The Myth of McCain as Political Maverick
David Ignatius has a positively silly column in the Washington Post today in which he parrots the lame old myth of 2008 presidential hopeful John McCain as a straight-talking,
tough-guy maverick who damns political consequences and goes his own way. As a Veteran with boundless admiration for McCain's heroic conduct during his imprisonment in
Vietnam, I must also evaluate his career incarnation
which, if you examine his record, shows him to be a 98-pound political weakling, who does best when others tell him
what to do.
Even putting aside his nauseating and ongoing devotion to the White House after what Team Bush did to smear him, his
wife and his child in the 2000 presidential primary, McCain's Senate record shows a man who toes the party line and
is a straight-shooting nonconformist only when George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Bill Frist tell him he's allowed to be.
The biggest disconnect from reality comes in the public perception of McCain as a potential president whose strong suit would be national security, even though his record in the 109th Congress shows a man who follows the Senate Majority Leader's commands, no matter how much weaker those edicts make our country.
Here are just a few samples of the things McCain voted against in 2005 and 2006, while offering no substantive legislation himself to strengthen America:
Senator Daniel Akaka's (D-HI) S.Amdt. 3007, which was intended to increase Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in 2007 by closing corporate tax loopholes.
Three bills by Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) -- S.Amdt. 3056, S.Amdt. 1687 and S.Amdt. 1217 -- that would have provided critical funds for interoperable communications equipment for emergency first responders so that they could effectively communicate with one another during natural disasters, terrorist attacks and other public safety situations.
Christopher Dodd's (D-CT) S.Amdt.2735, which was intended to “…support the health needs of our veterans and military personnel and reduce the deficit by making tax rates fairer for all Americans.
In short, the measure proposed additional funding to shore up the failing infrastructures at Veterans hospitals all over the country. The bill would have mandated a minor rollback
in the capital gains tax cuts the Bush administration
has given to the richest one-fifth of one percent of
Americans.
S.Amdt.2737, sponsored by Jack Reed (D-RI) sought a rollback in capital gains tax cuts to purchase much-needed equipment
for troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have the responsibility to be responsible, not only give the troops
what they need but pay for it so we do not increase the deficit, argued Reed on the Senate floor at the time.
I hope we respond by supporting my amendment which takes
care of the troops but does so in a responsible way by providing the resources to pay for this necessary equipment.
Charles Schumer (D-NY) had two amendment defeated by the GOP (S.Amdt. 1189 and S.Amdt. 1190) that would have provided $70 million to identify and track hazardous materials shipments and fund new security programs for inspection of air cargo containers.
S.Amdt. 16, by Dick Durbin (D-IL), would have exempted military people from some facets of the GOP's hideous 2005 Bankruptcy Bill by disallowing "… certain claims by lenders charging usurious interest rates to service members, and to allow service members to exempt property based on the law of the State of their premilitary residence."
Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Patty Murray (D-WA) both had legislation killed -- S.Amdt. 2634 and S.Amdt. 344, respectively -- that would have funded additional
medical care and readjustment counseling "for [Iraq]
veterans with mental illness, post-traumatic stress disorder, or substance use disorder."
The common denominator in all of these was McCain, the alleged maverick, doing exactly what his masters told him to do
and voting against every single one of these bills
designed to bolster our national security and care for our Veterans and active military.
As McCain himself is quoted as saying in Ignatius's
column, "It's awfully hard to say no to the president
of the United States."
see more at http://www.democrats.com/node/8803
see www.mccainalert.com
see more antics from MccainAlert Blog
Monday, May 22, 2006
where's Senator Kerry on the illegal workers problem ?
where's Senator Kerry on the illegal workers problem ?
unusually quiet on this problem.
maybe his wife , the kethcup queen, is profittering from cheap farm labor ?
unusually quiet on this problem.
maybe his wife , the kethcup queen, is profittering from cheap farm labor ?
Arizona Tax cheaters beware, maybe ????????
Arizona Tax cheaters beware, maybe ????????
Arizona Tax cheaters beware Will Arizona follow suit............ Missouri is prosecuting employers accused of hiring illegal alien workers under state tax laws. DOBBS: The federal government's refusal to enforce this nation's immigration laws is forcing states to fight the growing crisis themselves. Tonight, the state of Missouri is prosecuting employers accused of hiring illegal alien workers under state tax laws. Missouri officials say it is outrageous that employers taking jobs away from American citizens and giving them to foreign citizens are also tax cheats. Lisa Sylvester reports. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Missouri's Lake of the Ozarks, lots of land and beautiful scenery. Here, a new luxury condo complex called The Plaza Gardens is being built. State officials say the developer, Michael Schlup, was pumping up his profits by hiring illegal aliens, paying them cash, and avoiding state taxes. JAY NIXON, MISSOURI ATTORNEY GENERAL: We hope it sends a strong signal to all employers that they shouldn't be bringing in undocumented workers and trying to profit off the back of those, while clearly leaving out the taxpayers, as well as protection of those people at the same time. SYLVESTER: Schlup now faces 14 felony counts of failure to deduct, file, and pay Missouri employer with holding taxes. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How do you (INAUDIBLE)? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fine. Wonderful. SYLVESTER: If convicted on all counts, he could face a fine of up to $140,000 and up to 70 years in prison. Schlup's attorney says his client did nothing wrong. DEE WAMPLER, MICHAEL SCHLUP'S ATTORNEY: So he's working very hard, as he always has, trying to make a living. So, like I say, it was a surprise to him the fact that the charges were filed. And we'll just have to wait. Right now let the case play out. SYLVESTER: More cases like this one are coming to light. Federal prosecutors raided the IFCO pallet company last month after illegal aliens were allegedly seen ripping up W-2 forms. The federal government is in charge of enforcing immigration laws, but state governments can prosecute tax cheats. STEVE CAMAROTA, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: There's clearly a role to play for state and local governments. One area is in tax law. If you've got people working off the books in states with income tax, you've got employers and employees explicitly avoiding their tax obligation. SYLVESTER: The Center for Immigration Studies estimates 40 percent of illegal aliens in the United States are working off the books. (END VIDEOTAPE) SYLVESTER: The Missouri attorney general began investigating Plaza Gardens after several serious workplace accidents. This is the first case like this that the state has brought. But Attorney General Jay Nixon is now looking at other employers -- Lou. DOBBS: And Lisa, we're seeing a across the country more and more states and local governments taking on the responsibility of enforcing immigration law through -- whether it be through enforcement of tax laws or any -- any other number of laws in trying to deal with what is nothing less than a crisis. Lisa, thank you very much. see full transcript at...
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0605/19/ldt.01.html
Arizona Tax cheaters beware Will Arizona follow suit............ Missouri is prosecuting employers accused of hiring illegal alien workers under state tax laws. DOBBS: The federal government's refusal to enforce this nation's immigration laws is forcing states to fight the growing crisis themselves. Tonight, the state of Missouri is prosecuting employers accused of hiring illegal alien workers under state tax laws. Missouri officials say it is outrageous that employers taking jobs away from American citizens and giving them to foreign citizens are also tax cheats. Lisa Sylvester reports. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Missouri's Lake of the Ozarks, lots of land and beautiful scenery. Here, a new luxury condo complex called The Plaza Gardens is being built. State officials say the developer, Michael Schlup, was pumping up his profits by hiring illegal aliens, paying them cash, and avoiding state taxes. JAY NIXON, MISSOURI ATTORNEY GENERAL: We hope it sends a strong signal to all employers that they shouldn't be bringing in undocumented workers and trying to profit off the back of those, while clearly leaving out the taxpayers, as well as protection of those people at the same time. SYLVESTER: Schlup now faces 14 felony counts of failure to deduct, file, and pay Missouri employer with holding taxes. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How do you (INAUDIBLE)? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fine. Wonderful. SYLVESTER: If convicted on all counts, he could face a fine of up to $140,000 and up to 70 years in prison. Schlup's attorney says his client did nothing wrong. DEE WAMPLER, MICHAEL SCHLUP'S ATTORNEY: So he's working very hard, as he always has, trying to make a living. So, like I say, it was a surprise to him the fact that the charges were filed. And we'll just have to wait. Right now let the case play out. SYLVESTER: More cases like this one are coming to light. Federal prosecutors raided the IFCO pallet company last month after illegal aliens were allegedly seen ripping up W-2 forms. The federal government is in charge of enforcing immigration laws, but state governments can prosecute tax cheats. STEVE CAMAROTA, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: There's clearly a role to play for state and local governments. One area is in tax law. If you've got people working off the books in states with income tax, you've got employers and employees explicitly avoiding their tax obligation. SYLVESTER: The Center for Immigration Studies estimates 40 percent of illegal aliens in the United States are working off the books. (END VIDEOTAPE) SYLVESTER: The Missouri attorney general began investigating Plaza Gardens after several serious workplace accidents. This is the first case like this that the state has brought. But Attorney General Jay Nixon is now looking at other employers -- Lou. DOBBS: And Lisa, we're seeing a across the country more and more states and local governments taking on the responsibility of enforcing immigration law through -- whether it be through enforcement of tax laws or any -- any other number of laws in trying to deal with what is nothing less than a crisis. Lisa, thank you very much. see full transcript at...
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0605/19/ldt.01.html
can I stop paying taxes too?
can I stop paying taxes too?
Say good bye to your w-2, 1040 and the April 15 deadline /headache ?
If I claim "illegal alien/ worker status" will the IRS forgive me too?
Say good bye to your w-2, 1040 and the April 15 deadline /headache ?
If I claim "illegal alien/ worker status" will the IRS forgive me too?
Illegal aliens /workers as tax cheats
Illegal aliens /workers as tax cheats
it seems to be reported that illegal alien worker are filling out false w-9 forms, claiming 6 or more dependents in order to avoid taxes.
see more thoughts on Senator Mccain
it seems to be reported that illegal alien worker are filling out false w-9 forms, claiming 6 or more dependents in order to avoid taxes.
see more thoughts on Senator Mccain
Senator Mccain's Situational ethics not real principles
Senator Mccain's Situational ethics not real principles
Senator Mccain's Situational ethics are not
the same as real principles.
McCain's straight-talk express breaks down.
On April 23, the National Consortium of Torture
Treatment programs -- including 34 programs that
care for "victims of politically motivated torture"
-- awarded Sen. John McCain its 2006 Human Rights
Visionary Award for his "tireless work to pass
the McCain Anti-Torture Amendment."
Omitted was McCain's disturbing silence after his
amendment was made meaningless to prisoners at
Guantanamo Bay when the president signed the Detainee
Treatment Act of 2005 last December.
That law strips these prisoners of the habeas corpus
rights provided them in the Supreme Court's ruling
in Rasul et al. v. Bush in 2004. Accordingly,
no matter how harsh these detainees' conditions
of confinement are, they have no recourse to our
courts. For example, during the brutal
force-feeding of prisoners on a hunger strike,
the guards told a detainee, "We can do what we
want now because you can't go to court anymore."
McCain has not publicly protested the effect of this law.
see more editorial at...........
http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/editorial/ci_3833134
more thoughs at MccainAlert.com
Senator Mccain's Situational ethics are not
the same as real principles.
McCain's straight-talk express breaks down.
On April 23, the National Consortium of Torture
Treatment programs -- including 34 programs that
care for "victims of politically motivated torture"
-- awarded Sen. John McCain its 2006 Human Rights
Visionary Award for his "tireless work to pass
the McCain Anti-Torture Amendment."
Omitted was McCain's disturbing silence after his
amendment was made meaningless to prisoners at
Guantanamo Bay when the president signed the Detainee
Treatment Act of 2005 last December.
That law strips these prisoners of the habeas corpus
rights provided them in the Supreme Court's ruling
in Rasul et al. v. Bush in 2004. Accordingly,
no matter how harsh these detainees' conditions
of confinement are, they have no recourse to our
courts. For example, during the brutal
force-feeding of prisoners on a hunger strike,
the guards told a detainee, "We can do what we
want now because you can't go to court anymore."
McCain has not publicly protested the effect of this law.
see more editorial at...........
http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/editorial/ci_3833134
more thoughs at MccainAlert.com
Friday, May 19, 2006
commenst from Senator Kyl
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
May 18, 2006
CONTACT:
Andrew Wilder or Ryan Patmintra, (202) 224-4521
Kyl: Temporary Means Temporary
Kyl Amendment Ensures Temporary Workers Remain Temporary
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) today will introduce an amendment to S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006, that would ensure future participants in a temporary worker program cannot be placed on a pathway to citizenship. The White House has expressed support of Kyl’s amendment.
“A temporary worker program should be for temporary workers, and not for aliens who wish to become U.S. citizens – we already have a program for that,” said Kyl. “When the economy has a high demand for workers and can satisfy the demand with foreign workers, temporary work permits could be granted. But when the economy enters an economic downturn, no more temporary visas should be granted until jobs are again available to foreign workers. A temporary worker program should allow foreign workers in when the economy needs them – and prevent them from being here when the economy is struggling and there are not enough jobs even for Americans. Temporary must mean temporary.”
The Kyl amendment prohibits illegal immigrants who have been in the country less than five years and any future program participants from being eligible for legal permanent residence or citizenship under the bill. In its current form, the bill allows all illegal immigrants and future foreign workers who enroll in the temporary worker program become legal permanent residents and be placed on a pathway to citizenship.
“Under the provisions of the bill, temporary workers can petition with their employer for a green card on the very first day they start work,” said Kyl. “Senator Kennedy’s amendment that passed this morning goes one step further by allowing these temporary workers to even self-petition for permanent status in the United States. We are talking about hundreds of thousands of workers each year, added to the 10 million or so unauthorized workers already here who will receive a permanent right to remain in the United States, unless my amendment is passed.
“We must think ahead to a day when the economy might not be as strong and robust as it is today, and we’re left with millions of what will be unemployed foreign workers. Our first responsibility is to the American people and the American economy.””
Kyl and Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) are the authors of S. 1438, the Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act of 2005, the only Senate proposal that creates a temporary worker program that does not place illegal immigrants on an automatic path to citizenship.
May 18, 2006
CONTACT:
Andrew Wilder or Ryan Patmintra, (202) 224-4521
Kyl: Temporary Means Temporary
Kyl Amendment Ensures Temporary Workers Remain Temporary
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) today will introduce an amendment to S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006, that would ensure future participants in a temporary worker program cannot be placed on a pathway to citizenship. The White House has expressed support of Kyl’s amendment.
“A temporary worker program should be for temporary workers, and not for aliens who wish to become U.S. citizens – we already have a program for that,” said Kyl. “When the economy has a high demand for workers and can satisfy the demand with foreign workers, temporary work permits could be granted. But when the economy enters an economic downturn, no more temporary visas should be granted until jobs are again available to foreign workers. A temporary worker program should allow foreign workers in when the economy needs them – and prevent them from being here when the economy is struggling and there are not enough jobs even for Americans. Temporary must mean temporary.”
The Kyl amendment prohibits illegal immigrants who have been in the country less than five years and any future program participants from being eligible for legal permanent residence or citizenship under the bill. In its current form, the bill allows all illegal immigrants and future foreign workers who enroll in the temporary worker program become legal permanent residents and be placed on a pathway to citizenship.
“Under the provisions of the bill, temporary workers can petition with their employer for a green card on the very first day they start work,” said Kyl. “Senator Kennedy’s amendment that passed this morning goes one step further by allowing these temporary workers to even self-petition for permanent status in the United States. We are talking about hundreds of thousands of workers each year, added to the 10 million or so unauthorized workers already here who will receive a permanent right to remain in the United States, unless my amendment is passed.
“We must think ahead to a day when the economy might not be as strong and robust as it is today, and we’re left with millions of what will be unemployed foreign workers. Our first responsibility is to the American people and the American economy.””
Kyl and Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) are the authors of S. 1438, the Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act of 2005, the only Senate proposal that creates a temporary worker program that does not place illegal immigrants on an automatic path to citizenship.
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Colorfull Protest at Senator McCain's speech, some turned thier backs towards him
Colorfull Protest at Senator McCain's speech, some turned thier backs towards him
Colorfull Protest at McCain speech Colorfully and turned thier backs to him
Some scrawled "No War" and "Pro-Choice" on
their orange-and-white umbrellas; the buttons read,
"McCain does NOT speak for me."
Several also stood and turned their backs to
Mr. McCain as he spoke.
see more at............
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/17/nyregion/17columbia.html
see more mccain info at www.mccainalert.com
more mccain info
Colorfull Protest at McCain speech Colorfully and turned thier backs to him
Some scrawled "No War" and "Pro-Choice" on
their orange-and-white umbrellas; the buttons read,
"McCain does NOT speak for me."
Several also stood and turned their backs to
Mr. McCain as he spoke.
see more at............
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/17/nyregion/17columbia.html
see more mccain info at www.mccainalert.com
more mccain info
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
another view of Senator Mccain, war hero or victim?
another view of Senator Mccain, war hero or victim?
Senator McCain.
He identified himself as the son of the Admiral in charge of PacFleet when
he was shot down in order to get special medical
attention for his
injuries and was taken to a hospital in Hanoi
instead of being thrown in a
bamboo cage like other POWS.
Then he signed confession of war crimes and made
radio spots for the North
Vietnamese telling our guys to surrender etc. etc. etc.
This was in the day when all you were allowed to
tell them was name rank
and serial number.
He turned down repatriation several times
because he was facing life in Leavenworth at best.
Then his Daddy made Joint Chiefs of Staff and got them to change the rules so his son wouldn't spend life in prison or be executed.
As soon as Daddy got the rule changed he took the next repatriation and came home. McCain is one of the biggest traitors America ever had.
picked up as a post in the az.politics news group
Senator McCain.
He identified himself as the son of the Admiral in charge of PacFleet when
he was shot down in order to get special medical
attention for his
injuries and was taken to a hospital in Hanoi
instead of being thrown in a
bamboo cage like other POWS.
Then he signed confession of war crimes and made
radio spots for the North
Vietnamese telling our guys to surrender etc. etc. etc.
This was in the day when all you were allowed to
tell them was name rank
and serial number.
He turned down repatriation several times
because he was facing life in Leavenworth at best.
Then his Daddy made Joint Chiefs of Staff and got them to change the rules so his son wouldn't spend life in prison or be executed.
As soon as Daddy got the rule changed he took the next repatriation and came home. McCain is one of the biggest traitors America ever had.
picked up as a post in the az.politics news group
"silent protest." for Mccain in NY, out of state again.
'Silent Protest' May Greet McCain Speech at Columbia
Splashes of orange will dot a sea of blue graduation
gowns at Senator McCain's speech this morning at
Columbia University's Class Day. Some graduating
seniors are planning a "silent protest."
"Our goal is to show our opposition to McCain's
policies and voting record in a peaceful silent
demonstration during his speech," one of
the graduates planning to protest,
Ari Rosmarin, said.
"We have big orange buttons that say
'John McCain does not speak for me.'
We want to be as visually powerful as we can."
http://www.nysun.com/article/32790
Splashes of orange will dot a sea of blue graduation
gowns at Senator McCain's speech this morning at
Columbia University's Class Day. Some graduating
seniors are planning a "silent protest."
"Our goal is to show our opposition to McCain's
policies and voting record in a peaceful silent
demonstration during his speech," one of
the graduates planning to protest,
Ari Rosmarin, said.
"We have big orange buttons that say
'John McCain does not speak for me.'
We want to be as visually powerful as we can."
http://www.nysun.com/article/32790
MCCAIN SPEAKS AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
MCCAIN SPEAKS AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
For Immediate Release
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
New York, New York. – Today, U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) delivered the key note address at Columbia College Class Day. The following is the text of his address:
Thank you, faculty, families and friends, and thank you Class of 2006 for your welcome and for your kind invitation to give this year’s class day address. I want to join in the chorus of congratulations to the Class of 2006. This is a day to bask in praise. You’ve earned it. You have succeeded in a demanding course of instruction. Life seems full of promise as is always the case when a passage in life is marked by significant accomplishment. Today, it might seem as if the world attends you.
But spare a moment for those who have truly attended you so well for so long, and whose pride in your accomplishments is even greater than your own – your parents. When the world was looking elsewhere your parents’ attention was one of life’s certainties. So, as I commend you, I offer equal praise to your parents for the sacrifices they made for you, for their confidence in you and their love. More than anyone they have helped make you the success you are today and might become tomorrow.
When I was in your situation, many, many years ago, an undistinguished graduate of the Naval Academy, I listened to President Eisenhower deliver the commencement address. I admired President Eisenhower greatly. But I remember little of his remarks that day, impatient as I was to enjoy the less formal celebrations of graduation. I do recall, vaguely, that he encouraged his audience of new navy ensigns and Marine lieutenants to become “crusaders for peace.”
I became an aviator and, eventually, an instrument of war in Vietnam. I believed, as did many of my friends, we were defending the cause of a just peace. Some Americans believed we were agents of American imperialism who were not overly troubled by the many tragedies of war and the difficult moral dilemmas that constantly confront soldiers. Ours is a noisy, contentious society, and always has been, for we love our liberties much. Among those liberties we love most, particularly so when we are young, is our right to self-expression. That passion for self-expression sometimes overwhelms our civility, and our presumption that those with whom we have strong disagreements, wrong as they might be, believe that they, too, are answering the demands of their conscience.
When I was a young man, I was quite infatuated with self-expression, and rightly so because, if memory conveniently serves, I was so much more eloquent, well-informed, and wiser than anyone else I knew. It seemed I understood the world and the purpose of life so much more profoundly than most people. I believed that to be especially true with many of my elders, people whose only accomplishment, as far as I could tell, was that they had been born before me, and, consequently, had suffered some number of years deprived of my insights. I had opinions on everything, and I was always right. I loved to argue, and I could become understandably belligerent with people who lacked the grace and intelligence to agree with me. With my superior qualities so obvious, it was an intolerable hardship to have to suffer fools gladly. So I rarely did. All their resistance to my brilliantly conceived and cogently argued views proved was that they possessed an inferior intellect and a weaker character than God had blessed me with, and I felt it was my clear duty to so inform them. It’s a pity that there wasn’t a blogosphere then. I would have felt very much at home in the medium.
It’s funny, now, how less self-assured I feel late in life than I did when I lived in perpetual springtime. Some of my critics allege that age hasn’t entirely cost me the conceits of my youth. All I can say to them is, they should have known me then, when I was brave and true and better looking than I am at present. But as the great poet, Yeats, wrote, “All that’s beautiful drifts away, like the waters.” I have lost some of the attributes that were the object of a young man’s vanity. But there have been compensations, which I have come to hold dear.
We have our disagreements, we Americans. We contend regularly and enthusiastically over many questions: over the size and purposes of our government; over the social responsibilities we accept in accord with the dictates of our conscience and our faithfulness to the God we pray to; over our role in the world and how to defend our interests and values in places where they are threatened. These are important questions; worth arguing about. It is more than appropriate, it is necessary that even in times of crisis, especially in times of crisis, we fight among ourselves for the things we believe in. It is not just our right, but our civic and moral obligation.
I supported the decision to go to war in Iraq. Many Americans did not. I stand that ground not to chase dreams of empire; not for a noxious sense of racial superiority over a subject people; not for cheap oil; not for the allure of chauvinism; not for a foolishly romantic conception of war. I stand that ground because I believed, rightly or wrongly, my country’s interests and values required it.
War is an awful business. The lives of the nation’s finest patriots are sacrificed. Innocent people suffer. Commerce is disrupted, economies damaged. Whether the cause was just or not, we should all shed a tear for all that is lost when war claims its wages from us. However just or false the cause, how ever proud and noble the service, it is loss – the loss of friends, the loss of innocent life, the loss of innocence -- that the veteran feels most keenly forever more. Only a fool or a fraud sentimentalizes war.
Americans should argue about this war. It has cost the lives of nearly 2500 of the best of us. It has taken innocent life. It has imposed an enormous financial burden on our economy. It has complicated our ability to respond to other looming threats. Should we lose this war, our defeat will further destabilize an already volatile region, strengthen the threat of terrorism, and unleash furies that will assail us for a very long time. I believe the benefits of success will justify the costs and risks we have incurred. But if an American feels the decision was unwise, then they should state their opposition, and argue for another course. It’s your right and your obligation. I respect you for it. But I ask that you consider the possibility that I, too, am trying to meet my responsibilities, to follow my conscience, to do my duty as best as I can, as God has given me light to see that duty.
Americans deserve more than tolerance from one another, we deserve each other’s respect, whether we think each other right or wrong in our views, as long as our character and our sincerity merit respect, and as long as we share, for all our differences, for all the noisy debates that enliven our politics, a mutual devotion to the sublime idea that this nation was conceived in – that freedom is the inalienable right of mankind, and in accord with the laws of nature and nature’s Creator.
We have so much more that unites us than divides us. We need only to look to the enemy who now confronts us, and the benighted ideals to which Islamic extremists pledge allegiance -- their disdain for the rights of Man, their contempt for innocent human life -- to appreciate how much unites us.
Take, for example, the awful human catastrophe under way in the Darfur region of the Sudan. If the United States and the West can be criticized for our role in this catastrophe it is because we have waited too long to intervene to protect the multitudes who are suffering, dying because of it.
Now, belatedly, we have recovered our moral sense of duty, and are prepared, I hope, to put an end to this genocide. Osama bin Laden and his followers, ready, as always, to sacrifice anything and anyone to their hatred of the West and our ideals, have called on Muslims to rise up against any Westerner who dares intervene to stop the genocide, even though Muslims, hundreds of thousands of Muslims, are its victims. Now that, my friends, is a difference, a cause, worth taking up arms against.
It is not a clash of civilizations. I believe, as I hope all Americans would believe, that no matter where people live, no matter their history or religious beliefs or the size of their GDP, all people share the desire to be free; to make by their own choices and industry better lives for themselves and their children. Human rights exist above the state and beyond history – they are God-given. They cannot be rescinded by one government any more than they can be granted by another. They inhabit the human heart, and from there, though they may be abridged, they can never be wrenched.
This is a clash of ideals, a profound and terrible clash of ideals. It is a fight between right and wrong. Relativism has no place in this confrontation. We’re not defending an idea that every human being should eat corn flakes, play baseball or watch MTV. We are insisting that all people have a right to be free, and that right is not subject to the whims and interests and authority of another person, government or culture. Relativism, in this contest, is most certainly not a sign of our humility or ecumenism; it is a mask for arrogance and selfishness. It is not worthy of us.
Let us argue with each other then. By all means, let us argue. Our differences are not petty. They often involve cherished beliefs. Let us defend those beliefs. Let’s do so sincerely and strenuously. And let’s not be too dismayed with the tenor and passion of our arguments, even when they wound us. We have fought among ourselves before in our history, over big things and small, with worse vitriol and bitterness than we experience today.
Let us exercise our responsibilities as free people. But let us remember, we are not enemies. We are compatriots defending ourselves from a real enemy. We have nothing to fear from each other. We are arguing over the means to better secure our freedom, promote the general welfare and defend our ideals. It should remain an argument among friends; each of us struggling to hear our conscience, and heed its demands; each of us, despite our differences, respectful of the goodness in each other. I have not always heeded this injunction myself, and I regret it very much.
I had a friend once, who, a long time ago, in the passions and resentments of a tumultuous era in our history, I might have considered my enemy. He had come once to the capitol of the country that held me prisoner, that deprived me and my dearest friends of our most basic rights, and that murdered some of us. He came to that place to denounce our country’s involvement in the war that had led us there. His speech was broadcast into our cells. I thought it a grievous wrong and I still do.
A few years later, he had moved temporarily to a kibbutz in Israel. He was there during the Yom Kippur War, when he witnessed the support America provided our beleaguered ally. He saw the huge cargo planes bearing the insignia of the United States Air Force rushing emergency supplies into that country. And he had an epiphany. He had believed America had made a tragic mistake and done a terrible injustice by going to Vietnam, and he still did. But he realized he had let his criticism temporarily blind him to his country’s generosity and the goodness that most Americans possess, and he regretted his failing deeply.
When he returned to his country he became prominent in Democratic Party politics. He still criticized his government when he thought it wrong, but he never again lost sight of all that unites us.
We met some years later. He approached me and asked to apologize for the mistake he believed he had made as a young man. Many years had passed since then, and I bore little animosity for anyone because of what they had done or not done during the Vietnam War. It was an easy thing to accept such a generous act, and we moved beyond our old grievance.
We worked together in an organization dedicated to promoting human rights in the country where he and I had once come for different reasons. I came to admire him for his generosity, his passion for his ideals, for the largeness of his heart, and I realized he had not been my enemy, but my countryman . . . my countryman . . . and later my friend. His friendship honored me. We disagreed over much. Our politics were often opposed, and we argued those disagreements. But we worked together for our shared ideals. We were not always in the right, but we weren’t always in the wrong either, and we defended our beliefs as we had each been given the wisdom to defend them.
David remained my countryman and my friend, until the day of his death, at the age of forty-seven, when he left a loving wife and three beautiful children, and legions of friends behind him. His country was a better place for his service to her, and I had become a better man for my friendship with him. God bless him.
And may God bless you, Class of 2006. The world does indeed await you, and humanity is impatient for your service. Take good care of that responsibility. Everything depends upon it.
And thank you, very much, for the privilege of sharing this great occasion with you.
For Immediate Release
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
New York, New York. – Today, U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) delivered the key note address at Columbia College Class Day. The following is the text of his address:
Thank you, faculty, families and friends, and thank you Class of 2006 for your welcome and for your kind invitation to give this year’s class day address. I want to join in the chorus of congratulations to the Class of 2006. This is a day to bask in praise. You’ve earned it. You have succeeded in a demanding course of instruction. Life seems full of promise as is always the case when a passage in life is marked by significant accomplishment. Today, it might seem as if the world attends you.
But spare a moment for those who have truly attended you so well for so long, and whose pride in your accomplishments is even greater than your own – your parents. When the world was looking elsewhere your parents’ attention was one of life’s certainties. So, as I commend you, I offer equal praise to your parents for the sacrifices they made for you, for their confidence in you and their love. More than anyone they have helped make you the success you are today and might become tomorrow.
When I was in your situation, many, many years ago, an undistinguished graduate of the Naval Academy, I listened to President Eisenhower deliver the commencement address. I admired President Eisenhower greatly. But I remember little of his remarks that day, impatient as I was to enjoy the less formal celebrations of graduation. I do recall, vaguely, that he encouraged his audience of new navy ensigns and Marine lieutenants to become “crusaders for peace.”
I became an aviator and, eventually, an instrument of war in Vietnam. I believed, as did many of my friends, we were defending the cause of a just peace. Some Americans believed we were agents of American imperialism who were not overly troubled by the many tragedies of war and the difficult moral dilemmas that constantly confront soldiers. Ours is a noisy, contentious society, and always has been, for we love our liberties much. Among those liberties we love most, particularly so when we are young, is our right to self-expression. That passion for self-expression sometimes overwhelms our civility, and our presumption that those with whom we have strong disagreements, wrong as they might be, believe that they, too, are answering the demands of their conscience.
When I was a young man, I was quite infatuated with self-expression, and rightly so because, if memory conveniently serves, I was so much more eloquent, well-informed, and wiser than anyone else I knew. It seemed I understood the world and the purpose of life so much more profoundly than most people. I believed that to be especially true with many of my elders, people whose only accomplishment, as far as I could tell, was that they had been born before me, and, consequently, had suffered some number of years deprived of my insights. I had opinions on everything, and I was always right. I loved to argue, and I could become understandably belligerent with people who lacked the grace and intelligence to agree with me. With my superior qualities so obvious, it was an intolerable hardship to have to suffer fools gladly. So I rarely did. All their resistance to my brilliantly conceived and cogently argued views proved was that they possessed an inferior intellect and a weaker character than God had blessed me with, and I felt it was my clear duty to so inform them. It’s a pity that there wasn’t a blogosphere then. I would have felt very much at home in the medium.
It’s funny, now, how less self-assured I feel late in life than I did when I lived in perpetual springtime. Some of my critics allege that age hasn’t entirely cost me the conceits of my youth. All I can say to them is, they should have known me then, when I was brave and true and better looking than I am at present. But as the great poet, Yeats, wrote, “All that’s beautiful drifts away, like the waters.” I have lost some of the attributes that were the object of a young man’s vanity. But there have been compensations, which I have come to hold dear.
We have our disagreements, we Americans. We contend regularly and enthusiastically over many questions: over the size and purposes of our government; over the social responsibilities we accept in accord with the dictates of our conscience and our faithfulness to the God we pray to; over our role in the world and how to defend our interests and values in places where they are threatened. These are important questions; worth arguing about. It is more than appropriate, it is necessary that even in times of crisis, especially in times of crisis, we fight among ourselves for the things we believe in. It is not just our right, but our civic and moral obligation.
I supported the decision to go to war in Iraq. Many Americans did not. I stand that ground not to chase dreams of empire; not for a noxious sense of racial superiority over a subject people; not for cheap oil; not for the allure of chauvinism; not for a foolishly romantic conception of war. I stand that ground because I believed, rightly or wrongly, my country’s interests and values required it.
War is an awful business. The lives of the nation’s finest patriots are sacrificed. Innocent people suffer. Commerce is disrupted, economies damaged. Whether the cause was just or not, we should all shed a tear for all that is lost when war claims its wages from us. However just or false the cause, how ever proud and noble the service, it is loss – the loss of friends, the loss of innocent life, the loss of innocence -- that the veteran feels most keenly forever more. Only a fool or a fraud sentimentalizes war.
Americans should argue about this war. It has cost the lives of nearly 2500 of the best of us. It has taken innocent life. It has imposed an enormous financial burden on our economy. It has complicated our ability to respond to other looming threats. Should we lose this war, our defeat will further destabilize an already volatile region, strengthen the threat of terrorism, and unleash furies that will assail us for a very long time. I believe the benefits of success will justify the costs and risks we have incurred. But if an American feels the decision was unwise, then they should state their opposition, and argue for another course. It’s your right and your obligation. I respect you for it. But I ask that you consider the possibility that I, too, am trying to meet my responsibilities, to follow my conscience, to do my duty as best as I can, as God has given me light to see that duty.
Americans deserve more than tolerance from one another, we deserve each other’s respect, whether we think each other right or wrong in our views, as long as our character and our sincerity merit respect, and as long as we share, for all our differences, for all the noisy debates that enliven our politics, a mutual devotion to the sublime idea that this nation was conceived in – that freedom is the inalienable right of mankind, and in accord with the laws of nature and nature’s Creator.
We have so much more that unites us than divides us. We need only to look to the enemy who now confronts us, and the benighted ideals to which Islamic extremists pledge allegiance -- their disdain for the rights of Man, their contempt for innocent human life -- to appreciate how much unites us.
Take, for example, the awful human catastrophe under way in the Darfur region of the Sudan. If the United States and the West can be criticized for our role in this catastrophe it is because we have waited too long to intervene to protect the multitudes who are suffering, dying because of it.
Now, belatedly, we have recovered our moral sense of duty, and are prepared, I hope, to put an end to this genocide. Osama bin Laden and his followers, ready, as always, to sacrifice anything and anyone to their hatred of the West and our ideals, have called on Muslims to rise up against any Westerner who dares intervene to stop the genocide, even though Muslims, hundreds of thousands of Muslims, are its victims. Now that, my friends, is a difference, a cause, worth taking up arms against.
It is not a clash of civilizations. I believe, as I hope all Americans would believe, that no matter where people live, no matter their history or religious beliefs or the size of their GDP, all people share the desire to be free; to make by their own choices and industry better lives for themselves and their children. Human rights exist above the state and beyond history – they are God-given. They cannot be rescinded by one government any more than they can be granted by another. They inhabit the human heart, and from there, though they may be abridged, they can never be wrenched.
This is a clash of ideals, a profound and terrible clash of ideals. It is a fight between right and wrong. Relativism has no place in this confrontation. We’re not defending an idea that every human being should eat corn flakes, play baseball or watch MTV. We are insisting that all people have a right to be free, and that right is not subject to the whims and interests and authority of another person, government or culture. Relativism, in this contest, is most certainly not a sign of our humility or ecumenism; it is a mask for arrogance and selfishness. It is not worthy of us.
Let us argue with each other then. By all means, let us argue. Our differences are not petty. They often involve cherished beliefs. Let us defend those beliefs. Let’s do so sincerely and strenuously. And let’s not be too dismayed with the tenor and passion of our arguments, even when they wound us. We have fought among ourselves before in our history, over big things and small, with worse vitriol and bitterness than we experience today.
Let us exercise our responsibilities as free people. But let us remember, we are not enemies. We are compatriots defending ourselves from a real enemy. We have nothing to fear from each other. We are arguing over the means to better secure our freedom, promote the general welfare and defend our ideals. It should remain an argument among friends; each of us struggling to hear our conscience, and heed its demands; each of us, despite our differences, respectful of the goodness in each other. I have not always heeded this injunction myself, and I regret it very much.
I had a friend once, who, a long time ago, in the passions and resentments of a tumultuous era in our history, I might have considered my enemy. He had come once to the capitol of the country that held me prisoner, that deprived me and my dearest friends of our most basic rights, and that murdered some of us. He came to that place to denounce our country’s involvement in the war that had led us there. His speech was broadcast into our cells. I thought it a grievous wrong and I still do.
A few years later, he had moved temporarily to a kibbutz in Israel. He was there during the Yom Kippur War, when he witnessed the support America provided our beleaguered ally. He saw the huge cargo planes bearing the insignia of the United States Air Force rushing emergency supplies into that country. And he had an epiphany. He had believed America had made a tragic mistake and done a terrible injustice by going to Vietnam, and he still did. But he realized he had let his criticism temporarily blind him to his country’s generosity and the goodness that most Americans possess, and he regretted his failing deeply.
When he returned to his country he became prominent in Democratic Party politics. He still criticized his government when he thought it wrong, but he never again lost sight of all that unites us.
We met some years later. He approached me and asked to apologize for the mistake he believed he had made as a young man. Many years had passed since then, and I bore little animosity for anyone because of what they had done or not done during the Vietnam War. It was an easy thing to accept such a generous act, and we moved beyond our old grievance.
We worked together in an organization dedicated to promoting human rights in the country where he and I had once come for different reasons. I came to admire him for his generosity, his passion for his ideals, for the largeness of his heart, and I realized he had not been my enemy, but my countryman . . . my countryman . . . and later my friend. His friendship honored me. We disagreed over much. Our politics were often opposed, and we argued those disagreements. But we worked together for our shared ideals. We were not always in the right, but we weren’t always in the wrong either, and we defended our beliefs as we had each been given the wisdom to defend them.
David remained my countryman and my friend, until the day of his death, at the age of forty-seven, when he left a loving wife and three beautiful children, and legions of friends behind him. His country was a better place for his service to her, and I had become a better man for my friendship with him. God bless him.
And may God bless you, Class of 2006. The world does indeed await you, and humanity is impatient for your service. Take good care of that responsibility. Everything depends upon it.
And thank you, very much, for the privilege of sharing this great occasion with you.
Monday, May 15, 2006
Senator Jon Kyl says he's "delighted", where's "crash" Mccain at ?
Kyl happy with Bush plan to put Guard on border; others skeptical
Senator Jon Kyl says he's "delighted", where's "crash" Mccain at ?
Arizona Senator Jon Kyl says he's "delighted" with President Bush's plan to send the National Guard to the U-S border with Mexico.
Senator Jon Kyl says he's "delighted", where's "crash" Mccain at ?
Arizona Senator Jon Kyl says he's "delighted" with President Bush's plan to send the National Guard to the U-S border with Mexico.
guest worker program ? we got an "uninvited guest worker" problem already !
guest worker program ? we got an "uninvited guest worker" problem already !
that's the prblem, uninvteed workers.
guest worker program ? we got an "uninvited guest worker" problem already !
that's the prblem, uninvteed workers.
guest worker program ? we got an "uninvited guest worker" problem already !
Republican newsletter for Arizona
Republican newsletter for Arizona
"So full marks to Arizona Congressman John Shadegg, who was the first politician of note to propose that the government suspend the outrageously high tariffs on imported ethanol."
- From a Wall Street Journal editorial last week lauding Congressman John Shadegg's introduction of the Ethanol Tax Relief Act.
Congressman Shadegg Offers Real Solutions to High Gas Prices
With consumers continuing to face high gas prices, Congressman John Shadegg is offering relief with the introduction of the Ethanol Tax Relief Act.
With the gasoline additive MBTE being phased out, almost every gallon of gasoline sold in the United States is going to require ethanol, but the domestic ethanol supply is simply inadequate. The United States levies a tariff of 2.5 percent and a 54-cent per gallon duty on imported ethanol. The result is higher gasoline prices. Rep. Shadegg's bill would suspend the taxes on imported ethanol until January 1, 2007, increasing supply and lowering prices.
The Wall Street Journal praised Congressman Shadegg's bill, saying, "Washington is floating so many bad ideas in its panic over $3 gasoline that it's something of a miracle when someone proposes a good one. So full marks to Arizona Congressman John Shadegg, who was the first politician of note to propose that the government suspend the outrageously high tariffs on imported ethanol."
The New York Sun agrees. In an editorial, the paper wrote, "Rep. John Shadegg has introduced one of the few sensible proposals for dealing with high gasoline prices - a lifting, albeit temporary, of protectionist tariffs on foreign ethanol."
With Democrats proposing shortsighted tax gimmicks to fix our pains at the pump, Congressman Shadegg is leading the fight for commonsense solutions to the energy crunch.
Margaret Garcia Dugan Addresses Tucson Magnet High School
Margaret Garcia Dugan, the Arizona Department of Education's deputy associate superintendent for schools, addressed Tucson Magnet High School on Friday, May 12. You'll recall that's the same high school where last month labor activist claimed, "Republicans hate Latinos" during a left-wing rant in a speech before students.
In her remarks, Ms. Garcia Dugan set the record straight on Republican values and spoke of the need for students to think independently.
In her speech, Ms. Garcia Dugan said, "When you hear a broad and unsupported statement like, 'Republicans Hate Latinos,' you should check it out to see if there is any evidence backing it up before you make up your mind to believe it. Any time a person gives you a blanket statement, that stereotypes people into a category, you need to be smart enough to see through that."
Ms. Garcia Dugan is to be commended for seeking to give students a new perspective on our nation's political landscape.
Trunk & Tusk 2006 Dinner Series Kicks Off With Governor Mitt Romney
Trunk & Tusk is back! By joining TNT you get invitations to all TNT events and special membership benefits.
The TNT 2006 series starts June 10 at the Scottsdale Plaza Resort with special guest Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. The VIP reception starts at 6 pm, with dinner at 7 pm.
For $275 you get a Silver membership, which includes three dinners in 2006.
A Gold membership is $500 and includes three dinners and VIP receptions.
A Platinum membership is $5000 and includes the dinners and receptions for two people, and participation in exclusive roundtable discussions with Arizona Republican Party Chairman Matt Salmon and national political leaders.
Become a member today by registering at the AZ GOP Web page or by sending your check or credit card information to:
Arizona Republican Party
3501 N. 24th St.
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Congressman Renzi Votes for Tax Relief While Opponent Calls for Giant Tax Hike
America's most liberal Congressional candidate and former ACLU President Ellen Simon announced her support for a massive $70 billion tax increase for Arizonans - including vulnerable senior citizens- over the next four years.
Simon criticized Congressman Rick Renzi for voting in support of tax relief for working Americans and small businesses that are spurring explosive economic growth across the nation and in Arizona. Twenty-eight million families will benefit from the tax cuts by an average of almost $990 on their 2006 tax returns. Over eight million beneficiaries are seniors who received an average benefit of $1,144.
If Ellen Simon had her way, we'd have a crippling tax hike that would send our economy into a tail spin and take money from the pockets of Arizona's families and seniors.
The National Taxpayers Union said preventing the tax hike will boost America's economy. According to the NTU, "By extending the lower tax rate on this vital fuel for our economic expansion, the bill ensures that Americans will be able to count on some stability in the tax system. Since many large and small investors try to plan on a multi-year financial horizon, middle-class families saving for college or retirement will see greater returns and smaller tax bills."
Hayworth Campaign Going Strong, But Mitchell Can't Get Support
In a sign of a campaign failing to gain traction with supporters, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has decided not to include Harry Mitchell's campaign for the District 5 seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in its current fundraising efforts. DCCC support is a key gauge of the confidence the Democratic Party has in its candidates.
This is a rare example of fiscal conservatism from a party known for its spendthrift ways. While Republicans are united behind Congressman J.D. Hayworth, Democrats have looked at Harry Mitchell and decided to spend their money elsewhere.
Capitol Update
WHAT YOUR REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE IS DOING - FOR THE WEEK ENDING MAY 12, 2006
• Comprehensive immigration plan takes shape. The Republican Legislature has crafted the most aggressive and comprehensive border security plan in the country. This week the Legislature plans to take up the multi-layered approach to securing the nearly 400 miles of Arizona's border with Mexico.
Highlights of the plan include a radar system that can spot illegal aliens crossing the desert; $55 million for local law enforcement for jail and immigration enforcement costs; $10 million to station the National Guard on the border; and employer sanctions that hold businesses liable that knowingly hire illegal aliens.
The comprehensive Republican built plan invests $150 million where Arizona really needs it - border security.
• Tax cuts part of state budget package. The Legislature has proposed a two-year, $500 million tax relief package that reduces both personal income and property taxes to help ensure the state's economy continues humming along. A new budget proposal contains a five percent reduction in income tax rates in each of the next two years to ensure that Arizonans get to keep more of the money they work so hard to earn. And with property taxes on the rise thanks to an explosive increase in valuations, the Legislature is proposing a substantial reduction in the state property tax.
In addition to tax relief, the fiscally responsible proposal that does not spend more permanent revenue than the state has, demonstrates a commitment to funding all of the state's top priorities like infrastructure, public safety, education, health care and the above-discussed groundbreaking and critically important package for border enforcement.
And speaking of investing in our burgeoning state's infrastructure, to help relieve traffic congestion the Republican Legislature is proposing to invest $345 million for new roads around the state.
Quote of the week: "It focuses on education, taxpayers, illegal immigration issues and financial, fiscal responsibility by not spending more than we have." Senate President Ken Bennett on the legislative budget proposal set to move through the legislative process this week.
Did you know? Governor Napolitano's spending plan, which loads up on social welfare and entitlement spending and offers no meaningful or broad-based tax cuts, would land Arizona right back into a deficit, with ongoing spending outstripping ongoing revenue to the tune of a whopping $375 million.
By contrast, the Republican Legislature's plan that will move through the legislative process this week leaves the state with a positive balance.
Campaign Season Means Field Offices are Open for Business
As Republicans begin the march to victory in November, we need your help to make every campaign a winning one.
We'll be running phone banks and other campaign activities from our field offices and we count on volunteers like you to help with staff support.
If you are able to help at any of the offices below, please contact Mateo Figueroa via e-mail.
West Valley
15440 N. 35th Ave., Ste. 4
Phoenix, AZ 85053
(North of Greenway Rd. in the Thank Q Shopping Center)
602-843-3863
Flagstaff
405 N. Beaver
Suite #3
Flagstaff, AZ 86001
928-213-0849
Green Valley
125 W. Calle de Las Tiendas
Suite #119A
Green Valley, AZ 85614
520-399-4671
Tucson
Pima County Republican Party
5447 E. Fifth St., Suite 100
Tucson, AZ 85711
520-360-2412
Tempe
Tempe Executive Center
1232 E. Broadway
Suite 202
Tempe, AZ 85282
AZ GOP Headquarters
3501 N. 24th Street
Phoenix, AZ 85016
602-957-7770
Sierra Vista Office
498 W. Fry Rd.
Sierra Vista, AZ 85635
520-417-1000
Senator Kyl Bumper Stickers Available at AZ GOP HQ
Just a quick reminder that Kyl for Senate bumper stickers are available at Arizona Republican Party headquarters at 3501 N. 24th St. in Phoenix.
Upcoming Events
Cocktails and conversation with Senator Jon Kyl
Please join politically-astute women for cocktails and conversation with The Honorable Jon Kyl, U.S. Senator, Arizona on Friday, May 19, 2006 from 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm.
At the home of Susan Bitter Smith, 5806 East Lewis Avenue, in Scottsdale.
$100 per person. For event questions and details, please contact Pam Barbey or Anne Lynch at 602-840-0306 or pam@jonkyl.com or anne@jonkyl.com.
Contributions are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.
Coconino County Lincoln Day Dinner
Join the Acting Secretary of the Interior Lynn Scarlett at this year's Coconino County Lincoln Day Dinner on Friday, May 19. This annual celebration will take place at the Canyon Clubhouse at Forest Highlands in Flagstaff.
• Roundtable discussion: 4:30 PM - $1000 per person - includes VIP reception and dinner.
• VIP Reception: 5:30 PM - $125 per person/$250 per couple includes dinner and photo.
• Dinner: 6:30 PM - $75 per person/$150 per couple
• Table of 10 for $750
Call (928) 213-0849 to make your reservation.
Arizona Latino Republican Association Meeting
ALRA, the Arizona Latino Republican Association, will meet on May 22 at 5:30 PM at AZ GOP Headquarters at 3501 N. 24th St., in Phoenix.
For more information contact Alica Lara.
"So full marks to Arizona Congressman John Shadegg, who was the first politician of note to propose that the government suspend the outrageously high tariffs on imported ethanol."
- From a Wall Street Journal editorial last week lauding Congressman John Shadegg's introduction of the Ethanol Tax Relief Act.
Congressman Shadegg Offers Real Solutions to High Gas Prices
With consumers continuing to face high gas prices, Congressman John Shadegg is offering relief with the introduction of the Ethanol Tax Relief Act.
With the gasoline additive MBTE being phased out, almost every gallon of gasoline sold in the United States is going to require ethanol, but the domestic ethanol supply is simply inadequate. The United States levies a tariff of 2.5 percent and a 54-cent per gallon duty on imported ethanol. The result is higher gasoline prices. Rep. Shadegg's bill would suspend the taxes on imported ethanol until January 1, 2007, increasing supply and lowering prices.
The Wall Street Journal praised Congressman Shadegg's bill, saying, "Washington is floating so many bad ideas in its panic over $3 gasoline that it's something of a miracle when someone proposes a good one. So full marks to Arizona Congressman John Shadegg, who was the first politician of note to propose that the government suspend the outrageously high tariffs on imported ethanol."
The New York Sun agrees. In an editorial, the paper wrote, "Rep. John Shadegg has introduced one of the few sensible proposals for dealing with high gasoline prices - a lifting, albeit temporary, of protectionist tariffs on foreign ethanol."
With Democrats proposing shortsighted tax gimmicks to fix our pains at the pump, Congressman Shadegg is leading the fight for commonsense solutions to the energy crunch.
Margaret Garcia Dugan Addresses Tucson Magnet High School
Margaret Garcia Dugan, the Arizona Department of Education's deputy associate superintendent for schools, addressed Tucson Magnet High School on Friday, May 12. You'll recall that's the same high school where last month labor activist claimed, "Republicans hate Latinos" during a left-wing rant in a speech before students.
In her remarks, Ms. Garcia Dugan set the record straight on Republican values and spoke of the need for students to think independently.
In her speech, Ms. Garcia Dugan said, "When you hear a broad and unsupported statement like, 'Republicans Hate Latinos,' you should check it out to see if there is any evidence backing it up before you make up your mind to believe it. Any time a person gives you a blanket statement, that stereotypes people into a category, you need to be smart enough to see through that."
Ms. Garcia Dugan is to be commended for seeking to give students a new perspective on our nation's political landscape.
Trunk & Tusk 2006 Dinner Series Kicks Off With Governor Mitt Romney
Trunk & Tusk is back! By joining TNT you get invitations to all TNT events and special membership benefits.
The TNT 2006 series starts June 10 at the Scottsdale Plaza Resort with special guest Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. The VIP reception starts at 6 pm, with dinner at 7 pm.
For $275 you get a Silver membership, which includes three dinners in 2006.
A Gold membership is $500 and includes three dinners and VIP receptions.
A Platinum membership is $5000 and includes the dinners and receptions for two people, and participation in exclusive roundtable discussions with Arizona Republican Party Chairman Matt Salmon and national political leaders.
Become a member today by registering at the AZ GOP Web page or by sending your check or credit card information to:
Arizona Republican Party
3501 N. 24th St.
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Congressman Renzi Votes for Tax Relief While Opponent Calls for Giant Tax Hike
America's most liberal Congressional candidate and former ACLU President Ellen Simon announced her support for a massive $70 billion tax increase for Arizonans - including vulnerable senior citizens- over the next four years.
Simon criticized Congressman Rick Renzi for voting in support of tax relief for working Americans and small businesses that are spurring explosive economic growth across the nation and in Arizona. Twenty-eight million families will benefit from the tax cuts by an average of almost $990 on their 2006 tax returns. Over eight million beneficiaries are seniors who received an average benefit of $1,144.
If Ellen Simon had her way, we'd have a crippling tax hike that would send our economy into a tail spin and take money from the pockets of Arizona's families and seniors.
The National Taxpayers Union said preventing the tax hike will boost America's economy. According to the NTU, "By extending the lower tax rate on this vital fuel for our economic expansion, the bill ensures that Americans will be able to count on some stability in the tax system. Since many large and small investors try to plan on a multi-year financial horizon, middle-class families saving for college or retirement will see greater returns and smaller tax bills."
Hayworth Campaign Going Strong, But Mitchell Can't Get Support
In a sign of a campaign failing to gain traction with supporters, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has decided not to include Harry Mitchell's campaign for the District 5 seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in its current fundraising efforts. DCCC support is a key gauge of the confidence the Democratic Party has in its candidates.
This is a rare example of fiscal conservatism from a party known for its spendthrift ways. While Republicans are united behind Congressman J.D. Hayworth, Democrats have looked at Harry Mitchell and decided to spend their money elsewhere.
Capitol Update
WHAT YOUR REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE IS DOING - FOR THE WEEK ENDING MAY 12, 2006
• Comprehensive immigration plan takes shape. The Republican Legislature has crafted the most aggressive and comprehensive border security plan in the country. This week the Legislature plans to take up the multi-layered approach to securing the nearly 400 miles of Arizona's border with Mexico.
Highlights of the plan include a radar system that can spot illegal aliens crossing the desert; $55 million for local law enforcement for jail and immigration enforcement costs; $10 million to station the National Guard on the border; and employer sanctions that hold businesses liable that knowingly hire illegal aliens.
The comprehensive Republican built plan invests $150 million where Arizona really needs it - border security.
• Tax cuts part of state budget package. The Legislature has proposed a two-year, $500 million tax relief package that reduces both personal income and property taxes to help ensure the state's economy continues humming along. A new budget proposal contains a five percent reduction in income tax rates in each of the next two years to ensure that Arizonans get to keep more of the money they work so hard to earn. And with property taxes on the rise thanks to an explosive increase in valuations, the Legislature is proposing a substantial reduction in the state property tax.
In addition to tax relief, the fiscally responsible proposal that does not spend more permanent revenue than the state has, demonstrates a commitment to funding all of the state's top priorities like infrastructure, public safety, education, health care and the above-discussed groundbreaking and critically important package for border enforcement.
And speaking of investing in our burgeoning state's infrastructure, to help relieve traffic congestion the Republican Legislature is proposing to invest $345 million for new roads around the state.
Quote of the week: "It focuses on education, taxpayers, illegal immigration issues and financial, fiscal responsibility by not spending more than we have." Senate President Ken Bennett on the legislative budget proposal set to move through the legislative process this week.
Did you know? Governor Napolitano's spending plan, which loads up on social welfare and entitlement spending and offers no meaningful or broad-based tax cuts, would land Arizona right back into a deficit, with ongoing spending outstripping ongoing revenue to the tune of a whopping $375 million.
By contrast, the Republican Legislature's plan that will move through the legislative process this week leaves the state with a positive balance.
Campaign Season Means Field Offices are Open for Business
As Republicans begin the march to victory in November, we need your help to make every campaign a winning one.
We'll be running phone banks and other campaign activities from our field offices and we count on volunteers like you to help with staff support.
If you are able to help at any of the offices below, please contact Mateo Figueroa via e-mail.
West Valley
15440 N. 35th Ave., Ste. 4
Phoenix, AZ 85053
(North of Greenway Rd. in the Thank Q Shopping Center)
602-843-3863
Flagstaff
405 N. Beaver
Suite #3
Flagstaff, AZ 86001
928-213-0849
Green Valley
125 W. Calle de Las Tiendas
Suite #119A
Green Valley, AZ 85614
520-399-4671
Tucson
Pima County Republican Party
5447 E. Fifth St., Suite 100
Tucson, AZ 85711
520-360-2412
Tempe
Tempe Executive Center
1232 E. Broadway
Suite 202
Tempe, AZ 85282
AZ GOP Headquarters
3501 N. 24th Street
Phoenix, AZ 85016
602-957-7770
Sierra Vista Office
498 W. Fry Rd.
Sierra Vista, AZ 85635
520-417-1000
Senator Kyl Bumper Stickers Available at AZ GOP HQ
Just a quick reminder that Kyl for Senate bumper stickers are available at Arizona Republican Party headquarters at 3501 N. 24th St. in Phoenix.
Upcoming Events
Cocktails and conversation with Senator Jon Kyl
Please join politically-astute women for cocktails and conversation with The Honorable Jon Kyl, U.S. Senator, Arizona on Friday, May 19, 2006 from 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm.
At the home of Susan Bitter Smith, 5806 East Lewis Avenue, in Scottsdale.
$100 per person. For event questions and details, please contact Pam Barbey or Anne Lynch at 602-840-0306 or pam@jonkyl.com or anne@jonkyl.com.
Contributions are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.
Coconino County Lincoln Day Dinner
Join the Acting Secretary of the Interior Lynn Scarlett at this year's Coconino County Lincoln Day Dinner on Friday, May 19. This annual celebration will take place at the Canyon Clubhouse at Forest Highlands in Flagstaff.
• Roundtable discussion: 4:30 PM - $1000 per person - includes VIP reception and dinner.
• VIP Reception: 5:30 PM - $125 per person/$250 per couple includes dinner and photo.
• Dinner: 6:30 PM - $75 per person/$150 per couple
• Table of 10 for $750
Call (928) 213-0849 to make your reservation.
Arizona Latino Republican Association Meeting
ALRA, the Arizona Latino Republican Association, will meet on May 22 at 5:30 PM at AZ GOP Headquarters at 3501 N. 24th St., in Phoenix.
For more information contact Alica Lara.
should Mexico be placed on the " axis of evil" list of terrorist nations ?
should Mexico be placed on the " axis of evil" list of terrorist nations ?
Mexico exports drugs,
imports a lot of stolen US cars
a deflationary cheap labor source
economic sanctions if they continue to ignore the these serious issues.
Mexico exports drugs,
imports a lot of stolen US cars
a deflationary cheap labor source
economic sanctions if they continue to ignore the these serious issues.
how about merely boosting and fund the 1986 act ?
how about merely boosting and fund the 1986 act ?
Statement on Signing the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
November 6, 1986
The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 is the most comprehensive reform of our immigration laws since 1952. In the past 35 years our nation has been increasingly affected by illegal immigration. This legislation takes a major step toward meeting this challenge to our sovereignty. At the same time, it preserves and enhances the Nation's heritage of legal immigration. I am pleased to sign the bill into law.
In 1981 this administration asked the Congress to pass a comprehensive legislative package, including employer sanctions, other measures to increase enforcement of the immigration laws, and legalization. The act provides these three essential components. The employer sanctions program is the keystone and major element. It will remove the incentive for illegal immigration by eliminating the job opportunities which draw illegal aliens here. We have consistently supported a legalization program which is both generous to the alien and fair to the countless thousands of people throughout the world who seek legally to come to America. The legalization provisions in this act will go far to improve the lives of a class of individuals who now must hide in the shadows, without access to many of the benefits of a free and open society. Very soon many of these men and women will be able to step into the sunlight and, ultimately, if they choose, they may become Americans.
Section 102(a) of the bill adds section 274B to the Immigration and Nationality Act. This new section relates to certain kinds of discrimination in connection with employment in the United States. Section 274B(a) provides that it is an ``unfair immigration-related employment practice'' to ``discriminate against'' any individual in hiring, recruitment or referral for a fee, or discharging from employment ``because of'' such individual's national origin or -- if such individual is a United States citizen or an alien who is a lawful permanent resident, refugee admitted under INA section 207, or asylee granted asylum under section 208, and who has taken certain steps evidencing an intent to become a United States citizen -- because of such individual's citizenship status. Employers of fewer than four employees are expressly exempted from coverage. Discrimination against an ``unauthorized alien,'' as defined in section 274A(h)(3), is also not covered. Other exceptions include cases of discrimination because of national origin that are covered by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, discrimination based on citizenship status when lawfully required under government authority, and discrimination in favor of a United States citizen over an alien if the citizen is at least ``equally qualified.''
The major purpose of section 274B is to reduce the possibility that employer sanctions will result in increased national origin and alienage discrimination and to provide a remedy if employer sanctions enforcement does have this result. Accordingly, subsection (k) provides that the section will not apply to any discrimination that takes place after a repeal of employer sanctions if this should occur. In the light of this major purpose, the Special Counsel should exercise the discretion provided under subsection (d)(1) so as to limit the investigations conducted on his own initiative to cases involving discrimination apparently caused by an employer's fear of liability under the employer sanctions program.
I understand section 274B to require a ``discriminatory intent'' standard of proof: The party bringing the action must show that in the decisionmaking process the defendant's action was motivated by one of the prohibited criteria. Thus, it would be improper to use the ``disparate impact'' theory of recovery, which was developed under paragraph (2) of section 703(a) of title VII, in a line of Supreme Court cases over the last 15 years. This paragraph of title VII does not have a counterpart in section 274B. Section 274B tracks only the language of paragraph (1) of section 703(a), the basis of the ``disparate treatment'' (discriminatory intent) theory of recovery under title VII. Moreover, paragraph (d)(2) refers to ``knowing an intentional discrimination'' and ``a pattern or practice of discriminatory activity.'' The meaning of the former phrase is self-evident, while the latter is taken from the Supreme Court's disparate treatment jurisprudence and thus includes the requirement of a discriminatory intent.
Thus, a facially neutral employee selection practice that is employed without discriminatory intent will be permissible under the provisions of section 274B. For example, the section does not preclude a requirement of English language skill or a minimum score on an aptitude test even if the employer cannot show a ``manifest relationship'' to the job in question or that the requirement is a ``bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise,'' so long as the practice is not a guise used to discriminate on account of national origin or citizenship status. Indeed, unless the plaintiff presents evidence that the employer has intentionally discriminated on proscribed grounds, the employer need not offer any explanation for his employee selection procedures.
Section 274B(c) provides that the President shall appoint, with the advice and consent of the Senate, a Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices within the Justice Department, to serve for a term of 4 years. I understand this subsection to provide that the Special Counsel shall serve at the pleasure and with the policy guidance of the President, but for no longer than for a 4-year term (subject to reappointment by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate).
In accordance with the provisions of section 274B(h) and (j)(4), a requirement to pay attorneys' fees may be imposed against nonprevailing parties -- including alleged victims or persons who file on their behalf as well as employers -- if claims or defenses are made that do not have a reasonable foundation in both law and fact. The same standard for the imposing of attorneys' fees applies to all nonprevailing parties. It is therefore expected that prevailing defendants would recover attorneys' fees in all cases for which this standard is satisfied, not merely in cases where the claim of the victim or person filing on their behalf is found to be vexatious or frivolous.
The provisions of new INA section 245A(a)(4)(B) and (b)(1)(C)(ii), added by section 201(a) of the bill, state that no alien would qualify for the lawful temporary or the permanent residence status provided in that section if he or she has been convicted of any felony or three or more misdemeanors committed in the United States.
New INA section 245A(d)(2) states that no alien would qualify for the lawful temporary or permanent residence status provided in that section if ``likely to become [a] public charge [ ].'' This disqualification could be waived by the Attorney General under certain circumstances. A likelihood that an applicant would become a public charge would exist, for example, if the applicant had failed to demonstrate either a history of employment in the United States of a kind that would provide sufficient means without public cash assistance for the support of the alien and his likely dependents who are not United States citizens or the possession of independent means sufficient by itself for such support for an indefinite period.
New INA section 245A(a)(3) requires that an applicant for legalization establish that he has been ``continuously physically present in the United States since the date of the enactment'' but states that ``brief, casual, and innocent absences from the United States'' will not be considered a break in the required continuous physical presence. To the extent that the INS has made available a procedure by which aliens can obtain permission to depart and reenter the United States after a brief, casual, and innocent absence by establishing a prima facie case of eligibility for adjustment of status under this section, I understand section 245A(a)(3) to require that an unauthorized departure and illegal reentry will constitute a break in ``continuous physical presence.''
New INA section 210(d), added by section 302(a) of the bill, provides that an alien who is ``apprehended'' before or during the application period for adjustment of status for certain ``special agricultural workers,'' may not under certain circumstances related to the establishment of a nonfrivolous case of eligibility for such adjustment of status be excluded or deported. I understand this subsection not to authorize any alien to apply for admission to or to be admitted to the United States in order to apply for adjustment of status under this section. Aliens outside the United States may apply for adjustment of status under this section at an appropriate consular office outside the United States pursuant to the procedures established by the Attorney General, in cooperation with the Secretary of State, as provided in section 210(b)(1)(B).
Section 304 of the bill establishes the Commission on Agricultural Workers, half of whose 12 members are appointed by the executive branch and half by the legislative branch. This hybrid Commission is not consistent with constitutional separation of powers. However, the Commission's role will be entirely advisory.
Section 304(g) provides that upon request of the Commission's Chairman, the head of ``any department or agency of the United States'' must supply ``information necessary to enable it to carry out [the] section.'' Although I expect that the executive branch will cooperate closely with the Commission, its access to executive branch information will be limited in accordance with established principles of law, including the constitutional separation of powers.
Section 601 establishes a Commission for the Study of International Migration and Cooperative Economic Development, all of whose members are appointed by the legislative branch. Section 601(d)(1) states that the access to executive branch information required under section 304(g) must be provided to this Commission also. Accordingly, the comments of the preceding paragraph are appropriate here as well.
New INA section 274A(a)(5) provides that a person or entity shall be deemed in compliance with the employment verification system in the case of an individual who is referred for employment by a State employment agency if that person or entity retains documentation of such referral certifying that the agency complied with the verification system with respect to the individual referred. I understand this provision not to mandate State employment agencies to issue referral documents certifying compliance with the verification system or to impose any additional affirmative duty or obligation on the offices or personnel of such agencies.
Distance has not discouraged illegal immigration to the United States from all around the globe. The problem of illegal immigration should not, therefore, be seen as a problem between the United States and its neighbors. Our objective is only to establish a reasonable, fair, orderly, and secure system of immigration into this country and not to discriminate in any way against particular nations or people.
The act I am signing today is the product of one of the longest and most difficult legislative undertakings of recent memory. It has truly been a bipartisan effort, with this administration and the allies of immigration reform in the Congress, of both parties, working together to accomplish these critically important reforms. Future generations of Americans will be thankful for our efforts to humanely regain control of our borders and thereby preserve the value of one of the most sacred possessions of our people: American citizenship.
Note: S. 1200, approved November 6, was assigned Public Law No. 99 - 603.
Statement on Signing the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
November 6, 1986
The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 is the most comprehensive reform of our immigration laws since 1952. In the past 35 years our nation has been increasingly affected by illegal immigration. This legislation takes a major step toward meeting this challenge to our sovereignty. At the same time, it preserves and enhances the Nation's heritage of legal immigration. I am pleased to sign the bill into law.
In 1981 this administration asked the Congress to pass a comprehensive legislative package, including employer sanctions, other measures to increase enforcement of the immigration laws, and legalization. The act provides these three essential components. The employer sanctions program is the keystone and major element. It will remove the incentive for illegal immigration by eliminating the job opportunities which draw illegal aliens here. We have consistently supported a legalization program which is both generous to the alien and fair to the countless thousands of people throughout the world who seek legally to come to America. The legalization provisions in this act will go far to improve the lives of a class of individuals who now must hide in the shadows, without access to many of the benefits of a free and open society. Very soon many of these men and women will be able to step into the sunlight and, ultimately, if they choose, they may become Americans.
Section 102(a) of the bill adds section 274B to the Immigration and Nationality Act. This new section relates to certain kinds of discrimination in connection with employment in the United States. Section 274B(a) provides that it is an ``unfair immigration-related employment practice'' to ``discriminate against'' any individual in hiring, recruitment or referral for a fee, or discharging from employment ``because of'' such individual's national origin or -- if such individual is a United States citizen or an alien who is a lawful permanent resident, refugee admitted under INA section 207, or asylee granted asylum under section 208, and who has taken certain steps evidencing an intent to become a United States citizen -- because of such individual's citizenship status. Employers of fewer than four employees are expressly exempted from coverage. Discrimination against an ``unauthorized alien,'' as defined in section 274A(h)(3), is also not covered. Other exceptions include cases of discrimination because of national origin that are covered by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, discrimination based on citizenship status when lawfully required under government authority, and discrimination in favor of a United States citizen over an alien if the citizen is at least ``equally qualified.''
The major purpose of section 274B is to reduce the possibility that employer sanctions will result in increased national origin and alienage discrimination and to provide a remedy if employer sanctions enforcement does have this result. Accordingly, subsection (k) provides that the section will not apply to any discrimination that takes place after a repeal of employer sanctions if this should occur. In the light of this major purpose, the Special Counsel should exercise the discretion provided under subsection (d)(1) so as to limit the investigations conducted on his own initiative to cases involving discrimination apparently caused by an employer's fear of liability under the employer sanctions program.
I understand section 274B to require a ``discriminatory intent'' standard of proof: The party bringing the action must show that in the decisionmaking process the defendant's action was motivated by one of the prohibited criteria. Thus, it would be improper to use the ``disparate impact'' theory of recovery, which was developed under paragraph (2) of section 703(a) of title VII, in a line of Supreme Court cases over the last 15 years. This paragraph of title VII does not have a counterpart in section 274B. Section 274B tracks only the language of paragraph (1) of section 703(a), the basis of the ``disparate treatment'' (discriminatory intent) theory of recovery under title VII. Moreover, paragraph (d)(2) refers to ``knowing an intentional discrimination'' and ``a pattern or practice of discriminatory activity.'' The meaning of the former phrase is self-evident, while the latter is taken from the Supreme Court's disparate treatment jurisprudence and thus includes the requirement of a discriminatory intent.
Thus, a facially neutral employee selection practice that is employed without discriminatory intent will be permissible under the provisions of section 274B. For example, the section does not preclude a requirement of English language skill or a minimum score on an aptitude test even if the employer cannot show a ``manifest relationship'' to the job in question or that the requirement is a ``bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise,'' so long as the practice is not a guise used to discriminate on account of national origin or citizenship status. Indeed, unless the plaintiff presents evidence that the employer has intentionally discriminated on proscribed grounds, the employer need not offer any explanation for his employee selection procedures.
Section 274B(c) provides that the President shall appoint, with the advice and consent of the Senate, a Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices within the Justice Department, to serve for a term of 4 years. I understand this subsection to provide that the Special Counsel shall serve at the pleasure and with the policy guidance of the President, but for no longer than for a 4-year term (subject to reappointment by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate).
In accordance with the provisions of section 274B(h) and (j)(4), a requirement to pay attorneys' fees may be imposed against nonprevailing parties -- including alleged victims or persons who file on their behalf as well as employers -- if claims or defenses are made that do not have a reasonable foundation in both law and fact. The same standard for the imposing of attorneys' fees applies to all nonprevailing parties. It is therefore expected that prevailing defendants would recover attorneys' fees in all cases for which this standard is satisfied, not merely in cases where the claim of the victim or person filing on their behalf is found to be vexatious or frivolous.
The provisions of new INA section 245A(a)(4)(B) and (b)(1)(C)(ii), added by section 201(a) of the bill, state that no alien would qualify for the lawful temporary or the permanent residence status provided in that section if he or she has been convicted of any felony or three or more misdemeanors committed in the United States.
New INA section 245A(d)(2) states that no alien would qualify for the lawful temporary or permanent residence status provided in that section if ``likely to become [a] public charge [ ].'' This disqualification could be waived by the Attorney General under certain circumstances. A likelihood that an applicant would become a public charge would exist, for example, if the applicant had failed to demonstrate either a history of employment in the United States of a kind that would provide sufficient means without public cash assistance for the support of the alien and his likely dependents who are not United States citizens or the possession of independent means sufficient by itself for such support for an indefinite period.
New INA section 245A(a)(3) requires that an applicant for legalization establish that he has been ``continuously physically present in the United States since the date of the enactment'' but states that ``brief, casual, and innocent absences from the United States'' will not be considered a break in the required continuous physical presence. To the extent that the INS has made available a procedure by which aliens can obtain permission to depart and reenter the United States after a brief, casual, and innocent absence by establishing a prima facie case of eligibility for adjustment of status under this section, I understand section 245A(a)(3) to require that an unauthorized departure and illegal reentry will constitute a break in ``continuous physical presence.''
New INA section 210(d), added by section 302(a) of the bill, provides that an alien who is ``apprehended'' before or during the application period for adjustment of status for certain ``special agricultural workers,'' may not under certain circumstances related to the establishment of a nonfrivolous case of eligibility for such adjustment of status be excluded or deported. I understand this subsection not to authorize any alien to apply for admission to or to be admitted to the United States in order to apply for adjustment of status under this section. Aliens outside the United States may apply for adjustment of status under this section at an appropriate consular office outside the United States pursuant to the procedures established by the Attorney General, in cooperation with the Secretary of State, as provided in section 210(b)(1)(B).
Section 304 of the bill establishes the Commission on Agricultural Workers, half of whose 12 members are appointed by the executive branch and half by the legislative branch. This hybrid Commission is not consistent with constitutional separation of powers. However, the Commission's role will be entirely advisory.
Section 304(g) provides that upon request of the Commission's Chairman, the head of ``any department or agency of the United States'' must supply ``information necessary to enable it to carry out [the] section.'' Although I expect that the executive branch will cooperate closely with the Commission, its access to executive branch information will be limited in accordance with established principles of law, including the constitutional separation of powers.
Section 601 establishes a Commission for the Study of International Migration and Cooperative Economic Development, all of whose members are appointed by the legislative branch. Section 601(d)(1) states that the access to executive branch information required under section 304(g) must be provided to this Commission also. Accordingly, the comments of the preceding paragraph are appropriate here as well.
New INA section 274A(a)(5) provides that a person or entity shall be deemed in compliance with the employment verification system in the case of an individual who is referred for employment by a State employment agency if that person or entity retains documentation of such referral certifying that the agency complied with the verification system with respect to the individual referred. I understand this provision not to mandate State employment agencies to issue referral documents certifying compliance with the verification system or to impose any additional affirmative duty or obligation on the offices or personnel of such agencies.
Distance has not discouraged illegal immigration to the United States from all around the globe. The problem of illegal immigration should not, therefore, be seen as a problem between the United States and its neighbors. Our objective is only to establish a reasonable, fair, orderly, and secure system of immigration into this country and not to discriminate in any way against particular nations or people.
The act I am signing today is the product of one of the longest and most difficult legislative undertakings of recent memory. It has truly been a bipartisan effort, with this administration and the allies of immigration reform in the Congress, of both parties, working together to accomplish these critically important reforms. Future generations of Americans will be thankful for our efforts to humanely regain control of our borders and thereby preserve the value of one of the most sacred possessions of our people: American citizenship.
Note: S. 1200, approved November 6, was assigned Public Law No. 99 - 603.
Sunday, May 14, 2006
does amnesty equate to a pardon ?
does amnesty equate to a pardon ?
amnesty roots........... see amnesia in November elections ?
[Latin amnstia, from Greek amnsti. See amnesia.]
amnesty roots........... see amnesia in November elections ?
[Latin amnstia, from Greek amnsti. See amnesia.]
'This Is Nuts,' Senator Kyl Says of Leak
'This Is Nuts,' Kyl Says of Leak
'This Is Nuts,' Kyl Says of Leak
A massive government program to track billions
of domestic telephone calls tumbled into the
open yesterday, triggering an outcry from members
of Congress and prompting President Bush to offer
new assurances to the American people about the aims
and scope of the surveillance effort.
see complete article at..........
http://www.nysun.com/article/32643
www.mccainalert.com
mccain alert com
'This Is Nuts,' Kyl Says of Leak
A massive government program to track billions
of domestic telephone calls tumbled into the
open yesterday, triggering an outcry from members
of Congress and prompting President Bush to offer
new assurances to the American people about the aims
and scope of the surveillance effort.
see complete article at..........
http://www.nysun.com/article/32643
www.mccainalert.com
mccain alert com
is the time right for a third party ?
is the time right for a third party ?
public opinion shows an all time low of congress.
a alternative to the Democrats and Republicans
Friedman submits signatures for ballot
He's the second independent filer in governor's race
AUSTIN - Satirical musician and novelist Kinky Friedman gave state election officials 169,574 signatures Thursday in an effort to qualify for the November ballot as an independent candidate for governor.
"To the young people helping us, fix bayonets now because the new Texas revolution is coming," Friedman told about 50 supporters before turning his petitions in to Texas
Secretary of State Roger Williams for verification. Friedman needs 45,540 valid signatures to get on the ballot.
Friedman became the second major independent candidate
to file a ballot-access petition this week. Comptroller
Carole Keeton Strayhorn filed 223,000 signatures on
Tuesday as an independent candidate for governor.
If certified, Friedman and Strayhorn will join Democrat
Chris Bell and Libertarian James Werner in challenging the
re-election of Gov. Rick Perry, the Republican nominee.
Strayhorn's campaign has tried to portray her as more legitimate than Friedman. Her aides said she collected signatures at schools while claiming Friedman got
his from rowdy crowds at music halls.
"All I can say is, thank God for bars and dance halls," Friedman told his supporters as they unloaded 11
legal boxes of petitions from the "Guv Bug," a pink
trailer topped with Friedman's trademark black
cowboy hat.
see more at..........
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/3858158.html
public opinion shows an all time low of congress.
a alternative to the Democrats and Republicans
Friedman submits signatures for ballot
He's the second independent filer in governor's race
AUSTIN - Satirical musician and novelist Kinky Friedman gave state election officials 169,574 signatures Thursday in an effort to qualify for the November ballot as an independent candidate for governor.
"To the young people helping us, fix bayonets now because the new Texas revolution is coming," Friedman told about 50 supporters before turning his petitions in to Texas
Secretary of State Roger Williams for verification. Friedman needs 45,540 valid signatures to get on the ballot.
Friedman became the second major independent candidate
to file a ballot-access petition this week. Comptroller
Carole Keeton Strayhorn filed 223,000 signatures on
Tuesday as an independent candidate for governor.
If certified, Friedman and Strayhorn will join Democrat
Chris Bell and Libertarian James Werner in challenging the
re-election of Gov. Rick Perry, the Republican nominee.
Strayhorn's campaign has tried to portray her as more legitimate than Friedman. Her aides said she collected signatures at schools while claiming Friedman got
his from rowdy crowds at music halls.
"All I can say is, thank God for bars and dance halls," Friedman told his supporters as they unloaded 11
legal boxes of petitions from the "Guv Bug," a pink
trailer topped with Friedman's trademark black
cowboy hat.
see more at..........
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/3858158.html
Plane Carrying Kennedy Hit by Lightning
Plane Carrying Kennedy Hit by Lightning
The Associated Press
BOSTON -- A plane carrying U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy from western Massachusetts to his home on the coast was struck by lightning Saturday and had to be diverted to New Haven, Conn., his spokeswoman said.
The eight-seat Cessna Citation 550 plane lost all electrical power, including communications, and the pilot had to fly the plane manually, according to spokeswoman Melissa Wagoner. No one was hurt.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., discusses an upcoming book in Washington in this April 7, 2006, file photo. A plane carrying Kennedy across Massachusetts was struck by lightning and had to be diverted to New Haven, Conn., on May 13, 2006. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais) (Pablo Martinez Monsivais - AP)
Save & Share
Tag This Article
Saving options
1. Save to description:
Headline (required)
2. Save to notes (255 character max):
Blurb
3. Tag This Article
The Democrat had just delivered the commencement address at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts in North Adams and was on his way to his Cape Cod home when the plane was struck around 4 p.m., she said.
The jet landed safely at New Haven at 4:11 p.m., said Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Arlene Murray. A report was filed with the agency, which will look into the incident, she said.
Kennedy planned to stay in Connecticut overnight because he was scheduled to return to western Massachusetts on Sunday to deliver a commencement address at Springfield College, Wagoner said.
Plane Carrying Kennedy Hit by Lightning
The Associated Press
see Franklin Covey for your your Time Manegement
The Associated Press
BOSTON -- A plane carrying U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy from western Massachusetts to his home on the coast was struck by lightning Saturday and had to be diverted to New Haven, Conn., his spokeswoman said.
The eight-seat Cessna Citation 550 plane lost all electrical power, including communications, and the pilot had to fly the plane manually, according to spokeswoman Melissa Wagoner. No one was hurt.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., discusses an upcoming book in Washington in this April 7, 2006, file photo. A plane carrying Kennedy across Massachusetts was struck by lightning and had to be diverted to New Haven, Conn., on May 13, 2006. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais) (Pablo Martinez Monsivais - AP)
Save & Share
Tag This Article
Saving options
1. Save to description:
Headline (required)
2. Save to notes (255 character max):
Blurb
3. Tag This Article
The Democrat had just delivered the commencement address at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts in North Adams and was on his way to his Cape Cod home when the plane was struck around 4 p.m., she said.
The jet landed safely at New Haven at 4:11 p.m., said Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Arlene Murray. A report was filed with the agency, which will look into the incident, she said.
Kennedy planned to stay in Connecticut overnight because he was scheduled to return to western Massachusetts on Sunday to deliver a commencement address at Springfield College, Wagoner said.
Plane Carrying Kennedy Hit by Lightning
The Associated Press
see Franklin Covey for your your Time Manegement
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)