This post will maintain a list of those supposed conservative bloggers who support some form of comprehensive immigration reform (aka amnesty), specifically the amnesty proposed by Marco Rubio. This post doesn't list GOP politicians or pundits, just bloggers and other low-level members of the GOP establishment.
There are three audiences for this post:
1. If you already oppose amnesty, you can help block it by working to discredit those listed below to their supporters. You can do that by leaving comments on their relevant posts showing their readers how they're wrong. You can also look up those they talk to (or those who talk to them) on Twitter and inform those people how the blogger is wrong.
2. If you oppose those listed below for other reasons, do the same: use amnesty to discredit these bloggers to their supporters.
3. If you aren't that familiar with amnesty, then hopefully I can turn you into an amnesty opponent and get you to help discredit those listed below. Please see these:
* The Democrats and far-left people and groups that support Rubio's moves on immigration.
After reading those and the other entries on the Marco Rubio page, hopefully you'll be ready to join the first group.
Here's the list; other names may be added later:
...[Rubio's amnesty] would have a better chance of passing the Senate than a strict no-amnesty bill would, obviously. Democrats want to push on immigration reform anyway, and Republicans will have to have a reasonable alternative on the table. Rubio is under no illusions that this alone will allow the GOP to make inroads with Hispanic voters, but it will at least remove the biggest roadblock
[I'd like to see more details, but] I think Rubio is on the right path, and the sooner that this issue gets off the table, the better off the Republican Party will be. Given the results of the 2012 elections, we aren’t going to see anything better than this in principle that could resolve the differences between Republicans and Democrats, and its success or failure will tell us — and Hispanic voters — whether Democrats are serious about resolving the issue or just using it for demagoguery.
* Erika Johnsen, also of HotAir ( @ErikaJohnsen; source: peekURL.com/zCuaJmY ):
As Ed pointed out yesterday, Sen. Rubio is hatching a plan to ‘charge up the middle’ on illegal immigration — and it might not be a moment too soon. The White House has already indicated that they are planning to go full-throttle on prioritizing the immigration issue in a second term, and it looks like those plan are already starting to take a more definite shape in the form of a comprehensive legislative package that critics will undoubtedly say looks an awful lot like amnesty, reports the NYT:
I think it’s safe to say that plenty of the voting public can’t even summon the will to feign interest in the budget battles on the federal docket in the coming months, and President Obama is ready to use his campaign-like tactics to try and get people fired up about something again; that, combined with many GOP members’ post-election readiness to reassess their stances and not let the Democrats take the lead on a longstanding issue the country may finally be ready to tackle, might mean that this is the perfect political storm for movement on immigration.
...The GOP can’t risk getting caught with their pants down on this, and they’ll need to have a workable alternative on hand — and it sounds like Sen. Rubio is hoping to lead on the issue and further prove his national mettle.
* "SooperMexican", a blogger at @SooperMexican.
If Rubio were to pull this off, he would have a major accomplishment under his belt. It would be a “legacy” issue that might serve as a springboard to the White House... The hope is that Rubio’s common sense approach to what he views as a humanitarian crisis wins converts on both sides. If there was ever a time for two sides to come together over this issue, it might be now.
Senator Marco Rubio is taking the lead in proposing a comprehensive immigration reform bill that GOP bitter enders on immigration will no doubt refer to as “amnesty,” while the rest of the party struggles with how to connect to Hispanic voters on the issue.
...The best that can be said about Rubio’s proposal is that it is a good start. When Congress will find time to take up the issue is another question entirely, but getting out front on immigration as Rubio proposes to do may begin to reverse the toxic reputation the GOP has with the Hispanic community and help them see that the Republican party is a more welcoming place than Democratic propagandists would have them believe.
Rubio is offering the GOP a potential path out of the wilderness on immigration. He will no doubt be condemned by many on the far right just as vigorously as John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and George W. Bush were denounced when they tried to do similar things seven years ago. If Republicans listen to Rubio, though, they’ll realize that it’s time to stop listening to the talk radio guys and the xenophobes who clearly don’t like immigrants to begin with, and start legislating in a responsible manner. Let’s see if they listen to him.
To be sure, the American immigration system needs some comprehensive reform, but clearly, don't understand the wisdom of avoiding massive "fix-all" bills, a la the Affordable Care Act. As Nancy Pelosi famously said, a bill like this is so big you have to pass it just to know what it does. With policy as sensitive and all-encompassing as immigration, it's best to err on the side of caution -- and with our finances in dire straights, it's best to avoid bills that can easily hide pork.
So says Marco Rubio, who also intends to pursue immigration reform, albeit down a different path of the president and his fellows. Although he's met with the aforementioned bipartisan coalition, Rubio instead advocates for four or five niche-issue immigration bills, each dealing with one facet of the extraordinarily complicated topic: low-skill guest worker programs, increased quotas for high-skill workers, border security, employee status checks, and a program to bring the 12 million illegal residents already here into the light of the law. It's this last piece of the puzzle, of course, that has proved to be the most contentious in the immigration battle.
It'll be interesting to see how the various immigration bills stack up against each other, and who will prevail. Ostensibly, something like what Rubio has proposed -- introducing several pieces of legislation, and tackling each issue individually -- would make the most sense, but in this day and age, the most "bipartisan-looking" bill, not necessarily the sanest, is the one that tends to make it farthest on the floor.
* Conn Carroll of the Washington Examiner offers "The Obama-Rubio amnesty farce" ( peekURL.com/zSVzxAV ). While he realizes there's little difference between Obama's amnesty and Rubio's, he also supports a form of legalization:
Conservatives will never win sizeable portions of the Asian or Latino votes if they are constantly the bad guys of immigration enforcement policy. The Obama-Rubio plan forever keeps Republicans in that role. Permanent noncitizen resident status is one proposal conservatives should consider to get around that problem.
I could live with this. More importantly: so could probably 50+% of the electorate, which I suspect is getting thoroughly tired of this issue.
...Now, I know very well that a lot of people are going to be opposed to something like this, but here’s an uncomfortable truth: you can either have a significant easing of immigration policy done by Republicans, or you can one done by Democrats (the alternative of ‘don’t ease immigration policy’ died with Mitt Romney’s electoral prospects*). And while the Republicans may annoy you, the Democrats want you to die in a grease fire (I am only slightly exaggerating with that last bit). Your call.
* At RedState itself, a diarist named "Griffin@griffinelection" offers "Marco Rubio is exactly what the GOP needs on immigration" ( peekURL.com/zFU4BmH ). Another diarist says the opposite. Determining what percent of their readers and their leading contributors is on which side is left as an exercise.
* While Erick Erickson doesn't appear to have weighed in on Rubio's current amnesty, in June 2012 he did support Rubio's earlier amnesty (the alternative to the DREAM Act, see that link; quote source: peekURL.com/znvVnGE ):
Not a day goes by these days that I don’t hear more about Senator Marco Rubio’s immigration plan and get asked my thoughts on it. The plan is just that — a plan. To my knowledge there is no legislative language yet. But from what I have heard I like the plan with some reservations.
I am to the left of many of RedState’s readers when it comes to immigration. While I oppose the DREAM Act and amnesty, I have a moral problem with telling a child brought into the country by his or her parents and who has subsequently been raised here that the child, because of the parents’ actions, must now be sent back from the only country the child has known.
I like most of what I’ve heard of Senator Rubio’s plan, though I still have some substantive problems, including my foundational belief that we should pursue no plan until we have secured the border.
[But, the timing is wrong because it would divide the GOP]
* Mary Katharine Ham of Hot Air basically supports the amnesty plan, she just wants hearings ( peekURL.com/zzEJP49 ):
My skepticism of this bill comes, less from its content, about which I’m ambivalent and uncertain, and more from my utter lack of confidence that Congress can manage or even understand complex systems that it’s been spending the last half a century making more and more complex.
* Guy Benson (Hot Air contributor and Townhall Political Editor) interviewed Marco Rubio on his radio show ( peekURL.com/zzeyxVe ). In the introduction to the interview, Benson admitted that he supports amnesty, he just has qualms about the details of the current plan:
Putting my cards on the table, I am in favor of immigration reform. I think that the current status quo is unworkable. It's broken. It's dysfunctional. And at almost every level, it's unfair. It's unfair to citizens, it's unfair to people who worked really hard to get here legally, and at times, it's also unfair to people who came here illegally. It needs to be changed, and I entirely agree with Senator Rubio's contention that the status quo, staying as we are, amounts to a de facto amnesty for millions of people. It's a mess. He makes that point; it's valid. Let me also say this: I'm a huge fan of Marco Rubio. Ever since I saw him give his farewell speech on the floor of the House in Florida, when he was going to run for Senate against very long odds -- and ended up beating Charlie Crist, of course, and became the US Senator -- I was smitten politically when I saw that speech. He's a natural, he's hugely talented, he's likeable, he's conservative. I admire him, I respect him, I trust him. All that being said, in spite of my open-mindedness, if not appetite, for reform -- and my positive feelings toward Senator Rubio -- I have some real, serious, substantive issues with what I've seen so far coming out of the 'Gang of Eight.'
Ones to watch
The following have not come out for Rubio's amnesty, but it wouldn't be surprising if they indicate their support at some point in time. Even if they don't do that, the chances of them vigorously opposing amnesty is slim:
* Joel Pollak ( at the very least this is very bad political framing and advice; source: peekURL.com/zHqAuMF ):
Today, two factors have potentially tipped the scales in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, even without improved border security. One is the fact that immigration across the Mexican border has slowed dramatically, due to the stagnant economic recovery over which Obama has presided.
The other factor is the steep decline in Republican fortunes among Latino voters, leading some in the GOP to conclude the immigration issue is one that the party must try to put behind it by yielding ground on enforcement.
The political wisdom of such conclusions is dubious; Republicans did worse, not better, among Latino voters after President Ronald Reagan signed an amnesty for illegal immigrants in 1986. Yet Republicans seem committed to doing “something”; House Speaker John Boehner and influential conservative radio and television host Sean Hannity have both lent their support to passing new immigration reform legislation.
One thing is certain: such legislation might have passed already but for the deliberate, partisan, and cynical opposition of a junior Senator from Illinois who was eager to do Big Labor’s bidding, and who wanted the issue preserved as a grievance for his party to exploit in subsequent elections.
Having done so, Obama is now in a position to emerge as the potential--though undeserving--pioneer in comprehensive immigration reform.
* Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit)
* AllahPundit of HotAir has gotten better on immigration recently and has pointed out flaws in immigration proposals. Whether that continues or he caves is an open question.
* William Jacobson (his last immigration post appears to be August 2012)
* Patterico (likewise, his last immigration post appears to be August 2012)
Those in the second list and others will be monitored to see if they support Rubio's amnesty or some form of it.
If you want to help fight amnesty, please take a few minutes and take the actions outlined in the first part of this post.
Mon, 01/21/2013 - 06:47 · Importance: 4