After Gang of Eight, a new conservative message: Won’t get fooled again

Washington Examiner ^ | 6/29/2013 | Byron York

[markomalley]

Many conservatives gave Sen. Marco Rubio the benefit of the doubt when he said securing the border first was a top priority for the Gang of Eight comprehensive immigration reform effort. Later, when those conservatives realized that Rubio’s plan would first legalize the country’s estimated 11 million illegal immigrants, and only then put new border security measures in place, they expressed deep disappointment and disillusionment.

Now the Gang bill has passed the Senate and immigration is the work of the House, where former vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan is a leading reform advocate. Ryan favors the same legalization-first sequence for immigration reform that Rubio and the Gang did. The difference is that now, more conservatives are aware of the basics of reform proposals. And that means Ryan might be in for a rougher ride with the conservative base than Rubio experienced.

That, at least, is one conclusion to take from Ryan’s appearance last Wednesday on Sean Hannity’s Fox News program. Hannity interviewed Rubio several times during the Gang of Eight deliberations. In later interviews, Hannity became more skeptical and questioning, and in the last such interview expressed surprise that Rubio had declared legalization would come before border security. With Ryan in the interview chair, the first thing Hannity wanted to know was when securing the border would come in the sequence of immigration reform.

“I’m sure you are aware, a lot of conservatives including myself are angry,” Hannity told Ryan. “No border security first. How do you feel about it?”

Ryan stressed that the House would not take up the Senate Gang of Eight bill. “We want to have real triggers on the border, real triggers on what we call the E-Verify,” Ryan said. But Hannity wanted to know if that meant border security would come first: “Is securing the border first a top priority for you?” he asked.

“It is a top priority for me,” Ryan answered. But then Ryan explained that immigration reform as he envisions it would, like the Gang of Eight bill, begin with legalization, and only after that would it do the work of securing the border:

Hear what I say. What we’re talking about in the House is we’re saying, people who are here undocumented, because we realize we cannot deport 11 million people and find them and deport them, so we want to put them on a probationary status, that’s the kind of thinking we have here, and they can’t get out of that probationary status, they can’t get legal permanent residence, which is what Chuck Grassley was talking there*, until these border efforts are made, until the border is secure, until the E-Verify set up.

Now, we don’t want to leave it to the executive branch like Janet Napolitano to make that decision, we want objective metrics, we want Congress’ auditing on the General Accountability Office to tell us whether or not these metrics have been met, whether or not the border is really secure, whether or not the verification system is up and running. And only until that has occurred can a person in this status change their status from probation to something other than that.

Ryan’s position could not have been clearer: First, comes the legalization, and then come the measures to secure the border.

Hannity was skeptical and challenging. “My sources have been telling me, congressman, that you guys are considering a five-year temporary legal status, and then if the border security measure is not met in five years, that that would be revoked.”

“That’s right,” Ryan said. “That’s right.”

“I don’t believe that would ever happen,” Hannity shot back. Ryan answered:

Well, look, they can’t get — what a person would want to have, is they would come out of the shadows, they’d get put on probation, they’d pay taxes, pay fines, learn English, learn civics. If they break the terms of their probation, they can be deported. And if the border is not secure by that time, if the verification system is not up and running, they can’t get — not only does the status go away, they can’t get legal permanent residence…

If you want to get this population, the undocumented population, in legal permanent residency, get them a green hard, then these other things have to happen first, the border has to be secured, the E-Verify system has to be up and running. That’s the kind of system we’re talking about here in the House.

That is precisely the structure provided for in the Senate Gang of Eight bill that Senate Republicans opposed two-to-one. Hannity sensed that immediately.

“But what I’m hearing you say, is you’re still giving them legal status first, albeit temporary,” Hannity said. “And I think I speak for a lot of people, congressman. Most people see that when we are promised spending cuts, we get the tax increase, we never get the spending cut. We get the amnesty, we never get the border security. Why wouldn’t you support something such as expediting, building the security measures in — I mean, we sent men to the moon, couldn’t we do within 12 months, 18 months?

Ryan didn’t answer the question, instead stressing that legalization is necessary for the government to learn the real identities of the 11 million currently illegal immigrants. “We think it’s important to get legal immigration working in order to secure the border, to do it this way,” Ryan said. “This is not giving anybody an amnesty.”

“All right,” Hannity said. “So, what you’re saying is, temporary legal status, do you blame me for being suspicious — ”

“Not at all,” said Ryan.

” — that it would never be revoked, whether or not the border was ever secure?” Hannity said. “That why I think myself and a lot of conservatives are saying, don’t we have a right to have sovereign borders and that done first? Why not do that first?”

“Sean, I’m suspicious as well,” Ryan said. Past reforms have not worked, Ryan added, and this time, he wants to take a “wide gate, high fence” approach to immigration. “We think legal immigration that works and is viable is the best way of securing the border — it’s sort of a wide gate, high-fence approach….We need a workable legal immigration system, while we get the border under control and have employment verification system, because illegal immigration and identity theft are sort of one in the same thing.”

No matter how many times Hannity asked the question, Ryan’s answer was still the same: legalization first. But Hannity kept trying. “You know, I’m listening to you, and obviously, you put a lot of thought into this,” he told Ryan. “I talk to a lot of conservatives, they write me, they’re writing me right now on Twitter, and I can predict for you what the answer is going to be. If you don’t trust the government, and I don’t trust the government, and we can send a man on the moon, why don’t we just secure the border and expedite it immediately? Make it a national security priority and then deal with these other issues. Why is that not an option for you?”

“Because in order to secure the border, you have to have a workable legal immigration system that people who are trying to come to this country to work have a way of coming here legally,” Ryan said. “You can’t just seal it off, you need to make sure that people can come here legally and we also have to remember, we’ve got 11 million people in the country who are undocumented who either overstayed their visa or crossed the border illegally. What are we going to do? We’re not going to be able to find them and deport them. We have to find a way of dealing with this population, we want to do it in a way that respects the rule of law, and puts them at the back of the line, so that everybody who did things right — ”

“Can’t you do that after the border is secure, though?” asked Hannity.

“We think it goes with the border,” Ryan said. “We think it’s the best way to secure the border is to have this workable legal immigration system alongside it.”

By that point, it was obvious that Ryan is firmly and probably unchangeably committed to the legalization-first approach. Knowing that many conservative Republicans are firmly and probably unchangeably committed to an enforcement-first approach, Hannity moved on to the consequences of an internecine fight over the issue. “I’m concerned that there’s going to be a conservative revolt and a divide in the Republican Party,” he said. “Are you at all worried about that?”

“Of course I’m worried about that,” Ryan said. “But I want to get it right. I want it to work.”

Hannity’s tone was respectful throughout. But all in all, the interview had an entirely different tone from the questions asked Marco Rubio early in the Senate Gang of Eight process. Look for Paul Ryan to face a more aggressive, and more skeptical, conservative media as the House reform work goes forward.

 

* It’s unclear what Ryan meant by the reference to Grassley. The Iowa senator introduced an amendment that would have delayed the initial legalization of immigrants until after border security measures were in place. That was a non-starter both for Democrats on the Gang of Eight and would most likely be for Democrats in the House as well.

[sickoflibs]

Try again:

It doesn't matter as far as you are concerned because your position is that legalizing probational leglization w NO path to citizenship to a single illegal who pays $50K in federal income taxes and can get no benefits is the same thing as giving them the vote and my money.

That was the jist of my comment that you jumped on. >

[sickoflibs]

Sorry about that, its late.

[kabar]

I suggest you reread my post #51 to understand my position on the bill. And check out the link.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”I suggest you reread my post #51 to understand my position on the bill. And check out the link.”

No POTUS is deporting them and its gone to far to expect mass self deportation.

It never hurts to have an argument,those are not arguments,

Rubio made lots of promises about the Senate bill most lies regarding taxes and benefits.

And he agreed to give illegals the vote up front.

Since it was worth him lying about it is low hanging fruit to oppose and kill any bill that Dems will accept(and a few GOP Senators apparently) .

But the Mike Savage arguments are 100% losers.

[sickoflibs]

BTW : Ryan is playing the same role in House as Rubio did in the Senate.

To get a bill to Obama.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

It doesn't matter as far as you are concerned because your position is that legalizing probational leglization w NO path to citizenship to a single illegal who pays $50K in federal income taxes and can get no benefits is the same thing as giving them the vote and my money.

Let's assume Boehner keeps his promise and does not allow a vote on the senate immigration bill. If the House then passes "probational leglization w NO path to citizenship" 3 things can happen:

1) Dems won't vote for it and can't compromise with the House in conference, so both parties give up, conservatives celebrate, and Obama turns up the demagoguery.

2) Boehner/Ryan/Cantor send enough RINOs to the conference to add citizenship. Then Boehner would have a dilemma, because whichever GOP faction (pro- and aunti-amesty) loses the following vote in the full House on the conderence bill might hold a grudge for a long time. This is the possibility that drives so many posters (and Bachmann) to insist that the house pass NO immigration bill at all. (But as sickoflibs notes, when the House had no violence against women bill of its own, Boehner brought up the senate VAWA and House GOP cowards helped Dems to pass it.)

3) (I think this is very unlikely) Enough senate Dems vote for the non-citizenship to pass this thing in both houses. This would happen only if rabid pro-amnesty forces thought this would be a way to get part of the way to citizenship.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”3) (I think this is very unlikely) Enough senate Dems vote for the non-citizenship to pass this thing in both houses. This would happen only if rabid pro-amnesty forces thought this would be a way to get part of the way to citizenship.”

If all Dems in house vote no then Reid wont take it up in Senate, and conference goes no-where.

RE :”2) Boehner/Ryan/Cantor send enough RINOs to the conference to add citizenship. Then Boehner would have a dilemma, because whichever GOP faction (pro- and aunti-amesty) loses the following vote in the full House on the conderence bill might hold a grudge for a long time. “

The GOP house is in civil war already.

At this point the argument that the GOP House not pass anything until we see a proposal is attractive. Its a shame that that crap bill got out of Senate.

I suspect that like w the Senate, the House bill will have real issues to argue against, and Rubio will play Ryan’s role as traitor to tell us not to worry that it will be fixed.

I think we can argue against it on issues if its in any way acceptable to Dems.

Maybe Levin, Hannity and Rush need to stop sucking up to Ryan before its too late.

[Windflier]

America, the USSA, is finished.

"I'm Barack Obama, and I approve this message!"

[Prince of Space]

Ryan keeps talking about not being able to “seal the border” with all those faceless, nameless illegals stuck here. I guess he’s never heard of a gate, lol. As if sealing the border is the same thing as sewing someone up at the end of an operation. What a traitorous, idiotic putz!

[lodi90]

BTW : Ryan is playing the same role in House as Rubio did in the Senate.

To get a bill to Obama.

---

Exactly. This is all choreographed. The beltway GOP are running a harder nosed campaign for amnesty then they did for Romney. Unbelievable.

[Jacquerie]

Popularly derived institutions will always go that way. It is as certain as sunrise tomorrow. The wonder is not that the GOP Senate isn't entirely conservative, but rather that there are any conservatives at all. Booting states out of the senate was a huge mistake that is killing our republic.

[justa-hairyape]

Why would Latinos want to come to a country that treats them like George Zimmerman ?

[Mozilla]

Lot of us here weren’t fooled. We knew when Marco was drafting up the republican dream act he was a fraud and turned his back on everything he said in getting elected. That was two years ago.

[Mozilla]

time to go and create a third party. The constitution party is not an adequate replacement. Plus it is too isolationist. Too many people hate Obama for there not to be a real anti-Obama/anti-Democrat party that has congressional candidates.

[SeminoleCounty]

If there is no deportation of illegal aliens....it is Amnesty

[Liz]

Ryan compounded his stupidity by his sap-happy claim that reform would "take them out of the shadows, so that they can give us their real identities."

MEMO TO RYAN your sap-happy faith in latino human nature will not be rewarded---not by these conniving primitive invaders sucking off taxpayers bigtime.

Using multiple identities is v-e-r-y profitable.

<><> one latino illegal (one who got caught) scammed UI for some $3.4 MILLION.

<><> The Washington state latino rapist had some 30 identities---all riding the US gravy train.

<><> $43 million IRS refunds were sent to one address---that's about 37,000 fake ids---just at one address.

========================================

Cackle---gee, I just can't wait til La Raza comes out of the shadows, can you? They colluded w/ vote crazed US pols to extort millions from US taxpayers---that's only the beginning.

The greedy hate-America primitives made sure "immigration “reform” includes two “slush funds” amounting to $150,000,000 that may be supplemented with additional taxpayer dollars for years to come, earmarked for non-profit organizations such as the blood-thirsty La Raza.

LA RAZA TEACHING HATE-AMERICA WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS La Raza Studies do not even try to sugar-coat its anti-America agenda and its bloodthirsty plans to kill off Americans: Raza Studies textbook “Occupied America,” by Rodolfo Acuña, includes a violent and blood-curdling speech given by university professor Jose Angel Gutierrez: “We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is, if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him,” (pg. 323).

The following is taken directly from La Raza's Occupied America (pg. 167): “.......execute all white males over age 16,” (AKA the Plan of San Diego).

America-hating Raza Studies teach (1) violence, (2) undermining US ntl security, and, (3) the need for Mexico to "re-take seven states in the Southwest...in order to make the SW a Chicano nation. "

SCHOOL BOARD NUT CASES Adelita Grijalva is the woman on the Arizona school board pimping La Raza indoctrination programs in Tuscon schools. Adelita is all up in arms about Raza Studies getting tossed via the AZ state legislature's action...she is the daughter of Raul Grijalva (D-AZ-7) who was just narrowly re-elected to our US Congress. Cong Raul Grijalva is one of Mexico’s most productive and loyal Fifth Column in the US Congress....aiding and abetting the latino criminal underworld, colluding to take back the SW, and loot and pillage the US treasury.

Raul and friend.

[SC_Pete]

Yes, the 17th Amendment is killing us.

[VRW Conspirator]

Punk’d = Rubio’ed

[VRW Conspirator]

How many examiners would it take to give 11 million probationary American citizens English exams? How many teachers?

Let me call this plan, unsustainable!

[VietVet]

“Do you hear the people’s voice?
It is the sound of angry men;
It is the song of the people
Who will not be fooled again...”

The political class isn’t afraid of the people unless we are willing to go to the barricades.

‘Course, in “Les Miz” (and in France in 1832) the people on the Barricade lost.