Last year, the DREAM Act fell eight votes short of cloture in the Senate (see Donny’s detailed post for more). As with several other pieces of legislation in the 111th Congress, however, this time around the bill has a supporter in the White House. President Barack Obama helped to pass similar legislation while in the Illinois state legislature, and has voiced support for the federal legislation on the campaign trail.

I really hope you all have checked out OpenCongress, not just because I’m working there now, and not just because it’s such a useful site for finding information on bills and lawmakers. It’s also one of the best sites out there for participation. You can vote legislation “up” or “down” using Battle Royale; track individual bills, lawmakers, or issues with My OpenCongress; and of course you can add to the information we already have using the OpenCongress Wiki. And of course, since you know me, you have an insider that can help you out if you want to get started or run into problems.

(As usual, title meme courtesy of John Fleck.)

If you listened closely tonight, you could hear echoes of the voter bloc that will, in the long term, counterbalance the weakening pull of the angry white voter. The only Nevadan of Latino extraction who got to ask a question, UNLV student, George Ambriz, used his opportunity to finger debate CNN’s Lou Dobbs for “insinuating” a “linkage” between terrorism and security and immigration. “No terrorist threat has come from our southern border” he said before asking, “Are they (terrorism and immigration) “intrinsically related issues”?

Combined with the Democrats’ rightward turn on immigration, such questioning from an Angry Brown Voter bodes ill for a Democratic party that touted its decision to bring the debate—and a much-anticipated early primary—to Nevada as part of its efforts to be more inclusive of Latinos.

I flagged an American Prospect column last month on what the growing number of Latino voters could mean for politics in this country, and, indeed, the “Angry Brown Voter” may soon be a force to be reckoned with. This is the sort of thing to keep an eye out for.

Ambriz was just before my time at WNMU, but I later met him in Las Vegas at a model United Nations conference. Like me, Ambriz was heavily involved in student government and other clubs while at WNMU—he served as president of MEChA and was a member of the student government, the Associated Students of Western New Mexico University. That’s why it’s so hard to read this:

At the previous Senate meeting on September 12, the once recognized MECHA club of Western, a club since 1970, was denied for re-recognition by an 8 to 6 vote. The reason for the club’s denial was due to MECHA’s inability to adhere to rules stipulated in the student constitution. The primary reason the Senate did not pass the motion, according to ASWNMU, was that for the last two years MECHA did not participate in two student events specified in by-laws concerning recognized clubs; they did not help with homecoming or great race.

The article later cites Abraham Martinez, the current ASWNMU president, who says the students at Western helped lobby for $200,000 to renovate the MEChA building, and that the club hasn’t helped the students in return.

MEChA has had an incredible history at Western, and it’s members have been instrumental in many of the positive changes at the school in recent memory. Between 2003-06, I know members, working in conjunction with the Associated Students, were responsible for securing money for more than the MEChA building at the school. These students lobbied on behalf of the dorms, the natural sciences department, expressive arts, and athletics. In addition, they lobbied for a stronger Lottery Scholarship and against higher tuition increases.

The club’s building is the only student-owned facility on campus, and MEChA welcomed other student clubs to use the building for meetings and fundraising. Two such events were held there in 2005 to raise money for the family of slain WNMU football player Nick Arnold.

To be blunt, this is an area of ASWNMU law that needs to be rectified. The student government cited lack of participation in student events as the reason for denying the club’s recognition. However, if the club is not recognized, its members can’t be credited for participation in those events moving forward.

The best solution, in my opinion, would be a conditional recognition: withhold matching funds for the club (ASWNMU will match fundraising dollars for clubs on campus) during a probationary period, and require the club to participate in the required student events. That way, MEChA doesn’t receive any monetary gain for their club projects, while the students at WNMU are ensured the club is meeting it responsibilities. Everybody wins!

Well, unless somebody is trying to get their hands on MEChA’s building. If that’s the case, then recognition for MEChA can’t happen.

I’m too far removed from the situation to know exactly what’s going on, but I think one bit of the story is telling:

That night, [MEChA advisor Magdaleno] Manzanárez challenged the decision made by the Student Senate and requested an appeals process be put into action. Then he went on to state that he was aware that there was no current Supreme Court Committee in ASWNMU and also requested they bring one together for the appeals process concerning the eligibility of the club.

Looks like ASWNMU doesn’t exactly have its house in order either.

UPDATE: Sunday, 10:30 p.m. — Looks like the crazies are out in full force, concocting conspiracy theories about George and the other folks who asked questions during Thursday’s debate:

In a nutshell, CNN’s six “undecided voters” were:

A Democratic Party bigwig
An antiwar activist
A Union official
An Islamic leader
A Harry Reid staffer
A radical Chicano separatist

Here’s a simple thought: Americans participating in a Democratic primary election or caucus are more than likely going to be Democrats ((It works that way in Nevada and Iowa, and I would also assume that a primary election attracts voters from within the party)). And—horror of horrors—those Democrats might be undecided as to which Democratic candidate they would vote for! They might even attempt to, you know, find out more about the candidates, and even venture so far as to ask questions! I know, the audacity!

One could even presume that the best people to ask questions at a debate among candidates in the Democratic primary election would be actual Democrats.

And boy, MEChA, the “separatist” organization dedicated to overthrowing the U.S. government. I’m not going to bother duplicating the work of Ted at Crooked Timbers, who had a lengthy post on MEChA way back in 2003.

In the past, some Americans have planted south of the border to escape spiraling land prices and to ensure year-round deliveries of crops they can produce only seasonally in the United States. But in the last three years, Mr. Nassif and other growers said, labor force uncertainties have become a major reason farmers have shifted to Mexico.

Market realities, of course:

Tramping through one of his first lettuce crops near Celaya, an agribusiness hub in Guanajuato, Mr. Scaroni is more candid than many farmers about his move here. He had made six trips to Washington, he said, to plead with Congress to provide more legal immigrants for agriculture.

“I have a customer base that demands we produce and deliver product every day,” he said. “They don’t want to hear the excuses.” He acknowledges that wages are much lower in Mexico; he pays $11 a day here as opposed to about $9 an hour in California. But without legal workers in California, he said, “I have no choice but to offshore my operation.”

It’s an interesting dynamic: many of these jobs probably weren’t held by Americans anyway, but they did contribute to the economy. Many of them were likely taxed on their wages. But, regardless of the workers’ status, I can’t believe this is anything but a step in the wrong direction.

Keep an eye on Heath Haussamen’s place tomorrow: Gov. Bill Richardson’s Web site is declaring today that his campaign hit its goals for the fundraising quarter. Many have speculated that, should he out-raise John Edwards, then Richardson would move up into the first tier of presidential candidates. So far, I haven’t seen numbers for anybody besides Obama, who declared more than $30 million (!) raised. Anyhoo, Heath has been following this stuff, and he should have an update before I get back into town.

UPDATE: 6:30 a.m. — LP at NM FBIHOP already has the goods:

But it appears, at least according to the Albuquerque Journal, that Richardson has fallen short of the prediction of outraising Edwards.

The silver lining on this cloud is Edwards’ support has dipped significantly since the first quarter’s numbers, while Richardson’s held steady.  The dark part of the cloud is Richardson’s fundraising is still below that of Edwards and should be significantly farther below that of frontrunners Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Actually, I never crossed the border. I came close a few times, but, well, I had other things to do. The story isn’t quite live on the Daily Press site yet (UPDATE: it is now) but here’s a PDF (Border Issues Part 1).

Oh, and Gold Star for Laura!

Scandal, Richardson’s influence shaped 2006
In New Mexico, 2006 will be remembered for two things politically – widespread scandal in both parties and at all levels of government, and the impressive influence of Gov. Bill Richardson, who raised a record amount of money, won re-election by a record margin, and somehow managed to control state policy, avoid direct imp

Check the list!

In a major policy speech that was perhaps a prelude to a presidential run, N.M. Gov. Bill Richardson outlined today his plan for immigration reform in the United States and said the Democratic-controlled Congress has a duty to act on it in 2007.

During the speech at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., Richardson called on Congress to repeal a law passed earlier this year to create a $6 billion fence along the border.

Check the post for the details.

Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman, three of the largest (contractors), are among the companies that said they would submit bids within two weeks for a multibillion-dollar federal contract to build what the administration calls a “virtual fence” along the nation’s land borders.

Using some of the same high-priced, high-tech tools these companies have already put to work in Iraq and Afghanistan — like unmanned aerial vehicles, ground surveillance satellites and motion-detection video equipment — the military contractors are zeroing in on the rivers, deserts, mountains and settled areas that separate Mexico and Canada from the United States.

Folks around the Web have caught on, but nobody in New Mexico has picked up on the story yet. It strikes me as somewhat odd: rather than spend the money to train Border Patrol agents (most likely at the facility in Artesia), who would then live in border communities and contribute to the local economy, by buying homes and shopping at local (sic) grocery stores, the government is going to spend the cash on high-tech gizmos. I might be more enthusiastic, but here’s how the government’s tech programs have worked out in the past:

The government’s track record in the last decade in trying to buy cutting-edge technology to monitor the border — devices like video cameras, sensors and other tools that came at a cost of at least $425 million — is dismal.

Because of poor contract oversight, nearly half of video cameras ordered in the late 1990′s did not work or were not installed. The ground sensors installed along the border frequently sounded alarms. But in 92 percent of the cases, they were sending out agents to respond to what turned out to be a passing wild animal, a train or other nuisances, according to a report late last year by the homeland security inspector general.

A more recent test with an unmanned aerial vehicle bought by the department got off to a similarly troubling start. The $6.8 million device, which has been used in the last year to patrol a 300-mile stretch of the Arizona border at night, crashed last month.

(emphasis mine)

And for a different take, here’s former New Mexican Kathy Flake on other options for that cash:

I wonder what would happen if we spent billions on job growth programs in Mexico?

That’s an interesting idea! Why don’t we try to fix the source of problem?

Thanks to Needlenose for the heads up.

President Bush’s plan to send thousands of National Guard troops to secure the U.S.-Mexico border is appropriately being met with skepticism. It’s a blatant attempt to appease the conservative base in an election year when his approval rating is headed toward zero.

Haussaman’s got a good entry on the subject, so check it out. Also, I would recommend this post at Think Progress that discusses the poor shape of our National Guard, whose personnel and equipment have been depleted by the War on Terra. And, lest I try to best his comments, read Kevin Drum’s impressions of the speech itself:

The immigration speech seemed like it was mostly just the same ‘ol same ‘ol. Nickel version: Beef up the borders with troops and high tech wizardry but insist that it’s not “militarization”; start up a guest worker program that’s not called a guest worker program; introduce an amnesty program but insist that it’s not an amnesty program (it’s not, it’s not, it’s not!); and crack down on employers who employ illegal immigrants while pretending that they’re actually victims of highly sophisticated fraud rather than willing coconspirators aided and abetted by the business wing of the Republican Party.

I’m wary, however, of rejoicing completely. Bush’s speech, to me, guarantees one thing: a boost in those low poll numbers I told you about earlier. I don’t think it can be avoided, because his numbers are incredibly, fantastically low. And much of the discontent has come from conservatives. With this move to appease the base, I imagine Dubya will see a small jump at least – there’s just no other direction for the numbers to go.

Regardless, the latest news from the White House is, once again, policy that offers a temporary solution. Mexico and Latin America need higher paying jobs for their residents if we’re going to stem the tide of people seeking the American Dream. And putting National Guard troops in a “support role” doesn’t put more Border Patrol agents on the ground, something lawmakers in Congress and border governors have been asking for for years.
UPDATE: More from the Carpetbagger Report:

“Bush aims for middle ground; but misses everyone”

Last night, in his first Oval Office address on domestic public policy, Bush had a few goals in mind. It’s not at all clear he achieved any of them.

Did the proposals win anyone over? Apparently not.

For one thing, the plan isn’t terribly ambitious. When the White House said it wanted to avoid militarizing the border, it meant it — the 6,000 troops won’t even be seizing illegal immigrants or patrolling the border; they’ll instead help provide logistical support and taking on administrative tasks. Conservatives envisioned Guard troops taking on law-enforcement responsibilities, nabbing those who try to enter the country illegally. That’s not Bush’s plan at all. As the LA Times put it, “[T]he president’s big initiative is heavy on symbolism but will be small in scale — and largely invisible on the ground.”

UPDATE II: There’s even more from David Neiwert:

Why, if post-9/11 border security is such a suddenly serious concern, aren’t we sending the Guard to the Canadian border? — It is, after all our longest and most porous border, and its many open spots do not entail dangerous and potentially lethal desert crossings. Perhaps more to the point, the one terrorist who did try to sneak into the USA with explosives as part of a plot to attack a major metropolitan area was caught on the Canadian border.

Ah well. We’re not accustomed to logic from this president anyway, especially when it’s a twofer: a good photo op and rescuing your poll standings with the base are all in the offing. Especially if you can do it with military troops in the picture. Too bad about those cuts in the Border Patrol staffing last year.

UPDATE III: Welcome everybody from the Council on Foreign Relations!

In 1919, the U.S. Bureau of Education commissioned a Spanish translation of “The Star-Spangled Banner,” which the evil liberal assimilationists at the Library of Congress have the temerity to display — in its entirety — on the Library of Congress web site. Where is the outrage over that? Worse, we have The National Anthem Project, chaired by none other than Laura Bush, which offers a mariachi arrangement of the anthem. Dio mio, shouldn’t they be calling for Laura’s head on a stick for this?

UPDATE: Condi joins the assimilationist conspiracy! A Spanish version of the national anthem is also posted on the State Department’s site. Does George know?

Of course, the post was ripe with sarcasm on this issue, because, as usual, the right wing of the Republican Party is taking a stand on shaky ground:

Deep murmurs of approval arose from the crowd yesterday when Bush weighed in on the matter:

I think the National Anthem ought to be sung in English. And I think people who want to be a citizen of this country ought to learn English, and they ought to learn to sing the National Anthem in English.

The profound irony of this nonsense is that, according to a recent Harris Poll, two-thirds of the clamoring crowd don’t even know the English words to the first verse of “The Star-Spangled Banner” (much less the other verses) and thus have been shouting huzzahs to Bush for suggesting that perhaps they shouldn’t even be citizens. Or maybe this rule about learning to sing the anthem in English doesn’t apply to, you know, white people.

The hypocrisy is beyond funny in the immigration debate. I’ve heard several people recently reduce the debate to the word “illegal,” while the Wednesday Morning Quarterback made a similar case yesterday:

OK, Jerry…so if you are one of those people in this country who supports actually securing the nation’s border as well as requiring all people in this country to FOLLOW THE LAW whether you are Nordic, Asian, or Hispanic, than according to you, those people are “AGAINST the more than 11 million illegal immigrants in the United states”.

The WMQB, like millions of Americans, believe that laws are laws…we either follow them and enforce them or we are nothing.

But to reduce the discussion over the legality and the enforcement of our current laws to defining people LIKE US as being “AGAINST” 11 million people is absolutely shameful…

Meanwhile, we can reduce the discussion about immigration in this country to their “illegal” status? What of the discussion regarding the employers who hire illegal immigrants? Don’t we enforce laws about the hiring of illegal immigrants? What happens to the agriculture industry, not to mention construction and hospitality, when all those illegal immigrants go home or are incarcerated? The WMQB is right: this is not a simple discussion. It should not be treated that way.