McCain-Huckabee, McCain-Thompson

Monday David Broder, the unofficial Dean of the Washington press corps, wrote a piece encouraging Republicans to consider a McCain-Huckabee ticket for 2008. While I have talked privately to many about this exact ticket, and believe McCain-Huckabee could go a long way to securing a GOP hold on the Whitehouse for the next 16 years, I think it is probably not as a likely as a McCain-Thompson ticket.

Let me explain my logic and unfurl a scenario for McCain to bring back the sometimes misinformed and misled Republican base. First, Iowa and New Hampshire will likely split the vote and possibly give Huckabee and McCain the first two primaries. Huckabee is currently leading in Iowa polls and McCain just received the endorsement of the largest paper in New Hampshire with committed press every week from here on in. Next up is Michigan and Nevada, which could result in a Romney and Giuliani split before we head to the southern states and the conservative base.

It will be at this point, prior to the South Carolina and Nevada primary on January 19th, that I believe Fred Thompson will officially close his “lazy” campaign and call for his supporters to back John McCain, thus creating a 4-way race with only one conservative candidate.

For all the critics who say McCain is not conservative, you might need to check his record. McCain may be a maverick against the establishment and the neo-cons, but his 24-year voting record has always been consistently conservative on taxes, spending, and the role of government both domestically and abroad. In fact, the only reason he did not back Bush’s initial tax plan was because of its lack of spending controls which ended up costing the GOP the congressional majority in 2006.

As a matter of fact, if you go back and look at the record of when McCain broke from the ranks and criticized the Republican leadership, it was over the handling of the Iraq war in 2003 and the lack of spending restraints in the Bush tax bill (a view also shared by Alan Greenspan). His contentious Campaign Finance bill (McCain-Feingold-Thompson, as in Fred) was, in the end, supported by the Bush administration.

Back to the race at hand, the first thing going in McCain’s favor is the lack of an “establishment candidate.” The money players in the GOP don’t really have a strong option, so Giuliani and Romney have tried to vie for this spot. Both, however, have glaring weaknesses and problems fitting in on a myriad of high-profile issues such as abortion, limited government, and taxes. Not to mention, neither has the experience necessary to be considered a strong candidate to lead on foreign policy. Now, you might say as to that last point, neither did George W. in 1999 and 2000, but you have to remember that his candidacy was as much about his “team” as it was about him. Think back to the rumors circulated early that veteran statesman Dick Cheney and former President George H.W. Bush were calling in old allies to bring together a resurgence of the Ford administration from the late 70s. That’s just not the case with Giuliani or Romney.

Also consider that Thompson is a McCain supporter and always has been. He was heavily involved in McCain ’00 and agrees with the Arizona Senator on most issues including the most contentious issues of Campaign Finance Reform and Comprehensive Immigration. Although Thompson has spoken the rhetoric against so-called amnesty, he too was for the bill's provisions for a border security plan coupled with an identification program for the existing 12 million illegal aliens.

Second, Thompson does not have the desire to be President, or at least does not desire putting in the effort to run a national campaign. That was illustrated clearly in a recent NY Times article which states that the former Senator held only one retail campaign event last week. At this event he had supporters standing in a crowded BBQ restaurant for several hours only to give a 30-minute speech before leaving early.

Thompson is a nice guy and is liked by many Washington insiders, but his lack of (or perceived lack of) the drive and determination to fight for votes puts in play many questions about his ability to work 24/7 for our country while in office. However, a cushy Vice-President role is just the spot for Thompson and his supporters, which would turn the tide for McCain in the south and give conservatives a reason to vote against Rudy or Mitt.

Immigration reform is gone again...

Here we go again...

Politicking and fear tactics prevail in stopping progressive legislation. I am honestly very tired and upset about the misinformation campaigns from my "self-proclaimed" conservative brethren regarding the now dead immigration bill. "Give us your tired, your hungry, your poor, unless they speak Spanish…"

Both as a political participant and as a security professional, I am extremely dismayed by the actions and strong support garnered by the fanatical right-wing talking heads. What they don't get, and never got, was that a comprehensive border security bill must go hand-in-hand with a true immigration reform package. It will never be more cut and dry than that.

The not-so-understated racism and fear-mongering set out by the right was downright offensive. The actions by the 53 senators voting against this bill was a move away from pragmatism and their constitutional duty to create legislation that actually addresses the nation's issues. With no alternative measures being brought forward (Mr. Tancredo), we have ruined our first chance of addressing a problem that has a real chance of hurting our economy and national security. We have waited 21 years for our legislators to move on this issue, and at a time when both the congress and senate are sitting at all-time low approval ratings, our politicians pander to the talk-show hosts and far wings of the right and left without working towards the center on a bill that the majority of this nation is actually for.

I am well versed with this legislation, and after studying each twist and turn for the past two years, I can confidently say this was a path forward -- comprehensive border security, a national ID program with biometric identifiers, and most importantly a way to deal with the "real" problem of 12-20 million illegal immigrants. Bipartisan efforts, collaboration with the executive branch, DHS, and the Commerce Department are things you can't simply dismiss with a one-word backlash like "amnesty."

Please don't come at me with the "unfair for those who didn't break the law" argument. Be realistic here -- if there is not a concrete way to incentivize the current base of illeagls in this country, we will not be able to properly identify and deal with the problem head on. No one is offering citizenship "willy-nilly." Rather, the restrictions imposed on those for vying for full citizenship were very much a life-trial and hardship. Z-Visas are not green cards. Rather, they are simply a way to acknowledge the strong economic impact these workers currently have on our macro-economy. A Z-Visa holder would have to go through red tape and massive document trails (all feeding a centralized database) as well as fines of over $5,000 (a true test for individuals making minimum wage and below). Finally, these people would not benefit from their past discretions; instead they would be taxed, contribute to our national economy, and all the while be forced to the back of the "citizenship" line.

Twenty-one years ago, we did not have the technology to implement a comprehensive tracking program for immigration to the US. No biometric technologies could be employed, no rapid communication systems for transferring large amounts of data, and no real implementation schemas to hold, host, and mine that data. That is not the case now. We have the technology... we just don't have the vision to use it.

To the 53 senators, Tom Tancredo, Rush Limbaugh, Mike Reagan, and all of the others espousing fear and radical loss of national sense, I ask: What do we do now? Can you provide us with a plan that will garner support and realistically address a problem such as this? And most-importantly, when did our great nation become so fragile that bilingual education can threaten our very existence?

A Leader's Passing

Sometime last evening our country lost a great leader in its 38th President, Gerald R. Ford Jr. When looking back on President Ford’s life and particularly his presidency, we are reminded of particular leadership qualities that are at times taken for granted. Mr. Ford, by all accounts, was a likable, hardworking individual who recognized the position he was given and particularly what role had to be fulfilled in that position.

As a football player at the University of Michigan during his sophomore and junior seasons, he was a back-up (behind All-American athletes) and a role-player on teams that won conference titles. During his senior year, when it was his turn to fill the role, Ford became an All-American center and was offered multiple contracts to play professionally. As a Congressman, Mr. Ford was the consummate district-service politician, legislating on behalf of his constituency and fulfilling his role as it is defined in a representative government. As an executive, President Ford was a national healer.

Not one business leader would envy the circumstances in which Gerald Ford took office as “CEO” of this nation. Scandal had rocked the Office of the Presidency, Mr. Ford himself was never elected (either as Vice-President or as President after taking over for a resigning Richard M. Nixon), and the domestic economy was battling inflation and an impending energy crisis. Add to these circumstances, the foreign policy nightmare that was Vietnam in the early 70s and we can imagine that this was not an enviable position. Yet Mr. Ford took charge and went about his term by identifying his role in bringing our nation out of scandal and focusing on building a more productive future.

Gerald Ford’s presidency was not a long one (2½ years), but in this time he was able to bring several chapters of conflict and trouble to a close. His often criticized pardon of former President Richard Nixon was not a popular move, but as a realist President Ford needed the Watergate scandal to be closed. He also ended the conflict in Vietnam and worked towards reducing arms with the Soviet Union. President Ford was not in a position to completely turn around domestic issues (that would follow later under the Reagan-Bush-Clinton eras), but he was able to recognize his role and lead effectively through this period.

As business professionals, we can all learn something about the qualities of leadership from Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr. Understanding your position and identifying your role to improve and build your company is a fundamental building block to success. Our nation lost a true leader last night and we were all fortunate to have known him for so long.