Rand Paul’s immigration plan: Border security before probationary legal status

posted at 12:01 pm on March 19, 2013 by Allahpundit

The AP claimed this morning that Paul was set to endorse a path to citizenship in his speech today. Not so, countered conservatives on Twitter: Read his prepared remarks and you’ll see that citizenship is never mentioned. Which is true, and also irrelevant. The whole point of Paul’s speech is GOP rapprochement with Latino voters; he spends nearly two-thirds of it extolling Latinos’ work ethic, reminiscing about his friendships with Latinos growing up in Texas, name-checking Jaime Escalante and Pablo Neruda, and of course citing the ancient canard that Latinos are really just Republicans who don’t know it yet. (He mentions abortion and gay marriage as particular areas of overlap. In fact, younger Latinos support legal abortion in all or most cases and nearly 60 percent of Latinos overall support state recognition of gay marriage.) There’s no earthly way that Paul, having made a conciliatory pitch that florid, would ultimately turn around and insist that illegals be forever barred from seeking citizenship. In his op-ed on immigration today at the Washington Times, he actually refers to them at one point as “undocumented citizens.”(!) When pressed on the issue in the Q&A after his speech, he said this:

So no, he won’t create a special path to citizenship to help move illegals quickly through the green-card process but there’s a path to citizenship through normal channels in the end. Then again, with the singular exception of Jeb Bush, whom no one believes is serious anyway, every prominent Republican politician I can think of supports a path to citizenship eventually. That’s my whole point: If you’re trying to build goodwill with Latinos, there has to be. But what about the rest of Paul’s plan? Quote:

The first part of my plan – border security – must be certified by Border Patrol and an Investigator General and then voted on by Congress to ensure it has been accomplished…

With this in place, I believe conservatives will accept what needs to come next, an issue that must be addressed: what becomes of the 12 million undocumented workers in the United States?

My plan is very simple and will include work visas for those who are here, who are willing to come forward and work…

After an Inspector General has verified that the border is secure after year one, the report must come back and be approved by Congress.

In year two, we could begin expanding probationary work visas to immigrants who are willing to work. I would have Congress vote each year for five years whether to approve or not approve a report on whether or not we are securing the border.

Byron York’s right that that’s a key difference with the Schumer/Rubio bill. The Senate bill would grant probationary legal status to illegals on the day the bill is signed into law; the path to a green card and eventual citizenship would, however, be contingent upon improvements in border security. Immigration hawks argue that that’s not good enough. Realistically, once someone has probationary legal status, there’ll be no political will to revoke it or to postpone the citizenship process indefinitely until border security has been tightened. Paul’s solution is to make that initial probationary legal status also contingent upon better border security. Illegals here get nothing until there’s real evidence that the border’s being enforced more comprehensively. (Paul has been talking about that for weeks, in fact, as a contrast to Rubio’s plan; I wrote about it on January 31.)

There’s just one hitch. Democrats will never agree to let Congress decide whether the border’s been sufficiently secured yet, especially with the GOP poised to gain seats in the Senate next year. The left wants llegals on the track to citizenship as quickly as possible, but if you make that track contingent upon border security, you risk letting a Republican Congress block it every year by voting that the border hasn’t been tightened quite enough yet. Although actually, I think the left’s fear there is overblown: As we get closer to 2016, the specter of alienating Latinos anew by consistently voting to delay citizenship for illegals would convince enough Republicans in Congress to join with Democrats in rubber-stamping border security to get the citizenship process moving. Paul’s bill is actually better politics for the GOP, arguably, because it lets them sound tougher on the border now, when conservatives are paying attention, while letting them go soft later when right-wing voters will be more forgiving of GOP caves that are aimed at winning the election.

One other footnote: He wants to modernize the visa system so that we can better track illegals who are here, but he opposes E-Verify because it “forc[es] businesses to become policemen.” That’s a concession to his libertarian base, many of whom support open borders and won’t like seeing him acting like a border hawk today. The least he can do for them is make sure that private enterprise isn’t being deputized by the state to carry out its regime of policing labor. Why a libertarian would necessarily favor more robust federal visa-tracking over E-Verify, though, I don’t know. Granted, without E-Verify illegals who lack probationary status have a better chance of finding employment, but on the other hand Paul’s scheme would likely require a bigger, more intrusive government agency to check up on illegal workers in lieu of letting employers do it. But then, let’s not get bogged down in the details. This isn’t meant as a viable plan for the Senate, as Rubio’s is, but as a political document aimed at showing grassroots conservatives that he’s tougher on the legalization process than Rubio and at showing independents and Latino voters that he’s compassionate enough towards immigrants to want them to stay and work here as long as they want. I’ll leave you with this:


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Rand Paul is a pandering amnesty supporter. I will not support him for nomination.

bluegill on March 19, 2013 at 12:03 PM

Sounds better than what Rubio and his gang are working on, but the problem is when you leave so much of it up to Congress, we’re gonna get screwed in the end.

Doughboy on March 19, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Also,

$2500 dollar tax credit for everyone unemployed. A 1M dollar hardship payout for anyone that has lost a loved one since 1986 payed for by the US Treasury. This is fair!

jjnco73 on March 19, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Yeah yall do it. Let it burn. Really, Repubs are stupid.

Hispanics do not support Dems because of immigration. They support Dems because of their welfare programs and because of their economic policies.

You legalize all of those people and then we will get creamed even further in elections.

Repubs are the stupidiest most suicidal political party I have ever seen.

You think that by becoming Dem, you will get some tolerance cred. LOL– You could adopt the whole Dem platform, but as long as you have the R behind your name, you will remain a sexist,, homophobe in the media. When you all learn to combat that and stand by your principles maybe I might vote your way again.

melle1228 on March 19, 2013 at 12:08 PM

Rand Paul 2016!!

/nevertooearly

JohnGalt23 on March 19, 2013 at 12:08 PM

Sounds better than what Rubio and his gang are working on, but the problem is when you leave so much of it up to Congress, we’re gonna get screwed in the end.

Doughboy on March 19, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Who, exactly, should it be left up to?

JohnGalt23 on March 19, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Can you buy patriotism and loyalty?

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Unacceptable.

AZCoyote on March 19, 2013 at 12:10 PM

With the best metric for measuring said border security…Janet Napolitano.

Seriously, Congress will simply deem the border secure and WHAMMO!

welcome another few tens of millions in Democrat voters and supporters.

Sounds like a plan….

catmman on March 19, 2013 at 12:11 PM

That’s a concession to his libertarian base, many of whom support open borders and won’t like seeing him acting like a border hawk today.

This is one of the things I can’t understand about (certain) libertarians. An open-border policy is a suicide pact for libertarianism. Current American culture is the most libertarian in the world. By the simple law of diffusion, a policy of letting anyone in who wants in is guaranteed to result in an American culture that is much less libertarian.

sadarj on March 19, 2013 at 12:12 PM

still using the term “undocumented” huh?

GhoulAid on March 19, 2013 at 12:12 PM

GhoulAid on March 19, 2013 at 12:12 PM

“Illegal” would hurt their feelings./

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 12:14 PM

Looking for a Check, on a losing chess board perhaps?

Hey its passed in the Senate, they have the votes – Dem Commies just looking for Rs to fall on their swords so they can lie about the bi-partisan nature of it.

Its all gonna be up to Team Boehner.

oy.

FlaMurph on March 19, 2013 at 12:14 PM

Unacceptable.

AZCoyote on March 19, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Ditto!

ShainS on March 19, 2013 at 12:15 PM

I want Randstand to filibuster everything until that border is secure. Screw passing any legislation that uses border security to get or give something else. It’s called unfinished business – not new business. Jerks.

LetsBfrank on March 19, 2013 at 12:15 PM

“I appreciate the good work that senators in both parties have put into trying to fix our broken immigration system. There are some good elements in this proposal, especially increasing the resources and manpower to secure our border and also improving and streamlining legal immigration. However, I have deep concerns with the proposed path to citizenship. To allow those who came here illegally to be placed on such a path is both inconsistent with rule of law and profoundly unfair to the millions of legal immigrants who waited years, if not decades, to come to America legally.” – Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tx.
Monday, January 28, 2013

workingclass artist on March 19, 2013 at 12:15 PM

The border won’t be sealed, so Rand Paul doesn’t have to worry about it. All he’s doing is trying to look “reasonable” and convince people that he’s willing to “compromise.”

Hispandering will not get Republican votes, and it will alienate conservatives. This is a no-win for Republicans.

JannyMae on March 19, 2013 at 12:16 PM

rule of law

Never heard of it.

LetsBfrank on March 19, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Perhaps if the federal government offered the drug cartels cushy jobs in the TSA or DHS, Americaland could just annex Mexico as the 58th state and put this entire matter to rest.

Jeddite on March 19, 2013 at 12:16 PM

I think if Republicans go along with this, they are screwed. Welcome back Speaker Pelosi!

Republicans, you better understand the word gridlock.

jjnco73 on March 19, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Bottom line. I will vote for any presidential candidate who opposes amnesty and any form thereof, which this is. I don’t care if the candidate is republican, democrat, independent or Chinese.

And I will oppose any candidate that pushes for amnesty. Can you hear me now?

voiceofreason on March 19, 2013 at 12:18 PM

My plan is very simple and will include work visas for those who are here, who are willing to come forward and work…

After an Inspector General has verified that the border is secure after year one, the report must come back and be approved by Congress.

LOL. Get bent, Rand. The above is nothing but a sad, sick joke that only the dimmest among us would even take seriously. Aside from that, any legalization of illegals is beyond amnesty – it’s aiding and abetting. Illegals have to not only leave this nation but they can never be allowed to come back. Period. End of story.

Your stupid disgust with the notions of sovereignty and the nation-state is duly noted. Now, go sit in the corner with the other anti-nation-state worms who think their job is to work for non-citizens who have forced themselves on us. Utterly despicable – you and them.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 12:19 PM

A perfect solution: Give them all, starting today, temporary visa that allows to apply for work but not for any federal benefits such as food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, hospital care, S-CHIP, etc. Essentially, declare them all tourists with the right to work. Individuals who maintain continuous employment for the next 6 years (make it 2 for Army service, 3 for college degree holders), plus one year for each dependent co-applicant, are allowed to apply for the Green Card. That’s the proper way to retain hard-working Mexicans willing to sweat for their kids’ future and social parasites and welfare milkers.

Archivarix on March 19, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Okay, so we threw Marco Rubio out of the Conservative Movement a month or two ago.

Bobby Jindal got the axe back in December. Christie? Hell he was gone for some people the day he admitted that he didn’t think all Muslims were merely terrorists-waiting-to-happen, but Hurricane Sandy certainly sealed the deal.

Dr. Ben Carson was our New Hero. Now, he’s just another pile of garbage by the side of the road.

So today I guess it’s Rand Paul’s turn to be The Most Evil, Loathsome Traitorous RINO Sellout In The World.

(There’s a lesson here, but somehow I get the feeling it’s not one many people around here will accept: namely, you’re a goddamn retard if you keep violently throwing every single person out of your True Conservative Club the first time they deviate from your opinion on one issue or another. At this point people around here (and all over the Rightosphere) have developed 5,000 bright-line litmus tests, to the point where there isn’t a single friggin’ politician who can meet them. The only ones who can? Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin, I guess. And what a coincidence: they get paid to tell you exactly what you want to hear, as opposed to having to negotiate in the real world.)

And note: I think Rand Paul is quite wrong on this. But that doesn’t mean I want to execrate him.

Esoteric on March 19, 2013 at 12:20 PM

With the best metric for measuring said border security…Janet Napolitano.

Seriously, Congress will simply deem the border secure and WHAMMO!

welcome another few tens of millions in Democrat voters and supporters.

Sounds like a plan….

catmman on March 19, 2013 at 12:11 PM

You’ve hit on why this “secure the border first” crap is meaningless. Congress will be under great pressure from the parasites who are pushing amnesty to make the process to document and reward the boundry jumpers as painless and quick as possible. There will be no meaningful beefing up of the border- how do a few more million little brown criminals sneak into the Dem voter rolls if they can’t get across the border?

Nor will it be fair to all those who have tried to immigrate the right way but don’t have benefit of being the most sought after voting bloc in America after stupid women and the gays.

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2013 at 12:21 PM

just keep working and producing wealth for redistribution you white folk.

tom daschle concerned on March 19, 2013 at 12:22 PM

Then again, with the singular exception of Jeb Bush, whom no one believes is serious anyway, every prominent Republican politician I can think of supports a path to citizenship eventually.

Ted Cruz doesn’t. Don’t know about Jindal. Ben Carson is probably running, who knows where he stands.

Jon0815 on March 19, 2013 at 12:23 PM

You’ve hit on why this “secure the border first” crap is meaningless. Congress will be under great pressure from the parasites who are pushing amnesty to make the process to document and reward the boundry jumpers as painless and quick as possible. There will be no meaningful beefing up of the border- how do a few more million little brown criminals sneak into the Dem voter rolls if they can’t get across the border?

Nor will it be fair to all those who have tried to immigrate the right way but don’t have benefit of being the most sought after voting bloc in America after stupid women and the gays.

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2013 at 12:21 PM

Ok, let the border states determine if border security is in place.

jjnco73 on March 19, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Everyone ignores the one tactic that makes even border security moot. ATTRITION THROUGH ENFORCEMENT. Take away the jobs, free education, free healthcare and social services and these people will leave on their own and will have zero incentive to test/violate our borders again.

voiceofreason on March 19, 2013 at 12:24 PM

I want Randstand to filibuster everything until that border is secure.

LetsBfrank on March 19, 2013 at 12:15 PM

Border security is a meaningless joke without interior enforcement, which is exactly what all of these dirtballs refuse to do. We have tens of millions of aliens come through here on visas. It takes only a tiny percentage to just stay for this nation to fill up with illegals at any time. There must always be interior enforcement. There is no way around this.

Those who are calling for “a secure border …. and then aiding and abetting the illegals” can all take a running jump. They use the “secure border” ruse to finally get their treasonous plan through to just ignore all sovereignty issues and law and print up citizenships for people who already are citizens of other countries. They’re the Ben Bernankes of State, looking to devalue American citizenship (as if it hasn’t been ravaged enough, already) until it is less than meaningless. The Founders would spit on these dirtballs for their lack of understanding of the importance of the nation-state and the defense of our national sovereignty.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Here’s to hoping Rand’s children will one day pray to Agua Buda

renalin on March 19, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Meet the new boss. Same as the Old Boss. The Who

Rand Paul is the new John McCain and Lindsay Graham. Where is President Eisenhower when we need him.

Tripwhipper on March 19, 2013 at 12:26 PM

(There’s a lesson here, but somehow I get the feeling it’s not one many people around here will accept: namely, you’re a goddamn retard silly, silly person if you keep violently throwing every single person out of your True Conservative Club the first time they deviate from your opinion on one issue or another. At this point people around here (and all over the Rightosphere) have developed 5,000 bright-line litmus tests, to the point where there isn’t a single friggin’ politician who can meet them. The only ones who can? Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin, I guess. And what a coincidence: they get paid to tell you exactly what you want to hear, as opposed to having to negotiate in the real world.)

Esoteric on March 19, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Very much agreed. (Just fixed it for my own personal language preferences.

RightWay79 on March 19, 2013 at 12:27 PM

This is so discouraging.

Big Orange on March 19, 2013 at 12:28 PM

So today I guess it’s Rand Paul’s turn to be The Most Evil, Loathsome Traitorous RINO Sellout In The World.
Esoteric on March 19, 2013 at 12:20 PM

why is so hard to have someone in congress who is a solid, non-bending conservative who upholds traditional values and viewpoints all across the board. why???

GhoulAid on March 19, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Other than a willful disregard for enforcing the laws on the books, what,exactly is it about our immigration policy that is “broken”?

Mimzey on March 19, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Those who are calling for “a secure border …. and then aiding and abetting the illegals” can all take a running jump.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair

Both sides use legalizing illegals as currency to spend and treat enforcement of law as a la carte menu items. It’s disgusting.

LetsBfrank on March 19, 2013 at 12:31 PM

Rand Paul is a pandering amnesty supporter. I will not support him for nomination.

bluegill on March 19, 2013 at 12:03 PM

Rand Paul is grateful to lose your support.

portlandon on March 19, 2013 at 12:31 PM

, you’re a goddamn retard if you keep violently throwing every single person out of your True Conservative Club the first time they deviate from your opinion on one issue or another. At this point people around here (and all over the Rightosphere) have developed 5,000 bright-line litmus tests, to the point where there isn’t a single friggin’ politician who can meet them. The only ones who can? Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin, I guess. And what a coincidence: they get paid to tell you exactly what you want to hear, as opposed to having to negotiate in the real world.)

And note: I think Rand Paul is quite wrong on this. But that doesn’t mean I want to execrate him.

Esoteric on March 19, 2013 at 12:20 PM

There’s a difference between demanding purity on every issue and having a single dealbreaker issue. I’m a pragmatist, but I draw the line at candidates who are trying to create tens of millions of new voters for the other team, which is what amnesty inevitably does.

Jon0815 on March 19, 2013 at 12:31 PM

At this point people around here (and all over the Rightosphere) have developed 5,000 bright-line litmus tests, to the point where there isn’t a single friggin’ politician who can meet them.

Esoteric on March 19, 2013 at 12:20 PM

That’s retarded. There are a few deal-breaker issues and aiding and abetting illegals is certainly one of the big ones. Anyone who was even half conscious during 2006-2008 understands this as this same stupid and treasonous drive for illegals is what just about killed the GOP. That idiotic drive by the GOP is what really started the Tea Party, as people burned up the phone lines in Washington to get these idiots to stop their insanity.

I think you just like to whine about “purists”, though, because your argument is addle-brained, at best.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 12:31 PM

he actually refers to them at one point as “undocumented citizens.”

Idiot.

Ronnie on March 19, 2013 at 12:33 PM

Lawbreakers, Teaters, Generational entitlement leeches, NOT of this country, slaves for business interests that own both parties, and apparently Rand Paul.

#fail

The gop is NOT a Conservative limited government party.

PappyD61 on March 19, 2013 at 12:34 PM

why is so hard to have someone in congress who is a solid, non-bending conservative who upholds traditional values and viewpoints all across the board. why???

GhoulAid on March 19, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Because if you agree with any politician 100%, there is something wrong with you.

We don’t live in some Conservative Utopia where even 30% of the population agree on EVERYTHING.

To run the government of a country with such a wide variety of opinion requires finesse, give-and-take, and the understanding that disagreements do not make us enemies to each other.

RightWay79 on March 19, 2013 at 12:35 PM

That idiotic drive by the GOP is what really started the Tea Party, as people burned up the phone lines in Washington to get these idiots to stop their insanity.

??

Are you just rewriting history on the fly now? The Tea Party started as a response to the bailouts (remember Rick Santelli flipping his wig on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange?) and then Obamacare. Immigration was NEVER a part of its primary concern.

Or wait, you’re just one of those guys for whom “Tea Party” means “stuff I personally care about.”

Esoteric on March 19, 2013 at 12:36 PM

#standawayfromrand

#standwithamnestyrand

#standwiththelawbreakersupporter

#standwiththerulingclass

PappyD61 on March 19, 2013 at 12:37 PM

Yeah yall do it. Let it burn. Really, Repubs are stupid.

Hispanics do not support Dems because of immigration. They support Dems because of their welfare programs and because of their economic policies.

You legalize all of those people and then we will get creamed even further in elections.

Repubs are the stupidiest most suicidal political party I have ever seen.

You think that by becoming Dem, you will get some tolerance cred. LOL– You could adopt the whole Dem platform, but as long as you have the R behind your name, you will remain a sexist,, homophobe in the media. When you all learn to combat that and stand by your principles maybe I might vote your way again.

melle1228 on March 19, 2013 at 12:08 PM

What’s particularly amazing is how most of the GOP amnesty supporters specify their differences with those on the left, with plans that promote work visas and delay outright citizenship. That is to say: plans that make these “undocumented workers” only a drain on jobs, rather than newly enrolled voters. Yet they continue to utter this myth that they are natural Republicans.

When Schumer wants to see them on the voting rolls as soon as possible, I think that’s sign enough that this is about registering a crapton of new Democrat voters not “Republicans in waiting”…

I like Rand Paul in general, but if even the man who fired the 13 hour long shot heard around the world can’t see/won’t see/won’t admit to seeing that amnesty is nothing more than a plan on the part of the left to hijack this nation’s electoral system by way of race-baiting politics and government handouts, then there is nobody ready to save this nation.

Go with Chuckie and we’re screwed by 2020. Take the GOP path and we have the benefit of waiting a little while, maybe 2030 or so, before we’re hosed. That is, of course, if the damage hasn’t been done already. There’s no guarantee it hasn’t… amnesty is only about the final nail to the coffin and Chuck Schumer has half of our side holding the hammer for him.

Gingotts on March 19, 2013 at 12:37 PM

Okay, so we threw Marco Rubio out of the Conservative Movement a month or two ago.

Bobby Jindal got the axe back in December. Christie? Hell he was gone for some people the day he admitted that he didn’t think all Muslims were merely terrorists-waiting-to-happen, but Hurricane Sandy certainly sealed the deal.

Dr. Ben Carson was our New Hero. Now, he’s just another pile of garbage by the side of the road.

So today I guess it’s Rand Paul’s turn to be The Most Evil, Loathsome Traitorous RINO Sellout In The World.

(There’s a lesson here, but somehow I get the feeling it’s not one many people around here will accept: namely, you’re a goddamn retard if you keep violently throwing every single person out of your True Conservative Club the first time they deviate from your opinion on one issue or another. At this point people around here (and all over the Rightosphere) have developed 5,000 bright-line litmus tests, to the point where there isn’t a single friggin’ politician who can meet them. The only ones who can? Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin, I guess. And what a coincidence: they get paid to tell you exactly what you want to hear, as opposed to having to negotiate in the real world.)

And note: I think Rand Paul is quite wrong on this. But that doesn’t mean I want to execrate him.

Esoteric on March 19, 2013 at 12:20 PM

YOu know what? We aren’t talking about little policy disagreements. We are talking about being so out of touch with the Republican base that you can’t even see straight.

Republicans politicians are talking about legalizing gay marriage- piss off the socons

Talking about giving amnesty to illegals- piss off anti-illegal immigration

Already raised taxes

Cut the military, but haven’t made any progress cutting any welfare or entitlement programs.

I am sure I am missing some things, but these are all things that go against the party’s platform, and we are supposed to just go along when politician change the rule.

You people forget that these fools are supposed to be listening to us and working for US! Not us for them.

melle1228 on March 19, 2013 at 12:38 PM

Because if you agree with any politician 100%, there is something wrong with you.

We don’t live in some Conservative Utopia where even 30% of the population agree on EVERYTHING.

To run the government of a country with such a wide variety of opinion requires finesse, give-and-take, and the understanding that disagreements do not make us enemies to each other.

RightWay79 on March 19, 2013 at 12:35 PM

you’re right, we don’t live in a conservative utopis. we live in a unicorn and skittles combo for everyone utopis. that’s why this country has gone to sh_t.

YOU’RE WELCOME.

GhoulAid on March 19, 2013 at 12:39 PM

^utopia. ugh.

GhoulAid on March 19, 2013 at 12:40 PM

Idiots, one and all.

Anyone who calls them “citizens” is moronic.

These are illegal aliens, who broke the US law/s, with disregard, with the blessings of the overlords in DC and in the states.

Amnesty didn’t work under Reagan, and he said so, and it will not work, ever. It will only give the leftards more votes, which it seems the righttards want. They’d rather have power in the minority than have no power.

Politically pitchfork them in 2014, every single one in the House, and as many in the senate, as there are for Amnesty.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 12:40 PM

And note: I think Rand Paul is quite wrong on this. But that doesn’t mean I want to execrate him.
Esoteric on March 19, 2013 at 12:20 PM

I agree. He just probably won’t be who I’ll support for the nomination. The issue of illegal alien amnesty is actually my number one, most important issue.

bluegill on March 19, 2013 at 12:41 PM

and the understanding that disagreements do not make us enemies to each other.

RightWay79 on March 19, 2013 at 12:35 PM

This is not just a disagreement over what color to paint the walls. This is a disagreement over the Rule of Law, the notion of the nation-state, the benefit of being a citizen of a such a state and the very nature of our society. It ain’t small potatoes and no one can argue that they are surprised by any of the reaction to these treasonous representatives working for the interests of illegal aliens who have no business being here, at all. None.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 12:42 PM

he opposes E-Verify because it “forc[es] businesses to become policemen.”

Ugh. What a douchebag.

BuckeyeSam on March 19, 2013 at 12:42 PM

The USA – the water is already boiling in the pan, and the frogs are dead; they just doesn’t realize it, yet.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 12:43 PM

Hispanics do not support Dems because of immigration. They support Dems because of their welfare programs and because of their economic policies.

melle1228 on March 19, 2013 at 12:08 PM

Haven’t you heard? The Royal House of Bush’s courtiers released a document highlighting the GOP’s return to “compassionate conservatism”.

We’ll out-Santa the Santa Claus Democrats. Three cheers for the Royal House of Bush!

Punchenko on March 19, 2013 at 12:44 PM

he opposes E-Verify because it “forc[es] businesses to become policemen.”
Ugh. What a douchebag.
BuckeyeSam on March 19, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Wow. Rand Paul is a no-go for me.

bluegill on March 19, 2013 at 12:45 PM

I told you this guy was full of bluster and is all over the place.

KBird on March 19, 2013 at 12:45 PM

My plan will not impose a national ID card or mandatory E-Verify, forcing businesses to become policemen.”

How dumb.
Maybe he does have a lot of his father in him, because that makes zero sense.

Mimzey on March 19, 2013 at 12:46 PM

There are many Republicans(silent) and virtually all democrats that have bought into world globalization. The only thing standing in there way is The US Constitution.

If you are trying to destroy the American idea, flood the population with third world citizens. Bingo, you achieve your goal.

jjnco73 on March 19, 2013 at 12:46 PM

they just doesn’t don’t realize it, yet

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Parate con Rand!

renalin on March 19, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Wow. Rand Paul is a no-go for me.

bluegill on March 19, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Hopefully Rubio isn’t, either.

Cruz might be next on “oh, come on, let’s make the undocumented documented”.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 12:48 PM

BuckeyeSam on March 19, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Beat me to it.

What the hell is he thinking?? Does he think that the ones already here who are here to be opportunist criminals are going to “come forward”?

Mimzey on March 19, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Why are so many supposedly smart people going all mushy-thinking on this issue??

40% of Hispanic-Americans reject amnesty in favor of attrition through enforcement — only 54% favor amnesty.

So why try to out-pander the Democrats (an impossibility) chasing after the 54% and LOSE the conservative base, instead of appealling to the 40% and KEEPING the conservative base?? Duh!

Rewarding criminals (illegal aliens) with their ill-gotten goods (residency) is NEVER a sane or logical policy if you want to lower the crime rate!!!!!

Enforce the damn laws and they will go home on their own, as this illegal alien in GA explains.

fred5678 on March 19, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Rand just lost me! Has he not heard of Simpson-Mazzoli in 1986? The “one” time Amnesty ,for about 3-million illegal aliens, that had all the preconditions, with strong border enforcement as a result. Everyone knows that border enforcement has been practically non-existent…..that’s why there are 11-million plus, illegal aliens here today! Some states even give these illegals the right to get a driver’s license! Never mind the access to in-state-tuition status and all the other freeby benefits we pay for them to be here. All the while, there are about 17-20 nillion Americans looking for or can’t find work!

By the way, if there were an E-Verify in place, we could deport the illegals, via self-deportation, and real active deportation as our laws already specify. Whenever I hear a politition say,”we can’t deport 11-million illegals,” I want to ask them, “why do we have a law that allows for the deportation of anyone here illegally?”

The only transparency inside the Beltway is the scrambling for votes at the expense of our sovereignty and our wallets! Plus the assault on the Second Amendment!

tomshup on March 19, 2013 at 12:49 PM

All the weasels left this topic off from their CPAC rah-rahs.

Good night America.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Hispanics do not support Dems because of immigration. They support Dems because of their welfare programs and because of their economic policies.

melle1228 on March 19, 2013 at 12:08 PM

Moot point since amnesty leads to more voters, not that dead dogs vote for Ds now.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 12:50 PM

To the whiners that moan……ohhhhhh, you’re throwing away another “conservative”…..nnnnnnooooooo one is perfect enough, blah, blah, blah.

These are core principles of LAW and economic and political sanity.

1. Do you want to limit the size of the Federal government?

2. Do you want to secure our nations border and or reward illegal immigrants that came to this country to suck off our entitlements?

Helllllllo, if you can’t even support fiscal sanity, and securing the border of this country from tens of millions of illegals then you don’t even pass THE FREAKING MINIMUM TEST to be a Conservative.

Purity? How about just being able to pass the minimum?

PappyD61 on March 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM

How dumb.
Maybe he does have a lot of his father in him, because that makes zero sense.

Mimzey on March 19, 2013 at 12:46 PM

I am also against forcing businesses to police illegals. It’s the job of the federal government to conduct interior enforcement, not of businesses. It’s easier to find illegals by making hospitals and schools and the like report them (and deny them services, though our idiotic courts have ruled that out) than to start going after businesses.

But Rand doesn’t want the federal government to do any interior enforcement, either, so he doesn’t have a leg to stand on with his bleating about E-verify and the like. Rand wants to just legalize and print up citizenships for the invasion force so there wouldn’t really be a need for any enforcement of anything in his deluded, demented world. The rest of the illegal supporters who want to impose sanctions and responsibilities on businesses are just looking to create problems.

Illegals are most easily found as they come into contact with any government or official body and when they look to get any services. That is where they are in the open. To put the onus for interior enforcement on private businesses is ridiculous. Yes, a business that hires someone they KNOW is illegal is committing a crime and should be prosecuted but a blanket system to make business the enforceer of laws that the federal govenrment, itself, refuses to enforce … I don’t think so.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM

and the understanding that disagreements do not make us enemies to each other.

RightWay79 on March 19, 2013 at 12:35 PM

This is not just a disagreement over what color to paint the walls. This is a disagreement over the Rule of Law, the notion of the nation-state, the benefit of being a citizen of a such a state and the very nature of our society. It ain’t small potatoes and no one can argue that they are surprised by any of the reaction to these treasonous representatives working for the interests of illegal aliens who have no business being here, at all. None.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 12:42 PM

To be sure, it’s an important issue. But acting on it one way or the other will not solve our biggest problems. (likewise, not acting on Immigration will not make any of our problems just disappear).

And I am not surprised by the vitriolic reaction against even talking about reforming our Immigration system. I’m just continually disappointed by my fellow Conservatives.

RightWay79 on March 19, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Beware the friendship of enemies or the enmity of friends!

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Yes, a business that hires someone they KNOW is illegal is committing a crime and should be prosecuted but a blanket system to make business the enforceer of laws that the federal govenrment, itself, refuses to enforce … I don’t think so.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Most all businesses do, with the overlooking and blessings of the gov’t, from both sides, for different reasons.

The USA is the only land in the world, aside from Somalia, Mali and Afcrapistan, with open borders and unenforced immigration laws.

She deserves destruction in full because she votes for these fools, over and over and over again. A relatively free people always deserve their ‘leaders’.

p.s. I know what you tried to convey but laws not enforced and are encouraged to be broken.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 12:56 PM

And I am not surprised by the vitriolic reaction against even talking about reforming our Immigration system. I’m just continually disappointed by my fellow Conservatives.

RightWay79 on March 19, 2013 at 12:53 PM

There is no “reform” of anything in these ridiculous calls by the morons of the GOP. They merely want to certify that the Rule of Law is now moot. That is their “reform”.

BTW, a guy who crawls over the border today is not an instant “immigrant”. He’s an “illegal migrant”, at best.

It gets really, really tiring to have to put up with the intentional perversion of the language that accompanies this. It’s bad enough that the leftists screw with the language as part of their demented ideology.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM

Helllllllo, if you can’t even support fiscal sanity, and securing the border of this country from tens of millions of illegals then you don’t even pass THE FREAKING MINIMUM TEST to be a Conservative.

Purity? How about just being able to pass the minimum?

PappyD61 on March 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Bingo!

melle1228 on March 19, 2013 at 1:00 PM

One other footnote: He wants to modernize the visa system so that we can better track illegals who are here, but he opposes E-Verify because it “forc[es] businesses to become policemen.” That’s a concession to his libertarian base

I was a new Ron Paul supporter in ’12 and my impression was from a few Ron Paul sites that I started perusing that most of them probably opposed amnesty. That’s one of the reasons I preferred Ron Paul over Gary Johnson, because Ron Paul did not call for amnesty, that I’m aware of.

This is one of the things I can’t understand about (certain) libertarians. An open-border policy is a suicide pact for libertarianism. Current American culture is the most libertarian in the world. By the simple law of diffusion, a policy of letting anyone in who wants in is guaranteed to result in an American culture that is much less libertarian.

sadarj on March 19, 2013 at 12:12 PM

+1

While Rand’s position is slightly better than Schumer/Rubio, I’ll probably only be supporting Rand as a fallback candidate if Ted Cruz or somebody who opposes amnesty doesn’t rise to the top. And even then, if Rand turns out to be the nominee, if I get the impression he is going to amnesty illegals, I’ll probably be voting third party.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2013 at 1:01 PM

I am also against forcing businesses to police illegals. It’s the job of the federal government to conduct interior enforcement, not of businesses. It’s easier to find illegals by making hospitals and schools and the like report them (and deny them services, though our idiotic courts have ruled that out) than to start going after businesses.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM

I don’t quite get your reasoning.
Hospitals and schools are businesses.
Why not start at the first place…your job? Before you can rent a house or enroll in a school, you have to have a job to pay the rent etc.
That said, why either/or. Check in all places.

Actually, businesses having standards of employment, is not the same as “enforcement”. Can’t pass the drug test, etc?..no job.
That is not the same as making a business enforce the drug laws.

Mimzey on March 19, 2013 at 1:01 PM

The curageous see danger, the wise seek to find it, the crazy ignore it.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 1:05 PM

Where is Dr. Carson on amnesty?

Yes, I know about is stupid statement on selective gun restrictions.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 1:08 PM

p.s. I know what you tried to convey but laws not enforced and are encouraged to be broken.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 12:56 PM

I hear you. I was speaking on a more theoretical level since we all know that none of these people are going to enforce any laws, at all – which makes the whole E-Verify thing moot, anyway. If the federal government isn’t going to enforce any laws against illegals then why single out businesses for enforcement? For money, I guess. The illegals just walk away and the business has to pay someone in government. There’s something really wrong with that.

The fact that Barky and his administration have been able to ally with Mexico and take Arizona to court in order to STOP an actual state from just helping the federal government be able to enforce the laws (laws that the state is duty-bound to enforce in service of its own citizenry!) pretty much says it all. This nation has really had it. It’s time to just split up and each side go our own way – with the Vichy Right illegal supporters staying with the lefties and their dreamboat socialist superstate.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 1:08 PM

Rand Paul is a pandering amnesty supporter. I will not support him for nomination.

bluegill on March 19, 2013 at 12:03 PM

Then how do you explain your romance with Romney?

Rand Paul NEXT!

AllahsNippleHair on March 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM

sadarj on March 19, 2013 at 12:12 PM

That’s why the Libertarian Party is Utopian and not political viable. I think that most libertarians of the small-L variety probably oppose amnesty because we know that open borders will destroy liberty if we let world-socialists move in and take over the country, but my suspicion is that the Libertarian Party get’s a lot of its funding from a few wealthy donors that support open borders.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2013 at 1:11 PM

For the good of the order, I offer this.

I happened to be near a TV this morning when Washington Journal was on, and the guest was a GOP congressmen from NM named Steve Pearce. He’s the only GOP congressmen representing a district along our southern border–and GOP leadership has frozen him out of the immigration planning in the House.

Before today, I had never heard of this guy. And, certainly, he may have other problems. But from what I saw–don’t be fooled, most of the interview and caller questions and tweets were about immigration–this guy is awesome. Reasonable, logical, but firm on immigration. I urge you to take some time to watch this. Happily, there were few crackpot calls. He demonstrates a deep knowledge of the history of immigration policy in this country, and I couldn’t help wondering why this guy isn’t leading the discussion.

Please do yourself a favor and play this at your convenience. I learned a great deal.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311593-4

As an example, on the subject of border enforcement, he said that despite what the Obama and DHS say, it’s not secure. And the way to tell is by drug prices. If they’re stable, the smugglers are able to pass easily back and forth. If they’re high, the smugglers are not able to pass easily back and forth. For the past few years, I think he said, prices have been stable.

You won’t believe we have someone with this much common sense in Congress. After listening to him on this issue alone, I’m convinced that the GOP wants to destroy this country because it’s too lazy to get this guy to explain to his caucus and, then, to middle America what’s going on.

Low information voters are tired of this issue, and they’re tired of the screaming. What the GOP needs is this guy to explain to them, WTF is really going on.

As I admitted, if someone knows better about this guy, speak up. But I’m astounded. He reminds me of Barasso of Wyoming when he’s talking about health care–a rational doctor who makes infinite sense.

BuckeyeSam on March 19, 2013 at 1:12 PM

I am also against forcing businesses to police illegals. It’s the job of the federal government to conduct interior enforcement, not of businesses. It’s easier to find illegals by making hospitals and schools and the like report them (and deny them services, though our idiotic courts have ruled that out) than to start going after businesses.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM

So, I’m going to put you in the ‘NO’ category for businesses requiring pee test before they hire you? Yeah, how about that question about felonies?
I’ll wait.

AllahsNippleHair on March 19, 2013 at 1:13 PM

I don’t quite get your reasoning.
Hospitals and schools are businesses.

Mimzey on March 19, 2013 at 1:01 PM

I don’t think you understand the situation. E-Verify is not going to have hospitals or schools checking on illegals and then denying them services or reporting them. That’s not how this is. Businesses will be sanctioned, fined and prosecuted for hiring illegals but hospitals, schools and the rest will be forced to service them. That’s what our genius government has structured. It’s beyond ridiculous and only getting worse with every new idea by these bozos in Washington.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 1:13 PM

Hillary/Booker — 2016

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 1:15 PM

That’s why the Libertarian Party is Utopian and not political viable. I think that most libertarians of the small-L variety probably oppose amnesty because we know that open borders will destroy liberty if we let world-socialists move in and take over the country, but my suspicion is that the Libertarian Party get’s a lot of its funding from a few wealthy donors that support open borders.

FloatingRock on March 19, 2013 at 1:11 PM

I agree. I think Large L libertarians tend to be idealists who live more in a theoretical world than a real one. The problem is when you try to take ideas and put them into practical application and account for human nature and the Democratic political party-sometimes idealism just doesn’t work.

melle1228 on March 19, 2013 at 1:16 PM

So, I’m going to put you in the ‘NO’ category for businesses requiring pee test before they hire you? Yeah, how about that question about felonies?
I’ll wait.

AllahsNippleHair on March 19, 2013 at 1:13 PM

I was addressing the idea that businesses are FORCED BY GOVERNMENT to do certain things, not that they aren’t allowed to do whatever tests or checks they want to, on their own. There’s a big difference, you know.

I think that business owners have the right to hire or fire anyone they want, but the law restricts that, too. The law also tries to tell them how much they must pay certain pet classes of people … because the government knows the worth of people’s labor better than business …

I’m a smoker but I acknowledge that a business owner should have the right to not hire smokers if he is that stupid. It’s his business. Not one I would ever patronize, but he should have the right to decide who is working for him. Of course, most of the anti-smokers won’t extend me that same right for smoking …

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 1:17 PM

Border security is important, but its not shy illegals are coming here. Poor security simply facilitates their access.

They’re coming here because of the freebies. If we’re not talking about cutting them off from that, then it’s all pointless anyway.

Border security is simply a distraction. Congress will simply deem the border secure within a year (if that long) of enacting this even if they went with this plan

catmman on March 19, 2013 at 1:18 PM

I don’t think you understand the situation. E-Verify is not going to have hospitals or schools checking on illegals and then denying them services or reporting them. That’s not how this is. Businesses will be sanctioned, fined and prosecuted for hiring illegals but hospitals, schools and the rest will be forced to service them. That’s what our genius government has structured. It’s beyond ridiculous and only getting worse with every new idea by these bozos in Washington.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 1:13 PM

I must have misunderstood your point. I took this:

It’s easier to find illegals by making hospitals and schools and the like report them

..to mean, your suggestion was for hospitals to have some sort of e varify system and then report those trying to get service. Same with schools.
Without some sort of system data base being used, how would a hospital, etc, determine legal status?

Mimzey on March 19, 2013 at 1:19 PM

So, I’m going to put you in the ‘NO’ category for businesses requiring pee test before they hire you? Yeah, how about that question about felonies?
I’ll wait.

AllahsNippleHair on March 19, 2013 at 1:13 PM

I was addressing the idea that businesses are FORCED BY GOVERNMENT to do certain things, not that they aren’t allowed to do whatever tests or checks they want to, on their own. There’s a big difference, you know.

I think that business owners have the right to hire or fire anyone they want, but the law restricts that, too. The law also tries to tell them how much they must pay certain pet classes of people … because the government knows the worth of people’s labor better than business …

I’m a smoker but I acknowledge that a business owner should have the right to not hire smokers if he is that stupid. It’s his business. Not one I would ever patronize, but he should have the right to decide who is working for him. Of course, most of the anti-smokers won’t extend me that same right for smoking …

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 1:17 PM

And, again, E-Verify is a tool so that law abiding businesses can use to confirm their workers are legally able to work in the US. It should be used to confirm that if a business uses E-Verify and still willingly hired illegal alien workers, then they can be fined, sanctioned, etc. How else are they going to prove that the business knowingly hired illegals when the laws are eventually enforced?
Most of your argument is a lot of hot air.

AllahsNippleHair on March 19, 2013 at 1:21 PM

The same five people who never supported Rand are very upset with this proposal.

rndmusrnm on March 19, 2013 at 1:22 PM

.to mean, your suggestion was for hospitals to have some sort of e varify system and then report those trying to get service. Same with schools.
Without some sort of system data base being used, how would a hospital, etc, determine legal status?

Mimzey on March 19, 2013 at 1:19 PM

My point was that if anyone was to be forced to use E-Verify it should have to be hospitals, schools and government services. But those are exactly the spots that illegals are not allowed to even be asked if they are illegals. Some through court cases and some through the idiotic reasoning that “witnesses won’t come forward and victims won’t report crimes if they are scared that they’ll be deported”. They should be deported and they should be denied those services, but they won’t be, Only private business gets the onus of having to allegedly check up on everyone. Everyone else just laughs, from the government that is busier releasing illegals than anything to the hospitals that are running deficits and have little trauma or emergency services for citizens and people who pay in order to service illegals.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 1:23 PM

When the GOP caves, Latinos will become life long Obamaites. This victory will be all on Obama.

El_Terrible on March 19, 2013 at 1:23 PM

Most of your argument is a lot of hot air.

AllahsNippleHair on March 19, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Then don’t waste your time with me and go pester someone else.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 1:24 PM

why is so hard to have someone in congress who is a solid, non-bending conservative who upholds traditional values and viewpoints all across the board. why???

GhoulAid on March 19, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Isn’t this the truth? So far, I’m looking at Ted Cruz.

Mirimichi on March 19, 2013 at 1:25 PM

With the best metric for measuring said border security…Janet Napolitano.

Seriously, Congress will simply deem the border secure and WHAMMO!

welcome another few tens of millions in Democrat voters and supporters.

Sounds like a plan….

catmman on March 19, 2013 at 12:11 PM

It’s just a question of whether they get to vote as Obama runs for his third, fourth, or fifth term.

Ward Cleaver on March 19, 2013 at 1:26 PM

Most of your argument is a lot of hot air.

AllahsNippleHair on March 19, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Then don’t waste your time with me and go pester someone else.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 19, 2013 at 1:24 PM

Nah. I do agree E-Verify should be used at social services. Most are there to collect for their fifteen anchor babies, though.

AllahsNippleHair on March 19, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Amnesty. Fail.

Pork-Chop on March 19, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Read his prepared remarks and you’ll see that citizenship is never mentioned. Which is true, and also irrelevant

Irrelevant? In fact it is by far the most important issue… Giving working visas to illegal immigrant is one thing but giving them a path to Citizenship is a totally different universe… Working visas that should be renewed very 3 or 5 years can be tolerated by most Conservatives but giving a citizenship to illegal immigrants would destroy the chances of Republicans winning future elections…

mnjg on March 19, 2013 at 1:29 PM

With the best metric for measuring said border security…Janet Napolitano.

Seriously, Congress will simply deem the border secure and WHAMMO!

welcome another few tens of millions in Democrat voters and supporters.

Sounds like a plan….

catmman on March 19, 2013 at 12:11 PM

It’s just a question of whether they get to vote as Obama runs for his third, fourth, or fifth term.

Ward Cleaver on March 19, 2013 at 1:26 PM

All he needs is a red beret and a matching green parrot.

AllahsNippleHair on March 19, 2013 at 1:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3