President Obama is pushing a path to citizenship as a "poison pill" to prevent meaningful immigration reform, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) charged Monday.
“The part that I"ve got deep concerns about is any path to citizenship for those who are here illegally," Cruz said during an interview with Sean Hannity. "I think that is profoundly unfair to the millions of legal immigrants who have followed the rules, who have waited in line.
"I think the reason that President Obama is insisting on a path to citizenship is that it is designed to be a poison pill to scuttle the whole bill, so he can have a political issue in 2014 and 2016. I think that’s really unfortunate," continued Cruz.
The Tea Party favorite said Congress could easily pass a comprehensive immigration reform deal if Democrats, and particularly Obama, stopped demanding the inclusion of a pathway to citizenship for immigrants living in the country illegally.
Cruz's comments came as a bipartisan group of senators indicate that it’s nearly done crafting a broad immigration bill. The so-called "Gang of Eight" hopes to unveil the legislation in April, with Sen. Lindsey Graham on Sunday suggesting that the group could unveil legislation as early as next week...."
Huffington Post: May 8, 2013
WASHINGTON - Among the 300 amendments to the Senate immigration bill is one that would take away one of its central purposes: giving a pathway to citizenship to the 11 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), an almost certain "no" vote on the bill from the so-called gang of eight, filed an amendment on Tuesday to ban anyone who has been in the U.S. without status from becoming a citizen at any point.
The path to citizenship under the gang of eight bill is already a difficult one. It would take about 13 years and require immigrants to complete a number of requirements, such as learning English and paying hefty fines. Undocumented immigrants would first apply for provisional immigrant status, and most would be required stay in the U.S. for at least a decade before being eligible to apply for legal permanent residency. They could then eventually apply to be a U.S. citizen. But the government would have to meet certain border security benchmarks before any provisional immigrant could move into legal permanent resident status........
Fox News Latino: May 8, 2013
Ted Cruz Files Amendment To Deny Path To Citizenship As Senate Works On Bill
......"The amendments filed today to strengthen border security and reform our legal immigration system will not only bring meaningful, effective improvements to our immigration system, but also have a chance of becoming law," said Cruz in a statement. "America is a nation of immigrants, built by immigrants and we need to honor that heritage by fixing our broken immigration system, while upholding the rule of law and championing legal immigration."
His amendments are among more than 300 filed by the Tuesday evening deadline. Republicans wanting tighter enforcement provisions filed a majority of the amendments, with Sen. Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, leading the pack with 77 amendments.
Supporters of the bill, mainly of the part of it that would legalize millions of undocumented immigrants, kept a steady drumbeat in defense of the measure though emails, websites and social media.
In a press release, America's Voice, a leading national group that advocates for more lenient immigration laws, singled out Cruz's anti-citizenship amendment as particularly worrisome.
"This would not only destroy the path to citizenship in the Senate bill - the popular heart of an immigration reform solution - but also turn its back on 100 years of precedent in immigration policy," said the release..........
Politico: Dec 17, 2015
........Cruz says his amendment was a "poison pill" designed to doom the Gang of Eight reform package that Rubio co-authored.
So who's actually correct? There are two big points to unpack.
First is whether Cruz’s amendment was indeed a "poison pill" meant to kill the immigration bill, which the Texas senator’s campaign now contends. That is unequivocally true, so point goes to Cruz.
Second is whether Cruz's amendment signaled his true policy beliefs at the time. That's significantly murkier and ultimately, may never be knowable.
Let’s start with the first point.
The bipartisan group of eight senators - including battle-tested veterans and relative newcomers like Rubio - painstakingly negotiated a delicate compromise in early 2013 that would overhaul every corner of the U.S. immigration system, including a 13-year pathway to citizenship for millions here illegally.
Fans and foes of the legislation, as well as observers at the time, knew the core bill couldn’t change too dramatically because that would upset that compromise, which not only had the backing of Democrats and Republicans in the Senate but also coalitions off the Hill, such as labor unions and the business lobby.
Cruz's amendment - which called for stripping out a pathway to citizenship, but keeping a path for legalization - would have done precisely that.
The night before each Senate Judiciary Committee markup, senior Gang of Eight aides would huddle to scour through each of the amendments that were teed up for the following day, determining which proposals would be palatable and which would be unacceptable. This strategy was meant to ensure the core elements of the Gang of Eight deal would stay intact (the four members of the Gang who sat on the Judiciary Committee would vote in a bloc, usually with the rest of the committee Democrats, to vote down potential deal-killers).
"This one was one that clearly we all had to oppose because it went to the core of the deal," recalled an aide to a Senate Democrat during the 2013 negotiations. "It could've unraveled the whole deal."
Sure, Cruz himself never called it a "poison pill" at the time. But no senator refers to his own proposal as a poison pill, even if it plainly is. The Gang of Eight never considered Cruz as "gettable," and it was well-known at the time that Cruz was never going to vote for the bill and was in fact, trying to kill it.
"Everyone was rolling their eyes and smirking when he said it would improve the bill," said the aide. "I don't think anybody took it seriously.".........
Notice how Cruz “lashes out” at Trump and Rubio by attacking their policy positions, while Trump attacks Cruz because his speech was “far too long, rambling, [and] overly flamboyant”?
It’s substance vs. bluster, folks.
During the Fox News/Google GOP debate on Thursday night, the candidates, especially Rubio and Cruz, were taken to task over their record on immigration. In one exchange, moderator Megyn Kelly challenged Senator Cruz to on whether, based on his amendments offered, he supported legalization. "Yes it would," said Kelly of his amendment.
However, later that evening Kelly interviewed Cruz and conceded an important point. That being pretty much the opposite, which is that he did not and does not support legalizing the status of people here illegally.
**********
Back up (and comments) and LINK to the interview: FR THREAD: Megyn Kelly to Ted Cruz: "The record supports you."
Megyn Kelly:
"The record supports you." [Cruz: "Anyone here illegally is permanently ineligible for citizenship."]
"It was a poison pill."
"You do have a consistent record on that; I will give you that; we did look back on it."
Is this the Onion? He’s blasting Trump on immigration????
Trump has led the way on illegals/immigration. Cruz got nudged that way after he realized that’s what Americans wanted. He’s a Johnny Come Lately.
meanwhile, know what Trump is doing? Sulking & Tweeting.
“He also said Trump didn’t do anything to fight immigration reform as the debate raged on Capitol Hill in 2013.”
Huh?
That is true, BTW.
Meanwhile Trump is all over the place. First saying he will deport them all and then saying he supports a “touchback” system that would let millions into the country legally.
Trump was NOT in office or in a position to stop the gang of 8.....
BUT CRUZ, who was Bush’s immigration adviser did PLENTY to push amnesty in his official duties!
When he was working for Bush, he crafted the campaign’s immigration policy, which included a sped-up application process, a greater number of work visas, and a provision that allowed relatives of permanent residents to visit the United States.
http://prospect.org/article/ted-cruz-immigration-shuffle
Ted takes whatever position profits him at the time!
HISPANDERING: He was also a founding editor of the Harvard Latino Law Review (where he is listed as “Rafael E. Cruz”
Trump was in Congress in 2013?? I didn’t know that!
“He also said Trump didn’t do anything to fight immigration reform as the debate raged on Capitol Hill in 2013.”
Someone tell the Canadian that Trump held no public office in 2013. He seems to have forgotten. But there’s always another lie he can come up with and he will.
Different tactics I see. He left his Bible in Iowa
Teddy ‘Goldman Sachs’ Cruz is attaching Trump on immigration? That’s rich.
Thus speaks Cruz, he of teddy-bears-at-the-border diplomacy.
As for the dishonest claim that Cruz opposed legalization, even though he never did, based on the Gang of Eight bill.
The Gang of Eight fight was about citizenship. No one at that time was opposing legalization, not even Cruz. Rush Limbaugh even called deportation “unrealistic,” and actually favored, on air, Ted Cruz’s plan of legalizing them “after the border is secure” and as long as they cannot vote.
Not Cruz, not Sessions, not anybody, was fighting legalization of illegals, which Ted Cruz now claims he always opposed.
For a break down of Cruz’s public statements from 2013 to 2015 on legalization, demonstrating that he did support it, posters should see these two links:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3372213/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3374003/posts
Cruz and his supporters play fast and loose with the truth by confusing legalization with the pathway to citizenship, the latter of which he always opposed, while the former he supported openly as recently as March of this year, before going silent on the issue and promising there would be a “conversation” about what to do with illegals at some unspecified later time.
Let’em have it with both barrels, Ted!
So, we are further to believe that, when the bill languished in the House for a full year, that somehow it was still the Ted Cruz magic that prevented the bill from passing in the House.
This is all nonsense. Ted prevented nothing. The bill failed in the House because of another voter uprising, and the fact that the House has generally opposed the amnesty schemes of the past decade. And it was finally laid to rest with the shocking primary defeat of amnesty pusher Eric Cantor.
And:
President Obama is pushing a path to citizenship as a "poison pill" to prevent meaningful immigration reform, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) charged Monday.
If the bill already contained a poison pill, why did Ted think he needed to try to add poison pills? And, why was one of his pills an amendment to remove the very pathway to citizenship he claimed would already kill the bill?
Ted is simply revising history for the presidential campaign since Trump entered the race and made immigration one of the top issues. Ted offered amendments to try and improve it enough to assist in passage in the House.
Cruz is one angry Canadian. That is because he realizes Iowa is his only win.