In the span of two minutes, Hillary Rodham Clinton managed to be on all sides of the driver's licenses for illegal aliens issue in last night's Democratic debate. First she said New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's plan makes sense, then she said she that doesn't mean she thinks it should actually be done, then she defended the plan again, and finally ended by saying she doesn't think it's "the best thing" for governors to do.

Sen. Christopher Dodd, one of her rivals for the nomination, called her on it in the middle of the debate.

Here's the transcript of the exchange, moderated by NBC's Tim Russert and Brian Williams, with Rep. Dennis Kucinich chiming in:

MR. RUSSERT: Thank you, Brian.

Senator Clinton, Governor of New York Eliot Spitzer has proposed giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. You told the Nashua, New Hampshire editorial board it makes a lot of sense. Why does it make a lot of sense to give an illegal immigrant a driver's license?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is fill the vacuum left by the failure of this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform. We know in New York we have several million at any one time who are in New York illegally. They are undocumented workers. They are driving on our roads. The possibility of them having an accident that harms themselves or others is just a matter of the odds. It's probability. So what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is to fill the vacuum.

I believe we need to get back to comprehensive immigration reform because no state, no matter how well-intentioned, can fill this gap.

There needs to be federal action on immigration reform.

MR. RUSSERT: Does anyone here believe an illegal immigrant should not have a driver's license?

REP. KUCINICH: Believe what?

MR. RUSSERT: An illegal immigrant should not have a driver's license.

SEN. DODD: This is a privilege. And look, I'm as forthright and progressive on immigration policy as anyone here, but we're dealing with a serious problem here, we need to have people come forward. The idea that we're going to extend this privilege here of a driver's license, I think, is troublesome. And I think the American people are reacting to it.

We need to deal with security on our borders, we need to deal with the attraction that draws people here, we need to deal fairly with those who are here; but this is a privilege. Talk about health care, I have a different opinion. That affects the public health of all of us. But a license is a privilege, and that ought not to be extended, in my view.

MR. WILLIAMS: Who else? Senator --

SEN. CLINTON: I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do it. And we have failed --

SEN. DODD: Wait a minute. No, no, no. You said yes, you thought it made sense to do it.

SEN. CLINTON: No, I didn't, Chris. But the point is, what are we going to do with all these illegal immigrants who are (driving ?) -- (inaudible)?

SEN. DODD: Well, that's a legitimate issue. But driver's license goes too far, in my view.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, you may say that, but what is the identification if somebody runs into you today who is an undocumented worker --

SEN. DODD: There's ways of dealing with that.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, but --

SEN. DODD: This is a privilege, not a right.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, what Governor Spitzer has agreed to do is to have three different licenses; one that provides identification for actually going onto airplanes and other kinds of security issues, another which is an ordinary driver's license, and then a special card that identifies the people who would be on the road.

SEN. DODD: That's a bureaucratic nightmare.

SEN. CLINTON: So it's not the full privilege.

MR. RUSSERT: Senator Clinton, I just want to make sure what I heard. Do you, the New York Senator Hillary Clinton, support the New York governor's plan to give illegal immigrants a driver's license? You told the Nashua, New Hampshire, paper it made a lot of sense.

SEN. CLINTON: It --

MR. RUSSERT: Do you support his plan?

SEN. CLINTON: You know, Tim, this is where everybody plays gotcha. It makes a lot of sense. What is the governor supposed to do? He is dealing with a serious problem. We have failed, and George Bush has failed. Do I think this is the best thing for any governor to do? No. But do I understand the sense of real desperation, trying to get a handle on this? Remember, in New York we want to know who's in New York. We want people to come out of the shadows. He's making an honest effort to do it. We should have passed immigration reform.

-- Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

The Federation for American Immigration Reform has released a new report estimating the illegal alien population is now 13.2 million.

That's up 6 million from the 2000 estimate of the now-defunct Immigration and Naturalization Service.

FAIR President Dan Stein said President Bush deserves the blame.

"Almost from the day the Bush administration took office, they made it clear that their aim was to reward illegal immigration with amnesty and assorted other benefits. As a result, we have seen record increases in illegal immigration, mounting burdens on taxpayers, and unprecedented public concern about this issue," he said.

— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite is offering an amendment to the pending Border Control and Contractor Accountability Act of 2007 (H.R. 3496) to ensure that the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) work with the Small Business Administration to see that only qualified applicants receive SBA loans.

"America is the land of opportunity, and small business owners make up the backbone of our economy," said Mrs. Brown-Waite, Florida Republican. "However, Congress cannot continue to encourage and foster small businesses in our nation if we do not first take care of American citizens and those who are here legally.

"My simple amendment will ensure that Small Business loans and grants are going to those who followed the immigration rules we have in place."

The Small Business Act says that only those lawfully in the United States can receive SBA funds. H.R. 3496, written by Mrs. Brown-Waite, would debar or suspend contractors from federal contracting for unlawful employment of illegal aliens.

Mrs. Brown-Waite, who has emerged as a champion for immigration enforcement, also is the author of legislation designed to "send a loud and clear message" to a growing number of "sanctuary cities" across the country, saying those who offer safe harbor to illegal aliens will not be tolerated.

Her pending bill would make illegal immigration a felony and would clarify that state and local law enforcers have existing authority to investigate, identify, apprehend, arrest, detain and transfer to federal authorities any illegal alien apprehended in the course of routine duties.

Known as the Accountability in Enforcing Immigration Laws Act of 2007, that bill also would require ICE agents to take illegal aliens into custody or pay state and local governments the per-diem rate to detain them until they are removed.

The bill faces an uphill fight in Congress since Republicans are in the minority. Previous efforts to pass similar legislation failed, but the newly proposed measure has drawn support from state and local government officials.

— Jerry Seper, national reporter, The Washington Times

While Congress grapples unsuccessfully with comprehensive immigration reform — which took another hit last week when the Senate took a walk on the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act, or DREAM Act — federal law enforcement authorities are convinced that none of the Department of Homeland Security agencies responsible for managing the moving the pieces of any such bill will be able to handle the surge.

As far as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) goes, the agency currently has so many worksite enforcement leads that it would take several years to get through those without all the new cases and reporting requirements, that would be generated by any new legislation. Several veteran ICE supervisors and field agents asked, "What will happen to all the day laborers since they don't have full time jobs? They shouldn't be eligible for a visa? Do they think that they will leave the country?"

Currently, they said, the laws are in place to turn off the work magnet, but the Social Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) aren't engaged as they could be due to restrictions. If they were to assist, they said, it would make it extremely difficult for employers to hire and keep illegal aliens employed.

The system now in place at U.S. Customs and Immigration Services (CIS) to identify benefit fraud, they said, is completely overwhelmed — with thousands of leads and cases that can't be worked to due lack of personnel and antiquated tracking systems. The supervisors and agents agreed that that the fraud associated with comprehensive immigration reform — as being debated — will be 10 times worse that the 1986 Amnesty and Citizenship USA, which saw an influx of more than 3 million illegal aliens.

One longtime ICE supervisor said the document vendors will become rich producing rent receipts, pay stubs and other phony papers to show that an alien has been here prior to Jan 1, 2007. "They no doubt have already started," the supervisor said.

The veteran supervisors and agents said ICE is currently looking at companies that have multiple offices around the country so they can make a "big splash for the media to give the impression that we are really doing something." But, they asked, who will do the background checks for all these aliens and how accurate will they be? They said it will be impossible to hire enough agents or personnel for ICE and CIS, let alone the U.S. Border Patrol, to manage the changes.

-- Jerry Seper, national reporter, The Washington Times

When you try to play King Solomon, rule No. 1 is make sure you don't actually split the baby.

New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer appears to have gotten that wrong with his move over the weekend to adopt Real ID standards for most New York driver's licenses, while still allowing some illegal aliens to get other types of driver's licenses.

Now, in addition to infuriating those who want a crackdown on illegal immigration, he has angered those who had been his biggest fans.

Here's the reaction from Chung-Wha Hong, executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition:

"All eyes have been on New York for the past month and public safety advocates lifted up Governor Spitzer's policy as a national example to be replicated throughout the nation. We have praised his courage in standing up for the public good in the face of demagoguery. But today, he has let his good name be used to give cover to a policy rejected by nearly two dozen states across the country, that tramples on Americans' civil rights and liberties and is fraught with implementation problems. The Governor has given new life to a sinking ship that deserved to be sunk.

"His move is also a lose-lose political decision that betrays his most ardent supporters and emboldens the anti-immigrant opposition."

— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

The immigration crackdown forces are claiming a victory over Bank of America, saying part of the reason the company's profits fell nearly a third is because of a boycott they launched against BOA over its support of illegal aliens.

"Bank of America disgraced themselves nationally this year when the news broke they were going to give credit cards to illegal aliens," says William Gheen of ALIPAC. "CEO Ken Lewis refused to apologize or cancel the program despite massive public backlash so we launched the boycott and tens of thousands of Americans, perhaps more, have canceled their Bank of America credit cards and moved their mortgages elsewhere."

He pointed to news reports that BOA's consumer services, such as credit cards and bank branches, fell 16 percent in the last quarter.

News reports paint a slightly different picture of the problems at BOA, saying the consumer services fell as a result of the national credit crunch and pointing out BOA's biggest losses came in investment banking. BOA also seems to think the problems lie elsewhere than in lost credit card businesses, announcing layoffs in its investment banking divisions that could reach 3,000 employees.

— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

Immigration Law Weekly, which supported the Dream Act, has a unique way of looking at yesterday's vote to block the bill from coming to the Senate floor.

"A count of states with unanimous votes by both senators from each state reveals that the vote fell along the old Union/Confederacy line. 9 out of 14 states that unanimously voted no represent the original Confederate states, and 12 out of 17 states that unanimously voted yes represent the original Union states. This is the 21st century, yet sadly, we appear to have regressed back to the days of the Civil War," ILW said in its daily update e-mail.

— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

As a follow on yesterday's Dream Act vote tally, John McCain today told bloggers he opposed the measure, which would have legitimized illegal alien students.

McCain canceled his campaign schedule yesterday morning to be in the Senate for two votes on a judicial nomination. But he failed to stick around for a vote on the Dream Act, just minutes later.

Still, on a conference call with bloggers today he told them he opposed the bill, according to HumanEvents.

"I got the message, and the American people want the borders controlled first," he said.

— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

The Dream Act was blocked on a 52-44 vote today, falling eight votes short of the 60 needed to bring the bill to the Senate floor.

While today's vote was technically on a "motion to proceed" — a parliamentary measure about bringing the bill to the floor — both sides knew this vote was the make-or-break vote on the bill.

Several oddities stand out in the vote.

* Sen. John McCain ducked the vote, even though he was in the chamber minutes beforehand for another vote on a judicial nominee. Obviously it's a tough issue for McCain, who is running for president but has suffered by being identified with amnesty. But his ducking of this vote comes just days after he said assured conservatives he had seen the light on the issue. Today he missed a chance to prove that.

* Sen. Sam Brownback, after flipping on immigration during his presidential run, has now flopped back to where he was before, voting in favor of the Dream Act. This comes just weeks after he told the audience at one of the presidential debates that he no longer supports special paths to citizenship for illegal aliens.

* Sen. Trent Lott, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, surprised his colleagues by voting in favor of the bill. Hours later, some of his colleagues were surprised to hear of his vote, saying they had been led to believe he would vote against it. His vote puts him at odds with Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republicans' leader who told his troops to oppose the bill because Democrats were trying to shut out Republicans' amendments.

* After opposing President Bush's broad bill earlier this year, Sen. Jim Webb supported the Dream Act, breaking with two other freshman Democrats from red states — Sens. Jon Tester and Claire McKaskill — who voted against it.

* Among the Democratic presidential candidates, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Barack Obama voted for the bill. Christopher Dodd missed the vote.

— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

The Dream Act, which aims to legitimize illegal alien students, comes up for its first test vote in the Senate today, and the White House has weighed in with an official Statement of Administration Policy (known in policy-speak as an SAP).

It's far from a veto threat, so opponents shouldn't be counting on the White House to backstop for them should they be unable to block the bill.

But the White House identifies many problems with the legislation, including:

1. It's a perpetual amnesty, rather than a one-time amnesty, meaning it continues to forgive illegal alien children far into the future.

2. It sets up a special class of illegal alien, entitled to more rights than other illegal aliens.

3. It opens the door for massive document fraud.

That last point is interesting since it's also one of the major objections to the president's own broad immigration proposal. And Republican senators who balked at the president's bill said they had fought with the administration to tighten those fraud provisions in negotiations earlier this year, but were resisted by administration officials.

Here's the SAP in full:

S. 2205 — Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act of 2007 (Sen. Durbin (D) Illinois and two cosponsors)

The Administration continues to believe that the Nation's broken immigration system requires comprehensive reform. This reform should include strong border and interior enforcement, a temporary worker program, a program to bring the millions of undocumented aliens out of the shadows without amnesty and without animosity, and assistance that helps newcomers assimilate into American society. Unless it provides additional authorities in all of these areas, Congress will do little more than perpetuate the unfortunate status quo.

The Administration is sympathetic to the position of young people who were brought here illegally as children and have come to know the United States as home. Any resolution of their status, however, must be careful not to provide incentives for recurrence of the illegal conduct that has brought the Nation to this point. By creating a special path to citizenship that is unavailable to other prospective immigrants — including young people whose parents respected the Nation's immigration laws — S. 2205 falls short. The Administration therefore opposes the bill.

The primary change wrought by S. 2205 would be to establish a preferential path to citizenship for a special class of illegal aliens. Specifically, S. 2205 awards permanent status to any illegal alien who is under 30, has been in the United States for five years after arriving as a child, and has completed two years of college or in the uniformed services. This path to citizenship is unavailable to any other alien, no matter how much promise he or she may have, no matter how much he or she may contribute to American society. Moreover, the path that S. 2205 creates would allow illegal aliens to obtain a green card before many individuals who are currently lawfully waiting in line.

Sponsors of S. 2205 argue that the bill is necessary in order to give children who are illegal aliens incentives to obtain an education. But it is difficult to reconcile that professed aim with the bill's retroactivity provisions: even those who attended college years earlier will be eligible for a green card.

The legal status that the bill grants its beneficiaries means that they can petition almost instantly to bring family members into the country. It also places them on the fast track to citizenship because they can immediately begin accruing the residence time in the United States that is necessary for naturalization. Finally, this legal status entitles the bill's beneficiaries to certain welfare benefits within five years.

The bill is also indiscriminate in whom it would make eligible for the program. For example, S. 2205 includes loopholes that would authorize permanent status for certain aliens convicted of multiple misdemeanors and even felonies.

The open-ended nature of S. 2205 is objectionable and will inevitably lead to large-scale document fraud. The path to citizenship remains open for decades, thus creating a strong temptation for future illegal aliens to purchase fraudulent documents on a burgeoning black market. Moreover, the bill's confidentiality provisions are drawn straight from the 1986 amnesty law and will provide the same haven for fraud and criminality as that law did.

Immigration is one of the top concerns of the American people — and of this Administration — but it needs to be addressed in a comprehensive and balanced way that avoids creating incentives for problems in the future.

— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

Fred Thompson has just announced his own immigration plan today, and from the looks of it, he's the first major Republican candidate to realize that voters don't want amnesty or immediate mass deportations.

What they are willing to accept is attrition — lower the number of illegal aliens by going after those who shield them, give them jobs and give them the means to blend into society.

Here's the key paragraph:

"Attrition through Enforcement. Reduce the number of illegal aliens through increased enforcement against unauthorized alien workers and their employers. Without illegal employment opportunities available, fewer illegal aliens will attempt to enter the country, and many of those illegally in the country now likely will return home. Self-deportation can also be maximized by stepping up the enforcement levels of other existing immigration laws. This course of action offers a reasonable alternative to the false choices currently proposed to deal with the 12 million or more aliens already in the U.S. illegally: either arrest and deport them all, or give them all amnesty. Attrition through enforcement is a more reasonable and achievable solution, but this approach requires additional resources for enforcement and border security:"

— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

It's all about the new voters, says A.J. DiCintio, writing for the online New Media Journal.

DiCintio cites that reason in his theory on why New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer is pressing ahead with his plan to offer driver's licenses to illegal aliens, even in the face of substantial public opposition.

In short, since motor-voter laws require folks who show up to get a license to also be asked if they want to register to vote, DiCintio says this is about boosting the voting pool. And, DiCintio says, the first party listed on the New York registration form check-off list is the Democratic Party.

Of course this theory begs some questions. For example, New York's voter pool is not exactly short on Democratic voters already, so why face all this outrage over something with marginal effects? And the Spitzer plan does have some restrictions that will keep many illegal aliens from being able to get licenses. But the article is an intriguing take on the situation.

— Stephe Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

The Senate this week may vote on the Dream Act, the bill that would grant illegal alien students legal status and a path to citizenship if they go to college for two years or serve two years in the U.S. military.

Sen. Richard J. Durbin tried to attach the proposal to the defense bill last month but was forced to drop that idea after Republicans made it clear they would vote against it to keep it from interfering with important military matters.

At the time, many of those Republicans said the bill was one they would consider voting for in other circumstances because it applies to those whose parents brought them here and who had, in the words of one Republican, no "moral culpability" for having been here illegally.

Of course, many of the bill's supporters said Republicans were using the military bill explanation as an excuse to duck a difficult vote. Durbin is now ready to see if they were bluffing.

— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

"Joining the Minutemen because you have an issue with illegal immigration is like joining a White supremacist group because you have an issue with affirmative action," said Janet Murguía, NCLR's president, as the group announced it will boycott Kansas City by moving its 2009 annual conference out of the city.

NCLR's board reached the decision in a vote this weekend as retaliation against Kansas City Mayor Mark Funkhouser, a Democrat who took office in May and a month later appointed Frances Semler to the city's parks and recreation board.

Semler's offense was she has been a member of the local chapter of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps -- the group that calls for enforcement of immigration laws and has organized citizen patrols of the U.S.-Mexico border.

"An active member of the Minutemen should not be an official representative for a city that purports to believe in diversity," said Monica Lozano, chairwoman of the NCLR board.

Since Semler's appointment, the city council passed a resolution called on her to step down or be removed but the mayor has stuck by her.

-- Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times

Just posted in Stephen Dinan's blog on the Republicans:

The GOP has less to fear from a Latino backlash than some claim, says Steven Malanga, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. In a new article, he says those who have warned of impending doom haven't looked very closely at the Hispanic electorate.

His argument is not that there's good news for Republicans, but rather that the news was bad even before the immigration debate, and that the debate isn't likely to change the minds of many Hispanic voters for the worse.

That's partly because President Bush's success among Hispanic voters was exaggerated in 2004 (and besides, it was never clear his success would translate to the rest of the party anyway) and partly because Hispanic voters list plenty of other issues above immigration when asked what is most important to win their vote.

Immigration-rights groups aligned with Democrats say the difference is last year's mass marches, and this year's immigration bill. They say they have succeeded in focusing Hispanic voters' minds on immigration, and are also making headway in getting legal residents to become citizens and to register to vote.

Either way, it will be a year before we know for sure.

President Bush cut in half his plans for 12,000 National Guard troops on the Mexican border in 2006 after Mexican President Vicente Fox told him the deployment would hurt the conservative National Action Party's re-election chances in Mexico, according to congressional aides.

The aides, who attended meetings to discuss the deployment, say Mr. Fox was concerned an influx of National Guard soldiers would be used against his party's conservative candidate, Felipe Calderon, by leftist opposition leader Manuel Lopez Obrador, a member of the socialist Democratic Revolution Party.

Critics had claimed during the hotly-contested Mexican presidential race that Mr. Calderon -- who won a razor-thin victory in July -- was too close to President Bush, who is unpopular in Mexico despite pledges he made in 2001 to strengthen U.S. ties with Mexico. Many Mexicans oppose tough U.S. border enforcement policies and were disappointed in the U.S. Senate's failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation that called for amnesty for Mexicans now in the United States.

According to the aides, the Bush administration was concerned that Mr. Lopez Obrador, if elected, would become part of Latin America's new, anti-U.S. left.

The National Guard numbers were discussed during private conversations between the White House and several members of Congress, including the late Rep. Charlie Norwood, according to staff members familiar with the talks. John E. Stone, a former top advisor to Mr. Norwood who now serves as director of the U.S. Freedom Foundation, says the talks came after the Georgia Republican proposed the deployment of 36,000 Guard troops or state militia on the southern border to help stop a rising number of illegal aliens and drugs into America.

"The discussions got to a point where the administration wanted to look tough on enforcement but wasn't willing to deploy 36,000 troops on the border," Mr. Stone said. "Josh Bolton called Mr. Norwood and said the president was willing to send 12,000 National Guard troops to the border, but later called back and said the White House had heard from Mr. Fox and couldn't do more than 6,000," Mr. Stone said.
"He said they might add 6,000 after the (Mexican) elections -- but Mr. Norwood never thought that would really happen."

At the time, Mr. Bolton served as director of the White House Office of Management and Budget. He was named as White House chief of staff in March 2006.

-- Jerry Seper, national reporter, The Washington Times