Tag Archives: congress

The Coming National Budget Battle And Learning From California

Everyone else is doing such a great job on the budget that I don’t have much to say on that issue except what Mark Leno said.  But I will note that this issue of budgetary intransigence by radical Republicans is about to go national, and how we’re dealing with it in California should be a lesson for the nation.  I hope the Democrats are paying attention.

In his exit interview yesterday, Karl Rove tipped the hand the Republican strategy to resuscitate the President’s approval ratings.

Mr. Rove also said he expects the president’s approval rating to rise again, and that conditions in Iraq will improve as the U.S. military surge continues. He said he expects Democrats to be divided this fall in the battle over warrantless wiretapping, while the budget battle — and a series of presidential vetoes — should help Republicans gain an edge on spending restraint and taxes.

In fact, the President has been signaling this for a while, saying that he will veto any appropriations bill that doesn’t fall in line with his spending targets.  Never mind that Presidents don’t set budget policy, or that Bush allowed massive spending increases when the Republicans were in charge of Congress.  This is a play-to-the-base strategy to fire up conservatives by picking a massive fight with the Democrats over spending priorities.  And it will essentially force the budget items to be decided by overriding the veto, with a… wait for it… 2/3 vote.

Now, there are a LOT more Republicans in Congress that would have to be pressured into accepting the budget than Republicans in the California Legislature.  So I’m pessimistic  about the strategy for squeezing them.  I’m more interested in how we can win the rhetorical battle, and how we can learn from the California situation and empower the spine-challenged Democratic leadership from not caving on this one and doing the right thing.

While not many people are really watching the budget battle here, they most certainly will be watching the national battle and possible government shutdown.  There will be reminiscenses of 1995 and Newt Gingrich’s shutdown, and caution from the Beltway media that Congress should learn from Gingrich’s mistake and pull back.  That is absurd, since the President would be triggering the shutdown, and the budget priorities the Democrats are putting together are very much in line with what the public desires.  Still, we are seeing in California that disgust with the budget stalemate reaches across party lines and sours the public mood on government overall.  I believe this is the GOP strategy, to again make government a four-letter word and hope that their new “outsider” challengers (who will either be lobbyists or rich businessmen) can capitalize on it.

The key here, I think, it to define the tactic early, before Congress returns to session.  Fabian Nunez, Don Perata, and Governor Schwarzenegger are now excoriating the Republican obstructionists for delaying vital services for Californians.  This probably happened a few weeks late.  The Republicans have dug in their heels and have no exit strategy; in fact, not exiting IS the strategy.  To combat this on the national level, Nancy Pelosi and her leadership team need to be thinking about this now instead of reacting to the inevitable veto.  They need to be warning Republicans in Congress that tying themselves to the President is committing political suicide, and that they’re part of Congress too, and approval ratings cut both ways (especially in the Senate, where 22 Republicans are up for re-election as opposed to just 12 Democrats).  The best way to frame this is much like the Social Security debate.  We need to start proudly defending the budget priorities and make it completely toxic to act against them.

Maybe some of my colleagues who are little more plugged into the state battle would like to chime in.  How can we win this battle of ideas?

Update on Ellen Tauscher on Impeaching Gonzales

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Photo Source Representative Ellen Tauscher (CA-10th) in blue.

Many of you responded to my diary last week My Democratic Congresswoman Claims Alberto Gonzales Cannot Be Impeached! .

Recap (Again this is cross-posted at DailyKos):

A) I sent Representative Ellen Tauscher an email asking her to initiate impeachment proceedings against Gonzales. She (or her staff) responded via email (and again when I phoned them) that

The Attorney General serves at the pleasure of the president in a non-impeachable office. Unless convicted of an illegal act, the Attorney General cannot be removed from office without the president asking for or accepting his resignation.

B) After re-reading the U.S. Constitution, and posting here for feedback from others I concluded that Tauscher was quite wrong on this urgent point. I sent her local office the following:

1) A copy of the American Bar Association‘s “Impeachment: A Look at the Process. (Hat tip to MLDB)

2) A copy of Professor Frank Bowman’s NYT Op-Ed piece “He’s Impeachable, You Know”. (Hat tip to 8ackgr0und N015e)

3) A copy of the Constitution (because she obviously needs it).

4) A copy of my original letter requesting she start impeachment proceedings against Gonzales.

5) Her office’s response that Gonzales is not impeachable.

And as advised by mmacdDE, all pertinent excerpts are HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW!

Here’s the text of my 2nd letter to her:

Dear Representative Tauscher,

I received the enclosed email from you (or one of your staffers) in response to my message about impeaching Attorney General Alberto Gonzales (also enclosed). I was quite startled to read your claim that Gonzales is “not impeachable”. According to the U.S. Constitution he is (please read enclosed documentation). I’m hoping that your staff simply got confused about this very serious situation and sent the wrong information to me, your constituent. A good read-through of the materials I’ve been studying myself will correct that error for my neighbors and others who write to you about this.

If you yourself responded to my letter then I respectfully request that you immediately study the enclosed documents regarding Congressional impeachment of “civil officers”. It seems very clear to me (and to the American Bar Association, and to Professor Frank Bowman, all enclosed) that Mr. Gonzales is indeed impeachable.

I therefore again request that you begin impeachment proceedings against this man. He’s either lying to Congress (a triple felony) or he’s incompetent. Either way Mr. Gonzales is endangering our democracy every day he stays in office.

Please act as my reprepresentative in this urgent matter.

Sincerely,

Emily Duffy

I just received Tauscher’s response to my packet. There was a lot of repetition from the first form letter (why Gonzales is so bad, how she’s watching him carefully etc.) but this part was new, and probably as close to humble pie as she can swallow on this huge error:

I apologize for inaccuracies contained in any earlier correspondence. I want to set the record straight on my actions. I am a co-sponsor of two bills to remove Gonzales from office. On May 22, I co-sponsored H. Res. 417, which declares that the House of Representatives and the American people have lost confidence in Attorney General Gonzales. It calls on the President to nominate a new candidate capable of serving as the head of the Department of Justice. Additionally, I am a co-sponsor of H. Res. 589, introduced yesterday by Rep. Jay Inslee of Washington, which directs the House Judiciary Committee to initiate an impeachment investigation of the Attorney General. The resolution requests a formal investigation of the facts surrounding the Attorney General’s actions in order to allow Congress to determine whether articles of impeachment are appropriate.

My friends, don’t let ANYONE ever tell you that you have no political power. Here is your proof that something as simple as a letter to your Congressperson could change their position on a crucial issue (from impeachability-denier to impeachment-bill-co-sponsor in two easy steps).

I’m sure plenty of you will be angry at reading Tauscher’s lame inexplicable apology, and in a perfect world I would be as well (at least she didn’t try to lay it at some hapless staffer’s feet). I’m thrilled she changed her official position on this issue. Many of Tauscher’s votes piss me off but if she’s able to adapt to the rising power of the true political center (which is way left of her former position) then I’m willing to let her keep her job. But, the moment she slips back into DLC behavior, she’s an election target (and I think she is beginning to understand that). The key to this entire episode is that I’ve come to realize it’s MY DUTY to keep her on track.

No doubt the clout of my fellow Kossacks forced Tauscher to immediately examine her claims about Gonzales’ un-impeachabilty and for that I greatly thank you. Tauscher seems willing to mend her Blue Dog ways (time will tell) and no doubt we (collectively) can pressure the rest of this misguided pack to join her in moving towards the base. Or they can start packing their bags.

Meteor Blades provided the list earlier today. If your Representative is on this list, you need to get up in their face!

Be sure to sign John Edwards’ petition. They plan to

…send one copy of the Constitution to Gonzales’ office for every person who signs our petition. If we reach our goal of 40,000 signatures, we will add all the names to the biggest copy of the Constitution you have ever seen – and send that to his office too!

My DEMOCRATIC Congresswoman Claims Gonzales Cannot Be Impeached!

(This story is a couple days old at this point, but worth everyone seeing. – promoted by jsw)

Representatives Ellen Tauscher (CA 10th) and Jerry McNerney (CA 11th (with some guy inbetween). From Tauscher’s website.

READ THE UPDATE ON THIS STORY HERE!

(NOTE: This post was originally written for my DailyKos diary. It received over 300 comments, a first for me after writing there for more than 3 years. I’ve added new information that came in from those many amazing comments so you can track how the story developed. I’ve also rearranged it from the original format so it will make more sense.)

Cross-Posted at DailyKos and Political Artwork.

Sometimes I think I am the only person in my district writing or phoning my Representative. I live in a very long skinny district, badly patched together, and a few years ago I got moved into former DLC Vice President Ellen Tauscher’s district. Previously I was in George Miller’s district and he’s much more liberal. But I’ve come to believe it’s a good thing for more liberals from the Western edge of San Francisco’s East Bay to be all up in Ms. Tauscher’s political face.

I thought I’d let her know I wanted some action on Gonzales. I’d been reading the Constitution regarding impeachment and it appeared to me (lay-person that I am) that Gonzales could be removed in this way and Bush would be unable to pardon him. Here’s what I was looking at:

* The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

* Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Here’s where I figured we’d just push him out of office now and then charge him with crimes after Bush is no longer president (so he couldn’t pardon him.)

* The President…shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

* The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

So I was assuming that Gonzales, being the Attorney General was a “civil officer” which would allow Congress to indeed impeach him and or cause him to resign under threat of impeachment.

Congresswoman Tauscher responded thusly:

Thank you for contacting me about Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. I have reviewed your comments and welcome this opportunity to share my views.

I have long been concerned about Attorney General Gonzales’ role in crafting the Bush Administration’s policies that deny prisoners captured in the War on Terror protections afforded to belligerents under the Geneva Convention, including the right to protection from torture. Recent allegations regarding his role in the firing of eight U.S. Attorneys for seemingly political purposes and an audit of FBI use of national security tools which revealed multiple breaches of FBI and Justice Department regulations are further cause for grave concern.

The Attorney General is the top law enforcement officer in the nation, and it is his responsibility to uphold the rule of law and respect for civil rights that are granted by the U.S. Constitution. As a member of the Armed Services Committee and the Human Rights Caucus, I am deeply concerned about abuse and violations of the rights of detainees in U.S. custody. These allegations have undermined our nation’s credibility and have raised concerns in the international community that the United States no longer holds human rights as a guiding principle in its military and foreign policy.

Furthermore, the politicalization of the Department of Justice through the firing of U.S. Attorneys thought to be unsympathetic to Administration priorities and slow and incomplete responses to Congress by the Justice Department regarding this matter display a flagrant disregard for the Constitutionally-mandated neutrality of the legal system. The condoning of the abuse of national security powers by the FBI is further evidence of this disturbing trend. Accountability must begin at the top, and I expect the President to uphold openness and honesty in his Administration. As investigations into these matters continue, I will work with my colleagues to ensure that those who acted unethically – or even illegally – are held responsible.

Good, good, I’m liking the sound of this…but then she says this:

The Attorney General serves at the pleasure of the president in a non-impeachable office. Unless convicted of an illegal act, the Attorney General cannot be removed from office without the president asking for or accepting his resignation. However, please be assured that I will keep your thoughts and concerns in mind as I review the circumstances surrounding recent allegations of impropriety within the Justice Department.

Sincerely,

Ellen O. Tauscher
Member of Congress

Whatdayaknow…it turns out SHE’S QUITE WRONG! After reading the information shared by DailyKos readers, and doing more research, I’m convinced that my Democratic Congresswoman doesn’t fully understand the very same Constitution she took an oath to uphold! So I wrote her again, and sent along with my letter, a big pile of PROOF that  not only is Mr. Gonzales impeachable, it’s her duty as my Representative to help remove him.

Here is what I wrote in my 2nd letter to her:

Dear Representative Tauscher,

I received the enclosed email from you (or one of your staffers) in response to my message about impeaching Attorney General Alberto Gonzales (also enclosed). I was quite startled to read your claim that Gonzales is “not impeachable”. According to the U.S. Constitution he is (please read enclosed documentation). I’m hoping that your staff simply got confused about this very serious situation and sent the wrong information to me, your constituent. A good read-through of the materials I’ve been studying myself will correct that error for my neighbors and others who write to you about this.

If you yourself responded to my letter then I respectfully request that you immediately study the enclosed documents regarding Congressional impeachment of “civil officers”. It seems very clear to me (and to the American Bar Association, and to Professor Frank Bowman, all enclosed) that Mr. Gonzales is indeed impeachable.

I therefore again request that you begin impeachment proceedings against this man. He’s either lying to Congress (a triple felony) or he’s incompetent. Either way Mr. Gonzales is endangering our democracy every day he stays in office.

Please act as my representative in this urgent matter.

Sincerely,

Emily Duffy

Here is the list of documents (PROOF) that I included with my letter:

1) A copy of the American Bar Association‘s “Impeachment: A Look at the Process. (Hat tip to DailyKos writer MLDB)

2) A copy of Professor Frank Bowman’s NYT Op-Ed piece “He’s Impeachable, You Know”. (Hat tip to DailyKos writer 8ackgr0und N015e)

3) A copy of the Constitution (because she obviously needs it).

4) A copy of my original letter requesting she start impeachment proceedings against Gonzales.

5) A copy of Tauscher’s response to my original letter.

And as advised by DailyKos writer mmacdDE, all pertinent excerpts are HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW!

I’ll report back if I hear back from Tauscher’s office. If I don’t hear back from her, she’ll hear back from me!

NOTE: Here’s the text of the email I originally sent Tauscher. Please feel free to borrow any or all of it to send to your own Rep.

  Dear Representative …,

I have been watching Senate hearings at which Attorney General Gonzales is testifying about many, MANY irregularities and conflicting statements on several issues of national security etc. This man is not fit to continue in his position. He either seems confused, can’t recall, or doesn’t know the answer to most questions posed by the bipartisan Senate Committee. He’s either lying about his involvement with various illegal activities, or he’s incompetent! Either way, he needs to be removed.

The Constitution says:

“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. “

and,

The President…”shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

I understand that to mean, if Congress impeaches Attorney General (or any other Bush appointee, cabinet member, civil employee etc.) Bush cannot pardon them and they will be held accountable.

I respectfully request that you begin impeachment proceedings against the Attorney General immediately. That will begin the unveiling of crimes and corruption that this administration has committed, and continues to commit.

Thank You.

If you made it all the way to the end of this post, thank you for taking the time to read this strange tale. You might want to check and see if your own Congressperson knows that Alberto Gonzales is impeachable by writing to them HERE!

You can also sign John Edwards’ petition calling for Gonzales to resign HERE!

Thanks to 12 California House Democrats

…who just signed on to a letter to the President vowing not to appropriate any more money to the Iraq debacle for anything other than a fully funded withdrawal.  Kudos to these 12:

Lynn Woolsey
Barbara Lee
Maxine Waters
Ellen Tauscher
Diane Watson
Bob Filner
Hilda Solis
Grace Napolitano
Linda Sanchez
Mike Honda
Pete Stark
Lois Capps

Reward good behavior.  Letter on the flip.

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing to inform you that we will only support appropriating additional funds for U.S. military operations in Iraq during Fiscal Year 2008 and beyond for the protection and safe redeployment of all our troops out of Iraq before you leave office.

More than 3,600 of our brave soldiers have died in Iraq. More than 26,000 have been seriously wounded. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed or injured in the hostilities and more than 4 million have been displaced from their homes. Furthermore, this conflict has degenerated into a sectarian civil war and U.S. taxpayers have paid more than $500 billion, despite assurances that you and your key advisors gave our nation at the time you ordered the invasion in March, 2003 that this military intervention would cost far less and be paid from Iraqi oil revenues.

We agree with a clear and growing majority of the American people who are opposed to continued, open-ended U.S. military operations in Iraq, and believe it is unwise and unacceptable for you to continue to unilaterally impose these staggering costs and the soaring debt on Americans currently and for generations to come.

Sincerely,

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (CA); Rep. Barbara Lee (CA); Rep. Maxine Waters (CA); Rep. Ellen Tauscher (CA); Rep. Rush Holt (NJ); Rep. Maurice Hinchey (NY); Rep. Diane Watson (CA); Rep. Ed Pastor (AZ); Rep. Barney Frank (MA); Rep. Danny Davis (IL); Rep. John Conyers (MI); Rep. John Hall (NY); Rep. Bob Filner (CA); Rep. Nydia Velazquez (NY); Rep. Bobby Rush (IL); Rep. Charles Rangel (NY); Rep. Ed Towns (NY); Rep. Paul Hodes (NH); Rep. William Lacy Clay (MO); Rep. Earl Blumenauer (OR); Rep. Albert Wynn (MD); Rep. Bill Delahunt (MA); Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC); Rep. G. K. Butterfield (NC); Rep. Hilda Solis (CA); Rep. Carolyn Maloney (NY); Rep. Jerrold Nadler (NY); Rep. Michael Honda (CA); Rep. Steve Cohen (TN); Rep. Phil Hare (IL); Rep. Grace Flores Napolitano (CA); Rep. Alcee Hastings (FL); Rep. James McGovern (MA); Rep. Marcy Kaptur (OH); Rep. Jan Schakowsky (IL); Rep. Julia Carson (IN); Rep. Linda Sanchez (CA); Rep. Raul Grijalva (AZ); Rep. John Olver (MA); Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (TX); Rep. Jim McDermott (WA); Rep. Ed Markey (MA); Rep. Chaka Fattah (PA); Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (NJ); Rep. Rubin Hinojosa (TX); Rep. Pete Stark (CA); Rep. Bobby Scott (VA); Rep. Jim Moran (VA); Rep. Betty McCollum (MN); Rep. Jim Oberstar (MN); Rep. Diana DeGette (CO); Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA); Rep. Artur Davis (AL); Rep. Hank Johnson (GA); Rep. Donald Payne (NJ); Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (MO); Rep. John Lewis (GA); Rep. Yvette Clarke (NY); Rep. Neil Abercrombie (HI); Rep. Gwen Moore (WI); Rep. Keith Ellison (MN); Rep. Tammy Baldwin (WI); Rep. Donna Christensen (USVI); Rep. David Scott (GA); Rep. Luis Gutierrez (IL); Lois Capps (CA); Steve Rothman (NJ); Elijah Cummings (MD); and Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX).

ACTION: What’s Next On Net Neutrality and All Resolutions

As I mentioned, the CDP affirmed their support for net neutrality this weekend with a strong resolution that reflected the concerns of both labor interests and the progressive movement.  Brad Parker of PDA (Progressive Democrats of America) commended the process in the Sunday session as proof that the Progressive Caucus and the more institutional elements of the CDP can work together.  On that score alone, it’s a win. 

The best part, by the way, was that Speed Matters (the CWA’s astroturf campaign) spent major dollars creating a glossy brochure that they put on everybody’s seat this morning, and it included what they thought would be the resolution.  Biggest waste of money I’ve ever seen.  Ha!

As for how to translate this into policy, since after all it is merely a nonbinding resolution, that’s what I’d like to address.  These resolutions sit on some corner of the CDP website and collect e-dust.  They have no meaning unless they are publicized.  So here’s what I propose.

Every Democratic member of Congress and the state legislature should be getting calls this week.  You should say, “Hello, I’m a constituent, the California Democratic Party just passed a resolution supporting the preservation of a free and open Internet.  I would like (the congresscritter) to abide by the wishes of his/her party and support any legislation codifying the principle of net neutrality.  If you would like to look at the text I can fax it to you.”  Let’s hold our representatives to the demands of the Party they represent, as well as their constituents. 

The preservation of a free and open Internet is critical to the continued innovation and entrepreneurship of this country, as well as the free flow of information needed for a well-informed citizenry and the rights to free speech and freedom of assembly.  We can move this forward in California.  We know that, at the state level, Mark Leno sought to introduce net neutrality legislation back in February.  That needs to return next year and we need to organize around it right now.

This can also work for other resolutions, especially the one on parole and sentencing reform that passed this weekend.  Really they are completely useless unless publicized in this manner.  Let’s allow them to have some impact, otherwise the hard work crafting them and managing them on the Resolutions Committee goes to naught, and nobody wants that.

On the flip, I’ve added the resolution text if you want to fax it to your legislators.  Please call Congress and the State Legislature today.

Support of Affordable High Speed Internet for America and Internet Neutrality (it’s actually Network Neutrality –ed.)

WHEREAS to secure the rights of assembly, and free speech online, which are guaranteed by the Constitution and encourage new innovative American businesses to flourish , Americans are entitled to and require open, equal and impartial Internet access; we need high speed internet for our homes, schools, hospitals and workplaces to grow jobs and our economy; enable innovations in telemedicine, education, public safety and government services; foster independence for people with disabilities and strengthen democratic discourse and civic participation and;

WHEREAS the United States – the country that invented the Internet – has fallen from first to sixteenth in internet adoption; US consumers pay more for slower speeds than people in other advanced nations; millions of Americans, especially in rural and low income areas do not have access to affordable, high speed broadband; then United States alone among the advanced nations has no national, Internet policy; the US definition of “high speed” at 200 kilobytes per second (kbps) is too slow and has not changed in nine years: the US and California collections of broadband data does not tell us what we need to know about broadband deployment, adoption, speeds and prices and consumer and worker protections must be safeguarded on high speed networks and;

WHEREAS the growth of a free and open Internet has provided historic advances in the realms of democracy, free speech, communications, research and economic development; California and US consumers are entitled to and require open, unfettered access to the lawful Internet content of their choice without interference by any entity, public or private; build out of universal, high speed, high capacity networks will promote an open Internet by eliminating bandwidth scarcity;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the California Democratic Party endorses national,  state and local policies to promote affordable, high speed broadband for all with strong protections for consumers and the workers who build, maintain and service those networks; and a national goal for universal access and deployment of network capable of delivering 10 megabytes per second downstream and 1 megabyte per second upstream by the year 2010 and the California Democratic Party supports federal and state initiatives to improve data collection on high speed broadband deployment, adoption, speed and prices as a necessary first step; upgrading the current definition of high speed to 2 megabytes per second downstream, 1 megabyte per second upstream and policies that promote public programs to stimulate build out of high speed networks to all home and businesses in the nation and;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Democratic Party in order to promote vigorous free speech, a vibrant business community, and unfettered access to all information on the Internet, supports policies to preserve an open, neutral and interconnected Internet; protect against any degradation or blocking of access to any websites for content on the Internet and insure consumers have the right to free email; encourages build out of high speed networks to all homes and businesses so that everyone can go where they want and upload or download what they want on the Internet as a public utility maintained by union workers.

Submitted by the
Labor Caucus of the California Democratic Party
Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party

Nine Digits Away from a Dream

What would you do if your American dream had to be deferred? And how would you respond when you find out that your dream must be deferred because of nine digits? Yep, nine digits would be separating you from your plans, your hopes, your wishes, your future. Doesn’t that seem unfair?

Well, it is. It’s quite unfair for all the young people to work so hard to go to college, yet can’t access any financial aid because they are undocumented immigrants. And even if they can somehow make it through college, they can’t get a job because they don’t have those nine little digits. Even though they came here as children, and even though they only remember living here, they are punished for something they had no control over.

So what can be done about this injustice? Follow me after the flip for more…

A couple of days ago, I met this guy named Ricardo. He seemed like a nice guy, and like a typical young professional in Orange County who did everything he was supposed to do to succeed. Yet for some reason, he can’t.

Ricardo did everything he was supposed to do in high school. He excelled in his classes, and he went on to college. He now has a bachelor’s degree in molecular biology. He has a master’s in health policy. He wants to serve people in the medical profession. However, he can’t.

So why can’t Ricardo get a job? He doesn’t have those nine digits. His parents brought him here with them some nineteen years ago, and they all came here undocumented. He was only eight years old. He hardly even remembers Mexico. He’s spent the vast majority of his life in the US, and this nation is the nation he calls home.

Ricardo never sought to break the law. He doesn’t gang-bang. He doesn’t deal drugs. He’s not some “criminal alien”. He’s just a smart guy who did everything right and went to school and planned to do something good with his life. So why must he be “punished” for something that he had no control over.

Unfortunately, Ricardo had no opportunity to receive any financial aid. He started school before AB 540 became the law of the land in California in 2003. And since he didn’t have those nine digits, he had to struggle just to afford his college tuition.

But even now that he’s finished school, Ricardo still has to struggle. He can’t get a job. He still doesn’t have those nine digits. He’s at his wit’s end. Without the nine digits, all his dreams must be put on hold indefinitely.

So what can be done? Ricardo’s just one person who’s been unfairly “punished” because of his immigration status. These young people didn’t make a “choice to come here illegally”. They didn’t just decide to “break the law”. They came here as kids, yet they’re being punished like adult criminals. What can be done to fix this?

Obviously, AB 540 isn’t enough. This only helps immigrant students in California, and it only helps these students go to school. However, it doesn’t help them get jobs after school. That’s why we need the DREAM Act.

So what would the DREAM Act do? Basically, it would give a path to legalization for people who brought to the US undocumented as children by their parents. In order to qualify, they need proof of having arrived in the United States before reaching 16 years of age ,as well as proof of residence in the US for a least five consecutive years since their date of arrival. Oh yes, and they must have graduated from an American High School, or obtained a GED.  Oh, and they must also demonstrate “good moral character,” which is defined as the absence of a significant criminal record (or any drug charges whatsoever).

So what exactly would be done? Here’s a quick rundown from the Wiki entry:

Immigrants who meet the above requirements would be eligible to apply for a temporary six (6) year “conditional” residence permit which would allow them to live legally in the United States, obtain driver’s licenses, attend college as in-state residents, work legally (including obtaining a social security number), and apply for special travel documents which would allow for travel outside of the country for limited amounts of time.

During the six years of conditional status, the eligible immmigrant would be required to either (1) graduate from a two-year community college, (2) complete at least two years towards a 4-year degree, or (3) serve two years in the U.S. military. After the six year period, an immigrant who meets at least one of these three conditions would be eligible to apply for legal permanent resident (green card) status. During their temporary time, immigrants would not be eligible for federal higher education grants such as Pell grants, though they would be able to apply for student loans and work study.

There, now doesn’t that sound fair? Doesn’t this do justice for people like Ricardo who never sought to “break the law”, but just want a chance to do something good with their lives? Don’t they have a right to pursue their dreams? Oh yes, and shouldn’t they finally just have a chance to get those darn nine digits so that they can move on with their lives? Isn’t it only in the best interest of the greater society that they can be productive forces in our society?

So would you like to find out more about the stories of these immigrant students, the story behind the DREAM Act, and why we shouldn’t stereotype immigrants? If you’re in Orange County, you can watch a special play, “9ine Digits Away from My Dream”. You can hear more about Ricardo’s story, as well as stories from other immigrant students in Orange County who are struggling because of an unfair system. And yes, you can gain some more understanding, and find out what you can do to change this.

And no matter where you live, you can urge House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) to get the DREAM Act passed in the House. Isn’t it time that we stop deferring these young people’s dreams? Should we allow nine digits to get in the way of these people’s dreams of better lives?

Why Care About Corruption?

(Cross-posted at Trash Dirty Gary and Ditch Crazy Dana)

OK, so perhaps people in Southern California are finally starting to notice the immense corruption of members of Congress like Gary Miller, Ken Calvert, and Dana Rohrabacher. However, these everyday citizens and typical voters wonder how all this corruption applies to their typical everyday lives.

Why should they care about whatever Gary Miller did with some Lewis Group company in Upland? Why should they care about some land that Ken Calvert owned near March Air Force Base that just happened to benefit from Ken Calvert’s earmarks? Why should they care about Dana Rohrabacher’s Hollywood deals? How does any of this matter to people’s everyday lives?

Follow me after the flip for more…

When all else fails, voters often choose the party of their choice by default. And though the Republican Party is becoming less attractive nationwide, a good plurality of voters in this area still identify themselves as Republican. They still think the GOP is the party of low taxes and fiscal responsibility. They pretty much set their political compass to autopilot, and they just don’t have time to think too much about some silly politics in Washington.

And after all, who has the time to pay attention to these crazy political scandals? Who has time to drop everything in between the PTA meeting and the kids’ soccer game, after a hard day of work and before that fancy dinner that’s supposed to impress the new client, just to learn more about politics? Why does any of this matter?

That’s the challenge here. In order for us to defeat these corrupt Republicans, we have to get our family, friends, and neighbors to realize how all of this corruption is personally affecting them. We have to let them know that all these earmarks that go to these pet projects that just happen to be near their real estate holdings mean money that’s NOT being spent on real efforts to relieve traffic, such as improving local freeways and federal aid for commuter rail. We have to let them know that when these members of Congress try to weaken environmental laws, they are just taking away the parks and open space that we all love to hike through, bike through, and camp at, just so that they can make a little more money on their development projects. We have to make that personal connection, and make these folks realize that all that corruption in Washington really is making life more difficult for them at home in Fountain Valley and Mission Viejo and San Clemente.

That’s the key here. We have to show to them that all this federal money being spent on these shady earmarks is money that’s NOT being spent on the things that we care about. That money should go to our schools. That money should go to our parks. That money should go to our roads. Basically, that money should actually be spent toward helping our communities. These members of Congress should NOT spend that money, OUR MONEY, on projects solely meant to enrich themselves. They’re wasting our time, and they’re wasting our money. That’s why we need to kick them out of Congress!

If we want to defeat Dirty Gary and Crazy Dana and Creepy Ken next year, we need to get these voters in these districts out of their comfort zone of apathy, and force them to see the futility of sending these scumbags back to Congress. We need to get these voters to start caring again. After all, what we don’t like about politics will never go away if we never do anything to change it.

The Real Collectionator

Hannah-Beth Jackson brought up one of my favorite ways to needle Arnold Schwarzenegger, and that is to talk about his overblown self-appointed title of “Collectionator”.  He said he was going to go to Washington and use his relationship with the president and the then Republican Congress to bring back some of the $50 billion in tax dollars that Californians send to DC, but rarely receive back.  Arnold has been an abject failure in that regard.

That title really should go to Barbara Boxer.  Chron:

Sen. Barbara Boxer of California is giving her constituents a textbook example of the power a single senior senator can wield, using her new post chairing the Environment and Public Works Committee to add generously to the amount of money the state stands to get for water and flood control projects.

In all, California accounts for about $1.4 billion of the estimated $13.9 billion in projects authorized under the Water Resources Development Act passed 91-4 Wednesday by the Senate. At about 10 percent of the total, California ranks second only to flood- and hurricane-ravaged Louisiana, which accounts for 25 percent of the total.

Can I just say…wooohooo.  And it is about damn time, especially for those of us living in the Central Valley.

For California — a state whose leaders complain regularly about sending far more to Washington in federal tax dollars than the state gets back — the experience in the water legislation represents a positive reversal of fortune.

By the time the bill, the first such water program legislation to get this far in Congress in seven years, was wrapped up in Boxer’s committee, hundreds of millions of dollars for specific California projects had been added. What’s more, many other projects in the state were added to the bill without specific funding totals, making them eligible for future appropriations. And the bill called for federal studies of several other potential water projects.

“We have a lot of important projects in here because we have so many needs,” said Boxer, who has served on the committee in the minority and the majority since coming to the Senate in 1993. She became chairwoman after Democrats took control of Congress in November.

Way to go BB!  Now, I hope you can steer this through the Senate floor, get it through the House and somehow convince the President to sign it.  DiFi should be able to give you an assist with her chairmanship of the Senate appropriations subcommittee on the interior and the environment.

P.S. Why the heck did the Chron feel like they needed to rehash the dumb as bricks non-controversy over the $25 million for the Port of San Francisco.  They really should have included the response from the Port if they were going to talk about it at all.  Just because there are two sides, that does not mean you need to give them equal time.

Today is our opportunity to bring our troops home

(You bet it is! – promoted by Lucas O’Connor)

Crossposted at DailyKos

Friends,

Over four years ago President Bush misled our country into a bloody and costly occupation of Iraq.  Four years later, you have the power to end it.

For four years those of us in the progressive movement, in Congress, online, and in the streets, have stood firm in our opposition to the President’s failed occupation.  We have been called traitors; we have been accused of not supporting the troops; and some have even questioned our patriotism.  But four years later our voices have now become part of the mainstream position held by the majority of Americans.

And most importantly, today, we have the power to bring them home.

This afternoon the Congress will bring up H.R. 2237, a bill, which would ensure that the only money this Congress approves for Iraq would be used to fully-fund the safe and orderly withdrawal of our soldiers.  The Progressive Caucus has been for fighting for months to advance such a bill, both behind the scenes (link to relevant article -check Roll Call from March), and right in the open (link to floor speech), and finally we have our opportunity.  Back in February we even made it part of our official platform (link to CPC site).

So please, stop whatever you are doing, take two minutes, and call your Representative right away.  Tell them to support a fully funded withdrawal of our soldiers from Iraq, and to vote for H.R. 2237.

We must fully-fund the withdrawal

We must fully fund the reconstruction

But we cannot fund this President’s occupation any longer.

Thank you for your help

-Lynn

###

Calitics: You can help me “pay it forward”…

(OK, sure! : ) – promoted by atdleft)

First off, I want to say that I am looking forward to meeting a lot of folks I’ve only heard about online at the “Blue House at the Brew House” blograiser at the California Democratic Convention next Friday.

Just a few days ago, I went to the YearlyKos fundraiser YearlyKos fundraiser in Washington, DC. You can see some of the pictures from that event, including a photo of me with Dengre, in NYBri’s recommended diary.

As you all know, I defeated Richard Pombo, a seven-term Republican incumbent, and was elected to Congress in 2006 on a wave of grassroots and netroots support. But, what some of you may not know is that I ran in 2004 and lost.

Sometimes, it takes more than one election cycle for voters to realize it’s time for a change. That’s why I am proud to post the following request on Calitics today.

Come over to the other side of this diary for the rest of the story.

When the pundits and power-brokers were telling us we could not defeat Richard Pombo, thousands of Democracy for America supporters pushed back, voting to give me DFA’s 2006 "Grassroots All-Star" endorsement, a crucial turning point that provided our campaign with a major financial boost.

Today, seven excellent grassroots candidates are competing to win DFA’s  first congressional endorsement of 2007. You can help me grow the Democratic majority in Congress in 2008 by voting for your next DFA Grassroots All-Star right now:

http://www.democracy…

DFA’s early endorsement helped me win a seat in Congress, showing that bottom-up, people-powered grassroots organizing works. Your Grassroots All-Star vote changed the race, helping us attract significant early support from the netroots and crucial media attention.

As Charles Chamberlain commented in a diary on Daily Kos yesterday, even the National Journal recognized the power of this endorsement:

Even after McNerney’s impressive primary upset, the DCCC was not sold on his viability. But over the summer, he began picking up extensive “netroots” support and captured the imagination of liberal Internet activists. He also won the “Grassroots All-Star” online voting contest run by Democracy for America, a political action committee inspired by Howard Dean. The group’s endorsement triggered campaign contributions for McNerney from around the country.

Now, you can make a difference again. Democracy for America has put together a list of candidates that came extremely close last year, ran an excellent grassroots campaign, and have already thrown their hat back in the ring. These candidates need your help to finish what they started in 2006. It’s up to you to decide who DFA will support next.

Please vote today for DFA’s 2007 Grassroots All-Star:

http://www.democracy…

Don’t stop there. We won the Grassroots All-Star competition in 2006 because our supporters spread the word about this important competition to their friends, family and neighbors — in the grassroots and the netroots. So, after you vote today, please recommend this diary on Daily Kos and ask your friends to support your candidate.

Getting out the vote is how you took back Congress in 2006 and it’s how we’ll grow our Democratic majority in 2008. You can get the ball rolling now by voting for your DFA Grassroots All-Star candidate today and telling your fellow Kossacks to do the same.

IMPORTANT: According to DFA, the first-round deadline is Sunday at midnight. So, you’ve got three days to GOTV!

Please use this diary to talk up your favorite candidate and why you think they should be the next DFA Grassroots All-Star!

Thank you for everything you do.

Jerry McNerney
Member of Congress
2006 DFA Grassroots All-Star