Rahmbo Still Has a DREAM & Wants to Make It Come True in Chicago

In order to regain his liberal cred and get elected in the extremely liberal city of Chicago, Mayoral candidate and Obama's former Chief-of-Staff is looking to enact part of the federal DREAM Act in the Windy City, since it failed in the last Congress' lame duck session :

In recent months, former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has been widely criticized by immigration reform advocates who say he did not throw enough support behind the DREAM Act when he was in Washington. Emanuel has disputed those claims, and is now out to prove just how much he supports giving the children of immigrants a chance to attend college in the United States.

The Chicago for Rahm campaign issued a press release Thursday evening touting Emanuel's plan for immigration reform...in Chicago.

"Just because Congress has yet to pass the Dream Act doesn't mean we will wait for progress in Chicago," Emanuel said in a statement. "All children in Chicago deserve to have access to a quality education, and we will make sure they have that opportunity."

Emanuel's plan would not provide a path to citizenship as a national DREAM Act would, but would "allow these children to access the same financial aid opportunities as every other child," according to his campaign.

Of course, he is debating that this is about helping young people to afford to go to college by giving them small-interest loans. He plans to pay for this by "raising" it from "business and civic leaders".

I just wonder what "raising" means. Does this mean some sort of tax, or is he expecting them to freely give it to the city for the cause?

If the Chicago DREAM Act comes to be, Emanuel's campaign said a Chicagoan must meet the following criteria:

* Moved to Chicago before the age of 16...
* Resided in Chicago for at least five consecutive years prior to application for DREAM Status.
* Be a student in good standing at an elementary or high school in Chicago - public, private or religious.
* Be between the ages of 12 and 25 at the time of application.
* Be a law-abiding Chicagoan.

There may be some that will contest this on the grounds that American tax money may go to help illegal immigrants, but this will be largely academic, as Chicago is too liberal for this not to pass. I'd be shocked, if it did fail.

However, I'm putting the cart before the horse here because he hasn't even been elected, yet.

Reid: If Republicans or Anyone Else Opposes DREAM Act Than They're Insane or Something

If you could get past all of the all-too nauseating fluff piece from the New York Times that all-but expressed their undying love for Senator Harry Reid, (I barely could. I throw up a little in my mouth. Umm...forget that I said that.) You would've found something: a very noteworthy quote from the Senate Majority leader, which they conveniently hid down at the bottom of the love letter....I mean the totally unbiased, right down the middle news article.....Yeah, that's it:

For his part, Mr. Reid predicted, “We’ll get some things done,” naming comprehensive immigration legislation as one possibility.

If Republicans’ vulnerability among Hispanic voters does not persuade them to compromise, he noted, “they have real problems with their mental capacity.”

So, basically, all those that disagree with him are insane, he is the sane one. Of course, what was I thinking?

Of course, the New York Times reporter glossed right over this and would rather tell you what a swell guy Reid is. I'm shocked....shocked. I tell you.

Breaking: DREAM Fails 55-41

It wasn't much of a surprise, but the DREAM Act failed to get the 60 votes needed to pass the bill:

A measure that would have offered provisional legal status to some adults who came to America illegally as children failed to advance in a Senate vote Saturday.

Democratic backers of the legislation fell short of the 60 votes to move the DREAM Act legislation forward. Democratic Sens. Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Jon Tester of Montana, Max Baucus of Montana, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, and Ben Nelson of Nebraska voted against bringing the bill to the floor; Republican Sens. Richard Lugar, Lisa Murkowski, and Robert Bennett voted for it.

The vote was 55-41.

The DREAM (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors) Act would have allowed illegal immigrants with a high school diploma or a GED to apply for conditional U.S. status if they are under the age of 30 and arrived the U.S. before the age of 16. After a long process -- including two years of service in the military or enrollment in college -- they would then have been eligible to apply for legal immigrant status.

Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, who led GOP opposition against the legislation, called the measure “amnesty” and argued that it "incentivizes" illegal immigration. GOP opponents also noted that it would have allowed some illegal immigrants with criminal records to gain citizenship

Nothing about this vote was too surprising. It was close, and all of the likely suspects voted the for and against the bill. So, the DREAM should be dead, at least for this session of Congress.

Senate Republicans Warn Reid of Nuclear Option If Tax Cuts, Budget Aren't Dealt With First

The Republicans in the Senate sent a letter the the Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid warning him that the Republicans will throw a monkey wrench in his agenda, if the extension of the Bush's tax cuts and a federal budget isn't passed before even discussing the liberals' wishlist:

Dear Leader Reid,

The nation’s unemployment level, stuck near 10 percent, is unacceptable to Americans.  Senate Republicans have been urging Congress to make private-sector job creation a priority all year.  President Obama in his first speech after the November election said “we owe” it to the American people to “focus on those issues that affect their jobs.”  He went on to say that Americans “want jobs to come back faster.”  Our constituents have repeatedly asked us to focus on creating an environment for private-sector job growth; it is time that our constituents’ priorities become the Senate’s priorities.

For that reason, we write to inform you that we will not agree to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to any legislative item until the Senate has acted to fund the government and we have prevented the tax increase that is currently awaiting all American taxpayers.  With little time left in this Congressional session, legislative scheduling should be focused on these critical priorities.  While there are other items that might ultimately be worthy of the Senate's attention, we cannot agree to prioritize any matters above the critical issues of funding the government and preventing a job-killing tax hike.

Given our struggling economy, preventing the tax increase and providing economic certainty should be our top priority.  Without Congressional action by December 31, all American taxpayers will be hit by an increase in their individual income-tax rates and investment income through the capital gains and dividend rates.  If Congress were to adopt the President’s tax proposal to prevent the tax increase for only some Americans, small businesses would be targeted with a job-killing tax increase at the worst possible time.  Specifically, more than 750,000 small businesses will see a tax increase, which will affect 50 percent of small-business income and nearly 25 percent of the entire workforce.  The death tax rate will also climb from zero percent to 55 percent, which makes it the top concern for America’s small businesses.  Republicans and Democrats agree that small businesses create most new jobs, so we ought to be able to agree that raising taxes on small businesses is the wrong remedy in this economy.  Finally, Congress still needs to act on the “tax extenders” and the alternative minimum tax “patch,” all of which expired on December 31, 2009.

We look forward to continuing to work with you in a constructive manner to keep the government operating and provide the nation’s small businesses with economic certainty that the job-killing tax hike will be prevented.

###
SENATE REPUBLICAN COMMUNICATIONS CENTER

This is going to be a bit of a risky move for the Republicans. The left has already leaped onto this claiming that the Republicans are obstructionists. However, I believe that this will ultimately be seen as a bold, but needed move by most of Americans.

The tax cuts and the budget are far more urgent than repealing DADT, START, DREAM Act, or anything else that the Democrats can up with in between now and the end of the year.

Business, especially small businesses, are waiting to hear from Washington. Until they do, they will know how much their taxes will be next month, and they will be holding off on doing any major hiring until they know exactly how much taxes will should be taken out of their hiring budget.

Businesses aren't the only ones that will have their taxes go up in January, if nothing is done. The taxes of ALL Americans will go up in less than a month. Since we're already two months into the fiscal year, the budget is already way past due, too.

Considering that for a bill to pass it must go through the House, Senate, and Congressional Reconciliation before it even gets to the White House, there is only a limited amount of items that can actually be achieved in just three weeks. They won't be able to address them all, no matter how much they say otherwise.

The only reason why they are pushing for the more liberal bills to be passed ahead of the tax or budget bills is because it'll be much harder for them to pass it in a month, when the Republicans gain the House and a few seats in the Senate. If the election results were reversed, and the Democrats would have huge gains, it would be a completely different story. The Democrats would be waiting until January for all of those non-essential bills. They are playing politics and pandering to their base at the expense of our economy and all of our livelihoods.