Update on Gov. Spitzer (D-NY)'s plan to issue driver licenses to the "undocumented":

The state association of county clerks voted on Thursday to condemn Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s executive order allowing illegal immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses, and at least a dozen said they would not follow the new policy despite state laws obligating them to do so.

Some of the recent debate over immigration has focused on issues of federalism and the relationship of state powers (or, in some cases, local powers) to the federal government; this refusal now draws attention to a conflict between state and local power.

The Senate has passed 95-1--Voinovich (R-OH) voted against it, and McCain (R-AZ), Obama (D-IL), Specter (R-PA), and Warner (R-VA) did not vote--an amendment appropriating up to $3 billion for increased border security. The text:

SEC. __. BORDER SECURITY REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Border Security First Act of 2007''.

(b) Appropriations for Border Security.--There is appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $3,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2008--

(1) to achieve and maintain operational control over the entire international land and maritime border of the United States including the ability to monitor such border through available methods and technology, as authorized under the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-367);

(2) to hire and train full-time border patrol agents, as authorized under section 5202 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-458);

(3) to install along the international land border between the United States and Mexico--

(A) fencing required under section 102(b) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1103 note)); and

(B) vehicle barriers, unmanned aerial vehicles, ground-based sensors and cameras; and

(4) to remove and detain aliens for overstaying their visas, illegally reentering the United States, or committing other crimes for which they would be subject to removal; and

(5) to reimburse States and political subdivisions of a State, for expenses that are reimbursable under 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1357(g)).

(c) Employment Eligibility Verification.--Of the amounts appropriated for border security and employment verification improvements under subsection (b), $60,000,000 shall be made available for employment eligibility verification, as authorized under subtitle A of title IV of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note).

(d) Emergency Requirement.--Amounts appropriated under subsection (b) are designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 204 of S. Con. Res. 21 (110th Congress).

A federal judge has extended for another 10 days a hold order on the enforcement of the new Homeland Security/Social Security worker-verification rules.

In today's WSJ, Richard Nadler has a column (based on his "Border Wars" report) claiming that the GOP will suffer electorally for any seeming opposition to "comprehensive immigration reform." Nadler is the president of Americas Majority, a pro-"conservative" group. This group is now advocating in favor of "comprehensive reform," but with some interesting twists. It seems to be quite openly in favor of "amnesty" (something many supporters of the "grand bargain" said they were against). And it's on the verge of a scorched-earth campaign against opponents of "comprehensive" reform.
For example, in an ad against punishing employers for the hiring of the "undocumented," a voice asks:

Listening to the anti-employer rants on talk radio these days, I wonder: Is it illegality that the anti-immigrant crowd hates? Or is it really free enterprise?

Implication that supporters of enforcing employment laws are closet socialists? Check.
The "Economist" ad also pushes the claim that some are "smuggling Communist theories into the discourse of the political Right."

How will the UK Conservative party approach immigration?

A reader passes along an interesting WSJ story on some businesses' anxiety about a potential "crackdown" on "undocumented workers." An interesting bit of information on the number of construction workers who are thought to be "undocumented":

In the $1.2 trillion construction industry, at least one-third of the work force is undocumented, according to an estimate by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Industry experts believe the actual figure is much higher: Last year alone, nearly half of new construction workers were Hispanics who had arrived in the U.S. since 2000.

The Select Committee on Roll Call Vote 814 has issued a preliminary report:

The report outlined four areas of investigation, including an investigation of who is regularly on the Speaker’s dais and how their responsibilities relate to voting.

The panel’s final report is due no later than Sept. 15, 2008.

The probe will dissect the voting process, from the use of electronic voting machines to the proper duration of a vote, to determine what went wrong the night the House melted down into partisan chaos following a vote on a Republican motion to recommit that was gaveled early and ended in an unclear tally.

The panel, formally named the Select Committee on Roll Call Vote Number 814 and led by Reps. Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) and Mike Pence (R-Ind.), will use the information to recommend changes to the House voting system in an effort to rectify any lingering problems that could lead to another chaotic situation such as the one of Aug. 2.

House Clerk Lorraine Miller told the six members of the Select Committee on Roll Call Vote Number 814 that while the voting tally has not been located, the paper voting cards located in the well of the Speaker rostrum had been preserved for the investigation. The voting tally is a piece of paper with the final count that is passed to the chairman to be read for the official record.

The reason the tally is missing was not detailed Thursday, but that likely will be tackled as the committee’s work progresses.

A video of the committee's first public hearing is available here. Both the chair, Rep. Delahunt (D-MA), and ranking member, Rep. Pence (R-IN), say they're hopeful about the success of a bi-partisan investigation.

Over at the Politico, Mike Allen reports that Robert Novak will report that the chair of the national GOP, Sen. Mel Martinez (FL), will be stepping down once someone "clinches" the GOP nomination:

Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida, who was named general chairman of the Republican Party only nine months ago, has advised associates that he will leave the post as soon as somebody clinches the party's presidential nomination. That probably will come after the Feb. 5 primary elections next year. When Martinez took the party post Jan. 19, it was expected he would stay on through the 2008 elections as the GOP's principal national spokesman. Many Republicans now grumble that Martinez has been ineffective in that role, partly because he has been drowned out by the many presidential hopefuls. Kentucky lawyer Mike Duncan, who came on board with Martinez as chairman of the Republican National Committee, is expected to remain running day-to-day operations at national party headquarters for the balance of his two-year term.

It seems as though the Congressional Hispanic Caucus is pressing Speaker Pelosi (D-CA) for more unanimity among House Democrats on immigration-related measures; they're concerned about how some Democratic members of the House are supporting some Republican-back immigration measures. Maybe that's why Pelosi is now speaking out against the border fence?

Some anecdotal evidence of "illegal immigrants" leaving localities/states with stronger enforcement provisions?

A group of "illegal immigrants" has filed a lawsuit against Danbury, CT and the federal government over an immigration raid last year.

So who "won" in the pulling of the DREAM Act from the DoD bill--opponents of the act or supporters? At this point, I think it could be unclear. While pulling the act did probably indicate that supporters of it lacked the votes to get it passed at this time (which would seem to favor opponents), its separation from the DoD bill may be able to pull some senators into supporting it who had previously been opposed because they didn't think it should be attached to the defense measure (which would seem to be an advantage for supporters). Complaining about its attachment to the DoD bill could give some senators cover who had previously supported DREAM-like measure but now wanted to change their minds; they might not have the same cover for a stand-alone bill. It still sounds up in the air to me--and a few arms could be twisted between now and November.

Majority Leader Sen. Reid (D-NV) has apparently decided that the DREAM Act will not be voted on as an amendment to the DoD bill. He hopes, however, to have this measure voted on by some time in November. Some supporters of the DREAM Act sound disappointed; some opponents sound pleased. But both sides are gearing up for a renewed battle--and thinking about those senators who said they opposed Durbin's amendment because it was attached to the DoD bill. Reid has a press release up (in Spanish--not one in English yet [UPDATE: English version added]) reiterating his support for the DREAM Act and hopes for its passage.

The strike ends: the UAW and GM reach an agreement on a new contract.

The Washington Times has some information on the E-Verify system (aka the Basic Pilot Program). It reports that, in October, all new federal hires will have to be checked on this system.

Some are concerned about the constitutionality of an immigration law due to go into effect in Oklahoma on November 1. This measure

makes it illegal to transport, conceal, and harbor or house illegal immigrants. Violation of this order would be considered a felony, punishable by no less than a year in prison or a $1,000 fine.

The Hill has some information on the back-room struggle over the DREAM Act:

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the majority whip, wants to offer the legislation, dubbed the DREAM Act, as an amendment to the defense authorization bill, which the Senate could vote on this week.

But the Illinois Democrat has yet to strike a deal with Republicans, who may block the amendment from consideration, and he faces intense competition from Senate colleagues fighting to attach other provisions to the defense bill.

Although procedural obstacles could bottle up the amendment, the possibility of a vote has spurred groups on both sides of the immigration debate to ratchet up their lobbying efforts, three months after sweeping immigration reform collapsed in the Senate.

What was the sticking point in negotiations between GM and the UAW? The UAW claims it is job security for they future; the autoworkers' union wants guarantees from GM that certain future car models will be built in the US:

UAW officials said the 73,000 UAW members who work at about 80 U.S. facilities for the nation's largest automaker didn't strike Monday over what many thought would trip up the talks: A plan to shift the retiree health care burden from the company to the union. They said they also didn't strike over wages.

They said union members walked out because they want GM to promise that future cars and trucks such as the replacement for the Chevrolet Cobalt small car or the still-on-the-drawing board Chevrolet Volt plug-in electric car will be built at U.S. plants, preserving union jobs.

CQ reports on some struggles in the House between "moderate" and "conservative" Republicans over influence in various committees. Boehner seems to be trying to keep the peace:

So far, Boehner has kept mum about whom he will favor for the most coveted committee slots in the next Congress — and about what factors will be the most important in making those choices.

In addition to seniority, Boehner has signaled that legislative accomplishments will be weighed in the next round of deliberations over leadership posts, along with other factors like whether aspirants meet or exceed their National Republican Congressional Committee fund-raising quotas.

The old system, long presided over by DeLay and inherited by Boehner, tended to reward conservatives and punish

moderates. Financial service to the party was important, but so was ideological cohesion.

A helpful reader passes along a (subscriber-only)Roll Call story on a resolution House Democrats are considering putting forward on immigration:

House Democratic leaders are drafting a resolution designed to inoculate freshman lawmakers on the issue of immigration, despite concerns from within their own Caucus about reopening debate over the contentious topic.

According to several freshman Democratic lawmakers in attendance at a weekly breakfast meeting with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), Members were told to prepare statements on the resolution, which will endorse laws already on the books that prevent illegal immigrants from participating in taxpayer-funded programs, such as Social Security or food stamps.

In a draft of the resolution obtained by Roll Call, the measure expresses the sense of the House “with respect to the importance of upholding federal immigration laws and ensuring the integrity and security of the borders of the United States.”

In addition to the language on public benefits, the draft resolution also contains provisions calling on the executive branch to enforce laws on voter fraud and border security.

But one House lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said some senior Members have objected to the proposal over concerns that it will be difficult, if not impossible, to limit the scope of the debate. The House largely abandoned plans to pursue a comprehensive immigration reform bill earlier this year after the Senate failed to cut off debate on its own version of the legislation, effectively killing the bill.

Some think that this measure could be on the floor within a week--others think it could be longer.