Kaus on Rubio's BS
Print Friendly and PDF
The downside of Mickey Kaus as a blogger at the Daily Caller is that he doesn't Feed the Beast anywhere near as often as other bloggers, and unlike more successful bloggers, posts only on a fairly small number of subjects where he knows what he's talking about.

The upside of Mickey as a blogger is, well, stuff like this:

Marco Rubio was defensive and jargon-addled on ABCs This Week. He was slick and effective on NBC and  CNN and somewhere in between on FOX,  But he was selling BS on all four networks. Here are three examples:

1. Rubio repeatedly said it would be “cheaper, faster and easier” for illegal immigrants to go back home, wait 10 years, and apply for a green card (under current law) than to go through the longer “alternative” green card path created by his amnesty bill. That’s absurd. If Rubio’s bill passes, how many illegal immigrants are going to go home and wait 10 years versus accepting the bill’s more-or-less immediate legalization and then waiting to get their green cards?  The answer is a number approaching zero. Why? Because under Rubio’s bill they will get to do the waiting while living and working legally in the United States. That’s certainly easier than “self-deporting” for ten years under current law.

2. Similarly, Rubio argues that his bill won’t privilege illegals over those waiting in line abroad to get green cards, because it will take longer for illegals to get the green cards through his amnesty. But, again, the illegals–having been more or less instantly legalized–will get to do their waiting while having already achieved what the people waiting in line abroad can only dream of achieving: a legal life in the United States. Illegals FTW!

3. A controversy erupted late last week over the pro-amnesty “Gang of 8?s ambition to achieve a 90% apprehension rate of illegal border-crossers. Rubio’s campincluding his chief of staff, Cesar Conda–claimed this was a “trigger” that, if not met, would block the newly legalized illegals from proceeding down the road to green cards and citizenship. Democrats claimed it was just a goal that, if not met, wouldn’t block anyone. On Fox, Rubio basically admits the Democrats are right.

WALLACE: You say it’s a trigger, the number, 90 percent apprehension rate has to be certified by the Department of Homeland Security before the 11 million illegals, a decade from now, can begin to apply for green cards.

But the Democrats on your “Gang of 8?, including Dick Durbin, who will be on in the next segment, saying, no, it’s not a trigger. It’s just a goal that they have to be working towards.

Now, is it a trigger that has to be met or is it a goal?

RUBIO: Yes. Let me tell you why it’s a trigger because, basically, homeland security will have five years to meet that goal. If after five years, Homeland Security has not met that number, it will trigger the Border Commission who will then take over this issue for them. So, they’ll have five years to get it done. They have to create these two plans — a fence plan, there has to be a fence component to this, and a border security plan.

And if at the five-year mark, they have not achieved that 90 percent or 100 percent, then they lose the issue to the Border Commission who has money set aside so they can finish the job and they can get to that number.

In other words, all that’s triggered is a commission, not any holdup in the march to green cards (which means there will be little incentive to actually achieve the 90% goal).

Bonus BS: Rubio press aide Alex Conant tweets that

Without temporary worker program to fill US demand for low-skill labor, people will find way to come illegally despite new fence

Really? Hasn’t Rubio been busy telling us that his plan would secure the border? Now his flack tells us people “will find a way to come illegally” despite it? Doesn’t this mean that those who can’t get into the guest worker program (maybe because it’s full, or because they don’t qualify) will be able to “find a way” in as well–so the elaborately negotiated limits on the number of guestworkers will be routinely violated and, in practice, meaningless? Doesn’t it also mean that those who are drawn by the prospect of the next amnesty (because, you know, ”we can’t deport them all!” and “Latino voters”) will “find a way”in too? How secure is this new Rubio border going to be? Seems like it’s secure when he wants it to be and insecure when he doesn’t. Maybe we should find out before we turn on the amnesty magnet! Just a thought.
Print Friendly and PDF