Friday, June 28, 2013
Immigration - Rubio – Conscious and Political Folly – The Right and the Right of Cruz vs. Rubio
Rubio and Cruz - photo - Politico
The Senate Passage of the “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act’’ (Read Act Here)has shed some light as to the individuals within the Senate that are willing to compromise to move a goal post towards progress (rather than Progressive), and Marco Rubio, the Senator from Florida, appears to be of such mind. This was the type of move, bi-partisan in nature that sunk Scott Brown like a rock in the 2012 elections. One might think it was the fact that he was tagged as a Republican, however, those on the right in Massachusetts and those so-called independent voters, were not thrilled with the way he voted – crossing party lines in this heavily polarized nation in which we live, can be political folly. The Tampa Bay Times writes an interesting article, titled: “Senate passes immigration bill, but at what cost to Sen. Marco Rubio?”in which his move to work within the structure of the Senate and Comprise, may hurt him politically, with those considered to be on the “fringe” or “far right” voters – (see Tea Party). Of course, the later labels are journalistically created nonsense; rather it is a question of those who adhere to the Constitution and those who feel it is a document to be trifled with. Those Conservatives and Tea Party Members are constantly cast as out of the mainstream, however, one might find that more agree on principle, than not, with conservative values.
Ted Cruz, the Senator from Texas, is one who opposed the Act – not because of immigration reform, rather the contents of the ACT. There are those who refuse to go along to get along, and regardless of political outcome, act on their principals, rather than what is politically correct at the time.
Both Senator’s Cruz and Cornyn voted “No” on the Immigration Reform Bill (Dallas Morning News), as it was written. The Act in its current form, with the addition of amendments, and the loss in the bill of any border security, that stopped both Texans, and will cause the Act to die in the House.
One can understand that Rubio voted out of compassion for those, living here in this nation, who are in the shadows (to use a tired phrase), and would be allowed to come forward, with a process, and become law-abiding, tax-paying citizens. However, without border control, and with the past as a guide, once amnesty (and that is what this Act allows), is granted, millions more flock to this country. To get to the border, and across there is much peril, including those who would financially benefit from either holding individuals for ransom, or charging exorbitant fees to bring them across the border, or, once in the U.S., having them work of the cost of their travel to the U.S. which could take half a lifetime.
That is what Cruz objects to and rightly so. It is not that one might be against an orderly and fair immigration bill, as long as the first measure was to secure the border, by whatever means possible. It would be surprising if either man were hurt by their respective positions in the long-run, as geography is a grand factor – Florida being a microcosm of the Northeast, and Texas being a border state with good reason to be suspicious of any bill coming out of DC. – The Senate Bill as written, is similar to ObamaCare, and everyone knows how that is turning into a nightmare for the Democrat Party.