Get PJ Media on your Apple

Paul Embracing Role as ‘Conduit’ to Try to Forge Immigration Agreement

“I’m all for immigration reform. But I don’t want to vote ‘yes’ and then find out in 10 years that everybody is pointing a finger at me."

by
Rodrigo Sermeño

Bio

June 12, 2013 - 5:03 pm
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

WASHINGTON – Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Wednesday he would support an immigration bill if senators accept his amendments to the legislation, but will not vote on the immigration reform package as it stands because of the need for tougher provisions on border security.

Paul, who is considered a swing vote on immigration reform, referred to himself a few days ago as the “conduit” between conservatives in the House who oppose immigration reform and his Senate counterparts in favor of it.

“I am the conduit between conservatives in the House who don’t want a lot of these things and more moderate people in the Senate who do want these things,” Paul said on Fox News Sunday. “They’re going to have to come to me and they’re going to have to work with me to make the bill stronger if they want me to vote for it.”

Paul was among the majority of senators who voted Tuesday to move the immigration bill to debate. He said the Senate bill “is not there yet” but he is open to discussions with the bill’s supporters on what it would take to win his support.

“My suggestion to those in the Senate who are in charge of the bill is come to people like me who want to vote for it, but who are not quite there yet, and say to us, ‘What would it take to bring you along?’” Paul told reporters Wednesday after an event organized by the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles and the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference.

The Kentucky Republican plans to introduce a set of amendments intended to make the plan more appealing to those on the other side of Capitol Hill. Paul’s proposal, which he plans to file next week, aims to create a specific plan to secure the border.

“If you want this to happen, you’ve got to bridge the Senate and the House,” he said during the event. “I’m sort of in between where the Senate and House is, but not yet ready to vote for the Senate bill unless they’re willing to listen to people who say let’s make the border secure.”

Paul said that this proposal, called “Trust but Verify,” would make the comprehensive legislation more palatable to Republicans. Paul’s set of amendments makes immigration reform contingent upon an annual vote by Congress judging whether the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is making progress on border security.

“This is the real part of my amendment that makes the bill stronger: We vote each year on whether the border is becoming more secure,” Paul said.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Why can't politicians understand that we don't trust them? I don't believe that voting each year on border security will make one bit of difference. Want my trust? Enforce the existing immigrations to the letter for five years. No sanctuary cities, no catch and release, no driver's licenses, no in-state tution. Use those five years to build the border fence and get E-verify completely in place. Severly punish anyone who employs or harbors illegals. Do all this for five years and then I will listen to your plans with an open mind. But until I see current law enforced you get nothing from me.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Brief message to Sen. Paul: Then just vote NO and you won't have to fear for your reputation in the future. A vote YES would be voting for the Schumer/Durbin way. As the commenter once said, 'nuff said'.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All energy should be going into stopping this awful bill which no conservative wants. There is nothing good in this. Rand Paul should be fighting it not looking for accommodation. Is Ted Cruz the only reliable conservative in the Senate? And why is a Republican House looking favorably at a bill that the Republican base hates and only Karl Rove likes? The Republican Party will never get a vote from me again if this passes with their votes.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (14)
All Comments   (14)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
We were sold a bill of goods in 1986 and it's happening again. We were told that in EXCHANGE for amnesty, we would get a secure border. Our "leaders" lied then and they are lying now. We also received a set of reformed immigration laws, which we are being told are now, unenforceable. The borders were made soooo secure that 11 million more illegals found their way across. Does anyone believe that if we make some sort of deal on the 11 million that the flood across the border will immediately stop? No, in 15 more years it will be another 20 million demanding benefits and using the political power of numbers to get it.

If this abomination passes it will be the nail in the coffin of America.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Oh, I get it. Everybody is posturing. Immigration reform is dead.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I wish!

The bill will pass. Everybody is making statements now, so ten years from now when the situation is even worse, and they're advocating another illegal alien amnesty, they'll be able to trot out these remarks and say, "See, I told everyone the last amnesty should have been done differently">
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Why can't politicians understand that we don't trust them? I don't believe that voting each year on border security will make one bit of difference. Want my trust? Enforce the existing immigrations to the letter for five years. No sanctuary cities, no catch and release, no driver's licenses, no in-state tution. Use those five years to build the border fence and get E-verify completely in place. Severly punish anyone who employs or harbors illegals. Do all this for five years and then I will listen to your plans with an open mind. But until I see current law enforced you get nothing from me.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
There will be many fingers pointing at you, Rand Paul.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Paul's amendment wouldn't make a difference. The bill is loaded up with so many onerous provisions it must be defeated.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All energy should be going into stopping this awful bill which no conservative wants. There is nothing good in this. Rand Paul should be fighting it not looking for accommodation. Is Ted Cruz the only reliable conservative in the Senate? And why is a Republican House looking favorably at a bill that the Republican base hates and only Karl Rove likes? The Republican Party will never get a vote from me again if this passes with their votes.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
" I think sometimes these Cultural issues divide us...."

Rand Paul's Libertarian Populism

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2013/06/rand-paulrsquos-libertarian-populism
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Rand Paul is just posturing for his 2016 Presidential bid. He's a very smart person (an eye MD) and knows full well there is less than 0.001 chance of Reid allowing any changes to the Gang's bill.

You might as well book it -- the fix is in in both Houses to pass this. The GOP elites are drooling over somehow getting 12 more Hispanic voters with amnesty and getting immigration "off the table" for 2014.

Pick a date -- how about Thanksgiving Eve the joint House-Senate bill legalizes 30 million Dem voters.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It won't be off the table in 2014 even if it passes. There will be many Republicans defending their votes in primaries and they won't be getting as many votes in the general election either.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I'm going to send out a snowstorm of faxes.

Rand Paul will get the rundown on why it's a bad bill.

Pat Leahy will get a variety of dramatic pleas (an abundance of copy available at Daily Kos) to insist on the same-sex partner amendment.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
What Paul is suggesting more than makes sense, therefore, the Demsters will not consider it. It is not about protecting America and securing the borders. But it is about an electoral base which will ensure their rule for generations. Trust but verify is hardly what they are after.
In any event, does anyone believe that a lawless regime, like Obama Inc, will stick to ANY promises they make? - http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/10/20/what-are-the-chances-of-reining-in-a-lawbreaker-in-chief-who-abets-illegal-aliens-then-punishes-those-who-expose-said-lawbreaking-addendum-to-the-results-of-washingtons-dictator-in-chief-via/

Trusting Mafia Inc before Obama Inc is more rational.

Adina Kutnicki, Israel http://adinakutnicki.com/about/
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All