Initially embargoed pending negotiation of publication. More details later.

Let’s Get Real About EFCA

The United States Senate is poised to vote on S. 1041 “The Employee Free Choice Act” sometime in the next few days. Proving its bipartisan popularity, the bill cleared the House of Representatives with a large margin. Minority Whip Roy Blunt, in a pen and pad session with political reporters, warned that it would not be a free vote, and that there would be consequences for any Republican who broke ranks. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Minority Whip are now making similar threats, but the bill faces an uphill battle in the Senate. The Republican opposition to this bill is ostensibly about preserving the integrity of elections, but in reality, it’s about continuing to represent the interests of their corporate donors.

To review, the most controversial part of the bill re-introduces a “card-check” procedure. What this would do is make it easier for employees seeking to form a union to get straight to the certification process. If an employee signs a document indicating that he is in favor of a union being formed, it’s counted as a vote for the union. If a majority of the employees sign, then the vote is considered to have occurred, and the union proceeds straight to the National Labor Relations Board for certification. Other provisions of the bill provide for increased penalties for employers who violate labor negotiation laws and for making mediation and arbitration easier to reach for first time contracts.

The Republicans in the House and the Senate have few problems with the latter two provisions, but the first is the one that has them rallying the troops. Card-checks make union organizing much easier. Currently, the law makes it all but impossible for employees to form a union. Employers are able to harass and punish union organizers, prohibit them from any on-site organizing activity, subject workers to incredible amounts of compulsory anti-union propaganda during work hours and fire any employee who seems to remotely think that belonging to a union might possibly be something he’d consider considering. In addition to on-site employer harassment, employees are further disadvantaged by the fact that the only times that they can meet to talk about organizing are after work and off-site. Apparently, a group of people who’ve just worked a twelve hour shift in a slaughterhouse are expected to get together for chai lattes at the local Starbucks and talk about their options and 401(k)’s.

Republicans claim that they prefer the status quo in that it preserves a secret ballot process. After all, one of the hallmarks of a democracy is that no one knows how you voted. This doesn’t quite work, though, for two primary reasons. First of all, a place of work is not identical to a society or government. Short of being tried for treason and expelled, there is no real way for the government to punish someone for politicking. It’s a lot harder to legally find someone a traitor than it is to fire him because you don’t like his thoughts. Secondly, management already works by a card-check system, and Republicans consider that to be a hallmark of corporate efficiency and a strength of the American economic system. The difference is that in the corporate world, they’re called “proxies.” Shareholders are constantly signing over their voting authority to other shareholders to create large coalitions and get things done. What’s good for the goose isn’t good for the gander?

Assuming that we grant their argument is in good faith, however, there are other objections that come into play. Not all votes are best left in the dark and protected by secrecy. Perhaps the legislators in question would prefer it this way, but would anyone be happy if the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate were able to conduct their votes anonymously? Would any shareholder in any corporation feel comfortable with letting board members vote anonymously? When it comes to dictating policy for the country and for the company, we demand accountability and transparency from the voters. Why shouldn’t workers be able to demand the same accountability?

In closing, it’s worth investigating a thought experiment. Let us imagine that in the 2004 election, the Democratic party were able to take all the undecided voters in the country and get to them at their place of work. Let us further imagine that all of them were forced to listen to Democratic negative ads on the Muzak and be subjected to daily viewings of Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11. Furthermore, the Democratic Party hired public relations firms and strategic consultants to figure out how to bully those undecideds who hadn’t been brainwashed into voting Democratic. The Republicans would only be able to approach these voters at home, after hours and on their own efforts. Any attempt to talk to them at work would result in firing and excessive hounding. Would any Republican find this fair? It’s time to put the pretense behind us and pass the Employee Free Choice Act.

Notate bene this was initially embargoed pending negotiation for publication. More on the details later.

The Senator From Punjab

Apparently, the transformational politics of Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) bid for President of The United States of America is changing more than who can make a viable run for the office. Of course, all changes bring other changes, and the most recent one that Obama brought is changing who the evil, all controlling bugaboo minority in American politics is. Thanks to Obama, millions of Jews in America can sleep peacefully, knowing that the new bogeymen are Indians. According to an unsigned document that Obama’s campaign released on Friday, Hillary Clinton is not the senior Democratic Senator from New York. She is, apparently, the sole Democratic Senator from Punjab.

Punjab is a state in northwest India, not a state in the northeast of the United States. The headline on the document reads, “Hillary Clinton (D-Punjab)'s Personal Financial and Political Ties.” It then goes on to list several things pulled from public documents, such as newspaper accounts and financial disclosure forms, each of which shows Bill or Hillary Clinton representing their Indian constituents, accepting campaign contributions from companies that do business in India or investing in Indian companies. The language used to describe these activities, however, would make a tabloid journalist blush. In accepting $60,000 in campaign contributions from Cisco Systems, Clinton is not taking money from a pioneering software firm that has created hundreds of thousands of jobs, created millions, if not billions, of dollars of wealth and has created the software that enables e-commerce. Instead, Senator Clinton is cozying up with a group of robber barons who “laid off American workers to hire Indian techies.”

The rest of the document reads similarly, and takes the next step into conspiracy theory paranoia by creating a nefarious cast of characters, including respected hotelier and Democratic activist Sant Singh Satwal. Satwal is an immigrant who has built an empire of hotels, a living example of the American dream. He is also from Punjab.

Let us review the number of economic and political fallacies in this document. Initially, New York City has the greatest number of Indian immigrant families in the country. Senator Clinton is doing her job by advocating for her constituency. Moreover, trade with India helps bring a valuable ally in the global war on terror closer to the United States. We have been dealing with Islamist terrorists for perhaps twenty years. India has been dealing with them since before a group of Puritans set out on the Mayflower. On the economic level, trade with India helps reduce costs of business, making products cheaper and more available to more people. More Americans are able to consume products that were once playthings of the rich, and more Americans are able to use cheaper costs as a springboard to starting and expanding their own businesses. Global free trade has been the single most empowering force for Americans and their trading partners alike. Economies are not zero-sum: we all do better when we all do better.

However, this has never been about good governance nor has it been about economics. Over the last ten years, as the economy has become more globally integrated and Jews have become more accepted in society, the new bogeyman has become the Indian. Whether it’s people grumbling about telemarketing centers, manufactured goods, skilled artisans and executives coming to America, the Indian is the latest person to occupy the role of “foreigner who threatens American workers and has no loyalty to America.” One could very well expect that the next document will mention the “Hindu Occupied Government” or accusations that Indian-Americans are more loyal to India than they are to America.

The sad thing is that to date, Obama truly has run a transformational campaign. He has reached out to traditional Democratic constituencies, but has done so in a manner not seen since, well, Bill Clinton. He has offered up idea after idea, and has spoken inconvenient truths to both Democratic and Republican groups. Instead of continuing in his twenty-first century campaign, however, Obama has chosen to go back to nineteenth century Know Nothing politics. And just as the Know Nothings were happy to accept the cheap labor of Irish immigrants, so too is Barack Obama happy to accept the money and support of the incredible South Asians for the Obama movement.

Following the public outcry and disgust for his tactic, Senator Obama made what political observers call a “non-apology apology.” He said, “I thought it was stupid and caustic and not only didn't reflect my view of the complicated issue of outsourcing.” Senator Obama would be well advised to go back and read the document that his campaign is issuing on his behalf. It’s not about trade and economic dynamism. The document stops just short of constructing a hulking, decadent “Beast From The East” coming to The West to steal and corrupt. (Imagine the Persians from 300, only answering telephones and writing computer code.) If it were just about economics, the document wouldn’t have had the desired salacious effect. After all, who gets worked up about policy details and numbers? For someone who’s seemingly running on the politics of unity and hope, Senator Obama’s latest jab against the thousands of Indian-Americans is nothing more than the same, tired old politics of division and fear.

Dheeraj Chand is a political analyst in Washington, D.C. He maintains a website and blog at http://www.dheerajchand.com . He has family ties to Punjab, a state in northwest India.

Originally appearing at Talk Radio News Service

The White House Gaggle 19 January, 2007

By Dheeraj Chand

President’s Schedule

President Bush had his usual meetings and briefings, and will continue to do so through the day. The President will record his radio address today. The topic is health care, and we can expect to see previews of some of the policy initiatives from the State of the Union. At 1.20 p.m., the President will be giving an interview to David Jackson of USA Today. He is leaving for Camp David on Saturday morning. Secretaries Gates and Rice will be joining him there, but are not traveling with him.

The Week Ahead

Monday: The President will make his annual call to the participants in the "March for Life". He will make this call from Camp David. He will then return to the White House.

Tuesday: The President will address Congress for the annual State of the Union speech.

Wednesday and Thursday are still to be determined.

Friday: The President will deliver remarks to the House Republican Conference at 12.15 p.m.

Saturday: The President will attend the annual Alfalfa Club dinner.

The State of the Union

Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino spent quite a bit of time talking about the State of the Union address. She was emphatic about the global, positive vision that the President intended to set out about Iraq and other policy issues. He intends to discuss his surge strategy during the address, but in global terms, as part of the larger war on terror, and will most likely not use the address as a forum from which to rebut specific arguments against his strategy. Perino said that she didn’t expect that the weekend meetings with Secretaries Gates and Rice would affect the content or substance of the address.

Iraq

Perino had not heard about Talebani’s remarks that he would be willing to come to an understanding with Iran, and had no comment.

Chinese Anti-Satellite Weapon

The White House has conveyed its displeasure and concern to the Chinese government through diplomatic channels but has not yet heard back. Japan and Australia have also expressed concern. This is in response to the successful test of the satellite disabling weapon that the Chinese have been attempting to develop for almost thirty years.

Originally appearing at Talk Radio News Service

White House Gaggle 18 January, 2007

By Dheeraj Chand

President’s Schedule

President Bush had his usual morning meetings and briefings this morning.
Throughout the day, he will be giving interviews with different regional
media outlets. The President is headed to Camp David on Saturday, coming back to D.C. on Monday.

The Regional Media Interviews

Press Secretary Snow was asked which regional media outlets would be given
interviews. He responded that the major ones were Tribune, Cox, Sinclair
and others. He did not clarify the length of the interviews or the subject matter.

Maliki’s Statements on U.S. Funding

Asked about Maliki’s comments to the press that the United States
government didn’t give enough money to Iraqi troops for guns, bullets and
other supplies to accomplish their tactical objectives, Snow disputed that
characterization of the remark, saying that it was one comment taken in
isolation. Both Prime Minster Maliki and President Bush are very serious about a secure Iraq, Snow continued.

Hussein Hanging

Press Secretary Snow said that President Bush was not insulting the
government of Iraq during his interview with Jim Lehrer, and that the
disagreement over the hanging of Saddam Hussein was just a disagreement
between sovereign governments.

Agenda for the Weekend

Snow said that the agenda item for now is continuing work on the State of
The Union.

President’s New Strategy

Asked whether or not the White House regards Iraqi P.M. Maliki is fully on
board with the President’s new strategy, Snow enthusiastically responded,
"Oh, yeah!" He then said that the situation in front of us is that a
foreign head of state wants to take responsibility for political,
diplomatic and security issues of his state, just like any other leader.
They’re moving ahead as we speak, making progress towards critical
legislation like the hydrocarbon law, de-Baathification, etc.

Republican National Committee

Asked again about the RNC meetings taking place, and the anger of Sunbelt
and southern border states with the appointment of Sen. Mel Martinez, Snow
retorted that he is certain that the RNC is going to ratify Martinez and
Duncan. He responded to the specific complaints about Martinez, that he
is perceived as being pro-immigration, by saying that the President is
aware the that the GOP functions as any political party does, with
agreement and disagreement, and will move forward with great leadership.

Senate Activity

Snow said that the White House does not yet have a statement of
administrative policy on the Senate Finance passed small business tax
cuts.

Responding to questions about the veto threat on the energy bill because
of tax increases and spending cuts, Snow said that the President
doesn’t care for tax hikes. One of the great miracles of modern times, the
robust economy in light of historically unprecedented shocks, is largely
due to strategic tax cuts, and as a general policy, this administration
doesn’t care for tax cuts.

Originally appearing at Talk Radio News Service

White House Gaggle 17 January, 2007

By Dheeraj Chand

President’s Schedule

President Bush had his usual meetings and briefings, and will continue to do so through the day. The President went to the National Institute of Health labs today in Bethesda, Maryland, to attend a roundtable discussion on cancer prevention. In attendance were also Secretary Leavitt from the Department of Health and Human Services and several prominent oncologists. At 1.15 p.m., the President is meeting with a group of Republican legislators to discuss Iraq.

President Bush’s Recent Interviews

Asked about why the subject of Iran has not come up in any of the President’s recent interviews, and whether or not this was the result of a White House ban on the topic, Press Secretary Snow categorically stated that this was not the case. He said, tongue in cheek, that the White House would never dare dictate to Jim Lehrer or CBS News what they may or may not ask.

Sentiment on Iraq

Snow was asked whether it is the case that the President agrees that he and his advisors messed up when he says that he agrees with public sentiment that things are not going well in Iraq. He responded that the President agrees that the Baghdad security plan didn’t work as planned and that it is time to try new things in order to secure a free, stable and democratic Iraq that will be a valuable ally in the global war on terror.

Maliki Government Relations

Snow said that he is unsure of the last time that there was any diplomatic communication between the United States and the Maliki government, and that he’d imagine that it went through the normal diplomatic channels.

The Cancer Roundtable

Snow said that as a survivor of cancer himself, he is very moved by the President’s commitment to this issue, and that the reason that President Bush is focusing on this issue today is that there has been a lot of progress in the field and that it’s important to focus on programs that are doing well. He would not comment on funding priorities or the impending State of the Union, but he did say that the President is hopeful that the combined efforts of public and private sector actors would help the lives of the American people.

Oppositional Congress

Snow backed away from as many questions about the non-binding "Sense of the Senate" resolution as possible. He reiterated that Congress should ask itself what message it is sending with such a resolution. Then, when asked what he thinks that an appropriate role for Congress would be, if passing resolutions of disagreement is seemingly inappropriate. Snow responded that as far as passing resolutions goes, they’re free to do what they wish, but that they should be mindful of the message. Each branch of government has different responsibilities, and the courts have been very consistent in ensuring that executive power remains with the executive branch.
Snow clarified that the concerns that Congress should be mindful of are the following: First, the U.S commitment to success and peace for Iraq, second; that those who commit acts of violence in Iraq are mindful of our commitment, and third, that our international allies know that we remain committed to these goals. He said that he couldn’t comment on threats to cut off funding, as those bills don’t yet exist.

Israel/Syria

Press Secretary Snow had no comment for the second day in a row on the Ha’Aretz story claiming that the United States squashed an agreement of understanding between the governments of Syria and Israel.

War Protests

Responding to the protests of active-duty soldiers on Capitol Hill yesterday, Snow said that he understands that all wars are unpopular with some people, but that one could sense the overwhelming support of the armed forces by the high re-enlistment numbers and the thousands of people joining up for their first tours.

Originally appearing at Talk Radio News Service

White House Gaggle 5 January, 2007

By Dheeraj Chand

President’s Schedule

The President had his regular morning briefings, and will have his regular
meetings throughout the course of the day. He will record the radio

address this week on the subject of the budget. He will also continue his
congressional outreach meetings during the day.

Personnel Changes

Asked whether or not the personnel changes reflected the President’s
opinions on how the war in Iraq has proceeded and his opinions on the
prior staff’s competence, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow replied that there are no
implications and no one should make any inferences about President Bush’s
pleasure or displeasure. They have needed a Deputy at the Department of State,
but they were more concerned with finding the right person than they were
with merely filling the slot. Snow went on to discuss the
qualifications of Admiral McConnell, citing his experience, creativity,
intelligence, management capacity and his extensive contacts and good
relations with the intelligence community. Asked whether or not the
personnel changes in the intelligence, diplomatic and military are part of
President Bush’s Iraq policy-making process, Snow reminded the
press that he was not going to comment on the nominations and appointments
until after the President had announced them. He did, however, discuss
John Negroponte’s vast diplomatic experience. He also clarified that
Harriet Miers was not fired, and that she had resigned.

Meetings with Congress

Press Secretary Snow opted not to name which Representatives and Senators would
be meeting with the President over the course of the day, although he did
say that these meetings would continue over the weekend. He also declined
to comment on what the President and legislators would be discussing.

Relationship with an Opposition Congress

When asked what kind of bills the President would veto, Snow
replied that it would be irresponsible and dangerous for him to threaten a
veto on bills that haven’t been filed, yet, and tantamount to tossing a
gauntlet to Congress.

Originally appearing at Talk Radio News Service

White House Gaggle 15 December, 2006

By Dheeraj Chand

Special Notes

Today was Deputy Press Secretary Tony Frattow's first gaggle. He was formerly press spokesman at the Department of Treasury. Chatter in the press room said that it was comparable to Scott McClellan’s.

The President’s Schedule

President Bush had a foreign leader call with Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah. They discussed the general political climate and circumstances in the Middle East, their mutual hopes for a two-state, peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Bush expressed his regret that outside actors are interfering with the Iranian nuclear proliferation issue. He had his daily briefings at 7.30 a.m. After his briefings, he’ll be recording his weekly radio address. The topic is the economy, and we can expect that there will be a strong message to Congress on the subject of earmarks. At 8 am, there will be an hour long ceremony for recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Frattow joked that Tony Snow was excited about the ceremony, as it would give him a chance to discuss "guitar pickin’ and slingin" with B.B. King.

After the ceremony, the President will be at the Pentagon for a full armed services review.

Week Ahead

On Tuesday, December 18, there are no public events. On Wednesday, Bush will sign the tax extenders package, which also has all kinds of other legislation attached to it. He will also sign HR 6407: The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. On Thursday, there are no public events. On Friday, President and Mrs. Bush will attend a holiday service project at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. He will then leave for Camp David, where they will spend Christmas. They will leave for Crawford, TX, on the 26th of December, returning to D.C. on the New Year.

The Pentagon Ceremony

During the Q&A, Frattow informed us that Bush was expected to praise Rumsfeld at the ceremony, and to thank him for his six years of service and vision in restructuring and modernizing the military.

The Iraq Body Count

Helen Thomas wanted to know if the President was made aware with any regularity of the number of Iraqis who were injured or killed. Frattow had no answer.

Secretary of State Rice’s Statements about Syria

Frattow clarified that Secretary of State Rice said nothing new about the United States’ diplomatic position towards Syria and Iran, and that furthermore, the White House was not going to comment on specific recommendations of the ISG.

The Iraq Study Group

When asked about Bush’s plans to learn more before the Iraq policy speech, Frattow told us that there were no public events, but that Bush met with his military and diplomatic advisors with great frequency. The White House had no information on what other allied governments think of the Iraq Study Group’s report, but Bush and Blair have discussed it.

Saddam Hussein’s Nephew

Saddam Hussein’s favorite nephew escaped from prison this summer, and now wants to lead the Baathist rejectionists in Iraq. The White House had no comment on this.

Governor Bill Richardson

Frattow didn’t know that Governor Bill Richardson (D-NM) was meeting with North Korean officials, and as such, had no comment.

Same-sex parenting

When asked whether or not Bush had flip-flopped on the issue of same-sex parenting, Frattow said that he had no idea on previous statements, but that the entire White House was happy for the Cheneys. He then tried to avoid the question by saying that the President believed in marriage being a unique institution between a man and a woman.

When asked whether or not Bush had flip-flopped on the issue of same-sex parenting, Frattow said that he had no idea on previous statements, but that the entire White House was happy for the Cheneys. He then tried to avoid the question by saying that the President believed in marriage being a unique institution between a man and a woman.

Notate bene this originally ran in 2005, but very few people know about it, so I am moving it to the front page for a little while. -dx

Originally printed in The Providence Journal.

The Best and The Brightest: The Wrong Immigration Crackdown

AUSTIN -- Immigration is the most explosive issue in U.S. politics. While the controversy rages over how to deal with the problems created by illegal immigration, legal-immigration issues are in danger of being derailed in the frenzied political atmosphere.

On Sept. 15, the State Department released a shocking document that was barely noticed. Innocuously entitled "Visa Bulletin for October 2005," this document would normally be of interest only to bureaucrats and immigration lawyers and their clients. But this particular bulletin announced a five-year ban on all EB-1(3) petitions from people born in India: a radical change in policy that will badly hurt the U.S. economy and our diplomatic relations with a nuclear power and key ally in the war on terrorism.

An EB-1(3) visa is a petition that lets someone who works as an executive for a foreign branch of a multinational company immigrate to the United States to continue his or her job. The visa is normally used as a way of bringing talented employees from abroad to continue their professional development at the higher levels of management in the United States.

This is one of the most difficult immigration petitions to seek. It is used by firms who are capable of retaining expert counsel to navigate the process, which includes demonstrating the existence and viability of the company and the business necessity of the employee.

Such executives help develop these businesses in the United States, contributing to the local economy and creating hundreds of thousands of jobs for American workers.

In fiscal 2004, according to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service, 38,443 employment-based visas were issued to people of Indian birth, of which 8,363 were for managerial, executive or professional careers. The rest went to craftsmen, artisans, educators, and other workers.

Unfortunately, the Immigration Service doesn't publish the number of petitions denied or pending, so we have no way of knowing how many businesses have been frustrated in their efforts to bring their top employees to the United States.

The new ban means that all petitions filed after Oct. 1 will have to wait five years to be considered. This is sheer lunacy on the part of the State Department.

While a fierce controversy rages over immigration in this country, these are people who, we can all agree, should be welcomed with open arms.

They are the best and brightest, coming here to work for established businesses that are prosperous enough to have multinational operations. They are at the top of their fields, and work tirelessly to expand their companies here. Telling companies that they can't bring top executives home to corporate headquarters is a senseless policy, which will inhibit the growth of thousands of major U.S. companies and offer one more incentive, along with burdensome taxes and regulations, for corporate flight to offshore havens.

On the diplomatic level, we know that economic relations are an essential component of strong international alliances. After a mixed bag during the Cold War and the early Clinton years, India and the United States have finally built a fledgling level of trust, due largely to economic interdependence.

When large sums of money move back and forth between two countries, the two governments have to work together. This association is strengthened by the personal and cultural ties that develop as the populations of both countries become more aware of and connected to each other through commerce.

Economic and cultural ties to India, the world's largest democracy, and the region's one stable democracy, can only advance strategic U.S. interests in Asia.

We don't know why the U.S. State Department has made this decision (it has kept its internal deliberations private), but keeping highly skilled and educated people out of the country is no way to help the American economy.

Immigration is a complex and emotional issue, but even in this politically charged environment, highly skilled corporate executives should be immigrants whom everyone can support.

To advance the economic, diplomatic, and security interests of the United States, this misguided policy should be reversed.

Dheeraj Chand is president of Desis for Texas, a political-action group promoting the interests of South Asian - Americans.