The Blue State

NJ-Sen: Video) Menendez exposes GOP's weak cargo security bill

This is how to be strong on Defense!

New Jersey Democratic Senator Bob Menendez gave a very important speech on the Senate floor today that exposed the clear differences between where the two parties stand on port security.  Republican Senator Norm Coleman introduced a bill that does absolutely nothing to change the fact that only 5% of all cargo that enters the United States is inspected.  The bill calls for 5% of the cargo to be "screened."  Menendez explained the fundamental difference between "screening" cargo and "scanning" cargo.  Also, Menendez asked why we are waiting for the cargo to reach U.S. soil before being inspected? 

Right before the election, the GOP are trying to introduce a bunch of national security bills for political reasons even though none of them, including this one, will change the fact that the Republican Senate majority has dropped the ball on port security.  Here is part of Senator Bob Menendez's (D-NJ) speech on the floor:

Click to watch video clip << (YouTube)

--- Partial Transcript ---

MENENDEZ: "If we adopt the Gentleman from Minnesota's amendment, we're still saying, 'Okay, five percent is something we're willing to live with.'  At the end of the day we don't move to a plan of a hundred percent scanning of the nation's cargo."

"...It is very important to understand that when we keep saying 'screen' -- well, screen means looking at a manifest cargo...put(ing) it into a mathematical equation that says, 'Alright, let's look at this five percent of cargo.'  But that's not scanning one-hundred percent of what comes into the nation.  Let America not be confused by that."

"...also, this is about scanning it abroad.  When we wait until it comes into a port of the United States, if it has a nuclear device in it, it's a little late...We need to be doing that scanning abroad."

Leaders like Bob Menendez, who actually think through the problem pragmatically in order to find a solution, are the kinds of individuals we need in positions of power keeping the American people safe.  No offense to NJ Republican Senate candidate Thomas Kean Jr.  But I think Bob Menendez is proving quite clearly why he is smart, competent, nuanced, analytical, and deserves reelection.

GOP Congress ticks off White House on border security front

For anyone that has been following the immigration battle in the Senate, and the utter frustration coming from the White House as a result, the latest Senate bill passed that diverts some Iraq war money to the U.S. border patrol is enough to make you hold your head and laugh out loud.  You simply cannot put into words how angry White House officials have been at GOP leaders like Bill Frist over the immigration dispute.  John McCain and Ted Kennedy had a bill all worked out -- a bill that the White House supported.  Now immigration reform is being stalled, and the diverting of $1.9 billion worth of Iraq war money to step up border security efforts is making the White House lose its temper:

..the White House said the bill contains too manyitems that are "unrelated to the war or emergency hurricane reliefneeds." It said a final House-Senate compromise on it "must remainfocused on addressing urgent national priorities while maintainingfiscal discipline."

The White House has pretty much lost all control of the Legislative Branch as we approach the 2006 midterm elections.

But surprisingly, the vote was not supported by a number of Democrats, including Hillary Clinton:

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., said Gregg's cuts would "take money from troop pay, body armorand even joint improvised explosive device defeat fund. Now that is afalse choice and it is a wrong choice."

Republican Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire authored the bill, and gave this reasoning for it:

"Fighting the war in Iraq is critical to this war on terrorism.Fighting the war in Afghanistan is critical to this war on terrorism.But I have to think equally important is making sure that our bordersare secure. That is as big an issue as we have today in the area offighting the war on terrorism. We can't be effective on that issueunless we have the resources and the people in order to take care ofsecuring the border."

I happen to think that Gregg is right in what he said regarding the two issues being equal.  But are they related?  In other words, is it right to take a cut funds from an issue and appropriate them to an issue that is completely separate?  Probably not.  So I can see where Hillary is coming from.  But such a bill shows how the White House has completely lost its control over the Senate and the Congress.