Tag Archives: democrat

W.Va. governor reportedly target of federal probe

(CNN) — The Department of Justice served the state of West Virginia two subpoenas this week, the governor’s office said late Friday, adding that they had “not been informed that Governor [Joe] Manchin or any other state employee is under investigation.”

The statement came after West Virginia Watchdog, a state chapter of the nonprofit Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, reported the subpoenas are part of a federal grand jury investigation into work done at the Governor’s Mansion in Charleston.

West Virginia Watchdog asked for contracts and records for businesses that have done work at the mansion.

The Justice Department had no comment.

Manchin’s office said in a written statement that neither of the two subpoenas “was directed to Governor Manchin or the Governor’s Office” and that “no individual” in his office was served.

“The Governor has directed State officials to fully cooperate and comply expeditiously,” the statement said. “Governor Manchin wants to get to the bottom of the issue as soon as possible.”

Steven Allen Adams, the West Virginia Watchdog managing editor who also works for the conservative-leaning Public Policy Foundation of West Virginia, cited an unnamed source who said Manchin was the target of the probe.

Manchin, a Democrat, has been in office since 2005. He announced in July he would seek to fill the unexpired term of the late Sen. Robert Byrd.

W.Va. governor reportedly target of federal probe

Can Bush-bashing help sway voters?

Washington (CNN) — While he’s not on the ballot, George W. Bush is still vital to the midterm election as far as the nation’s top Democrat is concerned.

President Obama has made a point recently to invoke Bush’s name in what many say is a calculated effort to remind voters of the previous administration’s economic policies, which Democrats argue led to the worst recession in modern history.

On Monday, the president told those attending a Democratic fundraiser in Atlanta, Georgia, that the GOP has not distinguished itself from Bush.

“They have not come up with a single solitary, new idea to address the challenges of the American people,” Obama said. “They don’t have a single idea that’s different from George Bush’s ideas … not one.”

That sentiment was echoed once again on Wednesday during a speech before the AFL-CIO and at a fundraiser in Chicago, Illinois, a day later.

“They haven’t come out with a single solitary idea that is different from policies that held sway for eight years before Democrats took over,” Obama said Thursday. “Not a single policy difference that’s discernable from [George W.] Bush. Not one.”

Since taking office, Obama has largely referred to the “previous administration” or the “Republican control for the past eight years” in place of saying the name “Bush.”

So why the recent surge in Bush-bashing? It may have something to do with polls.

Video: Most negative campaign season ever?

Video: Obama: Job growth must increase

A Quinnipiac University poll, taken July 13-19, asked 2,181 registered voters: “Who do you blame more for the current condition of the U.S. economy: former President George W. Bush or President Barack Obama?”

Fifty-three percent said Bush; 25 percent said Obama; 21 percent said either neither, both or unsure.

Perhaps the most stark example of why Bush’s name is now a part of Obama’s stump speech comes from a poll by the Benenson Strategy Group, the president’s chief polling firm. The poll was taken for Third Way, a moderate think tank.

Conducted June 19-22 of 1,100 likely voters, the poll found that Bush’s economic principles are “almost universally rejected” by a large margin — and merely bringing up Bush’s name causes a swing in attitudes.

When respondents were asked whether they would prefer a candidate who “will stick with President Barack Obama’s economic policies” or “one who will return to President George W. Bush’s economic policies,” the result was a 15-point advantage for the Obama approach.

Read more of the poll results

“President Bush is the key here,” said Sean Gibbons of Third Way. “If you enter President Bush’s name into the equation and ask people when they’re making a choice at the polls between going forward with President Obama’s economic agenda or voting for a candidate who will pursue similar economic ideas as President Bush, Obama runs the table by 49 points. That is extraordinary.”

Conservatives fare better when one of the poll questions pitted generic conservative ideas on the economy to those of the Obama administration. It showed that a majority “actually favor conservative ideas,” Gibbons said, adding that “if you don’t use President Bush’s name, the whole thing flips.”

Republicans, meanwhile, discredit the notion that invoking Bush will change the outcome of the election.

“Democrats can keep talking about the [Bush administration], but they’ll do so in vain,” said Republican National Committee spokesman Doug Heye. “Voters are concerned with the here and now, which means a job market that has atrophied and foreclosures on the rise while the Democrats who control Washington pass a stimulus bill no one wanted.”

Oregon Republican Greg Walden, the deputy chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, has said that Democrats can “spin, they can sing, they can dance naked in the streets to say it’s about Bush, but he’s neither in the White House nor on the ballot.”

Texas GOP Rep. Pete Sessions, who chairs the campaign committee, told reporters in July that Republican candidates already “have their footing” in their races and noted that the former president has not participated in any political activities since he left office.

“He has not been involved. He does not do fundraisers. He’s said to us ‘I’m not interested in doing it’ and that’s goes back to the day he left,” Sessions added.

CNN’s Deirdre Walsh contributed to this report.

Can Bush-bashing help sway voters?

Rangel, Waters, and the perils of Democrats ‘draining the swamp’

By

Patrik Jonsson,

Ethics panel charges Rangel

Washington (CNN) — The House ethics committee on Thursday accused veteran Rep. Charles Rangel of 13 violations of House rules involving alleged financial wrongdoing and harming the credibility of Congress.

The charges accused the 20-term Democrat from New York of using his influence to solicit donations for a college policy center in his name from corporate heads and others with business before the powerful House Ways and Means Committee that Rangel chaired until forced to give up the leadership position earlier this year.

Other charges involve alleged income tax and financial disclosure violations, as well as improper use of government mail service and letterhead.

“Credibility is what’s at stake here; the very credibility of the House itself before the American people,” said Rep. Mike McCaul, the ranking Republican on a subcommittee that will hold a trial-like hearing on the charges against Rangel.

McCaul spoke at the subcommittee’s first meeting, described as an organizational session. Rangel was not required to attend and did not show up to hear the first public disclosure of the formal charges against him.

Asked later about his response to the charges, Rangel sounded contrite in saying he may have been “overzealous” in serving the public but took some comfort that the allegations involved no “corruption” or “self-dealing.”

“I can’t make an excuse for serious violations, but I can have an explanation of my intent,” he said. “And to large degree that’s what my life has been all about–intent.”

Video: Rep. Rangel speaks to press

Rangel said it was “a very, very rough period for me and my family, but we all, including my community, will get by this.”

In the days leading up to the hearing, Rangel had said he welcomed the completion of a two-year investigation by the ethics committee so that he could finally respond to specific accusations against him.

According to documents released by the committee, Rangel first learned of the charges being pursued by an investigating subcommittee on June 17. He filed a motion to have the charges dismissed, which the investigating panel denied, the documents showed.

In a document dated Wednesday, Rangel’s lawyers challenged the scope of the charges against him, saying Rangel “did not abuse his official position or enrich himself financially.”

“He did not target for solicitation foundations, corporations or individuals with business before the Ways & Means Committee, nor did he offer or provide preferential treatment or favors to potential contributors,” the document said. “He received no prohibited benefit, direct or indirect, from his work on behalf of this program that violates the ethics rules.”

However, the document said Rangel “recognizes that the public would have been better served if he had consulted the Standards Committee staff in advance” of soliciting funding for the college center.

Rangel said this week that his lawyers were in talks with committee lawyers on a possible deal to settle the case without a hearing. When Thursday’s hearing was delayed for 55 minutes with no explanation, rumors of an imminent agreement quickly spread.

However, the panel gathered and held the hearing, and it remained unclear whether a settlement avoiding the spectacle of a trial hearing was possible.

According to the charges, Rangel allegedly failed to report more than $600,000 on financial disclosure reports and improperly used a rent-subsidized apartment as a campaign office for over a decade and failed to pay taxes on a home in the Dominican Republic.

Rangel “argues that errors on his personal taxes do not implicate discharge of his official responsibilities,” committee investigators concluded in response to Rangel’s request to have the charges dismissed. He “appears to be operating under the erroneous belief that the only conduct subject to discipline is conduct directly related to the discharge of his official responsibilities.”

An investigative subcommittee report on Rangel’s dealings, available on the committee’s website, detailed a lengthy series of meetings the congressman held with business leaders to raise funds for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Policy at the City College of New York. His repeated attempts to woo potential donors violated the House’s solicitation and gift ban, the report said.

Among other things, the report stated that Rangel met with a lobbyist for insurance giant AIG in April 2008 with the objective to “close” a $10 million “gift for the Rangel Center.”

At the meeting, “AIG raised concerns about a potential donation, including the potential headline risk,” the report stated. But Rangel pushed ahead, asking “AIG, at least twice, what was necessary to get this done.”

During the period of time that Rangel was seeking donations from AIG, according to committee investigators, the company was lobbying the House on several tax and trade issues — matters over which Rangel exercised considerable influence.

It also noted that, in March 2007, he used congressional letterhead to send notes to business leaders such as Donald Trump, in which he requested meetings to discuss the Rangel Center.

The congressman’s “acceptance of favors and benefits from donors to the Rangel Center … might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of his governmental duties,” the report concluded, adding that the “accumulation of (Rangel’s) actions reflected poorly on the institution of the House and, thereby, brought discredit to the House.”

In the July 28 response, Rangel’s lawyers argued that some of the cited infractions were unintended in his effort to help the college.

“If he mistakenly used the wrong letterhead or other modest resources in this worthy cause, the error was made in good faith,” the document said.

“It is undisputed that every single charitable contribution in this case went to CCNY, a public educational institution, and not to the congressman,” it said, later adding that”the uncontroverted evidence is that Congressman Rangel never suggested that any donor to the Rangel Center would receive favorable consideration in legislative matters and never gave preferential treatment to any contributor.”

McCaul said the allegations against Rangel, if proven, would violate “the most fundamental code of conduct” for House members.

Rep. Gene Green of Texas, a Democrat who led a two-year ethics subcommittee investigation of Rangel, said it was a difficult job.

“The task is even more difficult when the subject has befriended and mentored so many new members, and I’m one of them,” Green said.

Another ethics committee member, Republican Rep. Jo Bonner of Alabama, said “this is truly a sad day where no one, regardless of their partisan stripes, should rejoice.”

Rangel temporarily stepped down as Ways and Means Committee chairman earlier this year following the announcement of an ethics investigation of several allegations, including failure to pay taxes on the Dominican Republic residence.

The House ethics committee previously admonished Rangel for violating rules on receiving gifts. Specifically, the committee found that Rangel violated House gift rules by accepting reimbursement payments for travel to conferences in the Caribbean in 2007 and 2008.

Rangel, whose autobiography that discusses his Korean War experience is titled “And I Haven’t Had a Bad Day Since,” told reporters earlier Thursday that “I have to reassess that (statement)” in light of the pending hearing.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday — in response to a question about Rangel — that there must be “accountability” and “transparency” in cases of ethical transgressions.

“Holding a high ethical standard is a serious responsibility … and a top priority” for the House Democratic leadership, she said. In terms of political fallout from cases such as Rangel’s, “the chips will fall where they may,” she said.

Congressional Democrats have reportedly expressed concern that an extended public airing of the charges against Rangel could damage the party’s prospects in the November midterm elections.

CNN’s Deirdre Walsh, Brianna Keilar, Evan Glass, Alan Silverleib and Tom Cohen contributed to this report.

Ethics panel charges Rangel

How Rangel’s ethics hearing could play out

(CNN) — Longtime Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel of New York will be the subject of the House ethics committee’s first corruption trial in almost a decade unless his attorneys reach an agreement to settle his charges.

The House ethics committee on Thursday will make public a report of Rangel’s alleged violations. After a nearly two-year investigation of Rangel, the committee’s report could bring a trial by a panel subcommittee in September.

A formal hearing would be a trial-like session involving formal charges with lawyers for the House acting as prosecutors and Rangel’s attorneys defending him, but some experts don’t foresee Rangel making it to the trial stage.

“I think all sides are going to be motivated to reach some kind of resolution short of the public hearings,” said Robert Walker, former chief counsel and staff director of both the Senate and House ethics committees.

Rangel said he welcomes the trial. He has said that “sunshine will pierce the cloud of serious allegations.”

The outcome of the hearing could range from dropping all charges to reprimand to expulsion from the House of Representatives.

Video: Rep. Rangel addresses ethics charges

Video: Rangel: ‘I look forward to responding’

As a result of his 2002 corruption trial, former Rep. James Traficant, an Ohio Democrat, became the second member of Congress to be kicked out since the Civil War.

Charles Tiefer, a professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law, said Traficant’s case “hardly even counts as a serious precedent.”

At the time of his ethics hearing, Traficant already had been convicted of taking bribes and other charges in a court of law. He spent seven years in prison and was released last year.

“A trial, particularly of a senior congressman, on charges that have been headline news, would be one of the most striking committee proceedings the House can have,” said Tiefer, who was solicitor and deputy general counsel of the House for 11 years.

Rangel temporarily stepped down as Ways and Means Committee chairman following the announcement of an ethics investigation of several allegations, including failure to pay taxes on a home in the Dominican Republic.

The congressman has also admitted a failure to report several hundred thousand dollars in assets on federal disclosure forms. In addition, he is under scrutiny for the purported misuse of a rent-controlled apartment for political purposes, as well as for allegedly preserving tax benefits for an oil-drilling company in exchange for donations to a project he supported at the City College of New York.

The House ethics committee previously admonished Rangel for violating rules on receiving gifts. Specifically, the committee found that Rangel violated House gift rules by accepting reimbursement payments for travel to conferences in the Caribbean in 2007 and 2008.

Should Rangel face a trial, it would play out in what Walker described as a cross between a courtroom trial and a congressional hearing.

Both sides would deliver opening statements and present their cases. They could also call witnesses, who could be cross-examined by the other side.

In a public hearing, there is more leeway given to the committee in terms of admissibility of evidence, Walker said.

Following the evidentiary part of the process, there would be closing arguments, and the case would go back to the jury.

In a House ethics trial, the “jury” is made up of an eight-member adjudicatory subcommittee whose members are allowed to question witnesses.

The subcommittee that would consider Rangel’s case comprises four Democrats and four Republicans, according to the ethics committee document.

It said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-California, is the panel’s chair. Other Democratic members are Reps. G.K. Butterfield of North Carolina, Kathy Castor of Florida and Peter Welch of Vermont. The four Republicans are Reps. Michael McCaul of Texas, Mike Conaway of Texas, Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania and Gregg Harper of Mississippi.

The jury then would have to determine whether each charge was proven by the standard of “clear and convincing evidence.”

“That is less than ‘proof beyond a reasonable a doubt,’ which would be the standard at a criminal trial, but it’s more than the standard of just ‘preponderance of the evidence, which would be the standard at a civil trial,” Walker said.

Despite the outcome, the trial phase could be detrimental to Rangel, Tiefer said.

“It hurts his public image to parade a sequence of witnesses who testify that he is guilty of receiving favors and so forth, and it also arguably hurts the image of those connected with him in his party delegation,” he said.

If he adequately disputes the facts, he could persuade the committee to moderate or even drop all of the charges, Tiefer added.

The whole matter could be dismissed with no further action if the subcommittee decides that no wrongdoing was proven, but if members decide punishment is warranted, they would then have to decide whether to sanction Rangel.

“If they determine that it was a technical violation, the committee could then issue what’s called a letter of reproval, which is not an actual sanction,” Walker said.

If the committee decides more serious punishment is in order, such as reprimand, censure or expulsion, the full House must vote on the issue.

A simple majority vote is required to reprimand or censure a member of Congress, while a two-thirds majority is required for an expulsion.

The House has expelled only five members of Congress. A number of members, however, have resigned before the House took formal action, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Rangel has served 20 consecutive terms in the House. He’s facing a September 14 Democratic contest with Adam Clayton Powell IV, the son of the late scandal-plagued congressman Adam Clayton Powell Jr., who was ousted by Rangel 40 years ago.

Rangel’s other primary challengers include banker Vince Morgan, liberal activist Jonathan Tasini and Joyce Johnson, a field director for President Obama’s 2008 campaign.

Rangel said last week that he hoped the matter could be concluded in time for the September contest.

CNN’s Deirdre Walsh contributed to this report.

How Rangel’s ethics hearing could play out

Some Dems still fuming over Gibbs’ comments

Washington (CNN) — House Democratic leaders met with President Barack Obama on Wednesday night to discuss legislative priorities in the run-up to the November mid-term election, but one topic was bypassed — the weekend assessment by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs that Republicans could win back the chamber.

Aides to the House Democratic leaders told CNN that the meeting with Obama was productive and focused mostly on economic issues and policy. One leadership aide said Obama declared the Democrats would retain control of the House in November, but there was no mention in the meeting of the remark by Gibbs.

Earlier, senior Democratic officials said that at a private Capitol Hill meeting on Tuesday night, a string of House Democrats — including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — expressed deep frustration that Gibbs had played into Republicans’ hands by answering a hypothetical question on NBC’s “Meet the Press” about whether Democrats may lose their grip on power.

In a statement that senior White House officials maintain was blindingly obvious and really not newsworthy, Gibbs said on Sunday, “I think there is no doubt there are enough seats in play — that could cause Republicans to gain control.”

The senior Democratic officials said it’s one thing for a pundit to state the obvious about the state of play in the election and quite another for a top White House official to offer an assessment that may depress the party’s base just as officials hope to start revving liberals up.

“Members were hot — hot, hot, hot,” one senior Democratic official told CNN about the private meeting Tuesday where House Democrats directed their anger at Dan Turton, a White House aide who attended the session.

A senior administration official acknowledged to CNN there was heavy tension at Tuesday’s congressional meeting, but stressed that many lawmakers also said that after expressing their frustration they now want to turn the page and did not plan to rail against the president himself at Wednesday night’s meeting at the White House with Pelosi and other leaders including Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn of South Carolina.

Several House Democrats offered a similar message.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman, took a jab at Gibbs on Wednesday when he told reporters that “people need to be aware of how their comments will be interpreted in a political environment.”

Later, in an interview with CNN, Van Hollen stressed the need to move past the comments by Gibbs.

“There is no upside to this and we need to get beyond this and focus less on what the president’s spokesman said on a news show and focus on what the Republicans say they will do if they get control of the House,” said Van Hollen, of Maryland. Republicans are asking voters “to send back the same guys who got the economy in the ditch to begin with,” he said.

Hoyer said Democrats need to get on the same page when they meet with Obama.

“I think our message to the president is we need to be speaking obviously on message from the White House, and from the House, and I think we need to be focused on what we’ve done to create jobs and move the country forward,” Hoyer said, repeating his comment Tuesday that “we’re going to maintain control of the House so I think any conclusion other than that is incorrect.”

Meanwhile, House Republican Leader John Boehner described the chamber’s Democratic caucus as “in chaos,” but acknowledged Republicans have “a steep hill to climb to get to the majority.”

“We’ve got a lot of work to do, but it is possible,” said Boehner, of Ohio.

Dina Titus, a first term Democrat from Nevada and a top target of Republicans, told CNN she hoped the party spat would “get Democrats all enthused and they turn out even more because these are tough races.”

But she also sought to distance herself from the White House and top Democrats, saying: “We’re just running our own race. I’m not Obama. I’m not Reid. I’m Dina Titus and that’s what we’re focusing on.”

Gibbs, on Wednesday at his White House briefing, sought to ease some of the tension by saying Pelosi’s efforts have been “monumental” on behalf of the president’s agenda. He also reiterated that his original comments on Sunday were meant to rally the party into coming together on showing voters there will be a sharp contrast between the Republican and Democratic agendas in November.

“On that choice we will do very well,” said Gibbs, adding that he believes Democrats will keep control of both the House and Senate.

Nevertheless, Gibbs’ comments sent alarm bells through the upper echelons of the Democratic party, especially because Van Hollen’s Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has a long-planned breakfast meeting Thursday with lobbyists who are key party fundraisers.

The committee, which is in charge of helping to elect House Democrats, had been hoping to project momentum in advance of Friday’s deadline to publicly reveal fundraising numbers for the first six months of this year.

The fear now among some top Democrats, in the words of one top party official, is that the Gibbs comments will “give the Republicans a big fundraising boost” as perception builds that Democrats are in even deeper trouble than already expected.

Gibbs himself has insisted all week that he was really just stating the obvious about the challenge Democrats are facing.

“I think I did what is maybe uncommon in this town and yesterday I opened my mouth and stated the obvious,” Gibbs said at Monday’s daily press briefing with reporters. “I do not believe that you all are now scurrying around to cover this election markedly different based on my having said that there are a number of seats that are in play.”

Gibbs has also stressed all week that he’s merely trying to focus everyone on the fact that both parties will be offering sharply different visions of how to deal with key issues like the economy.

“You’re going to have a choice between the leadership that we have now and the leadership that believes that BP should be apologized to first and foremost, and that the type of calamity wrought by the financial meltdown in the end of 2008 is analogous to the size of an ant,” Gibbs said Monday. “Those are choices that the American people are going to get a chance to hear and make in November.”

CNN’s Deirdre Walsh and Brianna Keilar contributed to this report.

Some Dems still fuming over Gibbs’ comments

‘Clock is ticking’ on immigration reform

Washington (CNN) — With Arizona’s controversial immigration law set to go into effect next month, calls for federal action on comprehensive immigration reform are growing louder.

But with other issues dominating Congress’ schedule, can the bill currently in the House gain any traction?

Yes, according to a leading Hispanic congressman involved in the immigration reform fight.

“We know the legislative clock is ticking. We know people are getting deported at the highest rate in modern history,” Rep. Luis Gutierrez said in remarks delivered at a news conference Thursday, attended by dozens of members of Congress. “We know that the Arizona law, which, unless something happens, will go into effect in about one month, is a call to action. It is a cry of frustration.”

Arizona’s law, signed by Gov. Jan Brewer in late April, requires police to question people about their status if they have been detained for another reason and if there’s reason to suspect they’re in the United States illegally. It also targets those who hire illegal immigrant laborers or knowingly transport them.

Read more about Arizona’s immigration law

More than a dozen states are now following Arizona’s lead in taking up legislation to deal with illegal immigration.

Gutierrez, a Democrat from Illinois and chairman of the Immigration Task Force of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said July will be a critical month in getting the House’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America’s Security and Prosperity Act on the front burner. The bill has more than 100 co-sponsors.

“After the August recess, we all know the chances of major action dwindle and that if the Arizona law is allowed to go into effect, it will cause massive disruptions and set a dangerous precedent,” he said.

Gutierrez believes that an immigration bill can be passed this year with bipartisan support from both legislative chambers, according to Gutierrez spokesman Douglas Rivlin.

“He has offered to bring 200 House Democrats to the table if the House Republicans can bring 20 and the math is similar in the Senate,” Rivlin said. “He would not be pushing it if it were impossible.”

On the Senate side, Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, and Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, have an immigration plan of their own, which was introduced in March.

“The American people deserve more than empty rhetoric and impractical calls for mass deportation,” the two senators said in a March 19 Washington Post op-ed. “We urge the public and our colleagues to join our bipartisan efforts in enacting these reforms.”

So far, the legislative plan has failed to gain traction and will probably be pushed aside as the Senate tackles the Supreme Court confirmation hearings and other issues such as financial regulatory reform.

Obama, though, has signaled that he is hopeful the senators’ plans will gain momentum.

But it’s not just members of Congress pushing for federal action.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano recently said that Congress should move on legislation while the administration strengthens security at the U.S.-Mexican border. She said it’s the federal government’s job to set immigration and border security policies.

“We need a single, functional immigration and border policy,” she said. “We cannot have 50 different state policies. It simply will not work for us.”

Case in point, advocates say: Voters in Fremont, Nebraska, passed a much-debated measure Monday that would prohibit businesses and landlords from hiring or renting to people who are in the United States illegally.

Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum — a leading immigrant advocacy organization — said in a statement Thursday that allowing states to create their own legislation would “create chaos and confusion for both immigrants and law enforcement while not fixing the immigration problem at its core.”

“We don’t need an uneven patchwork of state-based immigration laws; we need a comprehensive national solution,” Noorani added. “State-based immigration proposals should be a wake-up call to Congress, they need to take the steering wheel, fix the immigration problem and finally pass comprehensive immigration reform.”

Advocates for immigration reform legislation point to polls showing that Americans are not only concerned about the issue, but want federal action now.

In late May, a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll showed that six in 10 respondents found that the federal government should focus on stopping the flow of illegal immigrants into the U.S., deporting those already here and supporting more border security.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll released in mid-June found that 52 percent of respondents said immigration enforcement should be under the control of the federal government, and 46 percent said immigration laws should be made and enforced by the states.

CNN’s Carol Cratty contributed to this report.

‘Clock is ticking’ on immigration reform

Obama marks stimulus plan milestone

(CNN) — President Barack Obama traveled to Columbus, Ohio, on Friday to mark the groundbreaking of what the administration is touting as the 10,000th road project to be funded by the politically controversial $862 billion economic stimulus plan.

The trip was part of the launch of the White House’s “Recovery Summer,” a six-week push to highlight what the administration says will be a summer and fall of job creation fueled by a new surge in federal stimulus spending.

Obama visited a project in downtown Columbus expected to create more than 300 construction jobs while contributing “to the broader economic development effort underway in the area,” according to the White House.

“These projects haven’t just improved communities,” Obama said. “They’ve put thousands of construction crews … to work.”

The project is a good example of the purpose of the stimulus plan, which is “not just to jumpstart the economy … but to make the investments that will spur growth and spread prosperity and pay dividends to our communities for generations to come.”

The trip marked Obama’s eighth visit to the politically critical swing state since assuming the presidency a year and a half ago. Obama last visited Ohio on May 18 — a trip also used to defend the stimulus plan.

The stimulus, which is formally known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, was designed to boost the country’s economy by increasing federal government spending and cutting taxes. Critics have repeatedly characterized the plan as a budget-busting boondoggle that failed to sufficiently reduce unemployment.

No Republicans in the House and only three in the Senate voted for the bill. The measure was initially believed to have a price tag of $787 billion, but earlier this year, the Congressional Budget Office increased its forecast for how much the stimulus will add to the nation’s deficit, raising its estimate by $75 billion.

While job creation is a top issue across the country, it’s especially important in Ohio, where the most recent data put the state unemployment level at 10.9 percent.

Ohio is a crucial state in presidential elections. Obama won Ohio by 5 points over Republican Sen. John McCain in the 2008 election. The most recent polls in Ohio indicate that Obama’s approval rating on the job he’s doing as president stands around 45 percent.

The state also has some high-profile contests in this November’s midterm elections, including governor and senator. In the gubernatorial contest, incumbent Democrat Ted Strickland faces a tough re-election battle against his Republican challenger, former Rep. John Kasich.

The Republicans are hoping to hold on to the seat of retiring Sen. George Voinovich. Surveys suggest a close race between the GOP nominee, former Rep. and Bush administration budget director Rob Portman, and the Democratic nominee, Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher.

Republicans note that Fisher didn’t team up with the president the last two times Obama was in Ohio. Both Fisher and Strickland were scheduled to appear at Friday’s event.

CNN’s Paul Steinhauser and Xuan Thai contributed to this report

Obama marks stimulus plan milestone

Obama names rest of Gulf disaster commission

Washington (CNN) — President Barack Obama on Monday announced the remaining five members of a commission he appointed to investigate the BP Gulf of Mexico oil disaster.

A White House statement said Obama named Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council; Donald Boesch, president of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Sciences; Terry Garcia, executive vice president for mission programs for the National Geographic Society; Cherry Murray, dean of the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences; and Frances Ulmer, chancellor of the University of Alaska-Anchorage.

Obama previously appointed former U.S. Sen. Bob Graham of Florida, a Democrat, and former Environmental Protection Agency administrator William Reilly, a Republican, as co-chairman of the seven-member commission.

“These individuals bring tremendous expertise and experience to the critical work of this commission,” Obama said in Monday’s statement. “I am grateful they have agreed to serve as we work to determine the causes of this catastrophe and implement the safety and environmental protections we need to prevent a similar disaster from happening again.”

The commission established by executive order will look at how the devastating oil spill happened, how the government and BP responded, and how to avoid situations like it again in the future. Obama set a deadline of the end of 2010 for the commission to complete its work.

Obama names rest of Gulf disaster commission