January
31st 2010
On Marco Rubio and Immigration
Bede

Posted under Election 2010 & Immigration

I keep receiving emails from various conservative email lists advertising that Marco Rubio is a “real conservative” – versus Charlie Crist, “a liberal in disguise.” (If you haven’t been following, Rubio is a white Cuban-American vying with Charlie Crist in the Florida Republican primary for Mel Martinez’s U.S. Senate seat.) What never is discussed in these emails, however, is Rubio’s ambiguous record on immigration.

While it is true that both Martinez and Crist have supported mass amnesty and Rubio has stated he would have opposed the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill, Rubio otherwise seems to be intentionally vague on the issue of immigration.

Washington Watcher at VDare notes that prima facie Rubio does indeed seem an improvement over Mel Martinez on immigration:

[Rubio's] platform states:

“Legal immigration has been a great source of strength and prosperity for America, but I believe illegal immigration threatens the foundation of this system. If I had been in the Senate at the time, I would have opposed the McCain-Kennedy bill. I believe we must fix our immigration system by first securing the border, fixing the visa and entry process and opposing amnesty in any reform.”

But “fixing the visa and entry process” could mean a lot of things—including massively increasing legal immigration. Remember how Bush tried to portray amnesty as “immigration reform”.

And Rubio gave a disturbing hint of what this meant in a convoluted interview with the website Red County. He absurdly accused Democrats and labor unions of being against legal immigration, while Republicans (he asserted) support it.

Rubio must be either completely ignorant of the sellout of union workers by Big Labor, or he is promoting a guest worker program—the only aspect of legal immigration that labor unions oppose.

Even more ominously, Rubio blamed the Republican’s “tone” on immigration for alienating Hispanic voters.

Even Rubio’s record on illegal immigration is dubious. In 2008, patriotic Florida state legislators proposed over a dozen bills to crack down on illegal immigration, but as Speaker Rubio stalled them in the House:

“Florida lawmakers looking to pass bills targeted at curbing illegal immigration faced one major hurdle this session—convincing South Florida legislators, who hold key leadership positions in the House and Senate, to support their cause.

“Without the backing of House Speaker Marco Rubio, the first Cuban-American to hold the position, the bills failed to get any major play in their committees. Six weeks into the session, a three-hour workshop was held on the six House bills, but even that failed to produce its desired intent of combining the bills into one larger committee bill.

“‘Speaker Rubio outlined the priorities of the session and this didn’t fall under that list,’ said Rivera, one of Rubio’s lieutenants.”

[Miami-Dade lawmakers stymie immigration bills, by Laura Figueroa, Miami Herald, April 17, 2008]

Finally, Rubio was the object of a fawning National Review cover story recently which even worse, was written by the unspeakable John J. Miller—a very bad sign indeed. [Rubio Rising |The Florida GOP has a new star, Sept 7, 2009(Free link)]

Rubio is not the only anti-establishment candidate in the race. Former New Hampshire Senator Bob Smith, who has since moved to Florida, is also running. Unlike Rubio, he is making stopping illegal immigration a top priority. According to the Jacksonville Observer

“During a recent appearance on the Jacksonville Observer Radio Show, Smith made it clear that he was not pulling punches against Crist or Rubio. He noted that his campaign is going to include a significant focus on dealing with illegal immigration. On the issue of so-called amnesty, Smith replies: ‘No, no, and hell no!’” [Rubio and Smith to Participate in Senate Candidate Forum, by Austin Cassidy, The Jacksonville Observer, October 19, 2009]

That said, Smith’s record on immigration in the Senate in the 1980s and early 1990s leaves much to be desired. But it is clear that he is currently the only candidate in the race who is making stopping mass immigration a series issue.

delicious | digg | reddit | facebook | technorati | stumbleupon | chatintamil

7 Comments »

7 Responses to “On Marco Rubio and Immigration”

  1. Earl on 01 Feb 2010 at 11:38 am #

    Don’t know your bass from a hole in the ground, do you? Didn’t bother to find out why Rubio “stalled” those bills, did you?

    I didn’t think so.

    Marco Rubio in 2010!

  2. RedPhillips on 01 Feb 2010 at 6:48 pm #

    So why don’t you fill us in Earl, or at least provide a link.

    Smith is far from perfect, but I think he is clearly better than Rubio. Rubio is clearly better than Crist. But the Constitution Party candidate, Marshall DeRosa is awesome. He is a professor of political science and an expert on the Confederate Constitution. See here.

    http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_12?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=marshall+derosa&sprefix=marshall+der

  3. Tweets that mention On Marco Rubio and Immigration | Conservative Heritage Times -- Topsy.com on 03 Feb 2010 at 3:43 am #

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Walter Levin and Immigration Tips, law . law said: "On Marco Rubio and Immigration | Conservative Heritage Times" http://tinyurl.com/yeawlgj #immigration [...]

  4. Brittancus on 03 Feb 2010 at 4:51 am #

    Will the politicians that we elect ever carry out the interests of the American people? I read today on the AMERICAN PATROL website that President Obama is in a discussion to cap government money such as cutting back on NASA appropriations the sending men back to the moon in 1020? Yet we are still spending–BILLIONS–on illegal immigrants who have managed to settle here? If we cannot afford to go back to the moon, how can we afford to pay for illegal immigration? Obama can find billions to Prop-up States like Sanctuary California to pay for illegal immigrants, but he cannot find the cash to pay for space exploration. How can we allow millions of poor people to continue to cross our borders? So why are taxpayers forced by pariah lawmakers to pay for education, health care and even now anticipating BILLIONS more dollars to enact a ominous Comprehensive Immigration Reform? We all know by now, that this is a very crafty way to pass another AMNESTY. These people who have entered this country without permission? Every time a new immigration enforcement is passed, the open border Liberal-Democrats-Republicans use their influence to water the law down. How many of us know, that the controversial border fence is by law supposed to be–TWO SEPARATE–FENCES? Senator Obama voted for it. more than three years ago, but only 35 miles of double-layered fencing is in place and much of the remaining 360 miles of the border fencing is badly constructed–without real barriers. The Truth is the government is lying to us.

    The Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Pub.L. 109-367) was enacted October 26, 2006 in the United States. The act allows for over 700 miles (1,100 km) of double-reinforced fence to be built along the border with Mexico across cities and deserts alike, in the U.S. states of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas in areas that have experienced illegal drug trafficking, human slavery, gun peddling, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorism. Rep. Duncan Hunter of California who was the originator of the double fence, has not seen this happen, nor the complete wall that is just open areas, with the old barbed wire strands. Underfunded from its inception, the border fence was compromised by the open border organization, that includes American business consortium’s. As in Washington today, a team of intelligence operatives stated to Speaker Pelosi that a El Queda attack was imminent within the next 6 months. This is the time to enforce our borders with the National Guard fully armed and obviously apparent along the whole 2000 feet length. The majority of our State economies are broke–with California leading the pack. Arizona lawmakers realizing the main cause of their financial dilemma, the support of illegal workers and their families.

    E-Verify is one of the most successful mechanisms to remove illegal workers, but as yet it is not mandatory. It costs nothing to use it and it has been demonized by every pro-illegal immigrant group, along with corrupt politicians and their financial clients in the business consortium’s. E-Verify must be national, with no exclusions. THIS SHOULD BECOME THE No.1 PRIORITY FOR EVERY SMALL AND LARGE COMPANY, THAT KNOWINGLY HIRING A FOREIGN WORKERS CARRIES PENALTIES SUCH AS HARSH FINES AND PRISON SENTENCES. THERE SHOULD BE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE?

    Our GOVERNMENT HAS SOLD ITSELF TO WALL STREET AND BOTH WALL STREET AND THE UNITED STATES ARE DEBTORS TO COMMUNIST CHINA. We cannot afford to subsidize every illegal family member, every Mother with a child who becomes an instant citizen, when 15 million Americans and residents are jobless, when our own people live in poverty. Yes! We always need exceptional highly skilled engineers and scientists, but not the indigent and desperate that we must endlessly financially support. Not semi-skilled labor that will take less wages, than our own people, who themselves will end up in the unemployment benefits line. Call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 to be connected to your Senator and Congressman and use the voting power of THE PEOPLE. Go to NUMBERSUSA AND JUDICIAL WATCH for more information about this catastrophe that could overwhelm this country in the coming months.
    Latest Immigration news: President cuts border security budget
    While telling the American people that national security is a priority in his administration, President Barack Obama submitted a 2011 budget proposal that includes cuts to U.S. border security. — The proposed budget cuts include a reduction in Border Patrol agents and a cut in the amount of money allocated for the so-called “virtual fence” on the U.S.-Mexico border…

  5. Kimmy on 20 Feb 2010 at 2:01 pm #

    Excellent post, Brittancus!

    And I’d love to see Hunter/DeMint, 2012 ;)

  6. Is Nikki Haley just another neoconservative? | Conservative Heritage Times on 15 Jun 2010 at 3:17 am #

    [...] she’s a type of “constitutionalist” (whatever that means), others say she’s another neocon plant trying to capitalize on the tea-party movement. The fact that her three biggest [...]

  7. You’ve awoken a sleeping giant « The Radio Patriot on 29 Jul 2010 at 8:14 am #

    [...] record on immigration while he was speaker of the Florida House, I found this at a website called Conservative Times.  The writer could have been me: “I keep receiving emails from various conservative email [...]

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply