Dr Richard Moss Criticizes Bucshon's Support of Amnesty and Endorsement of Marco Rubio
Posted: March 18, 2016In newspapers throughout Indiana’s 8th district last December, on his website and through press releases, Congressman Larry Bucshon excitedly announced his endorsement of Senator Marco Rubio for President. Bucshon remarked that he was “… proud to endorse him because he is a next-generation conservative who will repeal Obamacare and replace it with a 21st century health care system.”
Although Bucshon was certainly not the only Congressman to endorse Rubio it is interesting to note his explanation for choosing him – that he would repeal Obamacare and replace it with something new. The problem is that Rubio is hardly alone among the Republican Presidential field or amongst Republicans in general in wanting to repeal and replace Obamacare. In fact, if there is one thing that unites Republicans it is that Obamacare must go.
But there is an issue that Rubio is closely identified with that he alone can claim ownership of. That, of course, would be his singular legislative achievement, his only accomplishment as Senator, his infamous Rubio-Schumer-Obama Gang of 8 Amnesty bill of 2013. This, indeed, is how Rubio distinguished himself amongst Republicans and other Presidential candidates – his efforts to force feed amnesty down the throat of the nation, abandoning his constituents, his conservative base, and the American people. Rubio was the poster boy of this disastrous bill, with his boyish good looks, affable smile, and his Cuban/Latino ancestry, a bill that would have exploded amnesty upon an unsympathetic and rebellious public and committed lasting and irreversible damage to the nation.
With Rubio now out of the Presidential race, having lost Florida, his home state, one need look no further than this bill to explain his failure – and what it suggests about those who endorsed him.
The Rubio-Schumer-Obama Gang of 8 Amnesty bill was a 1200 page monstrosity that was mirrored after the failed Kennedy-McCain bill of 2005 so heavily promoted by then President George Bush who, like his brother Jeb, favored “comprehensive immigration reform” also known as amnesty. The Kennedy-McCain bill was beat back by Republicans in Congress based on the intensely negative reaction by the conservative base throughout the country. Rubio et al. tried to resurrect it with his Gang of 8 bill and almost succeeded.
The Rubio-Schumer-Obama bill, as John Fonte wrote, would have granted immediate amnesty to illegal aliens with work permits and Social Security cards before any measures to ensure border security were in place. Chris Crane, the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) union, complained that the bill was weaker than existing law. There were over 1000 waivers, which gave the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) the power to bypass enforcement. The US Citizenship and Immigration Services Council, representing 12,000 federal employees, denounced the bill declaring, “It was deliberately designed to undermine the integrity of our lawful immigration system.” The ICE officers Council stated it would “provide instant legalization and a path to citizenship to gang members and other dangerous criminal aliens.” The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said it would not stop most illegal immigration and would double legal low skilled immigration. It was worse than the Kennedy-McCain bill. Fortunately, it died in the House – barely.
Never one to give up on increasing immigration, Rubio has now joined a new “gang,” the “Gang of Six.” This group of Senators is sponsoring the “Immigration Innovation Act of 2015” or “I squared,” which would double the number of H-1B “guest worker” visas for low-wage foreign tech workers, providing work permits for spouses and foreign students, and would increase permanent immigration. All this while three fourths of American IT college graduates cannot find jobs, and companies like Disney and Hewlett Packard are forcing American workers to train their foreign replacements before being fired.
It is worth noting the major donors who are supporting this latest amnesty incarnation, the I-Squared bill, and the individuals who supported the original Rubio-Schumer-Obama Amnesty bill of 2013. They are the super-rich and have been long time supporters of Rubio including his Presidential campaign. Andrew Puzder (fast-food executive), Oracle Founder Larry Ellison (a Silicon Valley Mogul worth $54 billion), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook Founder) and other members of the “tech alliance,” Las Vegas gambling interests, the Cruise Ship Industry, Michael Bennett of Colorado’s ski industry, and many others. They are large corporate donors, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Wall Street Journal. These are open borders/amnesty advocates. They want the cheap labor and do not mind the loss of jobs for American workers or the reduced wages that the importing of waves of cheap labor from the third world inevitably brings. Their goal as is Rubio’s is to permanently increase low skilled immigration, low wage guest tech workers who will replace American tech workers through an expanded H-1B program, and legalization, amnesty, and a path to citizenship for millions of illegal aliens – all while paying lip service to border security but doing nothing about it.
Rubio never had a chance in the Presidential field because of his support of the Gang of 8 Amnesty bill and now the I-squared bill. Rubio is an open borders/amnesty guy, the opposite view of his former voters and most Americans. He betrayed the voters that brought him to the Senate. It is why he lost the primary in his home state of Florida and has left the Presidential race.
Larry Bucshon’s endorsement of Rubio suggests that he too supports amnesty and open borders. Why else support someone whose signature legislative efforts have been geared to both. Among all the Presidential candidates, none has had such singular focus on expanding immigration and providing a path to citizenship for illegal aliens as Rubio. Speaking in Spanish on Univision with open borders activist Jorge Ramos, he said he would not repeal Obama’s lawless executive amnesty order. In truth, there is probably little separating Rubio from Obama on immigration.
But the question remains – why would Bucshon endorse Rubio unless he were comfortable with his position on immigration and amnesty? The answer is, he is comfortable with it or else he would not have endorsed him.
Bucshon seeks to carry water for the Republican Establishment who also favor amnesty and open borders because of big donors and special interests who want the same. These donors contribute heavily to Republican coffers. They did for Jeb Bush. And they did for Rubio. They presumably will for Congressman Bucshon. They want cheap labor and don’t care about the impact on American workers and the nation in general.
This is the key issue of the day.
Congressman Bucshon claims to oppose amnesty but he endorsed Mr. Amnesty. He also voted for the 2000 page $1.1 trillion Omnibus bill that fully funded the Obama amnesty plan, Syrian refugees, and sanctuary cities. In the end, Bucshon like Rubio, like various corporate interests, the Chamber of Commerce and the Wall Street Journal, wants amnesty and open borders – against the interests of the American people. This is as good a reason as any to retire Bucshon.
I will fight to build a wall and secure our border. I will vote to end illegal immigration and sharply restrict immigration levels. I would repeal the Kennedy Immigration Act of 1965 and Family Reunification, which created an unlimited category for family members that has led to the mass immigration or “chain-migration” situation we have today. This focus on family connections instead of assimilation and market needs, combined with the lack of limits, took away much of our national sovereignty. It transferred control of immigration policy from the American people through their elected representatives to individuals who wanted to bring relatives into the country. The new immigrants, post 1970, came from poor Asian and Latin American countries. They often lacked education, marketable skills, English language facility, and were much poorer than previous immigrants. They were much more likely to require government programs to assist them. I would develop a point system based on education, skills, English language ability, resources, good health, to ensure that future immigrants will contribute to and assimilate successfully into society. I will work to develop a pro-American immigration policy that puts the needs of American citizens first not the needs of immigrants.
Bucshon’s support of Rubio puts him squarely in his corner on immigration, amnesty, and open borders, as do other votes he has taken. We need a change.
In newspapers throughout Indiana’s 8th district last December, on his website and through press releases, Congressman Larry Bucshon excitedly announced his endorsement of Senator Marco Rubio for President. Bucshon remarked that he was “… proud to endorse him because he is a next-generation conservative who will repeal Obamacare and replace it with a 21st century health care system.”
Although Bucshon was certainly not the only Congressman to endorse Rubio it is interesting to note his explanation for choosing him – that he would repeal Obamacare and replace it with something new. The problem is that Rubio is hardly alone among the Republican Presidential field or amongst Republicans in general in wanting to repeal and replace Obamacare. In fact, if there is one thing that unites Republicans it is that Obamacare must go.
But there is an issue that Rubio is closely identified with that he alone can claim ownership of. That, of course, would be his singular legislative achievement, his only accomplishment as Senator, his infamous Rubio-Schumer-Obama Gang of 8 Amnesty bill of 2013. This, indeed, is how Rubio distinguished himself amongst Republicans and other Presidential candidates – his efforts to force feed amnesty down the throat of the nation, abandoning his constituents, his conservative base, and the American people. Rubio was the poster boy of this disastrous bill, with his boyish good looks, affable smile, and his Cuban/Latino ancestry, a bill that would have exploded amnesty upon an unsympathetic and rebellious public and committed lasting and irreversible damage to the nation.
With Rubio now out of the Presidential race, having lost Florida, his home state, one need look no further than this bill to explain his failure – and what it suggests about those who endorsed him.
The Rubio-Schumer-Obama Gang of 8 Amnesty bill was a 1200 page monstrosity that was mirrored after the failed Kennedy-McCain bill of 2005 so heavily promoted by then President George Bush who, like his brother Jeb, favored “comprehensive immigration reform” also known as amnesty. The Kennedy-McCain bill was beat back by Republicans in Congress based on the intensely negative reaction by the conservative base throughout the country. Rubio et al. tried to resurrect it with his Gang of 8 bill and almost succeeded.
The Rubio-Schumer-Obama bill, as John Fonte wrote, would have granted immediate amnesty to illegal aliens with work permits and Social Security cards before any measures to ensure border security were in place. Chris Crane, the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) union, complained that the bill was weaker than existing law. There were over 1000 waivers, which gave the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) the power to bypass enforcement. The US Citizenship and Immigration Services Council, representing 12,000 federal employees, denounced the bill declaring, “It was deliberately designed to undermine the integrity of our lawful immigration system.” The ICE officers Council stated it would “provide instant legalization and a path to citizenship to gang members and other dangerous criminal aliens.” The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said it would not stop most illegal immigration and would double legal low skilled immigration. It was worse than the Kennedy-McCain bill. Fortunately, it died in the House – barely.
Never one to give up on increasing immigration, Rubio has now joined a new “gang,” the “Gang of Six.” This group of Senators is sponsoring the “Immigration Innovation Act of 2015” or “I squared,” which would double the number of H-1B “guest worker” visas for low-wage foreign tech workers, providing work permits for spouses and foreign students, and would increase permanent immigration. All this while three fourths of American IT college graduates cannot find jobs, and companies like Disney and Hewlett Packard are forcing American workers to train their foreign replacements before being fired.
It is worth noting the major donors who are supporting this latest amnesty incarnation, the I-Squared bill, and the individuals who supported the original Rubio-Schumer-Obama Amnesty bill of 2013. They are the super-rich and have been long time supporters of Rubio including his Presidential campaign. Andrew Puzder (fast-food executive), Oracle Founder Larry Ellison (a Silicon Valley Mogul worth $54 billion), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook Founder) and other members of the “tech alliance,” Las Vegas gambling interests, the Cruise Ship Industry, Michael Bennett of Colorado’s ski industry, and many others. They are large corporate donors, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Wall Street Journal. These are open borders/amnesty advocates. They want the cheap labor and do not mind the loss of jobs for American workers or the reduced wages that the importing of waves of cheap labor from the third world inevitably brings. Their goal as is Rubio’s is to permanently increase low skilled immigration, low wage guest tech workers who will replace American tech workers through an expanded H-1B program, and legalization, amnesty, and a path to citizenship for millions of illegal aliens – all while paying lip service to border security but doing nothing about it.
Rubio never had a chance in the Presidential field because of his support of the Gang of 8 Amnesty bill and now the I-squared bill. Rubio is an open borders/amnesty guy, the opposite view of his former voters and most Americans. He betrayed the voters that brought him to the Senate. It is why he lost the primary in his home state of Florida and has left the Presidential race.
Larry Bucshon’s endorsement of Rubio suggests that he too supports amnesty and open borders. Why else support someone whose signature legislative efforts have been geared to both. Among all the Presidential candidates, none has had such singular focus on expanding immigration and providing a path to citizenship for illegal aliens as Rubio. Speaking in Spanish on Univision with open borders activist Jorge Ramos, he said he would not repeal Obama’s lawless executive amnesty order. In truth, there is probably little separating Rubio from Obama on immigration.
But the question remains – why would Bucshon endorse Rubio unless he were comfortable with his position on immigration and amnesty? The answer is, he is comfortable with it or else he would not have endorsed him.
Bucshon seeks to carry water for the Republican Establishment who also favor amnesty and open borders because of big donors and special interests who want the same. These donors contribute heavily to Republican coffers. They did for Jeb Bush. And they did for Rubio. They presumably will for Congressman Bucshon. They want cheap labor and don’t care about the impact on American workers and the nation in general.
This is the key issue of the day.
Congressman Bucshon claims to oppose amnesty but he endorsed Mr. Amnesty. He also voted for the 2000 page $1.1 trillion Omnibus bill that fully funded the Obama amnesty plan, Syrian refugees, and sanctuary cities. In the end, Bucshon like Rubio, like various corporate interests, the Chamber of Commerce and the Wall Street Journal, wants amnesty and open borders – against the interests of the American people. This is as good a reason as any to retire Bucshon.
I will fight to build a wall and secure our border. I will vote to end illegal immigration and sharply restrict immigration levels. I would repeal the Kennedy Immigration Act of 1965 and Family Reunification, which created an unlimited category for family members that has led to the mass immigration or “chain-migration” situation we have today. This focus on family connections instead of assimilation and market needs, combined with the lack of limits, took away much of our national sovereignty. It transferred control of immigration policy from the American people through their elected representatives to individuals who wanted to bring relatives into the country. The new immigrants, post 1970, came from poor Asian and Latin American countries. They often lacked education, marketable skills, English language facility, and were much poorer than previous immigrants. They were much more likely to require government programs to assist them. I would develop a point system based on education, skills, English language ability, resources, good health, to ensure that future immigrants will contribute to and assimilate successfully into society. I will work to develop a pro-American immigration policy that puts the needs of American citizens first not the needs of immigrants.
Bucshon’s support of Rubio puts him squarely in his corner on immigration, amnesty, and open borders, as do other votes he has taken. We need a change.
Comments
- There are no comments.