House Teabaggers Don't Fear McCain's Pending Attack... Not Even A Little

No one in the House Republican caucus thinks the man who befriended Muammar Qaddafi and lolled away his evenings at the Qaddafi family ranch, is any kind of threat to their political careers.

Beltway Republicans expect McCain to blow any minute now-- and that the target of his wrath will be the far right of the House Republican caucus this time-- teabaggers, Know Nothings and the blatantly racist end of the party. But they're laughing at the 2008 presidential candidate. His opposition-- the louder and more vitriolic, the better-- makes them stronger with an electoral base that gets all its information from Hate Talk Radio and Fox News. He's mad because the right-wingers are blocking immigration reform again and letting their anti-Hispanic/anti-Asian freak flags fly one more time. McCain worries that they're leading the party into a ditch so deep they'll never recover-- sort of like what happened to the California Republican Party when it went off on a racist jihad against Hispanics and turned itself into a sad, toothless rump. Still, Molly Hooper at The Hill, perhaps looking for some political news during the long, sweltering July 4th weekend, predicts that McCain is "on a collision course with House conservatives" (although she means House reactionaries or House fascists. McCain is a conservative. John Barrow. Lindsey Graham, John Boehner and Walter Jones are conservatives. Steve King and Louie Gohmert and Steve Stockman and racists, fascists and, if you want to be polite, reactionaries).

Throughout his Senate career, McCain has clashed with House Republican lawmakers over high-profile issues, including campaign finance reform, detainee interrogation techniques, earmarks and tax cuts. This year, McCain has ripped Republicans in the lower chamber for not agreeing to enter into a budget conference with the Senate.

Some political observers believe it’s just a matter of time before McCain aggressively goes after House GOP members for not voting on the Senate-passed immigration measure.

The five-term senator has stopped short of criticizing Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) vow to move immigration reform only if a majority of House GOP lawmakers are on board. Yet, McCain made a pointed comment last weekend that suggested he would only bite his tongue for so long.

“I really don’t feel it's appropriate for me to tell [Boehner] exactly how he should handle this. But I think Republicans realize the implications for the future of the Republican Party in America if we don't get this issue behind us,” McCain said on Fox News Sunday.

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who strongly opposes the Senate bill, took issue with McCain’s warning, but said he expects the 2008 GOP presidential nominee to continue challenging conservatives on the airwaves.

“Most of what [McCain] will do, in my anticipation is through the media. … He likes to drop a little bomb and watch how people will react, and he’ll do it again,” King said in an interview with The Hill.

King said McCain “should have learned his lesson” when he tried to pass immigration reform with the late Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.).

You can imagine how frustrating it is for a mainstream conservative like McCain when he finds himself on a team with people talking about, as Louie Gohmert recently did (video below) about people who have "a love for an animal" and want to get married-- a well known and long-standing problem in the east Texas district he represents.



Do you miss Michele Bachmann yet?

Read More

Did You Think Buck McKeon Only Hates Gays? He Also Hates Latinos

A few days ago we mentioned the 26 districts in Republican hands that have at least 25% Hispanic populations. The district with the 9th biggest Hispanic population is CA-25, Buck McKeon's district. Last year Democrat Lee Rogers won the heavily Hispanic third of the district in the Antelope Valley. With 38% of his constituents being Hispanic, maybe McKeon should be a little more respectful. The DCCC compiled a list recent comments and actions from the bigoted McKeon, Happy 4th of July:

McKeon: “I Do Not Support Amnesty For Those That Entered the Country Illegally.” In 2013, on his congressional website, McKeon wrote, “First and foremost, I do not support amnesty for those that entered the country illegally.” [mckeon.house.gov, accessed 4/19/13]

McKeon: “Individuals Who Came Here Illegally Should Be Punished.” In 2013, on his congressional website, McKeon wrote, “I strongly believe that individuals who came here illegally should be punished to the fullest extent of the law, not rewarded for their actions.” [mckeon.house.gov, accessed 4/19/13]

McKeon: “We Need to Examine the “Anchor Baby” Policy.” In 2013, on his congressional website, McKeon wrote, “We need to examine the ‘anchor baby’ policy and must fully comprehend the message we are sending to individuals considering entering the country illegally.” [mckeon.house.gov, accessed 4/19/13]

Voted to Restart Deporting an Estimated 800,000 DREAM Act Eligible Young People. In 2013, Congressman McKeon voted for an amendment to the 2014 Homeland Security appropriations bill that would prohibit the use of Immigration and Customs Enforcement funds to implement President Obama’s June 2012 order that protects the “DREAMers” from deportation—those estimated 800,000 young undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children and have since led law-abiding lives.  The amendment also prohibits other prosecutorial discretion policies that ensure the agency's immigration enforcement resources are targeted at serious criminals, and not at those who pose no threat to U.S. communities, such as victims of domestic violence and other crimes who come forward to seek protection and identify their abusers. The amendment passed, 224-201. [HR 2217, Vote #208, 6/06/13]

McKeon: “We Should Quit Rewarding Those Who Enter Our Country Illegally.” In 1995, McKeon opposed birthright citizenship saying: “We should quit rewarding those who enter our country illegally with citizenship for their children,” said McKeon. [Los Angeles Times, 6/11/95]

Voted to Make Undocumented Immigration a Felony. In 2005, McKeon voted for the House immigration bill that would create criminal penalties for illegal immigration including making living in the country illegally a felony and a crime to assist illegal immigrants. [HR 4437, Vote # 661, 12/16/05, CQ Quarterly Weekly, 12/23/05]

Voted Against the DREAM Act. In 2010, McKeon voted against the DREAM Act, which would provide a path to legal residency for hundreds of thousands of young, undocumented immigrants first brought to the United States illegally by their parents. [HR 5281, Vote #625, 12/08/10]

Co-Sponsored Bill to Block Undocumented Immigrant Students to Obtain In-State Tuition. In 2010, McKeon co-sponsored legislation that aimed at ending in-state tuition fees for illegal immigrants. [HR 4548, 1/27/10]

Supported Proposal to Allow States to Deny Public Schooling to Children of Undocumented Immigrants. In 1996, McKeon supported the amendment to an immigration bill put forth by Rep. Elton Gallegly that would give states the right to deny public schooling to illegal immigrant children. [Los Angeles Times, 4/12/96]

Co-Sponsored Bill to Abolish Birthright Citizenship for Children of Undocumented Immigrants. In 2010, McKeon co-sponsored the Birthright Citizenship Act that would abolish birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents. [Mckeon.house.gov, accessed 4/19/13]

Voted for the Real ID Act of 2005 that Restricted Drivers Licenses to Undocumented Immigrants. In 2005, McKeon voted for the Real ID Act of 2005 that would require all states to obtain proof of legal status and verify all documents before issuing a driver’s license. [HR 418, Vote #31, 2/10/05]

Co-Sponsored Legislation to Make English the Official Language in the U.S. In 1995, McKeon co-sponsored the Language of Government Act that would declare English the country’s official language and cut off federal spending for anything that did not promote English. [Los Angeles Times, 9/08/95]

If you'd like to help Lee Rogers defeat McKeon next year, you can contribute to his campaign here.

Read More

Big Money Invented Paul Ryan To Work For Them, Not For Teabaggers

Palin's not happy with the Republican Party Establishment-- and she claims she may be ready to bolt and start one of her own. No one represents that Establishment better than Paul Ryan. Ryan's a packaged product, courtesy of Wall Street and Madison Avenue. That's all he's ever been and Boehner was more than happy to boost him into the chair of the Budget Committee to please the banksters both serve. Recall, if you will, Ryan's first big effort for the criminal banksters who lifted him out of obscurity.

It's September 2008 and the GOP kleptocrats are winding up their last months in office. They wanted to deliver one more grand giveaway to Wall Street-- Henry Paulsen's bankster bailout. One problem: enough Republicans (133 of 'em) joined with Democrats to defeat it 205-228 when it was first brought up for a vote. Wall Street's best-paid shills, Boehner, Cantor and Paul Ryan, mobilized for battle. At the time Ryan, a relatively junior Member, had already taken $1,704,095 in legalistic bribes from Wall Street (a number that has now risen to $$3,303,872, just slightly more than the $3,283,687 the banksters gave Democratic crook Steve Israel). After the defeat in the House, Wall Street and the banksters went bonkers and pulled all Bush's strings and he and Paulsen easily got the monstrosity passed in the House of Lords and then went back to the House with a no less odious version of the bill that they had rejected a few days before. This time it passed 263-171 with not 65, but 91 Republicans joining in. Among the vote switchers who had had their arms twisted by Boehner, Cantor and Ryan plus the official registered Wall Street lobbyists:

• Gresham Barrett (R-SC- $807,723)
• Judy Biggert (R-IL- $1,675,717)
• Charlie Dent (R-PA- $760,872)
• Mary Fallin (R-OK- $336,576)
• Jim Gerlach (R-PA- $1,670,352)
• Pete Hoekstra (R-MI- $295,830)
• Gary Miller (R-CA- $807,688)
• Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL- $928,068)
• Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH- $458,449)
• John Shadegg (R-AZ- $1,218,261)
• Lee Terry (R-NE- $1,246,007)
• Patrick Tiberi (R-OH- $2,438,284)

At the time some people wondered if teabaggers and fiscal conservatives would hold a screamingly hypocritical Ryan accountable at all. Yesterday's selection by Romney-- popular with the GOP base-- shows they didn't give a damn. At the time, Ryan was the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee and a member of the Ways and Means Committee. He' had assigned himself the job of spokesperson for fiscal austerity but he had already taken more money from the banksters than any other politician in the history of Wisconsin politics and, as we saw, he voted for the bank bailout not once, but twice. In fact, Ryan was one of the hypocrites exposed in Michael Moore's film, Capitalism: A Love Story:

In a section of the critically acclaimed examination of how Wall Street insiders diverted hundreds of billions of tax dollars into their accounts, Moore illustrates how the bailout happened. Democratic and Republican members of Congress who do the bidding of the bankers scared their colleagues and the American people into approving a massive bailout of the speculators whose misdeeds created the financial meltdown that shocked the nation in September 2008.

Ryan, the Republican congressman from southeast Wisconsin's hard-pressed 1st District, is shown playing the fear card by telling the House that it had to steer almost $800 million BILLION to Wall Street's sleaziest players.

"If we fail to do the right thing, heaven help us-- if we fail to pass this I fear the worst is yet to come," claimed Ryan.

The statement from the Wisconsin Republican who has positioned himself as a budget specialist in the House played a significant role in securing support for a bailout bill that had not been adequately analyzed and that included few protections against fraud.

Had Ryan used his reputation and his role on key committees to aggressively oppose the bailout, he might have blocked the rush to judgment that economists now say could end up costing American taxpayers trillions of dollars-- and a big chunk of their country's future.

Instead, the GOP establishment's favored point man on fiscal issues claimed-- without benefit of facts, figures or any grounding in economic reality-- that a failure to give the bankers everything they were asking for could bring on a depression.

"This is a Herbert Hoover moment," Ryan told the House, as he reached a fear-mongering crescendo. "(Hoover) made mistakes during the Great Depression-- let's not make those mistakes."

It was a virtuoso performance. Moore was right to highlight it.

The filmmaker has given Wisconsin taxpayers a dramatic illustration of how it came to pass that we are bailing out bankers and billionaires at the same time that auto plants are closing in cities such as Janesville and Kenosha-- both of which are in the 1st District. More importantly, Moore has reminded the voters of southeastern Wisconsin how key members of Congress such as Paul Ryan determined to take care of the speculators on Wall Street rather than working families on Main Street.

Ryan was overjoyed to bail out his bankster/paymasters on Wall Street but when it came to bailing out their victims who, through no fault of their own, were swamped with screwed up mortgages, he changed his tune... drastically. Ryan always stands up for corporations and never stands up for working families.

And Ryan's a gift that keeps on giving. Over the weekend, a far right propaganda website wigged out at the way Ryan's playing Pied Piper to Republican House backbenchers over immigration, just as he did in the TARP battle.

Ryan has been meeting with House conservatives to persuade them that reform of the immigration system, including a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, is an economic necessity and critical to fixing the nation's fiscal problems.

...Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist said the sheer amount of time Ryan has spent talking with House Republicans about budget issues gives him the credibility to court them on immigration reform.

"I would bet you a nickel that he has had more face time with each member than anyone else in the caucus," said Norquist, an influential conservative who also believes immigration reform is vital to the economy.

Republican strategist Whit Ayres calls Ryan "one of the most effective messengers the Republican party has in the House," adding that "If Paul Ryan talks, the House Republicans will listen."

That assessment may be overly optimistic, considering the large number of House Republicans from conservative districts who see legalization of illegal immigrants and offering them a path to eventually become U.S. citizens as an "amnesty."

But Ryan said a Republican-backed amendment to the Senate bill to boost security on the U.S.-Mexico border improves the chances that the House and Senate could ultimately agree on a compromise version of the legislation.

The amendment "brings the Senate bill closer to the House's position and that gives me the belief that we have a better chance at getting this law fixed at the end," he said.

Unlike Republican Senator Marco Rubio, an architect of the Senate immigration bill and a potential rival for Ryan if both seek the presidency, Ryan is not writing legislation or participating in a congressional working group on the issue.

But both Ryan and Rubio face risks from the divisiveness of the immigration issue among Republicans.

Support for immigration reform could cost either man votes with conservatives who will nominate a 2016 Republican candidate. On the other hand, the influence of Hispanic-Americans in U.S. elections could make it harder for any candidate who opposes immigration reform to win the White House.

...In April, Ryan teamed up with his friend, Democratic Congressman Luis Gutierrez, who is a staunch supporter of immigration reform, to tout the issue at an event in Chicago. He has also co-sponsored immigration reform bills in the past.

Like Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, Ryan talks of the work ethic of immigrants and the high proportion who start businesses. He often tells of his Irish ancestors who fled the potato famine in the 1850s and started a family farm in Wisconsin.

In the interview, he cited future budget deficits as a reason for urgency on immigration reform. With 10,000 baby boomers retiring from the workforce each day, "our economy is going to need more labor in the future," he said.

Ryan said he believes the country needs a system "designed for the economy, to bring workers in to do jobs that people won't do or to bring their high-tech intellectual capital."

The fiscal argument helped fuel momentum for the Senate immigration bill when the Congressional Budget Office estimated it would reduce deficits by $197 billion over a decade because of additional workers paying income and payroll taxes.

If Ryan is worried about a conservative backlash on immigration, he is showing no signs of it.

He has offered to debate anyone who says an "earned" path to citizenship is the equivalent of amnesty.

And the man who has sparred for years with Democrats on budget issues believes he can play a role in getting the two parties to work together. "I think when you get Democrats to listen to Republicans and Republicans to listen to Democrats you can find the common ground," he said.

Alex Nowrasteh of the libertarian Cato Institute said Ryan could give other Republicans political cover to support immigration reform. "Nobody is going to question the conservative credentials of Paul Ryan," he said.

Really?

Read More

Does Steve Israel Understand How To Make GOP Racism Work Against Them-- Or Is That Not Reptilian Enough For Him?

Like we saw Thursday, now that the Senate has passed comprehensive immigration reform, what's next? The Senate Democrats have already given away every conceivable bargaining chip available before the bill becomes worthless and insupportable. Nothing will ever change the minds of the racists in control in the House. There are two camps of Republicans in the House on this issue-- the majority camp of racists and bigots and then a more mainstream camp that knows it should be done for various reasons but is afraid of the racists and bigots. Until Boehner has a majority of Republicans willing to break away from the racists and bigots, there will be no signing ceremony in the White House. So where do we go from here? Fawn Johnson sketched out a few ideas Friday for Roll Call.

Some proponents have floated the idea that the House could pass an immigration package that includes provisions unpalatable to President Obama and Democrats and excludes pieces they consider essential, such as a path to citizenship. They would settle for this outcome for the sole purpose of the House passing something-- anything-- that would get them to a conference committee with the Senate. In theory, the deal-breaker provisions could be erased in the conference negotiations.

That strategy isn't flying with Democrats. Here's just one example: House Republicans say that allowing local law enforcement to apprehend and detain unauthorized immigrants is critical to enhancing border security. Democrats reject that idea without blinking. "No," said Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., a lead sponsor of the Senate bill, when asked if Democrats could accept that provision as part of a comprehensive package. "Look, I have opposed that forever, because even the toughest law enforcement will tell you that you undermine the confidence of communities to talk to local police."

Democrats have other demands. Anything short of eventual, full citizenship for undocumented immigrants would trigger protest marches from liberal activists. And House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has made it clear that immigration negotiators are not to touch Obama's health care law, which means Republicans who want to ban health care subsidies for green-card holders are out of luck.

The situation becomes a stalemate: Deal-killer provisions for Democrats are essential components for Republicans.

There may be another way to get to Point B, but it is based on the questionable proposition that the House GOP would work its will at first and then be willing to compromise later. The House Judiciary Committee has readied a series of smaller immigration bills-- on local law enforcement, agricultural workers, electronic verification, and high-skilled visas-- that could see floor votes in July. Assuming they pass, Republicans say they could package them as an opening bid for conference negotiations with the Senate.

Thus far, however, the list of House bills doesn't include anything that legalizes the undocumented population, ignoring the top demand from both Democrats and Obama. What's more, the bills have not passed the committee with Democratic votes. It's hard to convince bipartisan reformers that they should back a strategy in which House GOP leaders have to rely solely on Republican votes. The farm bill's downfall last week erased what little faith they might have had in such a plan.

So what's next? Members "have to get beat up a little bit at home" before a vote on a major immigration bill is even possible, said one GOP aide close to House leaders. So far, that's not happening. "My constituents all like what we're doing," said Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., who chairs the Judiciary Committee's Immigration Subcommittee. "They like the fact that you're giving scrutiny to each component, as opposed to saying, 'We hope that you like this enough to overlook the fact that you don't like this at all.'"

The Senate's comprehensive immigration bill is exactly the kind of grand compromise that rank-and-file House Republicans are assiduously avoiding. They see Republican senators giving away a path to citizenship, desperately sought by Democrats, in exchange for promises of tougher enforcement-- a bad deal, in their eyes. "Oh, they hate it, my constituents," said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah.

It's hard for reform advocates to fathom that the GOP rejects what they see as an obvious truth-- either immigration reform passes or Hispanics ditch the Republican Party forever. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid calls House Republican opponents "the crazies."  Congressional aides supportive of reform efforts shake their heads in disbelief, urging reporters to ask Republicans what they propose to do about 11 million undocumented immigrants.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a supporter of a path to citizenship, says opponents of immigration reform hurt the GOP's image with Hispanics. "It's hard to sell your economic agenda if they think you're going to deport [their] grandmother," he said.

But such arguments don't seem to have much traction in the House. To wit, ultraconservative hard-liner Steve King, R-Iowa, is feeling pretty good. "I was a lonely guy two months ago," the congressman said of his protests against bipartisan groups in the House and the Senate crafting big immigration bills. "Lots of people said, 'You can't stop that... Now I'm juiced. I'm going to go try out for the Redskins."

The ultimate arbiter is liable to be voters at the ballot box. Nate Silver put together a list of the Republican congressmembers with the largest Hispanic populations. This chart is just the Members with 25% or more. No one wants to lose a quarter of the voters even before the campaign begins, right? Well, no one sane does. But who would argue that these far right Republicans from Texas and California-- and that's 22 of the 26 districts!

Mitt Romney’s dismal performance with Hispanic voters in November gave Republican legislators “a new appreciation” for change, as Senator John McCain, a Republican from Arizona who is one of the eight senators in the bipartisan group, has said.

That may be true for many politicians seeking to win national and statewide elections in places where the Hispanic share of the electorate has increased significantly. But the main hurdle is expected to be in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, where a different set of political incentives apply.

Most Republicans in the House come not only from very conservative districts but also from overwhelmingly white districts.

In the 232 Congressional districts represented by Republicans, the average Hispanic share of each district is 11 percent (the 200 Congressional districts held by Democrats are, on average, 23 percent Hispanic). Just 40 of the 232 Republicans in the House come from districts that are more than 20 percent Hispanic, and just 16 from districts that are at least one-third Hispanic. At the other end of the spectrum, 142 districts represented by Republicans are less than 10 percent Hispanic.

In all, 84 percent of House Republicans represent districts that are 20 percent or less Hispanic.

...[T]here is no guarantee that Republicans with a greater share of Hispanic constituents will necessarily favor reform. But three of the four Republicans in the House already negotiating an immigration bill with Democrats-- Representatives John Carter and Sam Johnson, both of Texas, and Mario Diaz-Balart, of Florida-- come from districts that are more Hispanic than the average Republican-held Congressional district.

The fourth Republican negotiator in the House, Raúl R. Labrador, represents Idaho’s First Congressional District, which-- at 10 percent Hispanic-- is just below the average for Republicans. Mr. Diaz-Balart represents Florida’s 25th Congressional District, which is 70 percent Hispanic. Mr. Carter represents Texas’s 31st District, which is roughly a quarter Hispanic. And Mr. Johnson represents Texas’s Third District, which is 15 percent Hispanic.

Of the 26 districts in the chart above, the DCCC is only targeting 6, even though some are Blue districts. The only Republicans worried about electoral defeat are

• David Valadao (R-CA)
• Stevan Pearce (R-NM)
• Blake Farenthold (R-TX)
• Gary Miller (R-CA)
• Jeff Denham (R-CA)
• Buck McKeon (R-CA)

Ileana's seat would be in the bag if Debbie wasn't protecting her

All these other seats... 100% ignored by the DCCC. Some of them have free reelection passes from Israel and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, like Ileana Ros Lehtinen. Others are just out of reach because of DCCC incompetence. In 2008 Obama beat McCain in Darrell Issa's district. Regardless of how badly Issa has been behaving, Steve Israel refuses to get serious about recruiting a candidate to run against him in a district with a 26% Hispanic population. Ed Royce may be quieter, but he's as much a villain as Issa-- and has a district that's over a third Hispanic and with lots and lots of Asian-Americans too, who Royce has given plenty of reasons to want a new congressman. Last year the Democrats had a sterling candidate running, Jay Chen, and the DCCC studiously ignored him. Royce-- who spent $4,515,190 to Chen's $714,594-- beat him 59-41%. The DCCC spent exactly-- to the penny-- zero. The Democrats will never-- and I mean NEVER-- win back Congress as long as Steve Israel is chairman of the DCCC. It's as though he were working for the Republicans. Reappointing him after his disastrous performance in 2012 was Nancy Pelosi's biggest career-long mistake. Sí, se puede!

Read More

Comprehensive Immigration Bill Passed The Senate... Now What?

Today, just after noon, the Senate broke the last-ditch attempt by the GOP racists and bigots to filibuster the bill. The vote for cloture was 68-32, Chambliss and Portman voting with the bad guys. A few hours later a solid majority in the Senate-- every Democrat and 14 Republicans-- overwhelmingly passed the bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill 68-32. Democrats, of course, over-compromised to get more GOP votes-- militarizing the borders, wasting billions of taxpayer dollars on bullshit that the Republicans insisted on and confiscating the Social Security contributions of millions of undocumented workers. Senate Republicans who voted for it, absolutely insisted on their pound of flesh. Democrats, as usual, were too weak and lame to fight back effectively.

These were the Republicanos who voted with the Democrats:

• Lamar Alexander (TN)
• Kelly Ayotte (NH)
• Jeff Chiesa (NJ)
• Susan Collins (ME)
• Bob Corker (TN)
• Jeff Flake (AZ)
• Lindsey Graham (SC)
• Orrin Hatch (UT)
• Dean Heller (NV)
• John Hoeven (ND)
• Mark Kirk (IL)
• John McCain (AZ)
• Lisa Murkowski (AK)
• Marco Rubio (FL)

One of the most progressive members of the Senate, Brian Schatz (D-HI), fought hard to make the bill better. Right after teh vote, he said "While this bill does not accomplish everything I hoped for, it will move us much closer to where we should be as a free and open society, bringing 11 million people out of the shadows and giving our economy a boost. Now, as the bill heads to the House and, hopefully, to President Obama’s desk, I was proud to cast my 'yes' vote-- but I am also proud to recommit to fighting for legislation that will make this bill a better one for Hawaii, in particular by passing stronger protections for family reunification."

Now the bill goes over to the House, where teabaggers and other racists have made it clear that they will depose Boehner as Speaker if he allows a vote on it.

“There gets to be a point in time where there is the proverbial straw that breaks the camel’s back,” Rep. Matt Salmon (R-AZ) said Wednesday, arguing that if Boehner violates the Hastert Rule again on the issue, “I think that a lot of members in the conference would probably be frustrated to the point of looking for new leaders.”

Speaking at a Capitol Hill panel organized by the Heritage Foundation, Salmon said there’s “great unrest” among Republicans about the violations of the majority-of-the-majority principle this year. GOP leaders have this year brought up four bills without the support of most House Republicans-- including legislation to avert the fiscal cliff, provide aid to Hurricane Sandy victims and reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act.

Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) issued the same threat.

“The American people elected a Republican majority to the House of Representatives,” McClintock said. “Were a leader of that majority to use his authority to circumvent that majority would be cause for removal in my judgment.”

...Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID) said Republicans are “running around like chickens with our heads cut off thinking that we have to do [immigration reform] for political reasons.” He said the farm bill fiasco last week was “very instructive” for Republicans, arguing that the legislation failed because GOP leaders relied on Democrats.

“So our leadership needs to take a lesson from this: Stop negotiating with Democrats,” he said. “Start doing what is the right policy-- the right conservative policy for America.”

Salmon said he’s organizing an internal GOP petition to codify the Hastert Rule and that he’s making good progress. “I do believe most members of our conference will believe that legislation that we pass should be majority legislation,” he said.

Is Boehner worried? Well, you tell me. This is what he said yesterday at a press conference, following orders from Bill Kristol: “For any legislation, including a conference report, to pass the House, it’s going to have to be a bill that has the support of a majority of our members." That's very bad news for everyone who wants to see immigration reform because a majority of the House-- a big majority-- favors it, but a majority of House Republicans are dyed-in-the-wool racists and xenophobes and they oppose it. Even with Republican leaders like Cantor, McCarthy and Ryan urging Republicans not to commit part suicide by opposing this, most Republicans are paying attention to extremist groups, Hate Talk Radio hosts and bigots inside the caucus like Bachmann, Gohmert, King, Broun, Gingrey and the other House hatemongers. So, yeah, it's great that the Republican filibusters were beaten back in the Senate and great that the Senate finally passed the whole bill, but... now what? Will Boehner kill the dreams of millions of Americans and make it official that the GOP is anti-immigrant-- just because he's a wretched political coward?

Right after the vote Congressional progressive Caucus co-chair Raul Grijalva, fired a warning shot over Boehner's bow: “This is a time to move together on a bipartisan basis and really do the people’s business. Speaker Boehner can show some leadership or keep playing the same political games that have Congress’ approval rating at a historic low. The American people are watching every step of this process very closely, and the next step is letting the House take a vote. Hiding and making excuses are not on the table.”

And a statement from El Presidente... putting mucho pressure on Señor Boehner:

The bipartisan bill that passed today was a compromise. By definition, nobody got everything they wanted. Not Democrats. Not Republicans. Not me. But the Senate bill is consistent with the key principles for commonsense reform that I-- and many others-- have repeatedly laid out.

If enacted, the Senate bill would establish the most aggressive border security plan in our history. It would offer a pathway to earned citizenship for the 11 million individuals who are in this country illegally-- a pathway that includes passing a background check, learning English, paying taxes and a penalty, and then going to the back of the line behind everyone who’s playing by the rules and trying to come here legally. It would modernize the legal immigration system so that it once again reflects our values as a nation and addresses the urgent needs of our time. And it would provide a big boost to our recovery, by shrinking our deficits and growing our economy.

Today, the Senate did its job. It’s now up to the House to do the same.

As this process moves forward, I urge everyone who cares about this issue to keep a watchful eye. Now is the time when opponents will try their hardest to pull this bipartisan effort apart so they can stop commonsense reform from becoming a reality. We cannot let that happen. If you’re among the clear majority of Americans who support reform-- from CEOs to labor leaders, law enforcement to clergy-- reach out to your Member of Congress. Tell them to do the right thing. Tell them to pass commonsense reform so that our businesses and workers are all playing by the same rules and everyone who’s in this country is paying their fair share in taxes. 

We have a unique opportunity to fix our broken system in a way that upholds our traditions as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. We just need Congress to finish the job.

Read More

Minutemen-- Liars, Rapists, Murderers, Nazis... And, Of Course, Republicans

3 American Nazis with a toxic agenda- Gilchrist, Simcox, Hannity

Last week David Vitter's viciously anti-immigrant amendment was defeated in the Senate, 58-36, with 7 Republicans rejecting it and only the most reactionary Democrat in the Senate-- Mark Pryor-- crossing the aisle and voting with Republican anti-immigrant extremists. Vitter's amendment was meant to slow down the temporary grant of legal status or adjustment to citizenship status of immigrants. John Cornyn's poison pill amendment suffered a similar fate two days later-- 54 senators voting to table it, only 43 backing it (just Manchin and Pryor among Democrats). When you hear respectable Senate Republicans-- not to mention less respectable ones like Ted Cruz and Chuck Grassley-- ranting about their Quixotic quest for “border security,” it’s a legacy of how the Minutemen changed the ground rules of the debate. And no one has covered that development better than David Neiwert, whose spectacular new book, And Hell Followed With Her: Crossing The Dark Side Of The American Border paints the definitive picture of what the Minutemen plague really consisted of, rather than the propaganda pumped out by political grifters like Tom Tancredo (R-CO), Tom DeLay (R-TX), John Culberson (R-TX), and Phil Gingrey (R-GA) and anti-immigrant media shills Lou Dobbs on CNN and Sean Hannity on Fox.

Right after Neiwert's book was released, Dobbs', Hannity's and Tancredo's close buddy, a founder of the Minuteman movement in Arizona, Chris Simcox, was arrested and jailed for raping a series of prepubescent girls. Hopefully Simcox will get what's coming to him in prison. Unfortunately Dobbs, Hannity and Tancredo are still free and still doing great damage, if not to 9 year old girls, then to Americans in general.

Chris Simcox, co-founder of the Minuteman border watch movement, was arrested Wednesday morning for allegedly having sexual contact with three young girls. Phoenix police booked Simcox on two counts of molestation of a child, two counts of sexual conduct with a minor, and one count of attempted molestation of a child.

Simcox, 52, co-founded the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, an armed volunteer group who assigned themselves the task of securing the southwest border. The group’s mission was to prevent “the unlawful and unauthorized entry of all individuals, contraband, and foreign military” in to the U.S.

Phoenix police spokesman Sgt. Tommy Thompson told Phoenix-based ABC 15 that authorities “developed probable cause to believe Simcox had sexual conduct with the girls, all under the age of ten.” ABC 15 reports Simcox has denied the allegations.

Before he founded the Minutemen, Simcox had a long history of working with children. In a 2006 USA Today profile, Simcox explained his first job was at a "a very bad high school in South Central L.A." Simcox then moved to work at a private elementary school where he taught kindergarten through third grade for 13 years before becoming a private tutor.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate-group activities, points out Simcox has been accused of child molestation before. His first ex-wife, Deborah Crews, accused him of pedophilia in 1998. "He tried to molest our daughter when he was intoxicated," Crews told the SPLC. "When she ran out, he tried to say he was just giving her a leg massage and she got the wrong idea.”

Dave's book begins with the story of one band of Minutemen who broke into homes to rob people, murdered a family in cold blood-- including a 9 year old girl-- and then loudly blamed it on Mexican immigrants. Not every Minuteman was a home invader, a murderer or a child rapist. But almost every one of them was a violent Nazi, KKK or militia militant. Heroes to the GOP, this was a group of murderous extremists, dangerous misfits and Glenn Beck-quoting racists who would have conversations like this, when, according to Neiwert's book, they didn't know informers were among them:

[Undercover journalist] Dave Holthouse listened as his fellow Minutemen explained their border philosophy: like Simcox’s old friend Craig Howard, they thought that a few well-placed rifle shots would solve the nation’s border problems.

“It should be legal to kill illegals,” said one of them, a sixty-nine-year old retired Special Forces veteran who fought in Vietnam. “Just shoot ‘em on sight. That’s my immigration policy recommendation. You break into my country, you die.”

His neo-Nazi compatriots nodded in assent. “I agree completely,” one of them said. “You get up there with a rifle and start shooting four or five of them a week, the other four or five thousand behind them are going to think twice about crossing that line.”

The locals down in the border area tended to not agree-- and to not support Simcox and his Nazi brigades. Border Patrol officials he interviewed told Holthouse that the Minutemen were "more hindrance than help because they so frequently called in false alarms and set off ground sensors."

“The Border Patrol didn’t want them, my community didn’t want them here, and I didn’t want them here,” said Ray Borane, the Douglas mayor who frequently crossed swords with Chris Simcox and the other border watchers. “All they succeeded in doing was creating hard feelings and spreading a racist message. The amount of media attention they received has been totally out of proportion to their actual impact. The Mexicans have a saying that I think applies quite well to the Minuteman Project: ‘It was all song and no opera.’”

Monday, just before the Senate started voting, Obama had a high visibility meeting with prominent businessmen who back immigration reform. He made the economic case for why reform would be helpful to the country. "All of these business leaders," he said, "recognize the degree to which immigration is a contributor to growth, a contributor to expansion, a creator of jobs, but they also recognize that the immigration system that we currently have is broken." He hit all the talking points:

We have a system in which we bring outstanding young people from all across the world to educate them here, and unfortunately, too often, we send them right back so that they can start companies or help to grow companies somewhere else instead of here.

We have a situation in which millions of individuals are in the shadow economy, oftentimes exploited at lower wages, and that hurts those companies that are following the rules, because they end up being at a disadvantage to some of these less scrupulous companies.

And so, all of us I think recognize that now is the time to get comprehensive immigration reform done -- one that involves having very strong border security; that makes sure that we're holding employers accountable to follow the rules; one that provides earned citizenship for those 11 million, so that they have to pay back taxes, pay a fine, learn English, follow the rules, get to the back of the line, but ultimately can be part of the above-board economy, as opposed to the low-board economy; and a system that fixes and cleans up our legal immigration system so that we can continue to be a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.

The good news is, is that we've got a strong bipartisan bill that meets many of those principles. As I've said before, it's not a bill that represents everything that I would like to see; it represents a compromise. And I think all the business leaders here recognize that there are elements of it that they might want to tweak one way or another. But it does adhere to the core principles that we need for comprehensive immigration reform, and now is the time to do it.

Just this past week, the Congressional Budget Office noted that this would end up bringing more money into the federal government. It would reduce our deficits-- people would be paying taxes. It would end up strengthening our economy, growing our economy. And so you've got a broad consensus all throughout the country, not just business leaders who are represented here today-- many of whom are immigrants themselves, many of whom started businesses and are now creating opportunity all across the country-- but we're also seeing labor leaders, we're seeing clergy, we're seeing people from all different walks of life saying now is the time to get this done.

Monday afternoon, the Senate voted 67-27 (with several supporters stuck at airports and on planes) to move forward with the immigration bill by further militarizing the U.S.-Mexican border and screwing with immigrants in various and sundry ways-- Democrats giving in to dozens of petty Republican demands in return for their votes. (One was to confiscation billions of dollars paid into Social Security by undocumented workers.) The Republicans who voted YES were John McCain (AZ), Lindsey Graham (SC), Marco Rubio (FL), Jeff Flake (AZ)-- Gang of Eight members-- and Bob Corker (TN), Lamar Alexander (TN), Kelly Ayotte (NH), Jeff Chiesa (NJ), Susan Collins (ME), Orrin Hatch (UT), Dean Heller (NV), Mark Kirk (IL), John Hoeven (ND), Lisa Murkowski (AK) and Roger Wicker (MS).

And yesterday there was another Republican filibuster of the immigration reform bill. It was shot down 67-31, with every single Democrat plus 13 Republicanos voting to shut it down. That should be similar to the final vote, although Dems might persuade Chiesa (NJ) and Chambliss (GA) to cross the aisle as well and vote for reform. The Republicans who voted with the Democrats yesterday:

• Lamar Alexander (TN)
• Kelly Ayotte (NH)
• Susan Collins (ME)
• Bob Corker (TN)
• Jeff Flake (AZ)
• Lindsey Graham (SC)
• Orrin Hatch (UT)
• Dean Heller (NV)
• John Hoeven (ND)
• Mark Kirk (IL)
• John McCain (AZ)
• Lisa Murkowski (AK)
• Marco Rubio (FL)

Read More

Republican SuperPACs Aren't Bringing In The Cash The Way They Used To

No more checks from Idaho fascist Frank VanderSloot unless candidates can prove their anti-American extremism

Saturday night I was driving home after dinner and I was hearing some pretty racist talk coming out of my radio. Had someone changed the preset? No, I had a local PBS affiliate on and it was the Tavis Smiley Show. He had some crackpot ant-immigrant kook on from a hate group, the California Coalition for Immigration Reform. And he interviewed her as though she were an expert and never questioned any of her racist assumptions. When she was done, he had a law professor from UCLA on as the next guest to talk about his new book about anti-black racism. What about the anti-immigrant racism Smiley had been promoting 2 minutes earlier? I'm still confused; is Tavis Smiley, a well-known liberal, into anti-immigrant bigotry? It doesn't make sense.

That's usually what you'd expect to hear on Hate Talk Radio, not on PBS. It's pretty much a Republican thing. The California Coalition for Immigration Reform sounds like a reasonable name for an organization but it's just a step or two from the KKK or a militia group, part of the Republican ever-shrinking pup tent. Over the weekend, the Washington Post took a look at how Republican SuperPACs are having trouble finding donors this year. They began with Republicans for Immigration Reform, a far more mainstream group than the California Coalition for Immigration Reform. One of the principals of the PAC, Charlie Spies, who helped raise $153 million for Romney's SuperPAC, Restore Our Future, isn't getting anywhere with Republicans for Immigration Reform. “It has been a challenge to get donors on the Republican side to reengage,” he told the Post. And it's not just because his group is viewed as more mainstream than the typical Republican Party hate groups.

Seven months after the 2012 election, a lingering hangover among conservative donors has stalled efforts by right-leaning independent groups to fill their coffers. Wealthy contributors who dashed off six- and seven-figure checks last year are eyeing super PACs and other politically active groups more skeptically, frustrated that the hundreds of millions of dollars spent to elect Romney went for naught.

“There’s donor fatigue,” said Fred Malek, a veteran GOP operative wired into high-net-worth circles. “Everyone was in a frenzy of giving up until the November elections, and then everyone was sort of worn out on the whole process. It’s very hard to raise money after an election, especially after you lose.”

Several Republican fundraisers said they remain optimistic that the money spigot will reopen as the 2014 congressional elections approach. But this time around, donors are seeking to be more judicious about where they put their money, asking groups for detailed strategy and spending plans.

“At the moment, I’m kind of in a waiting and watching mode,” said Howard Leach, an ambassador to France under President George W. Bush. In 2012, Leach gave $100,000 each to Restore Our Future and American Crossroads, the conservative super PAC co-founded by former Bush political strategist Karl Rove.

...One well-connected Republican donor and fundraiser, who has held off writing big checks to outside groups since the election, said he is among a group of top contributors now questioning the value of financing such organizations, which operate independently of candidates and party leaders.

“I do find it a little worrisome, frankly, that there’s so much more money and so few people behind it,” said the contributor, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about his misgivings. “I am concerned that all that money didn’t seem to bring results.”

Frank VanderSloot, chief executive of an Idaho nutritional-supplement company who gave abundantly to Romney and groups backing him, said he has concluded that it is not effective to finance tax-exempt advocacy groups that can only spend a limited amount on politics.

“If you can’t say what candidate you’re for, it’s hard,” said VanderSloot, who said he gave “several million” in all to various groups, including $1.1 million to Restore Our Future.

From now on, he said, he is sticking with super PACs, which have more latitude to directly engage in elections: “That’s where my money is going.”

...New conservative outfits are finding that they have to work much harder to win over donors, some of whom now hire lawyers to conduct due-diligence inquiries about the organizations soliciting their support.

“We’ve learned to ask people: ‘What is your message? Where are you going to spend the money, and how?’” said VanderSloot, who said that he also requests information about how much of a group’s budget goes to paying people running the organization. “In some cases, you may want to get that answer in writing.”

The intense scrutiny “is winnowing the field of consultants who are able to raise significant funds,” said Robert Kelner, a Washington campaign finance lawyer who heads the political law practice at Covington & Burling.

“You’re seeing more impressive business plans, on better paper with fancier graphics,” Kelner added, referring to the efforts of political groups. “They look more like the kind of proposals someone would submit to a private equity fund.”

In their pitches, many organizations are pledging to diversify their approaches and not rely as heavily on expensive television advertising as they did in the last election, when the airwaves were crowded with discordant messages. The new emphasis is on digital campaigns and get-out-the-vote organizing-- strategies that some groups expect to test this year in Virginia’s governor’s race and New Jersey’s U.S. Senate contest.

It's worth noting that big donors on the Democratic side are also keeping their powder dry but that Democratic grassroots donors are not. And the Republicans don't count on grassroots donors, only on the rich and on special interests. In the last quarter the DCCC outraised the NRCC and the DSCC outraised the NRSC. I can't mention this Inside-the-Beltway scams without reminding potential contributors that a far more effective way to give is to go to ActBlue and contribute directly to candidates who you see eye to eye with. Give to the DCCC, for example, are your money is going to wind up helping reelect anti-Choice, anti-gay, anti-family corporate shills because that's where the DCCC puts most of its money. If you want help in finding good House candidates, here's the place. And for good Senate candidates: here.

SCHEDULE NOTE -- COMING UP AT 9pm PT/12m ET:
YOUR SUPREME COURT AT WORK AND PLAY

Sorry, but for the second night in a row New York City Transit dumped me out of my no. 1 train short of home, and my normal hour-plus trip took closer to two hours (and that's with what I would describe as some highly creative alternative-route-planning; when a packed rush-hour trainful of passengers is disgorged onto a platform already teeming with passengers waiting for nonexistent trains, it's not a pretty scene), leaving me straggling home in a state of wipeout with a deadline bearing down on me, well, unbearably. Plus tonight I discover that I left the text file that contained most of the so-far-written text on my computer at work!

I realize it's outrageous to expect to be able to board a train and have it remain in service for a whopping 28 stops. (Beyond my stop, what do I care? Let them eat cake.) Last night we made it all the way to 137th Street, which is 23 stops, by my quick count; tonight, only as far as 50th Street, a mere 11 stops. Tomorrow -- well, one shudders to think! -- Ken

#

Read More

Another Manifestation Of The GOP Civil War: Utah's 2 Republicans Parted Ways On Immigration Reform

Mike Lee & Orrin Hatch

What's a Republicano to do? The racist, hate-filled base they've nurtured equates comprehensive immigration reform with national suicide but the party elders and, more important, the corporate financial financiers, absolutely insist on it-- and assert it would be political suicide for the GOP to derail it.

The conservative rank-and-file have a loud and clear message for Republican officials: Support citizenship for illegal immigrants at your own peril.

A sizable plurality of registered GOP voters say they will be less likely to support their incumbent lawmaker if he or she votes for immigration reform that includes a pathway to citizenship for those currently living illegally in the United States.

That's what happens when you outsource your party messaging to ratings (profit)-motivated shock jocks on Hate Talk Radio. But Paul Ryan, always a patsy for the check-writing Establishment that funds right-wing politicians like himself-- he really is their Frankenstein monster-- is helping persuade House Members to buck up, just like he persuaded them to back Bush's big bankster bailout. Cantor, McCarthy and Ryan are the Establishment's shock troops inside the House GOP caucus to deliver enough Republicans so that Boehner can slip the Senate bill in without violating "the Hastert Rule" and triggering his own political demise.

To watch how this is playing out locally, let's look at the reddest and most backward state in America. In 2012, Utah voters gave Romney 73% of it's vote, far worse than Alabama (61%), Mississippi (56%), Georgia (53%), South Carolina (55%), Arkansas (61%), Kansas (60%), Wyoming (69%), Idaho (65%), Louisiana (58%), Oklahoma (67%), Alaska (55%) or Texas (57%). Romney won every single county in the state, even Salt Lake, Summit and Grand counties. And in 10 counties, Obama only managed to score 10% of the vote or less, just 8% in benighted, all Mormon Rich County. Utah is a Republican hellhole. The only Democrat Utah sends to Congress, corrupt Blue Dog Jim Matheson, has been a more reliable supporter of this year's Republican's conservative agenda than half a dozen Republicans!

Junior Senator Mike Lee is one of the most right-wing ideologues elected to the U.S. Senate since before the Civil War. And, of course, he's an unapologetic bigot who caters to the worst instincts of the Hate Talk Radio crowd and a leader of the anti-immigrant hard-liners. Yesterday's Salt Lake Tribune features him vowing to fight on despite passage of comprehensive immigration reform. Hometown boy in the hometown paper:

Sen. Mike Lee has aggressively fought against the Senate’s immigration bill, but on Fox News Sunday he said not only is the Senate poised to pass the legislation this week, it may well get the 70 votes supporters have long desired.

That doesn’t mean Lee, R-Utah, is dropping his campaign. He is just shifting its target, hoping to bolster Republicans in the House who agree with him that the nation must not only pass border security legislation but also see it implemented before undocumented immigrants receive legal status.

...Lee argues the bill’s supporters are selling it on false promises.

"They told us that it would be tough but fair, and it is neither," he said. "It is not tough on those who have broken the law, and it’s not fair on those who have patiently been waiting in line to come to this country legally."

The legislation would allow many of the 11 million undocumented immigrants to begin a 13-year path to citizenship, with a green card contingent on border improvements and an expanded workplace verification system.

The state's other very conservative-- if more mainstream-- senator is Orrin Hatch. He was also in the Salt Lake Tribune yesterday... explaining why he was voting for the bill Lee and the hate Talk Radio crowd are so vehemently opposed to.

Eleven million people. That’s the number of undocumented immigrants estimated to be in our country, the result of our broken immigration system.

The question is not only what should be done with these 11 million people, but what should be done to prevent 11 million more from coming to the United States illegally. We can’t afford to ignore this reality any more.

Is this legislation perfect or what I would have drafted? Absolutely not. But as it stands now, the Senate immigration bill makes sure that these 11 million people are paying into society, and fixes many of the pressing issues associated with our broken immigration system.

That’s why I will vote for it this week.

This legislation significantly strengthens border security. An amendment by my colleagues Sens. John Hoeven, R-N.D., and Bob Corker, R-Tenn., means that an additional 20,000 Border Patrol agents will be stationed along the southern border, more than doubling the current force.

It also requires that an additional 700 miles of fencing be built and that E-verify-- an Internet-based system that ensures that employers hire only legal workers-- be used by all businesses in the country, making it virtually impossible to work in the United States illegally.

Some have said this bill grants amnesty, but that’s just not true. We have de facto amnesty right now, and this bill fixes that. The fact is that in order to be put on a pathway to citizenship, immigrants currently here illegally would be required to pay a fine, pass criminal and national security background checks and pay taxes.

Only after at least 10 years have passed and all five of these so-called “triggers” have been fully implemented can an illegal immigrant even apply for a green card. That’s hardly amnesty.

I successfully added an amendment to create a mandatory biometric exit system at the top airports to increase border security from the inside out.

Preventing individuals from entering the country illegally is only one side of the coin; the other side is preventing them from staying here illegally.

Two additional amendments I introduced to limit public benefits to newly legalized immigrants are a part of this package as well. Ensuring that federal welfare requirements are fully complied with and that unauthorized workers are prohibited from receiving Social Security benefits protects American taxpayers.

And I’m going to continue to push to include that back taxes must be paid for anyone who’s been here illegally.

The immigration reform legislation ensures that we can meet our labor needs in the short term and the long term.

First, the legislation creates a guest-worker program that’s vitally important for the agricultural sector of our economy, including Utah’s farmers and ranchers.

Second, the bill includes several amendments I introduced to improve our high-skilled employment base and education and training in the STEM fields-- science, technology, engineering, and math-- to ensure we can continue to compete in a global economy.

In the short term, the legislation creates a real-time, market-based escalator that allows additional high-skilled H-1B visas to be granted when these jobs are needed here in the U.S., and fall when they’re not.

The legislation also increases the number of visas allocated each year, which is important because the cap on these visas was met in only five days this year. And another one of my amendments included in the bill creates a STEM education and training account which takes money from visa fees and sends it to the states to use towards STEM education programs.

Finally, the legislation includes a number of additional provisions I fought for that also impact Utah.

It permanently extends a visa program for religious workers and establishes strong penalties for growing marijuana on federal land.

I’ve served in the Senate the last two times immigration has been undertaken-- in 1986 and in 2007. I voted against both of those pieces of legislation because they were the wrong approach.

I believe that the bill before the Senate today takes many important steps toward being the right solution for our country, but more needs to be done.

I will work with the House of Representatives to ensure that we continue to improve this bill for American families and taxpayers.

Read More