Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) elaborated a bit on his DREAM Act alternative on today’s Fox “Journal Editorial Report,” saying it takes the wind of out an issue that Democrats planned to use against Republicans in the fall.
“There are some that were counting on this issue to use on the campaign and to use against Mitt Romney and the Republican Party, and I don’t think they want there to be a reasonable Republican alternative, because it takes away the argument,” Rubio said. “I think we have plenty of other issues to debate and this is one we should take off the table and try to solve.”
While many are politicizing the issue of how to handle the children of illegal immigrants, he said, “there are some in the Democratic Party that legitimately want to help the kids.”
The senator said he’s heard “promising tones” from some Democrats who are willing to come to the table and work with him.
“All I’m trying to do is help these kids do right when their parents did wrong,” Rubio said.
“It’s a non-immigrant visa, which is what we give like a student visa, and it allows you to stay in the United States and complete your studies,” he said. “After some period of time in the future after you have been here — we are still debating how long that should be — at that point, you would be he like any other non-immigrant visa holder in the country, you would be allowed, if you want to, to apply through the green card through the existing system, not through some special path, because that is the complaint about amnesty.”
He seems unacquainted with the issues of the present H-1B visa, or he is simply letting Hispanic issues or his own theories of politics, dominate.
This means to me that he does not know or care much about the *economy*, which is sad. Rubio is bright, he’s a great wordsmith, and I had hopes for him, which are now dashed. Yes, I consider it that serious.
The economy is all about creating wealth. Wealth is created by people trading. The more people we have in this country trading the more wealth we create and the better the economy does.
As India and China have shown for millennia…….
Providing incentives toward behavior we don’t want to occur (illegal immigration) is harmful, not helpful, in the same way as illegals come to the US and use our emergency medical facilities enabled by our generous laws intended to care for our own citizens. Unfortunately “You can have a welfare state or open borders, but not both.” Milton Friedman. Sorry Marco. No sale.
To the GOP:
Do whatever you want to on the issue, because you intend to anyway, and always have.
A “modest” question:
As the GOP consumates its long awaited desires to just be a party that can reliably be elected (for I expect it is a given that the temporizers will eventually win on this issue, as well as any other where the liberals have decided its victory or bust), there are two things I would like to know though–since obviously “white” America*** can no longer expect any law to be enforced if it musses the hair of a minority group, is that going to be the limit, or should we expect more in the future when we become a minority forty years or so from now; and second, are the current Gen Xs and Gen Ys going to be the generations selected to pay the price for misdeeds done before they were born, or is this now going to be a standard blood libel on all “white” America***, sort of like the way Jews were persecuted for the cruxification of Jesus, that will follow our descendents down for the rest of time and render them automatically vetoed and ignored anytime it becomes an issue between their group*** and a more trendy one?
Just asking….
***Really, the Irish and Italians and Eastern Europeans shoud be left out of it. If you want to dilute the power of a group, you should just concentrate on us British Isles descendents, because our ancestors caused the problems, by and large. Also created the only Jacksonian republic that has ever worked in world history, and put in a system that caused the UnitedvStates to become the greatest nation in the history of man, but hey, I guess its perfection or nothing.
I was born & raised in South Texas & I have every right to be opposed to illegal immigration, & I am. What Sen Rubio is talking about (& Rick Perry as well, if you stop to listen) is trying to solve a consequence of illegal immigration. This involves people who are here through no fault of their own, just like any other child raised in America. For many, this is the only place they’ve known. Some I know can barely speak a few words of Spanish.
Rather than perpetuate & grow a large underground population, exacerbating our present situation, let’s co-opt the problem by turning this population of young people, who want to gain an education in order to succeed as Americans, into productive citizens. Their parents who are here illegally is another problem.
I personally would rather make it very very very clear to anyone thinking of illegally entering this country that we already have a system for allowing people in, and if they choose not to abide by that system that we are not enabling them in so doing. That, if they are truly so determined, will either have to live apart from their family, in the shadows, or, if they choose to bring their children, they need to understand those children have no future here. Period. We are not enabling this.
It would be far better for all if those desiring greater economic prosperity thought about the things that made America work and pressed for their adaptation to and adoption in their home lands. I thus continue in my opposition to the kind of proposals as suggested here, and to all who propose them. And I do mean all. We lose the deterrent effect when we mitigate the poor choices of others.
The message should be clear–we cannot solve the problems of the nations of Latin America by absorbing their citizens for them, and therefore will not do so. Latin America needs to take a serious look at its internal issues and solve them. I submit crony capitalusm, socialism, Peronism, communism, et al are probably not the answers.
And, finally, Marco Rubio can drop dead. Metaphorically, of course.
The H-1B visa need not be a model. Perhaps something more like the K-1 visa, which is a non-immigrant visa for a person coming to the U.S. to marry a U.S. citizen. It, basically, becomes an immigrant visa when the marriage is consummated and provides a path to a green card and citizenship after three years of marriage.
The question for the PC crowd has never been what to do for the child. That is fairly clear. The question is, what to do with the parent[s] if they remain in the U.S. Under current law, if the child gets a green card via some sort of “education” pathway then the parents will be entitled to a green card as well. Then you run into the “family reunification” provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act which grant automatic preferences to the parents, siblings, and so forth of both green card holders and naturalized or native born U.S. citizens.
Of course, any non-citizen who smuggled him/herself into the U.S. with a small child and successfully not only raised the family but avoided coming to the attention of the U.S. Government is obviously smart – or very lucky. Perhaps the family which has pulled off this deception successfully for ten to twenty years has earned the right to stay.
You folks do what you want, for you intend to anyway. But there will be a price.
The H-1B visa need not be a model.
But he made it sound like that’s exactly what he was doing.
I agree with you, and probably a majority in both parties have agreed with you for the last twenty years, that a rationalization of the current situation with some kind of guest-worker status and some kind of earned citizenship for those who’ve lived here illegally for twenty years and paid taxes and everything, is entirely a good thing. But both parties (mostly the (D)s of course) have preferred to use it as an issue than to actually solve it. Dubya would have happily done this, if the Democrats weren’t against giving him anything at all.
For better or worse the H-1B issues are rather separate from the mass Hispanic illegals issues. Not totally separate, as the Hispanics have destroyed compensation in the construction industry as the Indians (et al) have destroyed compensation in the STEM fields.
But I want to hear Rubio making these things clear, and he didn’t.
If you give legal status to these dependents then you will get every parent in Latin America of a mind to do so to start thinking that if they can just somehow get here, they can assure a future for their children that those children could not have ever had otherwise. For what parent will not sacrifice for their child?
The current illegal immigration rates, which apparently are quiescent, will start soaring again. Or at least it is a reasonable supposition.
You people are fools. We in fact do have limits to the numbers that can be admitted, both practically and legally. We made a law about the number who were to be admitted. Either enforce the one we have, period, or start understanding that I will start figuring out which laws I’m not going to obey, including election results.
And indeed, it is in fact an extremely legitimate qustion of political philosophy–why should I, why should anyone, feel overly compelled to gracefully submit to any election result or law enactment they feel adverse to their interests or principles if the power of the majority can be said to have its root basis in illegality, illegality that was known, repeatedly pointed out, and repeatedly ignored?
Exactly what part of the American canon covers that one–the part that demands obeiscience to the state no matter what?
And along with the above–”birthright” citizenship is an improper reading of the appropriate amendment, as should be clear to anyone who actually reads the thing and then thinks about what would have happened to 1860s America if it had tried to impose itself on the sons and daughters of the British ambassador.
It is a ruling and a reading that is part and parcel of the “damn the torpedoes, full new American populace ahead” mentality that has been on-going for decades. The law may say those so born are citizens, but the law also says they should not be here in the first place. Which law to believe? The current reading on birthright citizenship was never expressly put before the people for their approval. Why then should I acquiesce in those so made citizizens participating in the political system, and why should I feel bound by the majority if their votes helped make it so? Simply saying it is the law will not do, because the laws are not faithfully enforced, but only selectively. Therefore, I by reason and emotion do not think I should acquiesce, though physically I must, for it is very clear to me that those who will ignore a law that they don’t like will ruthless enforce upon me those they do. Those who should not be citizens seem to end up having more effective friends in government than citizens.
What are the possible consequences of that state of affairs?
This is my message to the politicians–at some point, political consultants not only can’t solve Kobayashi Maru scenarios for you, they’ll get you in one.
The argument in favor of any form of “Dream Act” attempts to capture morality by asserting that it’s unfair to “punish” those who broke the law through no fault of their own. Using the word punish is itself a stretch given that deportation isn’t, in and of itself, punishment but correcting a wrong. Allowing any other family member particularly the parents to benefit from this in any way is to reward bad behavior and therefore wrong.
All of this is however a moot point as the American people will not tolerate any immigration reform until the border is in fact secured.
Exactly. If I enter a foreign country illegally and am sent home, that is not punishment. Fines and imprisonment would be be punishment.
If punishment is defined as returning to your home country, what does that say about your home country? If it’s that bad, work with other citizens of your country to fix it. America cannot be responsible for raising every other country’s standard of living or taking care of everyone with a lower standard of living than ours.
We send hundreds of billions of dollars to other countries in foreign aid every year and the result is simply more resentment and hatred for the U.S. They don’t use the money to improve conditions or establish democratic reforms
We house, feed, educate and provide medical and social security benefits to tens of millions of illegal aliens and the result is widespread disrespect for our laws, charges of racism, failure to assimilate and demands for more benefits.
We can’t afford to take care of everyone.
The fact is that the proper approach to a problem is “baby steps”. If a problem is identified, write a law that is limited in scope and only addresses that problem. If it is enacted, track it for unintended consequences and adjust as necessary. The one thing we do not want to do is to let lobbyists write a massive piece of legislation to “solve” all facets of the problem at once. Take one small step at a time.
Rubio is a fraud and needs to be unelected! We currently allow 1 million+ legal immigrants and almost as many illegal immigrants into this country as we deal with between 10-20 million unemployed! Anyone that desires to continue this insanity needs to be removed from office.