Thread: A conversations with Jim Kolbe

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/border/118598

Published: 03.05.2006

A conversations with Jim Kolbe
ARIZONA DAILY STAR

Kolbe: On immigration, as you may know from the statements that I made at the time the House passed its bill, I am not very optimistic. I said it was a terrible mistake for us to pass a bill that emphasized enforcement only.

I think others really think that somehow we pass a bill and the Senate will pass a better bill, one that includes guest-worker provisions. It will go to conference and we will get a reasonably good bill.

In my view, it isn't going to work that way. Once the House has passed an enforcement-only bill, the Senate may or may not ever act on anything.
Enforcement is two parts. Border enforcement is actually the smaller piece. Employer enforcement (is the larger piece) and it only works if you have proper documentation.

The second part (of comprehensive immigration) is guest workers, which ties in with enforcing the employer. You have to have a guest- worker program with valid documentation that allows people to cross the border legally to take jobs that are needed in the United States. The third is the question of those who are already in the country illegally and how are you going to deal with them.

I think that any bill that falls short and simply ignores (those points) leaves you vulnerable to having legislation that will not work.

Star: It doesn't sound like we are going to get anything multitiered out of Congress anytime soon. Is everyone going to go home on their summer break without getting anything done?

Kolbe: I think we will be exactly where we are today. I think there will be no legislation of any sort.

Star: And so when our governor asks for money to support border security from Congress?

Kolbe: We will continue to put money up for more security through the regular appropriations process, not the new legislation.

Star: Have you heard anything about the governor's request to get more money for the Arizona National Guardsmen on the border? She has been talking about this for a couple of months, but do you get any sense of it going any place?

Kolbe: I don't have any sense of it going any place. (Secretary of Defense Donald) Rumsfeld has his hands full with using the Guard and the reserves in Iraq. The National Guard is not the solution to the problem.

Kolbe: Let me talk about earmark reforms, as that seems to be very much on the mind of everybody. I think we clearly need to do some things that would make earmarks more transparent than they are today. But I reject the notion that somehow Congress is supposed to give up its authority on how the money gets spent.

The last time I checked the Constitution, it says no funds are to be expended except as appropriated by the Congress of the United States. So it seems to me, that that's a fundamental responsibility of the Congress.

I personally think that we should have a provision that says that an earmark may not be added in conference. That's where the abuses occur. They are thrown between the two sides at the last minute.

Kolbe: The president, as you know, has submitted a supplemental appropriation bill, which asks mostly for money for the war in Iraq. Some people are raising some real questions as to why do we keep seeing these supplemental appropriation bills.

It's a valid argument that this additional money ought not to be built into the base of Defense Department spending simply because there will be an end. There will be a drawing down of the dollars that are spent in places like Iraq or Afghanistan.

If you put it (money for Iraq and Afghanistan) into the annual appropriation bill it is in the base for next year: that's why a supplemental appropriation bill (is necessary).

The appropriation request also includes $1.6 billion for a provincial reconstruction team (PRT), which has been used very successfully in Afghanistan and will be expanding to Iraq. The PRT in Afghanistan have been very successful with development assistance

There is also $160 million for the African Union, which I strongly support to keep the U.N. peacekeeping troops there. And that also includes money for food assistance there.

Finally, one of the difficult, contentious issues in this supplemental will be how the dollars (get to the) Palestinian areas.We haven't figured out what we are going to do with the money that we currently have in the 2006 bill that just got signed into law a few weeks ago. Do we cut if off altogether? Do we limit it?

Kolbe: Port Security has made headlines. It appears that this may be diffused a bit now, but this is just one of those really bogus issues. Who manages the port has nothing to do with the security. The company that manages the port runs the cranes, loads and manages the space.
What is disturbing is it allows us to divert our attention from the real issue. We inspect much less than 1 percent of all of the containers that come into the United States.

Star: About the Dubai issue, why are so many of the president's friends willing to beat him over the head with this?

Kolbe: It's two things. On the practical political front, they see the president weakened and they can afford to do it. If the president was extremely popular and strong, they wouldn't take him on this way. But he's not, so they can afford to look independent.

And secondly, it's a great demagogue issue. It makes a great press statement and gets on national news. It allows you to avoid the real issues, which we like to do sometimes.

Star: Can you talk a little bit about the leadership opportunity for Majority Leader Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio)?

Kolbe: He's going to make a difference. He has a very different style from Tom DeLay (R-Texas).

John Boehner can be tough, but I think John Boehner is a very practical kind of a guy. At the retreat the Republican House members had three weeks ago, you could sense a lessening of the tension. It's too early to tell about John Boehner's performance, but I feel pretty confident.

Star: What's the most important thing he can do immediately?

Kolbe: Restore the credibility of the House as an institution. We've got to show that we can respond to things, like the need to do something about the financial aspects, the management of the House, the management of the House scheduling system and the earmark issues. I hope we do it not in a reactive fashion, but in a fashion that is thoughtful and carefully considered.

We have to reach out to the other side, not holding good ideas along the Republican side, not holding the wisdom of the world along the Republican side, and we should reach out.

There's a practical reason for doing that: the narrow margin that we have. When you don't reach out for the other side, then the leadership has to go and twist arms, cajole and make promises. It's been the approach — it was the approach of Tom DeLay — that everything should be seen in basically a partisan light and that you should only count on getting votes from the Republicans. We put everything through the wringer or the test of how we squeeze 218 votes out of it.

With some things you just can't get 218 votes, so you end up without getting good pieces of legislation.

Star: So you're happy with the vote for Boehner? At least the direction?

Kolbe: I'm satisfied that I think he's not only clean, but he'll keep clean and he'll operate completely aboveboard. In this day and age, you can't operate any other way.

Star: Can you talk about Iraq? Is it sliding to civil war?

Kolbe: Well, I think there's a real danger of that. Maybe I'm being Pollyanna-ish or hopeful, but sometimes the media has to go to the edge of the abyss, look over the edge and see what's there to realize how horrific it would be and maybe to draw back. I'm wondering if the bombing of the shrine might have been the issue that maybe the Iraqis will say, "We really are going to slide into civil war if we don't stop this."
I noticed there have been a lot of calls from Iraqi leaders to pull back and to try and reach out and try to stop the violence from occurring. But it is certainly a real danger that we could be sliding into a civil war there.

Star: What will that mean to us and how do we prevent it?

Kolbe: I don't know how we are going to prevent it. We may have to get back in and take a much tougher role ourselves in terms of security. We may have to supervise the security forces. Our goal has been to get the security forces trained so that we can get out of the picture. Training them, if they don't have the right leadership, isn't enough.
I think we may find ourselves getting back into taking a bigger role in the patrols and actually supervising some of the security forces again until we can get them better trained and better leadership.

Star: So what is the world's hot spot that we're not, as Americans, paying enough attention to right now?

Kolbe: There are so many different places. Well, it's on my mind, since I was just there, but I'll tell you one is Indonesia — we've got an incredibly powerful government there. Bali is 40 percent of the country's tourism economy. If they (Bali) have a a third bombing, everybody agrees, it's finished. There will be no comeback after that. The people I talked to when I was in Bali advised me, if there's a third bombing, there's going to be an all-out sectarian war.

Star: So the U.S. role right now is preventing that or understanding it or doing something about it?

Kolbe: Doing everything we can to prevent it.
Another place to keep an eye on is the Horn of Africa: Somalia, Djibouti, Ethiopia. That war between Ethiopia and Eritrea could explode. Because of the sea lanes that carry the oil through the Red Sea, it's a very, very dangerous spot for us.

If I were to think of what headache the next administration is going to have — I'm just going to assume it's going to get worse in the next administration — they're going to have (Venezuelan President) Hugo Chavez as its number-one problem. We've got to pay more attention to Latin America. Latin America is taking a bad turn. We've got a president in Argentina that's following a dreadful economic policy.

Star: Do you think that's a trend or a cycle for Latin America?
Kolbe: To some extent it is a cycle, but it's a down cycle right now and it's something that we should be worried about.

Kolbe: This is the first time I have seen you since I have announced my retirement. You know, there is a time for everything. I want to leave while I am young enough to do something else.

Star: What is that something else going to be?

Kolbe: I don't know yet. I have had some conversations about doing some teaching and maybe some consulting.

Star: Are you going to come back here or are you going to stay in Washington?

Kolbe: I will definitely have a place here. I will continue to have one foot here. I may do as I am doing now and divide my time. In fact, that is probably what I would do.

Hopefully, I would not have to get on a plane every Monday to Washington.

While people are still urging me to stay, I want to do it (leave) when I can walk out and not be carried out. So I am very comfortable with the decision.

But you know I will miss a lot of the aspects of it. I have enjoyed it, particularly the last six years as a chairman of foreign operations. The ability that has been given to me to have an impact on foreign international affairs has really been terrific. Enough said about all of that, I guess.

Star: Your retirement has kind of spawned an industry. What is your inclination? Do you see anybody out there who makes a good candidate?

Kolbe: You think you are going to draw me into that today? I don't think so.

At the appropriate time I will say something about that, but I don't think I am going to make any endorsement at this point. There are a lot of good and interesting people out there that are running.

On StarNet: Read the recent conversations with Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl, and Rep. Raúl Grijalva at www.azstarnet.com/opinion
on U.S. port OPERATIONS

"Who manages the port has nothing to do with the security."
ON new LEADER JOHN Boehner
"He'll operate completely aboveboard."

When I hear these people, I only see the quickly gathering clouds of a darker storm than yesterday. They are so lost; so clueless; so indifferent.

In a phrase, the US Congress is impotent.

We alone, unrepresented and defenseless...being sold out by the people paid well to do otherwise.