be carried out to accomplish them. Just because a bill has good intentions, and this one clearly does, doesn't mean that the bill will accomplish those goals.

Everyone is fawning over this bill like it is the prom queen and no one is asking any critical questions. If we don't ask any critical questions then we will fawn over yet another counter productive bureaucracy.

Passing Along an Action Alert From Numbers USA Vis a Vis the SAVE Act

Numbers USA sent me this email this morning.

Senators Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) and David Vitter (R-La.) have introduced Senate versions of Rep. Heath Shuler's (D-N.C.) SAVE Act (Secure America with Verification Enforcement [H.R. 4088]). Sen. Pryor's bill is S. 2368 and Sen. Vitter's bill is S. 2366.

The two bills are substantively the same -- essentially both bills are identical, so the best thing would be to encourage your Senator to sign onto both. If they want to make a choice based on something other that the substance of the bill, that is their call, but NumbersUSA has endorsed both.

Send this fax asking your Senators to cosponsor BOTH S. 2368 and S. 2366, important bills that would immediately begin to reduce illegal immigration.

My last post on the matter pointed out that the SAVE Act has started to gain a sort of rockstar status. I believe this believe has all the right intentions and it has a ton of potential, however the fawning which is being given to it scares me.

This bill has a huge potential flaw that no one but me it seems is willing to talk about. This will create yet another massive government bureaucracy and that is almost never good and I have heard nothing about this bureaucracy.

Thus, my advice is that everyone do what Numbers asks, but that you also ask about this new bureaucracy and see if the pols know how it will be implemented.

SAVE Act: The New Rockstar Bill

If you ever wanted to compare a bill to a rock star, then the SAVE Act would be the rock star. Most bills are much to mundane and wordy to ever warrant such a comparison, however this one may be different. While I support the idea of this bill, and much of its content, I am concerned that the rock star status of the bill may lead to trouble.

First, let's get everyone a brief background on the SAVE Act. It does several things to beef border security however the center piece of the act is a new verification system, that if it works properly, will insure that every employer can easily verify if their employees are here legally. (Go here for more reference) This bill is being introduced by former quarterback now Congressman Heath Shuler of North Carolina. It has an impressive array of supporters. Everyone from Tom Tancredo, to the National Federation of Independent Business, to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers support this bill.

Congressmen from every stripe are lining up to support this bill. Everyone from members of the Congressional Black Caucus like Congressmen Davis (D-Alabama) and Bishop (D-Georgia), to members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus like Congressman Rodriguez (D-Texas), to strange bedfellows like Congressmen Rohrbacher and Murtha.

Numbers USA speaks about this bill the way most dorky high schoolers describe the head cheerleader.

NumbersUSA believes that this legislation originating on the Democratic side of the House is just the vehicle to give us a chance to actually pass immigration legislation through a Democratic-controlled Congress that would significantly improve the lives of most Americans. "It's the one [immigration] bill that will pass this Congress," said Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus Chairman Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.) in an interview with The Hill. "We have to make this about illegal employment and crack down on employers."

My own blog has lit up with readers of previous blog entries. It seems everyone is fawning over this bill as though it is infallable. The problem is that it is fallable. There is a huge potential problem that all the fawning supporters overlook and disregard. This bill would create a huge new bureaucracy. Most massive bureaucracies aren't merely a headache but frankly counter productive. Most people that I mention this to write it off and say it is just something we will need to deal with for border security.

Well, with all due respect to the fawning supporters of SAVE Act, it won't necessarily be a minor inconvenience. It may just be a disaster waiting to happen. This new bureaucracy sounds good on paper but there are no guarantees that it will do what it is supposed to do. INS and subsequent metamorpheses in the DHS have shown time and again that they fail to do what they are supposed to do. How many times do we hear stories of the Feds losing track of illegals.

This system can very well be headed for the same type of disaster if everyone that fawns over it refuses to address what I see as a huge potential problem. While politicians of both stripes push others out of the way to be the first in line to support this bill, I hope they also understand that just because a bill has good intentions doesn't mean it will actually be implemented effectively.

I have heard absolutely nothing from anyone about how this massive new bureaucracy is going to function. The only thing I hear is that we will finally have a system that tracks the legal status of employees. With all due respect to everyone, I thought that social security numbers were designed to do that. If those have proven ineffective, there are no guarantees that this will either. I am not saying this system will fail. In fact, I hope it won't. What I am saying is that everyone needs to stop fawning over this thing like a beauty queen and actually examine it in a sober manner. No bill is ever perfect and the worst are often those that everyone thinks at the time is great.

This bill has potential to do great things against the cancer of illegal immigration, however it also has the potential of creating yet another massive non functioning bureaucracy. Just because we want it to do the first doesn't mean it won't actually do the second.

Momentum Builds for SAVE Act

According to Numbers USA, both business and labor leaders have endorsed this bill.

The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), representing more than 600,000 small businesses in every state endorsed SAVE's requirement that every employer run every new hire (and eventually old hires) through the electronic E-Verify system to ensure that illegal aliens don't get American jobs. It said the bill strikes a “fair balance between increased enforcement and limiting regulatory burdens placed on small business.”

The 752,000-member International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers -- as a way to protect American jobs for American workers -- endorsed the Secure America through Verification and Enforcement Act (SAVE Act).

In politics you never say never, however it is fair to say that the SAVE Act has some great momentum. It certainly has all the political elements in place to become law. Here is how Heath Shuler, the man that introduced the bill, put it.

The SAVE Act is commonsense legislation that is bringing people together to address this difficult issue," Shuler said. "I was proud to work with the NFIB and IBEW while drafting this legislation because of their strong representation of American businesses and American workers. I deeply appreciate their continued support for this bill as we work to pass the SAVE Act into law.”

Numbers says that some bloggers have expressed doubts that it isn't tough enough. I have not heard and my doubts are different and so far they haven't been heard. SAVE Act will most likely create a massive new government bureaucracy. This bill has all the right intentions and lots of people behind it and for that matter I am afraid that many are overlooking its potential problem. I firmly believe that with proper attention and debate the Congress can work it out so that this bureaucracy doesn't become counter productive. That won't happen unless people recognize the potential problem.

Too often we fawn over good work. I believe that some of that is happening here. I firmly believe that Congressman Shuler has created a bill that can have tangible positive effects on stemming the flow of illegal immigration. That doesn't mean that there aren't potential flaws. If we don't address the right way to deal with the massive new bureaucracy that will be put in place, it will wind up working about as well as much of the rest of INS and other such bureaus.

I support the concept behind this bill and I believe that it needs a full and fair hearing, however I am troubled by the way in which a bi partisan group of legislators and special interests are falling over each other without offering any constructive criticism to make it better. We don't need another massive non functioning bureaucracy, and that is what we will have if the powers that be don't recognize that potential flaw and address it. It won't be addressed if every group under the sun is fawning over this bill like a rock star.

SAVE Act: The Follow Up

As usual on such matters, the hat tip goes to Numbers USA. They are all over such matters. Here is the latest coming from them.

Representative Heath Shuler (D-NC) is expected to introduce the Secure America with Verification and Enforcement Act (SAVE Act) November 5th. NumbersUSA
believes this immigration enforcement-only bill is just the vehicle to give us a chance to pass immigration legislation through the Democrat-controlled Congress that would actually improve the lives of most Americans.

Your Democratic U.S. Representative could quickly improve his/her immigration-reduction grade (click here to his/her see ABI gradecard) by becoming an original co-sponsor of the SAVE Act. He/she needs to hear from you TODAY. Call your representative and urge him/her to sign on as an original cosponsor to this important legislation, which would immediately begin to reduce the magnet for illegal immigration.

Once again, the SAVE Act would create a system where each employer can verify the status of each and every employee and potential employee. My main potential problem with this bill is that it sounds good in theory but may wind up being a scary monstrocity in practice. This bill would no doubt create another massive government bureaucracy and that almost never works. I want to hear some details about how this will be addressed, however that is what a full and fair debate is for, and everyone should be for that. Here are some more details.

We know Attrition Through Enforcement works because, in states that have passed tough new laws to penalize employers of and deny public benefits to illegal aliens, the illegal aliens began to move out of those states, often before the new laws are even implemented. As it currently stands, almost 200,000 illegal aliens self-deport from the United States every year, but imagine how many more would leave if our government refused to award illegal aliens another amnesty, mandated all employers to verify a person’s eligibility to work here, cracked down on identity fraud and enabled local police to easily transfer illegal aliens in their custody to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials.

Among many detailed border security provisions stressing more agents and better technology at minimal operating costs, the SAVE Act would: increase border patrol agents by 8,000, utilize new technology and fencing to secure the border; expand specialized enforcement programs, such as the "Tunnel Task Force"; and, address the "jobs magnet" by strengthening The Employment Verification Program (E-Verify) to close security gaps, address loopholes, and make it mandatory for employers.

The E-Verify program provides employers with an inexpensive, quick, and accurate way to verify employee eligibility. E-Verify has already achieved tremendous success, but is currently voluntary and offers little incentive for employers to participate. This puts users at an economic disadvantage when it is only being used by a fraction of U.S. employers and competitors continue to hire illegal aliens.

Last, but not least, the SAVE Act would address interior enforcement by employing more ICE agents, training additional state and local law enforcement personnel, and expediting the removal of illegal aliens by expanding detention capacity and increasing the number of Federal District Court Judges. Furthermore, this legislation would begin a targeted media campaign to inform illegal aliens of new laws and penalties, while also informing employers of penalties for hiring illegal immigrants.

Again, this all sounds great in theory and I hope it can be worked out but it needs to be debated fully first. The political dynamics on this are very interesting. While Shuler is a Democrat, he is also a Blue Dog, or quite moderate. The far left hates the Blue Dogs almost as much as they hate the Republicans. Don't look for any Soros disciples in Congress to back this up. They won't need to if the Reps get behind it in unison, but since he is still a Democrat, will they allow politics to trump policy? Only time will tell if that will happen. Please go here, find your representative and let them know that this bill needs a full and fair hearing.

UPDATE:

Here is my email to my Representative Rahm Emanuel.

Congressman,

Your colleague Heath Shuler is about to present the SAVE Act on the floor of the House within a week. This bill creates a system in which every employer can identify the status of everyone of their employees,. I think we finally have some sensible legislation with a lot of potential to do some real good in ridding this country of the Cancer of illegal immigration. More than once I believe your party has played politics with this issue rather than looking to make good policy. A couple weeks ago your Senate colleagues voted against making cities like ours, sanctuary cities, illegal. All but one Democrat voting against this bill. That is frankly reprehensible.

I don't know if the Democratic leadership is pandering to the Hispanics, trying to create a new base of current illegals, or simply bowing down to your puppetmaster, George Soros. Either way, your party has shown that it is more interested in compassion for law breakers than it is for the rule of law. I hope that will change with this bill.

This bill is being introduced by a fellow Democrat. I have one major problem with this bill. It appears to create a new huge government bureaucracy and that is almost never good. I believe with the proper debate this can be addressed and resolved. I hope that as a leader in your party and in the House in general, you will show that leadership in doing your part to make sure that this bill gets the debate it needs.

Now, it is your turn to do the same.

The SAVE Act: Finally Some Sensible Legislation Vis a Vis Illegal Immigration

Another hat tip goes to Numbers USA for bringing this to my attention. Heath Shuler, of North Carolina, has come up with a bill that may in fact be some sensible legislation to deal with the illegal immigration mess. The SAVE Act (Secure America with Verification and Enforcement) creates a system where employers can easily verify the status of all their employees. Here is how Numbers put it.

SAVE would eventually require every employee in America to go through the E-Verify system. This internet system provides employers with an inexpensive, quick, and accurate way to verify that employees are not illegal aliens. The rules for use are such that no employee or employer suffers if there is a mistake in the system because there is ample time to correct errors on the employee's side and on the government's side.

Here are the nuts and bolts of the loan again according to Numbers.

require during Year 1 that all government agencies, government contractors, plus all businesses with more than 250 employees run all NEW hires through E-Verify.

... require during Year 2 that all businesses with 100 or more employees use E-Verify for new hires.

... require during Year 3 that all businesses with more than 20 employees use E-Verify for new hires.

... during Year 4 add businesses with fewer than 20 employees so that all businesses use E-Verify for new hires.

... also during Year 4 require all businessese to run all their previous hires through E-Verify.

There is a huge potential pitfall that I see with this bill. As my favorite quote goes, "the nine most terrifying words in the English language are 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help''. This looks like the beginning of a massive new bureaucracy and for it to work the government would need to stay streamlined without being bloated. While this is certainly a concern, I also look forward to Shuler explaining the logistics of the system.

On the flipside, almost everyone agrees that without the temptation of jobs illegal immigration dries up. This deals with that temptation head on, and it isn't just some token measure. Shuler's plan at least appears deadly serious.

Currently, Shuler's own website has no information about this bill. That is problematic and besides Numbers USA there are very few resources touting this bill. That is also problematic. This bill has a lot of potential and I believe that with the proper debate it can be turned into one that deals with the problem of illegal immigration correctly without bloating government in an unnecessary way. Please contact your representative here and demand that the SAVE Act get a full and fair debate.