Quotes of the day

posted at 8:01 pm on June 16, 2013 by Allahpundit

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) on Sunday said that much of the Gang of Eight’s immigration reform bill was in “perfect shape,” but added he would insist on tougher border security measures.

Rubio, one of the authors of the bill, was asked if he still supported it on ABC’s “This Week.”

“I think it’s an excellent starting point, and I think 95, 96 percent of the bill is in perfect shape and ready to go. But there are elements that need to be improved. This is how the legislative process is supposed to work,” said Rubio.

***

“[A] senior White House offcial insisted that Obama’s role in overseeing details of the bill has been more signifcant than is generally known. ‘No decisions are being made without talking to us about it,’ the official said of the Gang of Eight negotiations … ‘This does not fly if we’re not O.K. with it, because everyone knows this is going to pass with some Republicans but with a majority of Democrats, and it’s going to require even more Democrats in the House.’ … ‘We’re not worried about short-term political credit. We’ll get plenty of it if it gets signed,’ the official said, adding that the White House was willing to let Republicans like [Lindsey] Graham and [Marco] Rubio, who are regularly attacked by conservatives, have the political space they needed. … ‘We’re the hammer on the back end. If the Republicans try to scuttle it, we’re the ones who can communicate to the Latino community who scuttled it.’ …

‘There are American workers who, for lack of a better term, can’t cut it,’ a Rubio aide told me. ‘There shouldn’t be a presumption that every American worker is a star performer. There are people who just can’t get it, can’t do it, don’t want to do it. And so you can’t obviously discuss that publicly.’…

“Fox News has notably changed its tone since the election. … McCain told me, “Rupert Murdoch is a strong supporter of immigration reform, and Roger Ailes is, too.’ … McCain said that he, Graham, Rubio, and others also have talked privately to top hosts at Fox, including Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Neil Cavuto, who are now relatively sympathetic to the Gang’s proposed bill.

***

Rubio badly needs immigration reform to pass, having invested so much time and political stock in the bill’s passage and lacking a major legislative achievement. Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Mike Lee of Utah signaled this week that their votes are out of reach, leaving Paul as Rubio’s best hope for a prominent tea party wingman.

Paul’s nod could boost the bill in the Senate and perhaps more importantly, give it some juice in the tea party-dominated House. “It’s not just Rand’s vote that Rubio needs but the people who will come along with him,” said Doug Stafford, a top Paul adviser. Paul’s support for immigration reform could also offer Rubio political cover in amnesty-wary, conservative corners if he runs for president.

For his part, Paul is trying to prove he can appeal to the growing minority share of the electorate in the wake of 2012 nominee Mitt Romney’s disastrous showing among Hispanic and African-American voters. If an immigration bill passes without Paul on board, he could appear to be left behind instead of leading.

“Rand doesn’t want to concede the general election audience and Rubio doesn’t want to concede the conservative audience,” said Marshall Fitz, director of immigration policy at the Center for American Progress. “It’s like mime theater in which they are playing off each other. It’s like shadow boxing.”

***

When the bill passes the Senate it will put enormous pressure — more than most now realize — on House Republicans. Speaker John A. Boehner, Mr. Ryan and possibly the House whip, Kevin McCarthy, whose California district is one-third Hispanic, want to pass legislation that is acceptable to the Hispanic community. A large majority of the House Republican caucus does not.

Conservatives insist on applying the so-called Hastert rule, which allows consideration only of bills that have a majority of the Republican caucus.

If this is irreconcilable, here is a prediction, based more on instinct than reporting: Mr. Boehner, if necessary, will sacrifice his speakership rather than be party to the death of the immigration overhaul. He realizes that, even though it may not much affect congressional elections next year, his party cannot continue to lose 70 percent of the Hispanic vote and be competitive nationally.

***

Gang of Eight member Bob Menendez advised Republicans to accept legalization status for current illegal immigrants if they ever want to see another president from their party.

“I would tell my Republican colleagues — both in the House and the Senate — that the road to the White House comes through a road with a pathway to legalization,” the New Jersey senator said on State of the Union this morning. “Without it, there’ll never be a road to the White House for the Republican party.”

***

Via the Corner.

***

“The question of border security is now tangled up with the IRS and the Justice Department and the general, pervasive distrust of the executive branch,” he explained. “Because, what the bill says is, ‘The executive branch will certify if the border is secure.’ I don’t believe that the Republicans in Congress are going to take that.”

“They’re going to vote for a bill — or against a bill — whether or not it has ‘Congress shall certify,’ not the executive branch, because no one trusts the executive branch anymore,” he said

***

“I don’t focus a lot on public polling, but if you look at these public polls, it’s clear the vast majority of Americans understand that what we have in place in this country is de facto amnesty, a broken legal immigration system that needs to be reformed,” he said.

That came after Rubio had already offered an even more dismissive answer to host Jon Karl, who asked “Are you being played by the Democrats? Is Chuck Schumer playing you, is essentially the charge?”

Rubio’s answer: “I don’t — I quite frankly, I don’t even know what that means.”


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 4 5 6

The Rolling Stones – “Shine a Light”

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 2:59 AM

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 2:59 AM

Cool. :) Excellent tune.

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:01 AM

I’ve Got The Blues – Rolling Stones

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:05 AM

Good evening, MontanaMmmm! Good to see you. :)

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 2:53 AM

You too,:)
I’ve been having to take a bit of a break, I find myself not being able to breath very well if I don’t.

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:09 AM

The Rolling Stones – “Sad Day”

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 3:11 AM

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:09 AM

We were just discussing the fact that it feels as if there’s something in the air.

Great tune. :)

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:12 AM

Since I’ve Been Loving You – Led Zeppelin

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:16 AM

For MontanaMmmm:

The Church – “Under The Milky Way Montana Skies”

:)

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 3:18 AM

We were just discussing the fact that it feels as if there’s something in the air.

Great tune. :)

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:12 AM

was this already spun tonight?

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:18 AM

We were just discussing the fact that it feels as if there’s something in the air.

Great tune. :)

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:12 AM

Thunderclap Newman – “Something in the Air”

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 3:20 AM

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:18 AM

I’m sorry… the link didn’t work for me. :(

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:22 AM

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 3:20 AM

LOL! Can’t beleive you found that one. :)

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:23 AM

We’ve Got Tonight – Seger

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:25 AM

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 3:18 AM

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:12 AM

This is the sound of my late night…good night all.

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:27 AM

LOL! Can’t beleive you found that one. :)

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:23 AM

That whole album is great! :)

Thunderclap Newman – “The Reason” (live)

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 3:27 AM

Shame On The Moon – Seger

Good tune….but not the moon’s fault. :)

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:30 AM

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:27 AM

The sounds of paradise. Goodnight you lucky woman. :) Sleep well.

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:31 AM

I’m sorry… the link didn’t work for me. :(

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:22 AM

I’ll try again too obvious?

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:31 AM

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 3:27 AM

It is. :)

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:32 AM

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:31 AM

LOL! Not too obvious at all… very apropos. :) Excellent choice.

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:33 AM

This is the sound of my late night…good night all.

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:27 AM

G/n.

Norman Greenbaum – “Milk Cow”

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 3:35 AM

Sometimes… no matter how hard we try to fly… we get all tangled up in … Gravity.

I bid you all a fond goodnight. It’s been a pleasure, as always.

Live in the moment…

…and…

“Keep yourselves where the light is.”

Goodnight, Anti-Contol. It’s been a pleasure sharing tunes with you. :) Sleep well.

thatsafactjack on June 17, 2013 at 3:36 AM

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 3:35 AM

Ooooh I saw this one, when playing your tune.
Spirits ascend.

:)

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:42 AM

Ooooh I saw this one, when playing your tune.
Spirits ascend.

:)

MontanaMmmm on June 17, 2013 at 3:42 AM

I thought of that one, in the skies over Montana! :)

Manfred Mann – “Spirits In The Night”

Anti-Control on June 17, 2013 at 4:00 AM

What the gang of 8 is pushing is utterly toxic. If it passes it will be the death of the GOP, and the country.

Rubio is a sad and sorry liar. He’s being played by Little Chucky and he knows what that means. He can’t possibly be that stupid.

Quartermaster on June 17, 2013 at 6:01 AM

What the gang of 8 is pushing is utterly toxic. If it passes it will be the death of the GOP, and the country.

Rubio is a sad and sorry liar. He’s being played by Little Chucky and he knows what that means. He can’t possibly be that stupid.

Quartermaster on June 17, 2013 at 6:01 AM

That’s why I believe he’s doing what he planned all along, having presented himself as a Conservative only to win election.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 6:08 AM

Somewhere in Florida, Charlie Crist is drunk and shouting, “I can’t believe I lost to this guy!

JB-STLMO on June 17, 2013 at 6:08 AM

Rubio is either a liar or a naive fool. I could make arguments for either, but I’m beginning to believe the former.

JB-STLMO on June 17, 2013 at 6:09 AM

good morning!

so its immigration all the way today on the lsm….gop will rue the day they defeat this bill…

everything else going on? meh, nothing to see here…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:24 AM

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:24 AM

Happy Monday!

I find it absurd that Pubs are listening to liberals when libs say the Pub party is doomed if it doesn’t pass this bill. Why would liberals want the Republican Party to have any kind of power in government? When your opponent wants you to have a fighting chance of any kind, beware.

The Pubs serve only one purpose to Dems: When a Dem plan fails, the Pubs are the ones to take the rap. If there are few to no Pubs, the Dems have to own their failures.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 6:29 AM

well gibbsy must have gotten the same talking points that menedez had…he basically said the same thing…gop will be a regional party instead of a national party, will never will the presidency again…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:30 AM

well gibbsy must have gotten the same talking points that menedez had…he basically said the same thing…gop will be a regional party instead of a national party, will never will the presidency again…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:30 AM

The Presidency isn’t the real power in this country. It’s in Congress, as it was meant to be.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 6:33 AM

mika bashing the congress for leaving early for the weekend instead of listening to the intelligence briefings….how many were gop and how many were dems that left is what I’m asking…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:35 AM

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 6:33 AM

unless you are obama where bypassing congress is the norm…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:36 AM

mika bashing the congress for leaving early for the weekend instead of listening to the intelligence briefings….how many were gop and how many were dems that left is what I’m asking…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:35 AM

They’re not telling the names.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 6:36 AM

unless you are obama where bypassing congress is the norm…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:36 AM

All the House has to do is cut off funds somewhere, and Obama is stuck. It doesn’t have to be related, either. For example, if Obama gives de facto amnesty, the House cuts funding to Obamacare. Or, Obama wants a war in Syria, the House doesn’t fund it.

The Pubs simply aren’t fighting back. They could even use the Supreme Court to stop Obama. But they’re too shickenchit.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 6:39 AM

Obama and Rubio are the Destroyers. The men the founders were so afraid would show up long after their deaths to undo that which they had toiled and bled to create.

VorDaj on June 17, 2013 at 6:43 AM

The Pubs simply aren’t fighting back. They could even use the Supreme Court to stop Obama. But they’re too shickenchit.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 6:39 AM

yup…squishy gop are killing us…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:43 AM

Good Morning, Patiots! About the Obamas’ “Working Vacation” in Africa…Priorities. My take.

kingsjester on June 17, 2013 at 6:44 AM

Somewhere in Florida, Charlie Crist is drunk and shouting, “I can’t believe I lost to this guy!

JB-STLMO on June 17, 2013 at 6:08 AM

Excellent.

VorDaj on June 17, 2013 at 6:45 AM

only 47 out of the 100 senators attending the briefing…

wow

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:45 AM

only 47 out of the 100 senators attending the briefing…

wow

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:45 AM

That’s why the Senate isn’t releasing the names of those who fled. Four or five could get away with the excuse ‘unbreakable obligations’, but not fifty-three.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 6:53 AM

I wish I could have confidence this report is true:

John Boehner won’t back immigration bill without majority GOP support:

House Speaker John Boehner is not going to bring a comprehensive immigration-reform plan to the floor if a majority of Republicans don’t support it, sources familiar with his plans said.

“No way in hell,” is how several described the chances of the speaker acting on such a proposal without a majority of his majority behind him.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/john-boehner-wont-back-immigration-bill-without-majority-gop-support/article/2531983

Jon0815 on June 17, 2013 at 6:58 AM

NSA Re-Clarification Sumpins!!

Report of US mining Internet company data

US government secretly accessing phone records

Office of the Director of National Intelligence statement on limits of surveillance activities: ‘The statement that a single analyst can eavesdrop on domestic communications without proper legal authorization is incorrect and was not briefed to Congress’

– via website
Story metadata:
Submitted 10 hours ago from http://www.dni.gov by editor
==================================================

ODNI Statement on the Limits of Surveillance Activities
Sunday, June 16, 2013 Office of the Director of National Intelligence

Washington, DC 20511

June 16, 2013

ODNI Statement on the Limits of Surveillance Activities

The statement that a single analyst can eavesdrop on domestic communications without proper legal authorization is incorrect and was not briefed to Congress. Members have been briefed on the implementation of Section 702, that it targets foreigners located overseas for a valid foreign intelligence purpose, and that it cannot be used to target Americans anywhere in the world.

Office of the Director of National Intelligence Public Affairs Office

http://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/191-press-releases-2013/880-odni-statement-on-the-limits-of-surveillance-activities

canopfor on June 17, 2013 at 6:58 AM

mika bashing the congress for leaving early for the weekend instead of listening to the intelligence briefings….how many were gop and how many were dems that left is what I’m asking…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:35 AM

Meh! I’m not saying it is right but, truthfully, when it comes to the briefings at this point what difference does it make?

The programs are in place- Congress failed in oversight years ago. The NSA has proven that they will lie and I am sure tht the briefing was heavy on “we foiled dozens of plots” and went very light on the “we are recording data on billions of phonecalls by Americans a day and keeping all that information in a center in Utah.”

In short, the briefing was for show only.

Happy Nomad on June 17, 2013 at 6:59 AM

http://washingtonexaminer.com/john-boehner-wont-back-immigration-bill-without-majority-gop-support/article/2531983

Didn’t we hear the exact opposite a few days ago?

If this report is true, isn’t this very good news?

bluegill on June 17, 2013 at 7:03 AM

In short, the briefing was for show only.

Happy Nomad on June 17, 2013 at 6:59 AM

I’m sure you’re right, and I imagine the Senators all knew it. Still, if those fifty-three couldn’t brave it out for appearance’s sake, how can they trusted to do the real work that needs doing?

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 7:05 AM

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 6:53 AM

yup

Happy Nomad on June 17, 2013 at 6:59 AM

now that i believe…why wait on a thursday afternoon to conduct the briefing…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 7:05 AM

When these characters-the GOP/RINO/leftist complex gets together, it is clear that the only enemy they really seek to destroy is the citizenry base (tea party) which foolishly believes in the constitution’s premise of a citizen run government.

It is impossible to speak too lowly of these people who pretend to guard the nation, freedom, and claim the conservative mantle.

Power is their only god…after self!

Don L on June 17, 2013 at 7:06 AM

Jon0815 on June 17, 2013 at 6:58 AM

he’ll probably cave once the lsm gets to him…

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 7:06 AM

only 47 out of the 100 senators attending the briefing…

wow

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 6:45 AM

cmsinaz:

GoodMorning,I cringe(sarc),if the other 53 Senators,
are from LowInfoVoter States!:)

canopfor on June 17, 2013 at 7:07 AM

canopfor on June 17, 2013 at 7:07 AM

morning canopfor :)

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 7:11 AM

I couldn’t care less how many people attended that briefing. That is such a red herring.

bluegill on June 17, 2013 at 7:16 AM

bluegill on June 17, 2013 at 7:16 AM

well the lsm will surely focus on it implying the gop should not be crying foul on this

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 7:19 AM

dear leader is still popular across the pond (when not talking about nsa) re: the economy
-chuckie todd

really??

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 7:21 AM

well the lsm will surely focus on it implying the gop should not be crying foul on this

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 7:19 AM

And they would be right, because it’s obvious all fifty-three couldn’t have been Democrats. I can suspect certain Pubs who didn’t attend, but there’s no way to know for sure since the Senate is hiding the names from the public.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 7:23 AM

IF it passes, and 20+ million people are rubber stamped into ‘the system’, the size and scope of this fraud will sink most EVERYONE that votes for it.

Freddy on June 16, 2013 at 11:44 PM

It’s more in the range of 30-40 million then you have to add 3-5 family members for each one. That’s essentially the entire population of the U.S. in 1950.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. ~ Edmund Burke

Burn the phones down this week.

TxAnn56 on June 17, 2013 at 7:23 AM

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 7:23 AM

yup

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 7:29 AM

Hmmmm…..

Edward Snowden revealed as source of NSA leak

Chinese foreign ministry says suggestions NSA leaker Edward Snowden may have spied for China were ‘completely groundless’ – @*NN

Story metadata:
Submitted 28 mins ago from www.*nn.com by editor

canopfor on June 17, 2013 at 7:39 AM

canopfor on June 17, 2013 at 7:07 AM
morning canopfor :)

cmsinaz on June 17, 2013 at 7:11 AM

cmsinaz:0

canopfor on June 17, 2013 at 7:46 AM

Limbaugh went on a rant about Gubmint needing the tax revenue from illegals…but if most of them are lower wage earners…would they even income pay taxes?

huh?

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 9:13 PM

They won’t; they will receive an EIC instead.

Meh!

Mission accomplished, utter implosion.

herm2416 on June 17, 2013 at 7:47 AM

It’s more in the range of 30-40 million then you have to add 3-5 family members for each one. That’s essentially the entire population of the U.S. in 1950.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. ~ Edmund Burke

Burn the phones down this week.
TxAnn56 on June 17, 2013 at 7:23 AM

Exactly.

Who are our best media allies?

Levin and Rush and the rest need to take off the gloves and go after Rubio. The sheen needs to be wiped off Rubio’s undeserved star status. Rubio is the one trying to make conservatives think it’s acceptable to support this crap.

bluegill on June 17, 2013 at 7:51 AM

Sarah Palin has also been rather meek on this issue. Where the hell is she?

bluegill on June 17, 2013 at 7:51 AM

I want to hear passion from all kinds of prominent conservatives about the need to stop this amnesty disaster.

bluegill on June 17, 2013 at 7:53 AM

Some data and some maps.

“Nearly half the Hispanics in the United States live in California or Texas, although there has been a large increase in the Hispanic population outside those states in the past decade, especially in the South.

Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee, and North and South Carolina all experienced Hispanic population growth rates between 55 and 61 percent from 2000 to 2006. All regions of the country saw double-digit growth rates of their Hispanic populations during that time.

In places such as California, the large Hispanic population has an especially significant impact on the economy, politics, and every aspect of social life: more than one-third of Californians are Hispanic (37 percent), while 42 percent are non-Hispanic white, and a much smaller minority are African American (7 percent).

Who are the Hispanics living in the United States? Most were born in the United States (60 percent), while the rest are immigrants. Two thirds are either from Mexico or of Mexican descent, while others hail from the US territory of Puerto Rico, Cuba, or the Dominican Republic.

According to 2010 estimates, undocumented workers make up about 5 percent of the United States’ civilian workforce, including approximately 24 percent of the agricultural workforce.

The amount of remittances Money sent home by immigrants. sent from undocumented workers in the United States to Mexico is estimated in the billions of dollars. The remittances from Mexican nationals living outside Mexico and sending money home to their families are Mexico’s second-largest source of foreign income. Without remittances, many Mexican families would have a difficult time making ends meet.

http://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/world-regional-geography-people-places-and-globalization/section_07_03.html

What the politicians think they’ll do is go after the remittances?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 7:54 AM

Limbaugh went on a rant about Gubmint needing the tax revenue from illegals…but if most of them are lower wage earners…would they even income pay taxes?

huh?

workingclass artist on June 16, 2013 at 9:13 PM

They won’t; they will receive an EIC instead.

Meh!

Mission accomplished, utter implosion.

herm2416 on June 17, 2013 at 7:47 AM

How hard would it be to setup a e-verify system that could track remittances going back to Mexico and intercept them?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 7:58 AM

I ask this cause California really needs that remittance revenue…

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:00 AM

How hard would it be to setup a e-verify system that could track remittances going back to Mexico and intercept them?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 7:58 AM

As difficult as Democrats and the ACLU could make it. It would be ‘discriminatory’.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 8:01 AM

How many White House Tours would a side trip to Dublin cover?

Have you opened the White House yet, Daddy?

Fallon on June 17, 2013 at 8:08 AM

To all of you kissing Snowden’s feet and believing every word out of Glenn Greenwald’s mouth, check this out:

http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/06/16/journalist-who-interviewed-snowden-called-911-blow-to-america-a-very-good-thing/

This is whose word you take as gospel.

bluegill on June 17, 2013 at 8:08 AM

Didn’t we hear the exact opposite a few days ago?

If this report is true, isn’t this very good news?

bluegill

If the report is true, it means Boehner knows he has majority support.

And by the way, in case anyone missed it, this is what these folks think about you:

Rubio Aide: ‘There Are American Workers Who, For Lack of a Better Term, Can’t Cut It’. There shouldn’t be a presumption that every American worker is a star performer. There are people who just can’t get it, can’t do it, don’t want to do it. And so you can’t obviously discuss that publicly.”

xblade on June 17, 2013 at 8:12 AM

Hmmmmm….

” What are remittances?

Remittances are payments sent by foreign-born workers (legal immigrants and illegal aliens) back to their home country. The transfers are facilitated by sending money through banks, making investments in the home country, or by returning to the home country while retaining bank accounts or other assets in the United States.

Remittances represent a staggering transfer of wealth world wide.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimated total global flows of remittances — including compensation, personal transfers, and capital transfers — to be approximately $407 billion in 2008. This represented an increase of about $250 billion since 2002.5

The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) estimated that 2009 migrants’ remittances from the U.S. were approximately $48 billion, or approximately 70 percent more than total official development assistance provided by the United States. Of that amount, $38 billion consisted of personal transfers abroad. The remaining $11 billion consisted of wages paid to workers in the U.S., although some of those wages obviously were spent in the U.S.6

The BEA estimated that countries in the Western Hemisphere received two-thirds of remittances in 2003, and Asia and the Pacific received one-quarter, while the remaining amount went to Europe and Africa. Unfortunately, the BEA did not report remittance data for specific countries; only “net private remittances” (outflows minus inflows) were reported. However, BEA did estimate that in 2009, approximately $20 billion in remittances was sent from the United States to Mexico. These remittances grew by 3 percent per year in inflation-adjusted 2009 dollars (see Table 1).5

Remittances are sensitive to economic fluctuations. From 1995 to 2003, the official count of Mexicans living in the United States increased by 56 percent and the median wage increased by 10 percent. Yet total remittances increased dramatically by 199 percent during those positive economic times.8

Remittances to Mexico peaked at $26 billion in 2007, then declined during the subsequent recession. Even so, Mexican workers living in the United States did not return home in large numbers.9 One might conclude that a weakened economy in the U.S. still offered better wages than the Mexican economy.

Western Union reported that its Mexico revenue declined 15 percent through the recession in 2009 to $306 million, then began to increase in 2010. Remittance business continued to strengthen through 2011, with Western Union stock prices consequently moving up more than 13 percent in the fourth quarter of 2011.The Bank of Mexico reported received $1.77 billion in remittances in November 2011, an increase of 8.9 percent over November 2010.10

Currency exchange rates also affect transactions. As the peso declined in September 2011, Mexican remittances rose at the fastest rate in five years.11

A broader picture of remittances includes migrants’ personal transfers (discussed above), institutional remittances by U.S. nonprofits, and other transactions. Net outflows (total outflows minus inflows) totaled $82 billion in 2009, as shown in Table 2. In addition to net private remittances, migrants’ capital transfers totaled nearly $3 billion in 2009.

A 2007 survey by the Banco de Mexico found that one-fifth of migrants who sent remittances home worked in the U.S. construction sector.9 The amount of migrants’ remittances has increased by 3 percent per year since 2000 (see Table 1). The increase has been facilitated by increased ease of low-cost money transfers, coupled with a corresponding increase in the number of foreign-born workers in the U.S., as shown in Table 3.

Although the Census Bureau estimated 23.9 million foreign-born workers in the U.S. in 2009, it should be noted that many believe Census Bureau numbers to be low, since for years the Bureau reported the number of illegal aliens in the United States to be an unvarying 8-12 million. The Social Contract addressed this issue in its Summer, 2007 issue, “How many illegal aliens are in the U.S.?” In that issue, a number of authors presented convincing evidence that the number of illegal aliens in the United States may be closer to 30-40 million.13

Clearly, the number of illegal foreign workers in the U.S. is substantial and has been growing, as has the corresponding amount of funds sent back to home countries.

Table 4 shows characteristics of those making remittances to Mexico, based on surveys of migrants from four Latin American countries. Interestingly, both legal residents and illegal aliens showed significant propensity to send money home, with 73 percent and 83 percent of each group making remittances, respectively. Those with higher education made fewer remittances. As might be expected, those who arrived during the most recent decade were inclined to make more remittances than those who have lived here for more than one decade. Time loosens the social bond with the home country, and declining personal remittances are one aspect of that diminishing bond.

U.S. remittance agents include banks, credit unions, post offices, money transfer operators, individual businesses, and chain stores (convenience stores, groceries, department stores). Home town associations, known as clubes des oriundos, facilitate collective transfers, and also maintain social ties between U.S. workers and communities in their home country.15

In 1996, approximately 14 million remittances were sent to Mexico, averaging $320 each. In 2000, approximately 17 million remittances were sent, averaging $365 each. By 2003, the number had jumped to approximately 40 million remittances at an average of $321 each. In 2010, the amount of the average remittance remained about the same at $302.16

In 2004, small money transfer operators had a 60 percent market share while Western Union had a modest 15 percent market share.17 However, at that time, the mechanism for transferring remittances from the U.S. to Mexico was undergoing a massive shift from a largely informal industry to institutional electronic transfers.18 In 1994, money orders comprised over 46 percent of the value of all reported transfers. By 2003, the share of money orders decreased to 12 percent and 86 percent of remittances were being made electronically.19 This was a tremendous opportunity for companies such as First Data/Western Union to compete for market share and profit potential.

This transition was facilitated by:

• Increasing accessibility of formal channels;

• Banks became independently competitive in
the funds transfer market;

• Growing financial awareness among migrants;

• Improving market information (e.g., financial
marketing);

• Bilateral initiatives by the U.S. and Mexican
governments and their monetary authorities.20

Financial institution requirements tightened after 2001; new regulations required banks to “know their customers.” This resulted in a massive push in the early 2000s by the Mexican government to issue millions of Matricula Consular de Alta Seguridad identification cards, which practically by definition declared the holder to be an illegal alien in the U.S. Although accepted in 32 U.S. states in 2005, no major Mexican bank accepted the card to open an account, and the cards were accepted as IDs in only 10 of Mexico’s 32 states and districts.21 These slippery ID cards greased the machinations of international finance.

As a result of increasing remittance volume, coupled with formalization of transfer channels, it has become steadily cheaper to send remittances out of the U.S.22 Fees to transfer $200 (the amount of a typical remittance) to Latin American countries decreased by an average of 3 percent to 10 percent per year between 2001 and 2009, depending on the recipient country.5 Fees to transfer $200 to Mexico declined from 10.4 percent ($20.80) in 2001 to 5.6 percent ($11.20) in 2009, representing an average annual percentage decrease of 5.5 percent.

Mexico received the largest amount of remittances in 2009 (see Table 6). Of 10 countries receiving 40 percent of total remittances and related flows from the U.S., Mexico received about 61 percent of funds. Mexico’s central bank reported remittances totaling $21.27 billion in 2010.

Remittances are indeed a significant source of income to Mexico. Remittance inflows of $25.3 to Mexico comprised approximately 3 percent of Mexico’s 2008 GDP.

http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc_22_3/tsc_22_3_elbel_printer.shtml

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:13 AM

How hard would it be to setup a e-verify system that could track remittances going back to Mexico and intercept them?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 7:58 AM

As difficult as Democrats and the ACLU could make it. It would be ‘discriminatory’.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 8:01 AM

Maybe…But Blue states are going broke…and many big cities/counties are defaulting.

It’s not as if democrats are incapable of instituting what amounts to a mexican tax…calling it something else and blaming republicans is it?

Democrats gain a short term advantage by passing immigration.

1. They gain a huge demographic shift which they hope to use especially in Texas.

What if the long term advantage is grabbing the remittances?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:19 AM

If the report is true, it means Boehner knows he has majority support.

And by the way, in case anyone missed it, this is what these folks think about you:

Rubio Aide: ‘There Are American Workers Who, For Lack of a Better Term, Can’t Cut It’. There shouldn’t be a presumption that every American worker is a star performer. There are people who just can’t get it, can’t do it, don’t want to do it. And so you can’t obviously discuss that publicly.”

xblade on June 17, 2013 at 8:12 AM

Anglos outside the southwest are fairly clueless about Hispanic duplicity in the culture.

Not all Latinos have this attitude generally…but democrats are experts at uniting amigos at election time.

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:23 AM

What if the long term advantage is grabbing the remittances?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:19 AM

It would be a tough slog, and destroy the ‘humanitarian’ label liberals have given themselves. They would be seen as ‘unfair’ and ‘trying to disenfranchise the newly-documented from the American Dream’. Or something along those lines. Long as there are folks with ‘white privilege’ who can be taxed, the illegals remain somewhat safe.

By the time liberals run out of the others, Congress will be largely Hispanic and won’t touch their own ‘people’.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 8:24 AM

How hard would it be to setup a e-verify system that could track remittances going back to Mexico and intercept them?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 7:58 AM

As difficult as Democrats and the ACLU could make it. It would be ‘discriminatory’.

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 8:01 AM

How hard would it be to intercept remittances headed to Mexico and blame the Drug Cartels?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:26 AM

How hard would it be to intercept remittances headed to Mexico and blame the Drug Cartels?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:26 AM

That’s something to explore…

Nah! Government is too benevolent and honest for that, isn’t it? /

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 8:29 AM

Even in 2003 — nearly a decade ago — crude oil exports were Mexico’s largest source of external revenue, with remittances comprising the second largest source, eclipsing direct foreign investment and tourism. In 2003, remittances amounted to 78 percent of crude oil exports, 138.9 percent of tourist expenditures, and 124.2 percent of foreign direct investments. Comparing 1998 to 2003, remittances approximately doubled as a percent of tourist expenditures and more than tripled as a percent of foreign direct investment.27

In effect, the huge remittance revenue stream is supplanting foreign investment in Mexico.

The National Population Council estimates that more than one out of 10 Mexican families in approximately 1.3 million homes depends on remittances.28 In fact, according to a poll by the Inter-American Development Bank, as many as one in five Mexican adults receives money from relatives working in the U.S.29

This support is the mainstay of rural Mexican communities, including Durango, Zacatecas, Guanajuato, Jalisco, and Michoacán.30 Remittances to the state of Michoacán alone amounted to $2.13 billion in 2009, while the states of Guanajuato, Mexico state, Jalisco, Veracruz, Puebla, Oaxaca, and Guerrero received sizeable inflows.31 In fact, in five Mexican states, including Zacatecas, remittances equaled or exceeded wages generated locally in 2006. In the state of Michoacan, remittances were a huge 182 percent of in-state incomes.32 This undoubtedly must have a deleterious effect on the motivation of residents to pursue local employment.

Surveys show that, regarding remittances to Mexico, 70 percent of the recipients use the funds for consumption, 3 percent use the funds for asset accumulation, and 26 percent use the funds for both purposes.5,6 In other words, remittances are used mostly for day-to-day expenditures, not for investment. Research indicates that remittances do not go just to the poor; surveys indicate that the monthly income of most remittance receivers is essentially the same as that of the total population.33

Particularly in Mexico, remittances are an extension of established cross-border networks, which facilitate a continuing bond between illegal aliens and their home communities. Remittances, therefore, are not simply a de facto transfer of wealth but rather are an extension of deep social connections between the U.S. and Mexico.34

Illegal immigration is now much more closely associated with organized crime, which is creeping north into the U.S. Migratory routes into the U.S. have been taken over to a large extent by Mexican cartels. It is now quite common for illegal aliens to carry heavy loads of drugs — particularly marijuana — as they sneak across the border into the U.S. In 2007, $25 billion in cash from drug sales was smuggled out of the U.S. The amount quickly grew to $30 billion in 2008.39 It might be reasonable to investigate whether any of this drug money is transferred via the remittance infrastructure.

Remittances comprise Mexico’s second largest source of foreign income, next to oil exports. While undoubtedly viewed as a positive factor by Mexico, the pressure to preserve remittances by exporting its enterprising working poor has a long-term negative impact on Mexico’s ability to maintain a stable and functioning society.

This vast transfer of wealth into Mexico encourages inappropriate Mexican meddling in U.S. immigration policy.

http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc_22_3/tsc_22_3_elbel_printer.shtml

I think they’re gonna go after the remittances…and that’s why they’re pushing this bill.

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:34 AM

How hard would it be to intercept remittances headed to Mexico and blame the Drug Cartels?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:26 AM

That’s something to explore…

Nah! Government is too benevolent and honest for that, isn’t it? /

Liam on June 17, 2013 at 8:29 AM

How long did it take Japanese citizens to be compensated for seizure of their property and internment in camps during WWII?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:35 AM

From the site…

” In the U.S., population recently surged past 300 million people, and with continued mass immigration, population could approach half a billion by the year 2050.41 Had the U.S. adapted a policy of zero net immigration in 1970, population would have maximized at a more sustainable 282 million.42

In a country saturated with illegal aliens, America’s working poor are being directly displaced by foreign workers who willingly accept sub-standard wages. This is particularly unsettling in the current period of economic distress, with unemployment rates reaching at least 9 percent.43

While displacing American workers, illegal aliens maintain a network of ties back to families and communities in Mexico, thus diluting their interest in assimilating into the U.S. The pervasive poverty of illegal aliens must be blamed in part on their individual choices to send thousands of dollars every year back home. This directly impacts the standard of living of illegal alien workers: in order to send remittances, they submit to living in crowded housing conditions, trim food budgets, and deny themselves adequate medical care.33 The result is a stratified society of lawful citizens and illegal aliens — a balkanized America.

Conclusion

Remittances are essentially a tax-free transfer of wealth out of the U.S. Approximately $20 billion of Mexican remittances each year disappear from the U.S. economy via the institutionalized money transfer industry, never to return.

While this massive amount may be considered virtual foreign aid, it is a non-sanctioned transfer of wealth that is based on a fundamental violation of America’s immigration and employment laws.

Projecting $26 billion sent as tax-free remittances by illegal aliens to Mexico in 2014,44 the negative impacts of this loss on the American economy would be significant.

That amount would purchase 1.5 million cars or 15-million computers, and $200 billion sent back to Mexico over the past 10 years would have purchased Americans an astounding number: 15 million cars along with 150 million additional computers.45 It well could have saved countless homeowners from foreclosure.

The financial institutions that participate in transferring remittances profit substantially from the transfer of wealth between nations. The families and communities who participate in this transfer similarly play an active part in the globalization process. It remains to be seen whether the interests of national unity and sovereignty will prevail against these immense financial and demographic pressures…”

http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc_22_3/tsc_22_3_elbel_printer.shtml

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:39 AM

Intercepting the Remittances to Mexico is probably hidden somewhere in this over 1,600 immigration bill…But I guess Mexicans get have to wait till this bill is passed before they can find out what’s in it.

I’d bet money on it…if I had spare money to bet.

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:42 AM

Intercepting the Remittances to Mexico is probably hidden somewhere in this over 1,600 immigration bill…But I guess Mexicans get have to wait till this bill is passed before they can find out what’s in it.

I’d bet money on it…if I had spare money to bet.

workingclass artist

Nah, won’t happen. Mexico helped write the bill. There’s no way they’d allow that gravy train to be cut off.

xblade on June 17, 2013 at 8:54 AM

“I would tell my Republican colleagues — both in the House and the Senate — that the road to the White House comes through a road with a pathway to legalization,” the New Jersey senator said on State of the Union this morning. “Without it, there’ll never be a road to the White House for the Republican party.”

Any time a Democrat says something like that, you can be assured that it means the exact opposite. I predict that the Republican Party is finished if it allows the amnesty bill to pass. Now I know why the government is buying up all the ammunition.

cajunpatriot on June 17, 2013 at 8:58 AM

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 8:39 AM

As if the picture isn’t bleak enough so as it is.

Cleombrotus on June 17, 2013 at 9:01 AM

THIS is what Marco Rubio and his traitorous ilk support

http://twitchy.com/2013/06/15/open-borders-mob-descends-on-home-of-kansas-secretary-of-state/

In a scene reminiscent of the SEIU’s siege of a Bank of America executive’s home in 2010, a mob of around 300 open borders protesters from across the country today descended on the home of Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who is also counsel to the Immigration Law Reform Institute and, according to the following tweets from 501(c)3 Sunflower Community Action, the “King of Hate.”

We found out where he lived and we came to visit him,” says a videographer before being herded back to a line of buses. Others left shoes on Kobach’s front steps to “symbolize all the fatherless families due to deportations” — as if trespassing en masse for the lack of a fence and then making demands wasn’t metaphor enough. It’s unclear if Kobach or his wife or four children were home at the time.

If you didn’t think that the thug-style tactics of “delivering a message” through mob intimidation were the Kansas way, we have news for you: that border’s wide open, and we’re all living in Chicago now.

PappyD61 on June 17, 2013 at 9:05 AM

Intercepting the Remittances to Mexico is probably hidden somewhere in this over 1,600 immigration bill…But I guess Mexicans get have to wait till this bill is passed before they can find out what’s in it.

I’d bet money on it…if I had spare money to bet.

workingclass artist

Nah, won’t happen. Mexico helped write the bill. There’s no way they’d allow that gravy train to be cut off.

xblade on June 17, 2013 at 8:54 AM

What exactly could Mexico do about it…complain to the UN?

Aside from the demographic advantage democrats want…which seems to make sense except that they’ve been allowing illegals to vote anyway for years.

But nobody has been able to do D*ck about the remittances going to Mexico which is why Mexico has been doing the demographic dumping.

Remittances = fast and easy tax free money.

Western Union…Sorry Amigo we don’t know what happened to your pesos.

US Government…Must have been intercepted by Drug Cartels, we’ll look into it.

Mexican Government…You anglos stop that chit…or we’ll @#$%@!!

What are illegals gonna do exactly…riot?

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 9:11 AM

As if the picture isn’t bleak enough so as it is.

Cleombrotus on June 17, 2013 at 9:01 AM

The bill establishes a permanent underclass of clueless Mexicans who won’t care cause being an underclass here is better than being an underclass in Mexico.

Typical european peasant thinking…But I digress.

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 9:15 AM

If Rubio thinks this is his ticket to the Presidency – then he needs to jump off the Karl “Marx” Rove bandwagon.

redguy on June 17, 2013 at 9:15 AM

The bill establishes a permanent underclass of clueless Mexicans who won’t care cause being an underclass here is better than being an underclass in Mexico.

Typical european peasant thinking…But I digress.

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 9:15 AM

And the Mexican government is working with the democrats to make it so, because Mexico would rather have the US support it’s clueless population and have them send back their lawn mowing money to Mexico.

redguy on June 17, 2013 at 9:18 AM

And the Mexican government is working with the democrats to make it so, because Mexico would rather have the US support it’s clueless population and have them send back their lawn mowing money to Mexico.

redguy on June 17, 2013 at 9:18 AM

Yeah but as I stated upthread… I think the US will likely intercept those remittances.

It’s a lot of money and Mexico won’t be able to do anything about it.

see the site info I posted upthread.

workingclass artist on June 17, 2013 at 9:24 AM

Texas is solidly red. Once this bill happens it will be dark navy blue. There are huge numbers of illegals in my state. That alone will guarantee that Republicans NEVER win a national election again. That is a FACT!

neyney on June 17, 2013 at 10:46 AM

Okay, I hate fishboy as much as you do, but that’s just f*cking disturbing.

MelonCollie on June 16, 2013 at 9:49 PM

S’mattah, G.I.? You no likee boom-boom wit fish?

Solaratov on June 17, 2013 at 3:42 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6