White House wants new US-Mexico trucking program

If you guys recall this is one of ALIPACs favorite causes. It think it's interesting for us for several reasons:

1- shows the White House is getting ready to move forward on issues that the public has little knowledge about and are not star pieces of legislation

2- shows that Obama is willing to take the lead on a border issue

3- they're working with Sen. Dorgan on the issue - Dorgan is a Dem but voted No on DREAM. Perhaps a legislative deal could be struck on this one for his vote. Our real problem are rogue Dems because we already have several Reps who will vote for DREAM while there are these two core groups of Democratic Senators who voted against us (Alabama-Arkansas and North Dakota-Montana). It's getting them in line that's the real issue.

Getting more Republican support in the Senate will be like pulling teeth, but Sen. Specter is one that I really want to switch from No to Yes. He supports the Dream Act but is afraid to vote for it because his conservative primary opponent, Pat Toomey, will use the vote against him. If Specter switched to Independent or Democrat, it'll be a lot easier to get his vote for Dream.

When Al Franken of MN is seated, we only need 3 votes to reach 60 provided that none of the Likely Yes people don't get wobbly. We can reach 60 any number of ways, but stray Democrats do need to get on board. The Obama White House can help on that part by both enforcing discipline and to do charm offensives. (also, I think you meant Alaska instead of Alabama because there are no Democratic Senators from Alabama - it's Republicans Sessions and Shelby from Alabama)

Still, Republican obstructionism should not be excused. If the Republicans would stop filibustering the Dream Act, we would only need 50 votes to pass Dream instead of 60.

If McCain votes yes, he could probably convince Graham to vote the same way. I have a strange feeling McCain might still vote no in the end.

Yeah, I have the same feeling also. But, it might very well play out the other way also. With a failed bid for the presidency in the past, he might just go ahead and vote "yes." I don't think he has any more national ambitions that might cause him to rethink voting affirmatively on something he supports deep down. T

The only reason I have that feeling is that when push comes to shove, certain senators are just too afraid to upset their constituents. For some, "afraid" is probably apropos (e.g. Crapo: former DREAM co-sponsor only to puss out when it came to vote). But perhaps I shouldn't mention McCain and Crapo in the same sentence; Crapo is no McCain.