Senator Marco Rubio defended his support of the Senate's massive and complex immigration bill by acknowledging that, "...what I have suggested to those who have problems with some component of the bill is, you know, maybe you have a very valid point. In fact I've heard some valid objections."
What are these valid objections? He doesn't say in any detail except to point to issues with "border security." Regarding those, and to other unnamed objections, he counsels, "Let's try to fix it. Let's try to change it, but to just say let's defeat the whole thing, I don't think that's a productive approach either. I think this is a starting point that obviously we can and should improve."
Sen. Rubio even created his own website "Immigration Reform Facts" in which he "calls for open debate, asks American public to read the bill and suggest improvements."
It's a tempting idea, and one that is consistent with this country's penchant for progress and second chances. However, concerning the Senate immigration bill, it just won't work.
The reason it won't is a by-product of the narrow range of policy options that were considered and made part of the bill largely by allies of the Democratic Party and others who had a vested interest in its premises.
Unions wanted and got tens of thousands new potential members. Religious groups wanted and got a large influx of new parishioners. Tech companies got tens of thousands new workers trained workers in math and technology to fill low- and mid-level jobs in America's high-tech industries. Business got more maids to clean your hotel rooms, workers to pluck chickens, and farm workers to pick fruit. And the Democratic Party got millions of potential new voters disposed toward their expansive view of government services and grateful for your help in legalizing their former illegal status.
However, it's not only the listing of these specific group incentives, but their cumulative impact. It is presumption that on top of the one million legal immigrants that the country takes in each year, the Senate bill would increase that one-million figure substantially.
An analysis of the Senate bill had this to say: "Even after decades of growth in the U.S. foreign-born population, the added increase could be felt in ways large and small around the country, from big cities that would absorb even more diversity to small towns that may still be adjusting to current immigrant arrivals."
Doris Meissner, a former Commissioner of the US Immigration and Naturalization Service, is quoted in that same article as saying of these numbers in relation to the Senate immigration bill, "That is baked into the basic premise of the bill..."
In other words, like the assumption of legalization for 11-12 million illegal aliens, a dramatic increase in the number of legal immigrants coming into the country each year is what every member chosen to write the Senate's immigration bill pledged to support.
Americans were not asked or clearly informed about this second basic premise of the Senate bill.
They still have not been.
That is the bill second basic fault.