Comment

Comment by amanda choate on June 25, 2013 at 6:42pm

Sorry but that simply isn't true. No one Senator can place in a bill an amendment that no one gets to vote on. So my point is this, there is plenty to argue here, but if you call your congressman or senator a nd start ranting about some 1190 page amendment put into the bill by Reid, well then, you are going to sound like an ill-informed boob. And they will dismiss you. Now in the spirit of the teaparty, I would say this false info has been planted out there by Republicans to make the tea party sound like a bunch of ill-informed boobs so that they can go ahead vote for this anyway. That is what I think must be going on here, because this notion of an 1190 page amendment is simply and totally untrue.

Comment by Leanne King on June 25, 2013 at 12:14pm

Friends,
Your calling effort yesterday was phenomenal! The number of Senators who voted against the Schumer-Rubio Amnesty bill, S.744, has doubled since debate first started, and we're approaching the 41 NO votes needed to derail the bill.
The fate of S.744 will be determined by the end of the week, so we need your continued urgent calls! Here's what's left:
• 1) final vote on Schumer-Corker-Hoeven amnesty amendment (50 votes needed),
• 2) motion to limit debate on Leahy manager's amendment (60 votes),
• 3) final vote on Leahy manager's amendment (50 votes), and
• 4) motion to end debate on the bill (60 votes).
Please help us keep the pressure on the Senate!
Call your Senators TODAY!

Calling is simple! You can use the toll-free numbers we've provided below that will connect you to either your Senator's DC office or the Capitol Switchboard. When the staffer answers, tell him/her that you want the Senator to vote NO on the Leahy amendment and you want the Senator to vote NO on final passage of S.744.
We've color-coded your Senators based on their first vote on the Schumer-Corker-Hoeven amnesty amendment -- green means they voted against the amendment, red means they voted for the amendment, and blue means they didn't vote. Please thank your Senator(s) if they're colored green!
SESSIONS (R-AL) 888-995-8349
SHELBY (R-AL) 888-995-8349
BOOZMAN (R-AR) 888-995-8349
PRYOR (D-AR) 888-995-2016
NELSON (D-FL) 888-995-8349
RUBIO (R-FL) 888-995-5431
CHAMBLISS (R-GA) 888-995-1975
ISAKSON (R-GA) 888-995-1978
LANDRIEU (D-LA) 888-995-2026
VITTER (R-LA) 888-995-8349
COCHRAN (R-MS) 888-995-1953
WICKER (R-MS) 888-995-2066
ALEXANDER (R-TN) 888-995-2018
CORKER (R-TN) 888-995-5271
Action Board

or click https://www.numbersusa.com/content/my/action/board

You can use these talking points when you call your Senators:
• The bill grants amnesty to 11 million illegal aliens with only promises of future enforcement
• According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the bill will increase unemployment and decrease wages for American workers
• Leaves total discretion for future enforcement in the hands of the administration, repeating the mistakes of the 1986 amnesty
Also, take a look at these recent poll results from Pulse Opinion Research:
58% of likely voters support full enforcement first before considering giving work permits to illegal aliens
72% of Republicans support full enforcement first
62% of Independents support full enforcement first
74% of likely voters want legal immigration numbers reduced or to remain the same
76% of Republicans want legal immigration numbers reduced or to remain the same
70% of Democrats want legal immigration numbers reduced or to remain the same
Thanks for all you do!

From a fb friend

Comment by Leanne King on June 24, 2013 at 9:50pm

Carole and I dropped our letters off at Rubio's office today. Ladies were polite and professional. Asked if we were there to drop off letters.

They were not on the phones...Call call call.. everyday

Thanks.

Comment by Leanne King on June 23, 2013 at 8:03pm

Candidate Marco Rubio in 2010: An 'Earned Path to Citizenship is Basically Code for Amnesty'
June 21, 2013 - 12:28 AM
________________________________________
By Terence P. Jeffrey
Subscribe to Terence P. Jeffrey RSS
118 163

Marco Rubio, Rep. Kendrick Meek, Gov. Charlie Crist in a Senate debate on CNN on Oct. 24, 2010. (AP Photo)
(CNSNews.com) - When former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio was running for the Senate in 2010--as a conservative candidate backed by the Tea Party movement--he insisted that illegal aliens inside the United States would need to go home and that giving illegal aliens "an earned path to citizenship," such as his opponent Gov. Charlie Crist, former President George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain had advocated, was nothing more than a "code for amnesty."
Rubio, who won that 2010 election, is now the leading Republican in the U.S. Congress pushing for illegal aliens to be given the earned path to citizenship that he himself insisted was "code for amnesty" only three years ago.

Rubio's declaration that to allow illegal aliens to stay in the United States and get on a pathway to citizenship was in fact amnesty came in an Oct. 24, 2010 debate hosted by CNN's Candy Crowley and Adam Smith of the St. Petersburg Times.
"So, your plan is that you're going to close the borders, get the electronic system, fix the legal system, and then do what?" Crowley asked Rubio in that debate.
"And then you'll have a legal immigration system that works," said Rubio. "And you'll have people in this country that are without documents that will be able to return to the, will be able to leave this country, return to their homeland, and try to re-enter through our system that now functions, a system that makes sense."
Adam Smith of the St. Petersburg Times then asked of Rubio's opponent, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (a one-time Republican who was running as an independent): "De facto amnesty if you're still not dealing with the illegals who are here?"
Crist responded by endorsing the immigration reform plans previously put forward by President George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain--plans that purported to secure the border while giving illegal aliens in the United States "an earned path to citizenship."
"I think what's important is that we have a common sense approach to this problem, like every other in Washington, D.C., that they're unable to fix," said Crist. "And what I think we need to do is what former President Bush supported, Senator John McCain, Senator Mel Martinez, Senator Kyl from Arizona, and others. And that is, first, secure the border. That's the right thing to do. We have to do that to enforce the law.
"After that," said Crist, "I think you have to have an earned path to citizenship, not amnesty, as the speaker [Rubio] has unfairly characterized, in my view. I'm not for amnesty. People should have to get in the back of the line, pay a fine if necessary, their back taxes, and be able to become productive members of the American economy. It's a compassionate way."
CNN's Crowley than asked the third candidate in the debate, Democratic Rep. Kendrick Meek, what he thought of the issue.
"Candy, I'm glad you checked Mr. Rubio on this whole amnesty issue, because the bottom line is the following," said Meek. "The DREAM Act was up, he said, well, you know, I'm for the DREAM Act but I'm not for the amnesty.
"Well, what did the DREAM Act call for?" Meek asked. "Mr. Speaker, it called for individuals to serve in the military or attend an institution such as this to educate themselves so they don't become wards of the state because, of course, you're not for that. I think it's also important to note this whole thing of kicking the ball down the field, secure our borders, we've been talking about that for 15, 20 years. It's important for us to move toward comprehensive immigration reform."
Shortly after Rep. Meek said this, Candy Crowley gave Rubio another 30 second to respond.
"First of all, earned path to citizenship is basically code for amnesty. It's what they call it," said Rubio. "And the reality of it is this: This has to do with the bottom line that America cannot be the only country in the world that does not enforce its immigration laws. It is unfair to the people that have legally entered this country to create an alternative pathway for individuals who entered illegally and knowingly did so."
"If you do that, you will never have a legal immigration system that works," said candidate Rubio. "No one is going to follow the law if there is an easier way to do it."
- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/candidate-marco-rubio-2010-earned-p...

Comment by Leanne King on June 23, 2013 at 8:02pm

on Rubio the candidate 2010 verse Rubio in 2013

RS
EDITOR OF REDSTATE
Rubio vs. Rubio
By: Erick Erickson (Diary) | June 20th, 2013 at 04:30 AM | 108
RESIZE: AAA
As a candidate for the United States Senate, Marco Rubio campaigned on a tough, “no amnesty” immigration stance, in which he advocated against a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants and in strong support of border security before legalization. Now, as a leader of the “Gang of 8,” he has embraced — and in many instances moved farther left of — the very policies he once criticized.
It is okay for Senator Rubio to change his mind, though he and I may disagree. For too many conservatives, though, Senator Rubio appears to be trying to reconcile irreconcilable positions. In the past several days, tea party activists who once supported him have been booing just the mention of his name. Conservative groups that once touted him as the second coming of Ronald Reagan have moved on to Ted Cruz.
There is much time between now and 2016, and there will be other challenges that see the right and Senator Rubio united. But I suspect the contradictions of these statements will come up in ad campaigns in Iowa, New Hampshire, and elsewhere.
Candidate Marco Rubio said:

About a path to citizenship —
“First of all, earned path to citizenship is basically code for amnesty.”[1]
“America cannot be the only country in the world that does not enforce its immigration laws. It is unfair to the people that have legally entered this country to create an alternative pathway for individuals who entered illegally and knowingly did so. And all I’m saying is that if you do that you will never have a legal immigration system that works. No one is going to follow the law if there is an easier way to do it.”[2] (emphasis added)
“If you grant amnesty, the message that you’re sending is that if you come in this country and stay here long enough, we will let you stay. And no one will ever come through the legal process if you do that.”[3]
“Well, we have a path for citizenship. It’s called coming legally into this country. The ones who are already here. You can’t do it.”[4]
“[Gov. Crist] would have voted for the McCain plan. I think that plan is wrong, and the reason I think it’s wrong is that if you grant amnesty, as the governor proposes that we do, i i, whether it’s back of the line or so forth, you will destroy any chance we will ever have of having a legal immigration system that works here in America.”[5] (emphasis added)

About border security first —
“Only after you deal with illegal immigration in a serious way — seal the border and the visa problem — can you then create a legal immigration system that works.”[6] (emphasis added)
“First and foremost we have to secure the border, we have to secure the workplace. We can’t move on to the modernization of our legal immigration system until both the border and the workplace are secure, through both E-Verify and real security at both the Canadian and the Mexican borders. We’ve got to accomplish that first before we can do any modernization, which is needed.”[7] (emphasis added)
In a CNN debate on Oct 24, 2010, moderator Candy Crowley asked, “So your plan is that you’re going to close the borders, get the electronic system, fix the legal system, and then do what?” Rubio responded: “And then you’ll have a legal immigration system that works. And you’ll have people in this country that are without documents that will…be able to leave this country, return to their homeland, and try to re-enter through our system that now functions, a system that makes sense…Earned path to citizenship is basically code for amnesty.”[8]
________________________________________
As a senator, Marco Rubio has reinforced both commitments: to deny illegal aliens a path to citizenship and to secure the borders before any legalization.
________________________________________
(In response to criticism of a path to citizenship) “I’ve long shared the same concern….and that’s why we’ve outlined it the way we have. [A]ll they [illegal aliens] get is a temporary status…they can’t turn that into citizenship or anything else….[A]fter we have certified that the enforcement things have actually happened, because the big mistakes of the past have been they’ve done the legalization but they haven’t done the enforcement, and hence, it’s led to 11 million people. I don’t ever want to have to do this again. So after…the enforcement things have happened, then the only thing they’re going to get is the ability to apply for a green card, just like anybody else would—not in a special way, in the regular way, by getting in line, qualifying for the visa they apply for, etc. So all we’re going to give them a chance to ultimately earn is the chance to do what they should’ve done in the beginning, and that’s try to enter the country legally.”[9] (emphasis added)
________________________________________
Senator Marco Rubio has reversed himself on immigration and demonstrated with words and actions that his Gang of 8 plan will provide a path to citizenship and that the path will begin before the border is secured.
________________________________________
(Speaking in Spanish on Univision) “Let’s be clear. Nobody is talking about preventing the legalization. The legalization is going to happen. That means the following will happen: First comes the legalization. Then comes the measures to secure the border. And then comes the process of permanent residence. What we’re talking about here is the system of permanent residence. As for the legalization, the enormous majority of my colleagues have accepted that it has to happen and that it has to begin at the same time we begin the measures for [the border]. It is not conditional. The legalization is not conditional.[10]
“[W]hen these people come forward, as part of that registration, they’re going to have to pay a fine. And that money from those fines is what I think is what we’re going to use to pay for the border security. Those are billions of dollars. I don’t want that money coming from the American taxpayer, and I don’t want that money coming from the Treasury or adding to the debt. It needs to be paid for, and that’s why we need that fine money up front.”[11]
“What we have in place today is de facto amnesty.”[12]
On June 13, Senator Rubio and the rest of the Gang of 8 voted to table an amendment that would have prohibited legalization until the Homeland Security Secretary has maintained effective control of the borders for 6 months.[13]
On June 18, Senator Rubio and the rest of the Gang voted against an amendment that would have required completion of the fence,[14] as well as an amendment that would have required implementation of U.S. VISIT[15] (a biometric border check-in and check-out system first required by Congress in 1996), before legalization.
________________________________________
1. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1010/24/sotu.01.html (Stated during a debate for Florida Senate candidates)
↩
2. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1010/24/sotu.01.html (Stated during a debate for Florida Senate candidates)
↩
3. http://www.postonpolitics.com/2009/11/rubio-reagan-erred-in-support...
↩
4. http://www.humanevents.com/2010/05/06/exclusive-rubio-clarifies-cri... (In response to a question about whether he favors a path to citizenship)
↩
5. http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/how-marco-rubio-evolved-on-... (State during a March 28, 2010 Fox News debate against then-Gov. Charlie Crist)
↩
6. http://www.postonpolitics.com/2009/11/rubio-reagan-erred-in-support...
↩
7. http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2011/05/marco-rubio-on...
↩
8. http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/how-marco-rubio-evolved-on-...
↩
9. Jan. 29, 2013, Lou Dobbs Moneyline, available at http://brandoclassic.blogspot.com/2013/01/marco-rubio-responds-to-t...
↩
10. http://www.cis.org/kammer/rubio-mccain-reid-talk-strategy-reform-bill (Sen. Rubio speaking on the “Al Punto” program on Univision)
↩
11. http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/14/rubio-new-border-security-ame...
↩
12. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnrb3Dd8KkM&feature=player_embe...
↩
13. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vot...
↩
14. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vot...
↩
15. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vot...

Comment by Leanne King on June 23, 2013 at 7:44pm

Rubio's Broken Promises in his April 16 Letter to the Patriot Movement

In the letter, Rubio accuses the patriot movement of being motivated by misinformation. The only misinformation being spread is what Marco Rubio promised in his April 16 letter to Patriot Movement leaders. In that letter, he made many promises that he will break if he votes for this Gang of 8 amnesty plan.

Promise 1 - "There is absolutely no truth to the idea that I will support any immigration legislation that is rushed through Congress in typical Washington fashion"

Broken Promise! The 1,190 page Schumer-Corker-Hoeven amendment was released Friday afternoon and Senators will be asked to vote on this total re-write of the bill on Monday!

Promise 2 - Marco Rubio said immigration reform was "an issue that inspired me to run in order to change the way Washington works."

Broken promise! In 2010, candidate Rubio stated that reducing the national debt was his priority. Candidate Rubio also said in 2010: "I will never support an effort to grant blanket legalization, amnesty to folks who have entered or stayed in this country illegally."

Promise 3 - Marco Rubio says he won't support a plan that makes the immigration system worse.

Broken promise!...status quo is better than this bill that the CBO says will cause unemployment to go up and wages to go down if passed.

Promise 4 - Marco Rubio says he won't support a bill that does not truly and legitimately secure our borders

Broken Promise!...This bill contains false border security as additional border agents don't have to be hired until 2017! Border enforcement would come after illegal aliens are granted legal status. Neither this bill nor this amendment require DHS Secretary Napolitano to build another inch of fence. Similar to the 2006 law requiring a 700-mile border fence, it's never going to happen. Furthermore, the CBO also says that 75% of illegal immigration would continue due to weak enforcement of visa overstays.

Promise 5 - Marco Rubio says he won't support a bill that will lead to future illegal immigration.

Broken Promise! The amendment under consideration indicates that those overstaying their visa in the future can still apply for a green card and become a citizen