Posts
IRAN, HERAN or noRAN??
2 months ago
Showing posts with label reid. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reid. Show all posts
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Get Back to the Phones
I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but this is an important provision in the Omnibus Bill which must be acted upon to ensure Americans are given the opportunity for the scarce jobs available and created by our taxpayer funded programs. My post yesterday updating you on Amnesty and E-verify speaks to this issue further.
ANOTHER CHANCE TO PUSH E-VERIFY -- Phone to Get Long-Term Extension in Spending Bill
*DEAR FRIENDS,*
Your anti-illegal-immigration allies in the U.S. House have asked us to get your help Tuesday and Wednesday in obtaining signatures on a crucial letter (see text below).
They need you to support their last-ditch effort to put a long-term extension of the E-Verify program in the giant spending bill before Congress this week.
When we are asked directly by Members of Congress for help, we have to be willing to back them up. They know that the only way to succeed is if they have your help in phoning their colleagues and asking them to sign a crucial letter to House Speaker Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Minority Leader Boehner (R-Ohio).
The key point sentence of the letter is this:
*"Please do everything within your power to protect legal workers by ensuring that the E-Verify program is reauthorized long-term in the Omnibus Appropriations Act."*
Pelosi and Boehner have the power to make that happen when the bill comes to the House/Senate negotiating committee if they would just resolve to do it.
*Your assignment* -- if you choose to accept it -- is to phone your own U.S. Representative
and ask him/her to sign the letter. If you don't know your U.S. Rep, supply your ZIP at congress.org to find
out.
* Step 1: Phone the Congressional operator at *202-224-3121.*
* Ask to be connected to you Rep's office.*
* Step 2: Tell the staffers that their boss has already received a letter about E-Verify from Rep. Bilbray's office.
* Step 3: Read the key sentence quoted above.
* Step 4: Ask that your Rep contact Congressman Bilbray's office at 225-0508 and pledge to sign the letter -- or at least to get another copy of it to read. (YOU should NOT call Mr. Bilbray's office because that will tie up his phone.)
* Step 5: Note that Mr. Bilbray has to receive! the pledge by the close of business Wednesday.
* Step 6: Emphasize that the American people are growing tired of the delaying tactics of Congress over the last six months. It is time to stop treating E-Verify as a political football and to give it the long-term authorization that states and businesses need to be able to rely on the program.
Thanks for taking quick action on this.
If your own Representative is Pelosi or Boehner, they obviously won't be signing the letter. Just phone them and tell them that you agree with the letter that is being sent to them from other Members.
If your Rep is Bilbray or Shuler (original signers), give their staffs a break and call a neighboring Member of Congress.
Here is the letter you are asking your Congress(wo)man to sign:
*
Dear Madam Speaker and Republican Leader Boehner:*
As Members of the House of Representatives, we appeal to you on behalf of American workers. Nationwide, 7.6 percent of the labor force 11.6 million workers is unemployed, and millions more are involuntarily working part-time or have given up hope of finding a job. Estimates of the number of jobs that might be created by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the Recovery Act) vary widely. While no one can predict exactly how many jobs will be created, we believe that the
American people deserve to know that their tax dollars are being used to create jobs for legal workers.
While the House version of the Recovery Act included two E-Verify-related measures to ensure American jobs would be protected, the Senate failed to include similar language. Because of the Senates oversight, we, the undersigned Members of the House of Representatives, urge you to protect taxpayers and legal workers by including these critical jobs protection provisions in any future economic recovery legislation. The House version of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, H. R. 1105, included a short-term extension of the E-Verify program through the end of the fiscal year (September 30, 2009). While a
short-term extension is a step in the right direction, it is difficult for business to plan and effectively utilize the program without its secure future.
According to recent analysis, as many as 300,000 illegal aliens could receive jobs funded by the recovery program because these provisions were not included in the final version of the Recovery Act. If these provisions do not become law, not only will the important E-Verify program be in danger of expiring on March 6, 2009, but it may mean that hundreds of thousands of potential jobs for American workers will be compromised.
The E-Verify program enjoys a success rate of 99.6%, meaning that 99.6% of those legal workers checked by the program are verified through E-Verify without receiving a tentative non-confirmation (TNC) or having to take any type of corrective action. Testifying in June, Rep. Heath Shuler said, E-Verify is handling at least one in eight new hires already. Based on recent load testing, the system has the capacity to handle 240 million queries a year thats four times the number of people in the United States who are usually hired in a given year. The E-Verify program is reliable, easy to use and, most importantly, expedient.
Employers who break the law by hiring illegal immigrants create unfair competition in the labor market and depress wages for all workers. The Center for Immigration Studies has found that the current level of immigration has reduced the wages of the average native-born worker in a low-skilled occupation by 12% a year, or almost $2,000. Alexander Aleinikoff, a former Clinton Administration INS official, Dean of Georgetown Law School and co-chair of the Immigration Policy Review Team
for the Presidential Transition of Barack Obama, calls it a myth that there is little or no competition between undocumented workers and American workers . . . . !
According to estimates from the Pew Hispanic Center, roughly 7.7 million illegal immigrants are employed in the United States in 2008. These are all jobs that currently unemployed United States workersboth citizens and legal immigrantscould and should have a chance to fill. If the E-Verify program is not reauthorized, this Congress and our President will spend more than $1 trillion of taxpayer money to possibly provide jobs for illegal workers. Please do everything within your power to
protect legal workers by ensuring that the E-Verify program is reauthorized long-term in the Omnibus Appropriations Act.
ANOTHER CHANCE TO PUSH E-VERIFY -- Phone to Get Long-Term Extension in Spending Bill
*DEAR FRIENDS,*
Your anti-illegal-immigration allies in the U.S. House have asked us to get your help Tuesday and Wednesday in obtaining signatures on a crucial letter (see text below).
They need you to support their last-ditch effort to put a long-term extension of the E-Verify program in the giant spending bill before Congress this week.
When we are asked directly by Members of Congress for help, we have to be willing to back them up. They know that the only way to succeed is if they have your help in phoning their colleagues and asking them to sign a crucial letter to House Speaker Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Minority Leader Boehner (R-Ohio).
The key point sentence of the letter is this:
*"Please do everything within your power to protect legal workers by ensuring that the E-Verify program is reauthorized long-term in the Omnibus Appropriations Act."*
Pelosi and Boehner have the power to make that happen when the bill comes to the House/Senate negotiating committee if they would just resolve to do it.
*Your assignment* -- if you choose to accept it -- is to phone your own U.S. Representative
out.
* Step 1: Phone the Congressional operator at *202-224-3121.*
* Ask to be connected to you Rep's office.*
* Step 2: Tell the staffers that their boss has already received a letter about E-Verify from Rep. Bilbray's office.
* Step 3: Read the key sentence quoted above.
* Step 4: Ask that your Rep contact Congressman Bilbray's office at 225-0508 and pledge to sign the letter -- or at least to get another copy of it to read. (YOU should NOT call Mr. Bilbray's office because that will tie up his phone.)
* Step 5: Note that Mr. Bilbray has to receive! the pledge by the close of business Wednesday.
* Step 6: Emphasize that the American people are growing tired of the delaying tactics of Congress over the last six months. It is time to stop treating E-Verify as a political football and to give it the long-term authorization that states and businesses need to be able to rely on the program.
Thanks for taking quick action on this.
If your own Representative is Pelosi or Boehner, they obviously won't be signing the letter. Just phone them and tell them that you agree with the letter that is being sent to them from other Members.
If your Rep is Bilbray or Shuler (original signers), give their staffs a break and call a neighboring Member of Congress.
Here is the letter you are asking your Congress(wo)man to sign:
*
Dear Madam Speaker and Republican Leader Boehner:*
As Members of the House of Representatives, we appeal to you on behalf of American workers. Nationwide, 7.6 percent of the labor force 11.6 million workers is unemployed, and millions more are involuntarily working part-time or have given up hope of finding a job. Estimates of the number of jobs that might be created by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the Recovery Act) vary widely. While no one can predict exactly how many jobs will be created, we believe that the
American people deserve to know that their tax dollars are being used to create jobs for legal workers.
While the House version of the Recovery Act included two E-Verify-related measures to ensure American jobs would be protected, the Senate failed to include similar language. Because of the Senates oversight, we, the undersigned Members of the House of Representatives, urge you to protect taxpayers and legal workers by including these critical jobs protection provisions in any future economic recovery legislation. The House version of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, H. R. 1105, included a short-term extension of the E-Verify program through the end of the fiscal year (September 30, 2009). While a
short-term extension is a step in the right direction, it is difficult for business to plan and effectively utilize the program without its secure future.
According to recent analysis, as many as 300,000 illegal aliens could receive jobs funded by the recovery program because these provisions were not included in the final version of the Recovery Act. If these provisions do not become law, not only will the important E-Verify program be in danger of expiring on March 6, 2009, but it may mean that hundreds of thousands of potential jobs for American workers will be compromised.
The E-Verify program enjoys a success rate of 99.6%, meaning that 99.6% of those legal workers checked by the program are verified through E-Verify without receiving a tentative non-confirmation (TNC) or having to take any type of corrective action. Testifying in June, Rep. Heath Shuler said, E-Verify is handling at least one in eight new hires already. Based on recent load testing, the system has the capacity to handle 240 million queries a year thats four times the number of people in the United States who are usually hired in a given year. The E-Verify program is reliable, easy to use and, most importantly, expedient.
Employers who break the law by hiring illegal immigrants create unfair competition in the labor market and depress wages for all workers. The Center for Immigration Studies has found that the current level of immigration has reduced the wages of the average native-born worker in a low-skilled occupation by 12% a year, or almost $2,000. Alexander Aleinikoff, a former Clinton Administration INS official, Dean of Georgetown Law School and co-chair of the Immigration Policy Review Team
for the Presidential Transition of Barack Obama, calls it a myth that there is little or no competition between undocumented workers and American workers . . . . !
According to estimates from the Pew Hispanic Center, roughly 7.7 million illegal immigrants are employed in the United States in 2008. These are all jobs that currently unemployed United States workersboth citizens and legal immigrantscould and should have a chance to fill. If the E-Verify program is not reauthorized, this Congress and our President will spend more than $1 trillion of taxpayer money to possibly provide jobs for illegal workers. Please do everything within your power to
protect legal workers by ensuring that the E-Verify program is reauthorized long-term in the Omnibus Appropriations Act.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Three Cheers for Rep. Shuler
Let's hear it for Rep. Heath Schuler (D-NC) for speaking the truth about the chief architects of the grotesque Spendulous Bill. Wow, a politician who says what he means and means what he says. I feel like we've just come across the last remaining member of a previously thought extinct species.
From Politico today;
Pelosi, Reid have "failed," Shuler says
Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C) has further ingratiated himself with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — not — by declaring that Pelosi and Harry Reid "failed" the bipartisanship test on stimulus.
"In order for us to get the confidence of America, it has to be done in a bipartisan way," Shuler said in Raleigh following an economic forum, according to the AP.
"We have to have everyone — Democrats and Republicans standing on the stage with the administration — saying, 'We got something done that was efficient, stimulative and timely.'"
Here's the kicker: "I truly feel that's where maybe House leadership and Senate leadership have really failed."
Shuler, rumored to be mulling a '10 Senate run, was one of 11 House Democrats to vote "no" on the stimulus and was already deep in Pelosi's doghouse. Now he'll have to build a Harry Reid wing.
From Politico today;
Pelosi, Reid have "failed," Shuler says
Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C) has further ingratiated himself with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — not — by declaring that Pelosi and Harry Reid "failed" the bipartisanship test on stimulus.
"In order for us to get the confidence of America, it has to be done in a bipartisan way," Shuler said in Raleigh following an economic forum, according to the AP.
"We have to have everyone — Democrats and Republicans standing on the stage with the administration — saying, 'We got something done that was efficient, stimulative and timely.'"
Here's the kicker: "I truly feel that's where maybe House leadership and Senate leadership have really failed."
Shuler, rumored to be mulling a '10 Senate run, was one of 11 House Democrats to vote "no" on the stimulus and was already deep in Pelosi's doghouse. Now he'll have to build a Harry Reid wing.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Will the Real Obama Please Stand Up?
Today, President Obama met with Republicans on the Hill to discuss his economic stimulus plan and encouraged them to put partisan politics aside in an effort to revive the ailing economy. Republicans, reportedly, were "swooning" over BO and his sincere efforts to listen to their concerns, something which the House and Senate leadership has utterly failed to do.
"President Obama won praise from some of the House's most conservative lawmakers as "engaging" and "respectful" during his meeting with congressional Republicans Tuesday.
Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) said that Obama was sincere and "impressive" during his meeting with Republicans Tuesday afternoon.
"There's real desire in this room to figure a way back to prosperity," Inglis wrote on Twitter. "[The president] and Republicans here [are] expressing deep concern about unemployment."
"If [the] President carries this on it does open door for a new tone!" Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) exclaimed.
"Sharp differences are muted," Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) Twittered."
After only one week in office, a distinct pattern has emerged of Obama's leadership style across the spectrum, from engaging foreign leaders to the American people to Republican lawmakers. He is conciliatory, seemingly willing to listen, speaks of unity and a post partisan nation.
Meanwhile, the Democratic leadership has acted in the exact opposite vein with their rhetoric and actions, by excluding Republican involvement in hammering out details of the stimulus plan, and marginalizing them even further than was possible for the majority party to do during the Bush years. The stimulus plan, as currently laid out, is a pork barrel of useless projects long adored by liberals, along with tax rebates which will do little to nothing to actually stimulate the economy. And it will, by all accounts, grow larger.
So who is the real Obama, and when will he emerge? Will he try to play both sides of the fence, acting as good cop to Pelosi and Reid's bad cop, but ultimately getting exactly what he intended all along? Or is he simply naive and unable to control the far left loons in the legislature, and despite sincere motivation to act in a bipartisan fashion, will prove to be impotent in reining in his own party? His record in the Senate shows an aversion to making hard choices. He cannot avoid them now. Soon, we will see the real Obama, but of the two choices, neither is encouraging, nor what this country needs at this perilous juncture.
"President Obama won praise from some of the House's most conservative lawmakers as "engaging" and "respectful" during his meeting with congressional Republicans Tuesday.
Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) said that Obama was sincere and "impressive" during his meeting with Republicans Tuesday afternoon.
"There's real desire in this room to figure a way back to prosperity," Inglis wrote on Twitter. "[The president] and Republicans here [are] expressing deep concern about unemployment."
"If [the] President carries this on it does open door for a new tone!" Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) exclaimed.
"Sharp differences are muted," Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) Twittered."
After only one week in office, a distinct pattern has emerged of Obama's leadership style across the spectrum, from engaging foreign leaders to the American people to Republican lawmakers. He is conciliatory, seemingly willing to listen, speaks of unity and a post partisan nation.
Meanwhile, the Democratic leadership has acted in the exact opposite vein with their rhetoric and actions, by excluding Republican involvement in hammering out details of the stimulus plan, and marginalizing them even further than was possible for the majority party to do during the Bush years. The stimulus plan, as currently laid out, is a pork barrel of useless projects long adored by liberals, along with tax rebates which will do little to nothing to actually stimulate the economy. And it will, by all accounts, grow larger.
So who is the real Obama, and when will he emerge? Will he try to play both sides of the fence, acting as good cop to Pelosi and Reid's bad cop, but ultimately getting exactly what he intended all along? Or is he simply naive and unable to control the far left loons in the legislature, and despite sincere motivation to act in a bipartisan fashion, will prove to be impotent in reining in his own party? His record in the Senate shows an aversion to making hard choices. He cannot avoid them now. Soon, we will see the real Obama, but of the two choices, neither is encouraging, nor what this country needs at this perilous juncture.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
I've Been Thinking
As I watch and read about Congress grilling the CEO's of the Big Three Automakers, some questions keep popping into my mind.
1) The CEO's rightfully took it on the chin for flying to Washington to beg for money in their private corporate jets. They have failing companies, and yet they still flew in those things, which cost $20,000 each for a round trip from Detroit to Washington. The leaders of Congress also have failed miserably in their jobs, and have approval ratings in the toilet. Why doesn't someone grill Nancy Pelosi about her taxpayer funded jumbo jet, which flies her non-stop to California and back every week at an estimated cost of over $5 million per year? Of OUR money? In THIS economy?
2) Barney Frank has also been front and center in the debate about how to spend bailout money. Why doesn't someone ask him about the part he played in the collapse of the economy with his demands to allow non-qualified buyers to buy houses?
3) Chris Dodd is asking for the ouster of failed GM CEO Richard Wagoner as part of the auto bailout deal. Why doesn't somone ask for his ouster for his part in the Fannie and Freddie debacle?
4) Sniveling Senate leader Harry Reid complains about the stinky tourists in Washington. Why doesn't someone ask him to go home where he will not have to put up with the unwashed masses he purports to stand up for?
The outright hypocrisy of our Congressional leaders boggles the mind. They don't even bother to hide it. Do they think that we are really that stupid? Apparently so.
1) The CEO's rightfully took it on the chin for flying to Washington to beg for money in their private corporate jets. They have failing companies, and yet they still flew in those things, which cost $20,000 each for a round trip from Detroit to Washington. The leaders of Congress also have failed miserably in their jobs, and have approval ratings in the toilet. Why doesn't someone grill Nancy Pelosi about her taxpayer funded jumbo jet, which flies her non-stop to California and back every week at an estimated cost of over $5 million per year? Of OUR money? In THIS economy?
2) Barney Frank has also been front and center in the debate about how to spend bailout money. Why doesn't someone ask him about the part he played in the collapse of the economy with his demands to allow non-qualified buyers to buy houses?
3) Chris Dodd is asking for the ouster of failed GM CEO Richard Wagoner as part of the auto bailout deal. Why doesn't somone ask for his ouster for his part in the Fannie and Freddie debacle?
4) Sniveling Senate leader Harry Reid complains about the stinky tourists in Washington. Why doesn't someone ask him to go home where he will not have to put up with the unwashed masses he purports to stand up for?
The outright hypocrisy of our Congressional leaders boggles the mind. They don't even bother to hide it. Do they think that we are really that stupid? Apparently so.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
There's Something About Obama
David Brooks had an interesting op-ed piece in the NY Times yesterday, entitled "Thinking About Obama". David has an ability to cut through a lot of extraneous stuff and get right to the heart of the characteristics that define a person, and how they may effect their actions. In the piece, he focuses on Obama's unflappably cool demeanor. In the 20 months or so of this unending campaign, Obama has time and again shown a calm, cool, analytical reserve; a detached demeanor that goes right to his core. David notes that this quality could serve him well, and could help make him a great President.
On the flip side, David opines, that coolness can be attributed to a lack of passion and courage, perhaps even a certain dullness. He may very well sit back and let government happen around him. This is not a difficult scenario to imagine, as he will probably have even larger majorities in both legislative branches who will do the dirty work for him. I have a feeling that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will be more than happy to oblige.
I found this article interesting because there has been something about Obama that has been gnawing at me, and I think that his almost inhuman coolness goes to the heart of it. Under the perfectly orchestrated veneer, is he actually cold, detached, and ruthless? We know he is aggressively ambitious. To gain his seat in the Illinois State legislature he had his opponent, the incumbent, thrown off the ballot on a technicality. In the US Senate, he has never rocked the boat, avoiding unwarranted negative attention from the Democratic leadership. We have seen him lie about his radical associations, using them when they can help, and eschewing the relationships when they hurt him. We've seen him go after not just McCain with a vengeance, but also an ordinary citizen who disagreed with his master plan.
What does all of this mean? How will it play out should he win the Presidency? Will he be cool under fire? A non-leader who lets others play the game of government, letting others take the blame when it is politically expedient, and grabbing the spotlight only when things look good? Is there a ruthlessness there that all those who question him should fear? I don't know. My gut tells me that there is something about Obama and it is not a good feeling.
On the flip side, David opines, that coolness can be attributed to a lack of passion and courage, perhaps even a certain dullness. He may very well sit back and let government happen around him. This is not a difficult scenario to imagine, as he will probably have even larger majorities in both legislative branches who will do the dirty work for him. I have a feeling that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will be more than happy to oblige.
I found this article interesting because there has been something about Obama that has been gnawing at me, and I think that his almost inhuman coolness goes to the heart of it. Under the perfectly orchestrated veneer, is he actually cold, detached, and ruthless? We know he is aggressively ambitious. To gain his seat in the Illinois State legislature he had his opponent, the incumbent, thrown off the ballot on a technicality. In the US Senate, he has never rocked the boat, avoiding unwarranted negative attention from the Democratic leadership. We have seen him lie about his radical associations, using them when they can help, and eschewing the relationships when they hurt him. We've seen him go after not just McCain with a vengeance, but also an ordinary citizen who disagreed with his master plan.
What does all of this mean? How will it play out should he win the Presidency? Will he be cool under fire? A non-leader who lets others play the game of government, letting others take the blame when it is politically expedient, and grabbing the spotlight only when things look good? Is there a ruthlessness there that all those who question him should fear? I don't know. My gut tells me that there is something about Obama and it is not a good feeling.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
