Sen. Jim DeMint, Sen. Jeff Sessions and Ed Meese (Reagan Distinguished Fellow of Public Policy at the Heritage Foundation and former Attorney General) held a press conference this afternoon concerning what they consider the essential requirements for immigration reform.  Below is a list of principles they put forth to be a measuring stick for what sort of legislation ought or ought not to pass. 

America's immigration system must be a national strength and not a strategic vulnerability.

The rule of law requires the fair, firm, and consistent enforcement of the law, and immigration is no exception.

Those who enter, remain in, and work in the country illegally are in ongoing and extensive violation our immigration laws.

Each nation has the responsibility— and obligation—to determine its own conditions for immigration, naturalization, and citizenship.

Immigration policy should be a fiscal and economic benefit not only for immigrants, but also for the nation as a whole.

A temporary worker program must be temporary, market-oriented, and feasible.

The principles above were derived from earlier research done by the Heritage Foundation.  All three men noted the great help that Heritage had been in taking these principles from earlier research and making them extremely applicable to the current situation in Congress.  You can read the backgrounder here for more information. 

The Heritage Foundation has produced a new video discussing what would be the largest tax increase in history.  Go HERE to find out more!

Ben Lieberman of the Heritage Foundation is featured in the latest Heritage in Focus video on YouTube.  Lieberman speaks about global warming, sorting fact from fiction.  Click here for the video. 

Yesterday afternoon, FreedomWorks held a press conference on Capitol Hill in support of the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights.  According to the FreedomWorks Web site, the plan has four pillars:

1) Spending caps to stop out of control budget growth.
2) Preserving Social Security money just for Social Security, not for a Congressional slush fund.
3) Sun-setting the entire federal tax code to hold budgets accountable to outcomes.
4) A balanced budget without raising taxes.

Senator Jim DeMint and former majority leader Dick Armey were joined by several others (including Alison Fraser of the Heritage Foundation) who spoke to how valuable this plan would be to the conservative movement.  Fraser has written extensively on the subject of government spending and most recently published a paper on the topic mentioned above.  Her paper on the RSC's Taxpayers Bill of Rights can be found here.   

Photos from the press conference are here via Rob Bluey. 

 

This Thursday, President Bush will take a trip to Latin America.  The plane ride in Air Force One ought to be cozy, but once he hits the ground it's likely to be a bumpy ride.  This CNN article shows a little of what awaits the President on his trip south:

       "The fiery leader of oil-rich Venezuela, who has labeled Bush "the devil" and dismisses him as the "little gentleman from the North," plans to play to this discontent. He has called for protests during Bush's stay and is leading a rally in Argentina when the president visits neighboring Uruguay."

Not exactly Spring Break in Panama.  But of the five countires he is visiting, the President has his biggest opportunity in our nearest neighbor to the south - Mexico.  This country is caught up in the mix of what is some of the most current inflammatory political issues.  Dialogue concerning immigration and national security tend to find their way back to Mexico.  Helle Dale of the Heritage Foundation argues in an article released today that in order to support Mexico and encourage reform, President Bush should:

-Offer further assistance to help combat drug cartels.
-Encourage legislation to break up monopolies and democratize unions.
-Urge an end to the system of special interest privileges.
-Stress the importance of limited, corruption-free government.

 

Yesterday, the Media Research Center held a press conference at the National Press Club, outlining the findings of their national cultural values survey. The report summarizes findings and draws conclusions about three separate descriptive groups. Persons in the study were selected to be in one of the three groups: orthodox, independent or progressive. These participants were asked questions that would help identify which group they fell into and subsequently asked questions regarding the media’s impact on moral values, their personal opinions on sexual activity among high school students, their position regarding classical virtues and a host of other indicators of cultural values. Among many things, the report concluded that most Americans “agree that the media are a powerful, harmful influence in American culture.” Also, American adults “agree overwhelmingly that America is in moral decline.”

To read this report in its entirety, click here.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but the blogosphere has been taking the political world by storm... and it isn't slowing down.  Grassroots political activism has found a new home on the internet, making noise and getting attention from influential lawmakers in the process.  In fact, if you take a close look at the democratic presidential candidates, you'll see a nod given to these technologically savvy warriors of the world wide web.  This Washington Post article says it nicely:

"Armed with massive e-mail lists and high-speed networks, these activists are bypassing the familiar campaign tactics of door-knocking and phone-banking. They are also using their new-age technologies for an old-fashioned purpose: making politicians take note of their legislative priorities.

One of those is "net neutrality." Hardly a household term, it has no overtly partisan or ideological dimensions. Yet it is shaping up as a Democratic issue this year, largely because its most fervid advocates are liberal bloggers and other Internet activists who play a big role in the early stages of choosing a Democratic presidential nominee.

Unlike their Republican counterparts, every major Democratic presidential candidate has endorsed net neutrality. The move keeps them in good standing with powerful grass-roots groups, such as MoveOn.org, and costs them little in return -- perhaps a bit of space on campaign Web sites to promote a matter that comparatively few voters might explore."

Net neutrality is shaping up to be an important issue in the coming years, especially among bloggers.  The WaPo article explains a bit more about the controversy surrounding this issue:

"Net neutrality is a principle that bars Internet providers, primarily phone and cable companies, from charging higher rates to Web-based firms in return for giving their content priority treatment on the pathways to consumers. Without such restrictions, proponents say, a user might find it time-consuming, or even impossible, to call up a favorite site that carriers have relegated to slower lanes for economic or even philosophical reasons.

Net neutrality is a principle that bars Internet providers, primarily phone and cable companies, from charging higher rates to Web-based firms in return for giving their content priority treatment on the pathways to consumers. Without such restrictions, proponents say, a user might find it time-consuming, or even impossible, to call up a favorite site that carriers have relegated to slower lanes for economic or even philosophical reasons."



However, there may be reasons to limit this regulation.  James Gattuso of the Heritage Foundation speaks about the benefits of limiting the regulation of this industry, and about the recent AT&T/Bell-South merger that finds itself at the center of this controversy.