Immigration bill drops overnight; Update: Sessions: “This bill is legalization first”; Update: The Rubio FAQ

posted at 9:21 am on April 17, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

It’s about half as long as some feared, and less than a third as long as ObamaCare. The new comprehensive immigration reform bill still comes in at 844 pages, and will be the center of curiosity in the Senate — at least after Harry Reid’s gun-control push stalls as expected today. The Hill reports that the Gang of Eight published the legislative language at 2 AM this morning:

The immigration reform bill a bipartisan group of senators released early Wednesday morning is more than 800 pages long.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), a member of the “Gang of Eight,” introduced the bill which runs to 844 pages early Wednesday morning at 2 a.m. …

Early reports suggested that the bill could run to as many as 1,500 pages.

“I’m for immigration reform, but we have 1,600 pages,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said. “We’re going to read the details and try to make it acceptable to conservatives.”

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) a member of the bipartisan group, defended the bill in a statement Wednesday.

“This bill marks the beginning of an important debate, and I believe it will fix our broken system by securing our borders, improving interior enforcement, modernizing our legal immigration to help create jobs and protect American workers, and dealing with our undocumented population in a tough but humane way that is fair to those trying to come here the right way and linked to achieving several security triggers,” said Rubio.

The Gang of Eight want to get this addressed immediately, but they’d better not get their hopes up.  According to the Washington Post, opponents plan on slowing the bill down as a means of killing it:

Leading Capitol Hill opponents of the proposal to overhaul the nation’s immigration system are coalescing around a strategy to kill the bill by delaying the legislative process as long as possible, providing time to offer “poison pill” amendments aimed at breaking apart the fragile bipartisan group that developed the plan, according to lawmakers and legislative aides.

The tactics, used successfully by opponents of an immigration bill during a 2007 debate in the Senate, are part of an effort to exploit public fissures over core components of the comprehensive legislation introduced Tuesday by eight lawmakers who spent months negotiating the details. …

An open process “is essential to gaining public confidence in the content of the bill. We know it’s complicated,” said Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the top GOP member on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s immigration subcommittee. “I can’t see any reason to undermine confidence by trying to jam it through without adequate time for people to read it and to hear from their constituents.”

Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) called the pace of the legislative process — with Judiciary Committee hearings set for Friday and Monday — a “serious problem.”

I agree with that.  We need to resolve the chronic failures of border security and the broken visa system — about which the 9/11 Commission warned more than eight years ago now — and Democrats won’t address either without trading for normalization.  But before we proceed on the latter, we need to make sure that the final bill will actually resolve those security issues, and a rushed hearing and vote won’t make anyone feel confident in that outcome.  Rubio himself has publicly demanded that kind of process, and he should use his large influence on this group to make sure we get that opportunity.

Fox gives the broad-strokes outline, and frames that core issue:

In total, the bill creates a minimum 13-year path to citizenship for up to 11 million illegal immigrants, costing them each $2,000 in fines plus additional taxes. Applicants would have to meet other criteria as well in order to qualify.

It’s unclear whether the border security “triggers” will be enough to satisfy skeptical lawmakers. Conservatives say border security improvements should be verified before illegal immigrants can seek citizenship. Illegal immigrant advocates say their pathway should not be held up by that process.

Regardless, the plan dedicates billions to security efforts, including $3 billion to providing more border agents, customs agents and surveillance systems along the border; and $1.5 billion to building up border fencing.

It also includes language meant to assuage concerns that the mass legalization would send millions onto the federal welfare rolls. The bill claims to strengthen a federal law requiring applicants for legal status to prove they won’t become government dependents — some Republicans have claimed this law is rarely enforced.

If nothing else, the guessing games are over.  The actual legislative language now exists, and can be examined thoroughly.  Let’s put a lot of eyeballs on this and see what the Gang of Eight has proposed, and what needs to be improved.

Update: I just received this statement from the office of Senator Jeff Sessions:

“Already, we know that the bill’s sponsors have abandoned their core promise to the American people that enforcement would come first. This bill is legalization first, not enforcement first. The day the bill passes there will be effective amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants, with only the same promises we have heard before of enforcement to occur at some later date. That amnesty will then become official in a matter of months—once DHS merely submits a plan for border security in the future. That’s not a trigger—that’s the honor system. DHS develops the metrics and DHS decides when those metrics are met. Why should we trust DHS to follow through—after amnesty is granted—when this administration has aggressively defied those laws already in place?

In recent years interior enforcement has been significantly undermined. And yet our interior enforcement needs are almost totally neglected in the Gang’s proposal. Alarmingly, the bill leaves intact the single greatest obstacle to immigration reform: the Administration’s abuse of prosecutorial discretion to prevent the enforcement of federal law. It will also provide safe harbor to those who have committed a variety of offenses—ranging from identity theft, to multiple immigration violations, and even those with criminal records.

This bill opens up citizenship to recent arrivals and, remarkably, millions who overstayed their visas. If adopted, this bill would send a message to the world that if you can beat the system, you will be rewarded with citizenship. If adopted, this bill would send the following message to the world: if you get a U.S. visa and it expires, never leave—just stay put and evade detection. It even opens up citizenship to those who have been deported from the country.”

Sesssions has long been skeptical of this effort, and his opposition will be a big problem for the Gang of Eight’s efforts.  The amendment process could fix these issues, but can that be done while holding the coalition together?

Update: Marco Rubio has a FAQ page up on his official site.  He answers the concern about the border-security “triggers”:

Q: What are the security triggers?

This bill fixes our broken immigration system by securing the border with the toughest border security and enforcement measures in U.S. history, based on the following six security triggers:

1. DHS must create, fund and initiate a border security plan (within 6 months of bill’s enactment).

2. DHS must create, fund & initiate a border fence plan (within 6 months of bill’s enactment). 3. DHS must achieve 100 percent border awareness and at least 90 percent apprehension

rates in high-risk sectors of the U.S.-Mexico border (within 5 years of bill’s enactment). 4. If DHS fails to achieve #3, a Border Commission of border state officials and stakeholders is required to create & implement a plan to achieve 100 percent border awareness and at least

90 percent apprehension rates in high-risk sectors of the U.S.-Mexico border (within 10

years of bill’s enactment). 5. Universal E-verify must be implemented (within 10 years of bill’s enactment). 6. Visa exit system must be implemented at all international airports & seaports (within 10 years of bill’s enactment).

Q: Are the security triggers going to be effective?

 Even the media has dubbed these as the “toughest immigration enforcement measures in the history of the United States.” The White House opposed having any security triggers, but this bill requires several triggers that must all meet congressionally mandated performance standards before any undocumented immigrant can apply for temporary status and, eventually, permanent residence. These include establishing, funding, and implementing our border fence plan; achieving 100 percent operational awareness of border and at least a 90 percent apprehension rate or else a border commission steps in to meet those goals; requiring the use of E-Verify by all U.S. employers; and implementing an effective exit system at our airports and seaports. The security triggers are not left at the discretion of politicians with agendas. Real measurable results must be achieved, and politicians cannot override them.

 Q: Which comes first: the border security and enforcement measures, or the legalization for undocumented immigrants? In other words, what happens on day one?

 The most important thing that happens on day one is that the toughest border security and enforcement plan in American history will be the law of the land. Those who came here illegally after the December 31, 2011 cut-off debate will be deported. The enforcement begins by requiring background checks, proof of gainful employment, and payment of fines and taxes. However, before undocumented immigrants even get to this step, the border security and fencing plan to achieve 100 percent border awareness and at least a 90 percent apprehension rate must begin implementation. The fine we’ve established is $2,000, nearly three times what President Obama has pushed for. We set this fine to be tough but realistic, without discouraging people from coming forward.

 

Gang of Eight immigration reform plan

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

In total, the bill creates a minimum 13-year path to citizenship for up to 11 million illegal immigrants, costing them each $2,000 in fines plus additional taxes. Applicants would have to meet other criteria as well in order to qualify.

What happens when these “11 million” can’t even come up with the $2,000?……extension?, deportation?

tencole on April 17, 2013 at 10:48 AM

I guess there’s no Hey, We’ve Already Got Immigration Laws! Bill in the pipeline. Oh well.

Dongemaharu on April 17, 2013 at 10:49 AM

The proponents of this bill continue to argue that it is “tough” on illegal immigrants because it requires a minimum of 13 years to get through the “path to citizenship.”

Does that count the 13 years they’ve already been here?, or an additional 13 years? or a combination? What are they called in the meantime?…..and what do the “legal immigrants” have to do in this 13 years period.
Still doesn’t sound “fair” to me, and that “gang of 8″ should try to explain this whole thing to them.

tencole on April 17, 2013 at 10:55 AM

This is still on the GOP website? It’t a bit obsolete…oh, wait…so is the GOP.

GOP platform
In this country, the rule of law guarantees equal treatment to every individual, including more than one million immigrants to whom we grant permanent residence every year. That is why we oppose any form of amnesty for those who, by intentionally violating the law, disadvantage those who have obeyed it. Granting amnesty only rewards and encourages more law breaking.

lynncgb on April 17, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Rubio’s diagnosis? Moses Syndrome, which affects young, idealistic narcissists and compels them to lead fictitious peeps out of slavery/shadows. Also detecting a little Ambition.

Take two doses of reality, avoid Chuck Shumer exposure, re-read your job description and check back with us in 2016.

And quit drinking McCoolaid.

LetsBfrank on April 17, 2013 at 10:58 AM

I like Jeff Session’s Gang of One. I’ll vote for his bill.

And the rule of thumb is that when legislation requires more amendments than the actual bill, it’s cr*p.

LetsBfrank on April 17, 2013 at 11:00 AM

~~~~~~▄▌▐▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▌
~~~▄▄██▌█ Inside: Immigration Bill
▄▄▄▌▐██▌█ Destination: (see sinkholes)
███████▌█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▌
▀(@)▀▀▀▀▀▀▀(@)(@)▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀(@)(@)▀▀

Rovin on April 17, 2013 at 11:01 AM

From Rubio’s FAQ, “Those who came here illegally after the December 31, 2011 cut-off debate will be deported.”

Does anyone believe this statement?

pilsener on April 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM

Leftist churches nationwide will fork over the $2000 fine for these illegals.Liberals will guarantee they become registered Democrap voters.And the border will never be secure once they do!Marco Rubio,McCain,and Graham should be deported!

redware on April 17, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Illegals….

Unlawful.

Here not legitimately.

Why should these illegals, any of them, be placed in a more favored position than those who have come here legally, gone through the entire legal process, or have entered the legal process, to attain what the Dems want to give those who did not?

Amnesty.

Pure and simple.

Rewarding bad behaviors with bad law. A mockery of law. Pure and simple.

Fix the border…first.

Then address the entire visa process for legal applicants.

Streamline it if need be, or make it more difficult, whatever is demanded, to make sure that legal immigrants are not thwarted by a bureaucracy that seems to favor illegals, or those attempting to enter from nations that have just plain lousy documentation.

And, stop this farce of offering fast-track visas to Saudis…or anyone else.

Got sa legit reason to be here or come here? Prove it.

Then, when ALL of that is accomplished….maybe, look at options other than deportation for illegals.

This is not rocket science.

Just about every other sovereign nation does so.

Why not the U.S.?

coldwarrior on April 17, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Illegal immigrants typically use a stolen/false SSN for work (then medical and credit etc) many of which belong to children. All the ‘reform’ bills I’ve seen just ignore this.

batter on April 17, 2013 at 10:11 AM

Yeah, the undocumented illegals really do have documents. Each and every one another crime on top of being here illegally.

Happy Nomad on April 17, 2013 at 11:09 AM

No. F*ck no. If they pass this, they are declaring w4r on the citizens of this country – *again*.

We better wake the f*ck up.

Midas on April 17, 2013 at 11:11 AM

Why exactly does Congress have to pass a massive amnesty for DHS to come up with a “plan” to secure the borders? Shouldn’t securing the border be one of the main, if not the primary, functions of DHS? If DHS can’t do that, wouldn’t the proper response be to…fire the DHS Secretary and one that can??? On top of that, this “plan” that must be submitted only covers “high risk” sectors–there are only 5 sectors across the entire border that meet the bill’s definition for a “high risk” sector. Also, why exactly is there going to be a commission to secure these sectors if DHS can’t manage to do its main job? If there was a panel of experts out there that could magically secure the border…why haven’t they either been commissioned before, or perhaps been brought into DHS as DHS Secretary and heads of ICE and Border Patrol? Instead, in 5 years we might get some random panel of experts to partially secure 5 sectors of the border if DHS hasn’t managed to do it yet? Seriously. That is what Rubio calls enforcement.

Additionally, the “entry-exit” system Rubio talks about has been required by law since 1996–Administrations simply refuse to create it and Congress has refused to fund it. But what is even more incredible, is the “entry-exit” system in Rubio’s bill is weaker than the one already required by federal law. The entry-exit system in this bill is only biographical information (i.e. passport scanner) and only applies to air and sea ports (it excludes land ports). Current law requires biometric entry-exit (i.e. fingerprints and pictures of those entering on visas) and includes all ports of entry, including land ports. In other words, Rubio’s bill weakens the entry-exit system that Congress required to be implemented in 1996 (i.e. 17 years ago).

And, Rubio’s “plan” for the fence is less than what is already required by US law under the Secure Fence Act of 2006…which if anyone is keeping track, the federal government has also refused to comply with.

It is hard to understand how a bill that weakens current federal requirements and the first “triggers” are nothing more than “plans” on how DHS will meet certain “goals” (“goals” which don’t even have to be met before adjusting to green cards, just “substantially met,” whatever that means, or theoretically a panel of experts could take over as well and do who knows what…) can be called the “toughest immigration enforcement measures” in US history? This bill is absurd on its face.

Conservative in NOVA on April 17, 2013 at 11:11 AM

Breaking! New Immigration Bill Gives ‘MarcoPhone’ to Immigrant Guest Workers

ObamaPhones? Wonder if they tell them how to press “D” for more freebies.

Rovin on April 17, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Rubio in 2016?

Not a snowball’s chance in hell.

coldwarrior on April 17, 2013 at 11:19 AM

“I think that he has been a very positive force,” Obama said of Rubio.

Jon0815 on April 17, 2013 at 9:31 AM

Of course he does. He leaves no fingerprints and he gets all the credit. Typical of Obama-lama-ding-dong.

herm2416 on April 17, 2013 at 11:19 AM

What happens when these “11 million” can’t even come up with the $2,000?……extension?, deportation?

tencole on April 17, 2013 at 10:48 AM

LOL. Funny.

The illegal will simply check the box on the application to apply for a “financial hardship waiver” of the fine. And “The Secretary” (Janet Napolitano) will rubber stamp both the application for amnesty, and the “hardship” waiver of the fine. (She has discretion to waive the fine, and there is no limit on how many applicants she can waive it for).

It would be downright mean and un-American to do anything less for these poor, hard-working, law-abiding, undocumented Americans who just want to do the jobs lazy Americans won’t do!

AZCoyote on April 17, 2013 at 11:22 AM

What I find disturbing is apparently Hot Air policy to take Rubio’s words as gospel and sincere. This push to make him the next star is failing. Let the people decide what they think of him not Hot Air pimping him

journeymike on April 17, 2013 at 11:24 AM

Does that count the 13 years they’ve already been here?, or an additional 13 years? or a combination? What are they called in the meantime?

tencole on April 17, 2013 at 10:55 AM

RPI’s (registered provisional immigrant)

I prefer Received Permanent Immunity

lynncgb on April 17, 2013 at 11:29 AM

…and guess what? Sec 2017(a) title “CORRECTION OF SOCIAL SECURITY RECORDS” explicitly exempts the illegal immigrant from prosecution of social security fraud/id theft without an notification/means/assistance for victims to reclaim their tainted records.

That is amnesty pure and simple. Worse, it punishes the innocent and rewards the perpetrator.

batter on April 17, 2013 at 10:34 AM

Seriously??? How can ANY Republican stand before us with a straight face and claim this isn’t amnesty?… or that they give one hot damn about the Rule of Law?

Murf76 on April 17, 2013 at 11:30 AM

What happens when these “11 million” can’t even come up with the $2,000?……extension?, deportation?

tencole on April 17, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Subsidies for those who can’t afford it will be provided by a future bill, to be titled “Affordable Amnesty and Immigrant Protection Act”.

BobMbx on April 17, 2013 at 11:39 AM

It’s really quiet simple GOP, if you pass this you deserve every single consequence of your actions. I would recommend that every single American call you state and local Republican officials and raise hell. The message is simple; “a republican vote for this, I walk away, and that means straight party line votes.”

jjnco73 on April 17, 2013 at 11:56 AM

You know how liberals work: INCREMENTALISM and AMENDMENT.Already 13 years has become 10. Sounds like a rocket countdown-then it will 9-8-7-6-5 years before eligibilty for citizenship.
Then the FINE will be reduced and then amended to NO FINE. Finally BACK OF THE LINE will be AMENDED to FRONT OF THE LINE–and all for people who illegally snuck into this country, don’t particularly like us (quite often displaying Mexican flags on Cinco De Mayo and demanding Texas etal be ceded back to Mexico)-and all because they vote largely for a political party that would sell their own daughters (as well as the entire nation) into prostitution for political gain.

MaiDee on April 17, 2013 at 12:05 PM

PS essentially we are not talking about Mexicans here and ONLY MEXICANS.
Puerto Ricans come and go as they wish because, as a Territory, they have NO immigration requirements. Cubans still slightly favor Republicans and NO other Latino vote is significant politically.

MaiDee on April 17, 2013 at 12:12 PM

1600 pages to “fix” the current system.

Down the road, I am so looking forward to the 16000 pages required to “fix” the 1600 pages of this new system.

Shameful. Absolutely shameful.

Carnac on April 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM

“Rubio, Rubio, where for art thou, Rubio?” He is lost in the aftermath of the 2010 Election to the Senate! He is actually a clone of the original Rubio, and cannot remember what he said or stood for prior to that election! A sad state of affairs, for which we will all be punished and left holding the bills!

tomshup on April 17, 2013 at 12:20 PM

20 million unemployed Americans and these traitors will ope the flood gates for illegal aliens to work for peanuts. Rampage the offices of Flake, laRaza Rubio, McCain’t, Flake etc, etc!

el Vaquero on April 17, 2013 at 12:28 PM

Grammatical correction-of course I meant to say statistically we are talking about ONLY MEXICANS-since Puerto Ricans can enter the US whenever they please without restrictions and Cubans split their vote 55-45 Republican without immigration being much of an issue with them.

MaiDee on April 17, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Go to Hell, all charlatans who destroy the land.

Schadenfreude on April 17, 2013 at 12:33 PM

Schumer looks like a charlatan, acts like one, always.

Schadenfreude on April 17, 2013 at 1:10 PM

MaiDee on April 17, 2013 at 12:05 PM

It’s already Five for Dreamers who were given amnesty by Obama’s executive order, or just about anybody between age 19 and 30. Five years, then green card and citizenship after that. There’s also ways to get around the five-year requirement.

TarheelBen on April 17, 2013 at 1:10 PM

… and Democrats won’t address either without trading for normalization …

Ed

Ed is spot-on, but this begs the question — why does everyone think that we have to legalize these invaders first? Rubio is either a liberal liar or a total sucker. He should tell his buddies Scummer and Turban to GFT until we stop illegal immigration.

Jaibones on April 17, 2013 at 1:12 PM

From Rubio’s FAQ, “Those who came here illegally after the December 31, 2011 cut-off debate will be deported.”

Does anyone believe this statement?

pilsener on April 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM

If these people are undocumented how are they going to prove that they arrived here before Dec 31?

hopeful on April 17, 2013 at 1:26 PM

Ed is spot-on, but this begs the question — why does everyone think that we have to legalize these invaders first? Rubio is either a liberal liar or a total sucker. He should tell his buddies Scummer and Turban to GFT until we stop illegal immigration.

Jaibones on April 17, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Ed’s dead wrong. That’s not compromise, it’s capitulation. And only people that want normalization can even make that argument. We can continue to insist on what we want, and we can let America sort out who it wants in power. And if we don’t like the choice, we can scratch and claw to the next election cycle and throw down again.

It makes no sense at all to keep doing what the other guy wants to do in order to preserve power. There’s no preservation of power there at all. There’s no difference between John McCain voting the D line and another D in his chair voting the D line. They’re both Ds. We know this because they’re both voting the D line.

Beat them in the elections. Accumulate a consensus. Overcome their resistance. Bugger the Democrats in power at the moment — bring them down. Forget what they’ll put on the table or not put on the table; it’s not about them. Obstruct. Buy time. Change the game.

– Anyway, Morrissey’s completely wrong.

And this bill is just Amnesty. That’s it. It isn’t about enforcement at all; you asked, “why does everyone think that we have to legalize these invaders first?” — the bill is about doing exactly that and nothing else. The rest is window curtains.

(All that was something I was trying to get into TEMS chat-room and couldn’t because I was running so hot, Jaibones. Not trying to romp you or invite a romping; just . . . trying not to explode. :)

Axe on April 17, 2013 at 1:37 PM

If these people are undocumented how are they going to prove that they arrived here before Dec 31?

hopeful on April 17, 2013 at 1:26 PM

Nobody seriously considers the enforcement of the present laws.

Nobody remembers the explosion of the people in the identified class, the administrative and judicial wreckage, the questionable paperwork and outright fraud under Pres. Reagan’s amnesty.

The gov’t who can enforce the present law is going to be any better with this complex process?

And what about their coming by air or water for the next 20 or 30 million?

And how kind and humane is this act, really?

I say an ID card and $20 a gallon gas without it and use the revenues for the energy problem, and spend some $$$ on the enormous cost of these poor folks.

IlikedAUH2O on April 17, 2013 at 1:39 PM

marcophones…

Sheesh!

workingclass artist on April 17, 2013 at 1:40 PM

I said this last night…

… I think it needs repeating:

Once illegals are given a work permit, they will be able to get a Driver’s License…

… Once they get a Driver’s License, under the Democrat’s “Motor Voter Law”, they will be given a Voter Registration card.

No one will check to see if they are illegal or not when they register to vote, and they will sign up as Democrats, per instructions by La Raza, et al., who wrote the legislation…

… The border will not be secured, and millions more illegals will flood into the Country, with the power to vote, changing this Country forever.

THIS is the plan behind all of this, the complete destruction of the Republican Party and the permanent change of demographics to people who hold no loyalty to the foundation and principles of he United States of America…

To think hundred of thousands have given their lives since the creation of this Country to protect and defend the Constitution, and protect our Representative Republic, and there is current legislation that throws all of that away…

… Treason. Pure and simple, Treason.

Seven Percent Solution on April 17, 2013 at 1:48 PM

Rubio is nothing more than an Obama appendage, a mini-me Obama.

VorDaj on April 17, 2013 at 1:51 PM

“I think that he has been a very positive force,” Obama said of Rubio.

Jon0815 on April 17, 2013 at 9:31 AM

Since they never had any sons, and it’s too late to adopt Trayvon Martin, Barack has asked Michelle if they can adopted Marco Rubio.

VorDaj on April 17, 2013 at 1:54 PM

I wonder if Rush and Levin will continue loving on Rubio. Something is hinky between Rush, Levin and this amnesty.

BoxHead1 on April 17, 2013 at 2:06 PM

Marcophone? Whoda thunk it? Rubio just keeps digging the hole deeper and deeper!
Rush is reporting that only 5-6% of Americans favor Amnesty! Only 4% support Gun Control!
Republicans are missing out on an opportunity by going along with any Gang of Eight bill, on top of those going along with Gun Control!
These numbers suggest the Beltay mavens are upside down with the very hot dem push for Amnesty and Gun Control!

tomshup on April 17, 2013 at 2:30 PM

From Rubio’s FAQ, “Those who came here illegally after the December 31, 2011 cut-off debate will be deported.”

Does anyone believe this statement?

pilsener

Hotair does, lol. Or at least they want YOU to believe it. Never mind how counterintuitive that policy would be in the first place. They tell us today Hispanics don’t vote for us because we crack down on illegal immigration, but after we give them amnesty, we’ll really really crack down on future illegals, causing Hispanics to continue to not vote for us because we aren’t being nice to illegals, lol. I guess it is less heartless to deport illegal immigrant grandmothers who came on Jan. 1 2012. You cannot make this stuff up.

And no, nobody seriously believes anyone will be deported if they miss the cut off date. Just another lie Rubio is telling people to get them to fall for this scheme.

xblade on April 17, 2013 at 2:44 PM

With all due respect to Sessions, we knew legalization would come first. It was part of the gangs’ outline at the outset.

dforston

But Rubio has been running around telling everyone who would listen that the border would be secured before legalization/citizenship is issued. And he’s used those two words interchangeably, and deliberately so in order to confuse people on the issue.

And by the way,something some of you may not know…this bill allows people who were deported prior to Dec. 31 2011 who are currently not in America to come back here and apply for the amnesty plan, so who knows how many that will be.

Another thing….they will probably grant instant access to the 4 million or so family members who are currently in other countries waiting to join their spouse/parent who is already here. So we’re talking about an even more massive influx of newly legalized folks than folks think.

xblade on April 17, 2013 at 3:19 PM

Democrats won’t address either without trading for normalization.

So Democrats (and McCain, Rubio, et al) are holding hostage our nation’s border security and economic security in exchange for pandering to “the Hispoanic vote”.

Let’s give in and reward foreign invaders with their ill-gotten goods — NOT!!!!

fred5678 on April 17, 2013 at 3:30 PM

So Democrats (and McCain, Rubio, et al) are holding hostage our nation’s border security and economic security in exchange for pandering to “the Hispoanic vote”.

Let’s give in and reward foreign invaders with their ill-gotten goods — NOT!!!!

fred5678 on April 17, 2013 at 3:30 PM

This is the part that ticks me off the most. If we had an objective media they would be asking these politicians why national security is taking a back seat to politics. How hard is it for somebody in congress to stand up and say-let’s inforce the border protections from the 1986 amnesty bill and the recommendations from the 9/11 Commisssion first. Then talk about the rest?

hopeful on April 17, 2013 at 3:53 PM

From Rubio’s FAQ, “Those who came here illegally after the December 31, 2011 cut-off debate will be deported.”

Does anyone believe this statement?

pilsener

No.

Freddy on April 17, 2013 at 5:00 PM

From Rubio’s FAQ, “Those who came here illegally after the December 31, 2011 cut-off debate will be deported.”

Does anyone believe this statement?

pilsener on April 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM

No.

Freddy on April 17, 2013 at 5:00 PM

They’ll be given a rain check for the next amnesty.

slickwillie2001 on April 17, 2013 at 5:05 PM

Good grief. It get’s even “better”.

Section 2105 explicitly prohibits any release of information and attaches a $10,000 fine paid to the permit fund in Section 6(a)(1). That means if those processing applications inform an ID theft victim that their SSN is being used, they get slapped with a $10,000 fine. That money can then be used to pay for a permit for another illegal immigrant (see next point below)…

Section 2106(d) appropriates $50 Million of tax money (treasury) for grants to organizations (see 2016(c)) who can use this to assist and pay for illegal immigrants permit applications.

It’s BOHICA legislation. Welcome to bizzaro world.

batter on April 17, 2013 at 5:48 PM

We get “plans” and they get instant legal status?

Rubio’s FAQ was so ridiculous he should be ashamed to call himself a politician. He can’t even BS with any degree of talent. If that’s the best he can come up with, this bill is even worse than feared.

jnelchef on April 17, 2013 at 5:54 PM

Ed, I’ve followed you from the CQ days and while I may not always agree with you I can always follow your logic…until now. I have no idea why you’re selling this turd sandwich.

jnelchef on April 17, 2013 at 5:59 PM

From Rubio’s FAQ, “Those who came here illegally after the December 31, 2011 cut-off debate will be deported.”

Does anyone believe this statement?

pilsener on April 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM

Not at all…it’s a complete joke. If Rubio thinks that the real problem right now is the illegal aliens need to be adopted, then why would anyone believe he is going to be indifferent to the next 15 million invaders? In 10 years it will be the same thing all over again, but we’ll have 25 million more Mexicans effing up our country.

Jaibones on April 17, 2013 at 6:48 PM

Comment pages: 1 2