Rand Paul's Signaling Exercise on Immigration


Need to get a better picture! |||

Have you read today's big immigration speech by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky)? Go ahead, give it a look.

It is above all a political and positioning document, more than it is a policy proposal. But on policy, as foreshadowed, Paul wants to A) expand legal immigration now, emphasizing high-skilled labor; B) mandate "certified" border security (as determined by the Border Patrol and approved annually by Congress; C) set up a "bipartisan panel" (shudder) to "determine number of visas per year"; D) "admit we are not going to deport the millions of people who are currently here illegally"; E) specifically reject "a national ID card or mandatory E-Verify" system (yay!); and F) offer current unauthorized residents a "probationary" type of visa, allowing them to continue living and working in the country, while otherwise moving to the end of the immigration line, whatever that means in practice. They would not, as in other bipartisan immigration reforms currently being contemplated, have to pay a big fine.

Paul is not a member of the two bipartisan groups of congresspeople currently trying to hammer out comprehensive immigration reform, so his proposal as it relates to the current debate should, at most, be seen as an attempt to influence events from the outside, preferably in a direction that's lighter on the more punitive, database-driven direction that those talks are inevitably heading.

In fact, if I was a member of one of those groups, I might find myself irritated by Paul's solipsistic framing, such as: "Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation." Why, it's almost as if conservatives haven't been talking about immigration reform!

But the man is running for president, an exercise both in ego and policy-personalization, so it's no real surprise that Paul's speech was more concerned with style and signaling than substance. He quoted Gabriel García Márquez and Pablo Neruda (!), made Seinfeld references, name-dropped Jaime Escalante, spoke the worst Spanglish this side of Michael Bloomberg, attempted once again to dress up his more libertarian approach in the mantle of Ronald Reagan (going so far as nicknaming his approach "Trust but verify"), repeated his recent warnings that the Republican Party needed to adapt or die, and sounded the kinds of pro-immigrant notes sorely lacking in the last two GOP presidential nominating seasons. Excerpt:

But is he illegal? |||

Republicans need to become parents of a new future with Latino voters or we will need to resign ourselves to permanent minority status.

The Republican Party has insisted for years that we stand for freedom and family values. I am most proud of my party when it stands for both.

The vast majority of Latino voters agree with us on these issues but Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration. […]

That they have steadily drifted away from the GOP in each election says more about Republicans than it does about Hispanics. […]

Somewhere along the line Republicans have failed to understand and articulate that immigrants are an asset to America, not a liability.

More after the jump, including a welcome section on education reform:

Yeah, he went there. |||

For the American Dream to be achievable for all, we have to have an educational system that believes that all students have the capability to succeed.

Unfortunately, the education establishment seems to casually discard Latinos, blacks, and others into crummy schools with no hope.

I argue that the struggle for a good education is the civil rights issue of our day. […]

My dream is that we transform the education monopoly into a thriving, competitive environment where Hispanic students get to choose what school they attend and that no student is forgotten or ignored.

If nothing else, the exercise will complicate narratives that Paul and/or the Tea Party is reflexively hostile to immigrants, as evidenced by the fact that many journalists really really think so. 

Reason on immigration here, on Rand Paul here.

NEXT: Covered at Reason 24/7: TSA Forced Wounded Marine to Remove Prosthetic Limbs

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I await the liberal condemnation over Rand Paul’s “kooky” views on comprehensive immigration reform.

    1. Oh, the talking point is that he’s following polls, or pandering, or some such nonsense.

  2. Somewhere along the line Republicans have failed to understand and articulate that immigrants are an asset to America, not a liability.

    Seems to me that at this point many are expenses.

    1. Seems to me that many Hispanics aren’t illegal/undocumented/whatever immigrants in the first place, so linking the two overmuch seems problematic from the get-go.

  3. By the way, I really like Stand and Deliver. Imagine a film against institutionalized racism that focuses on teaching calculus rather than “cultural competence.”

    1. …Although, after reading Wikipedia, it occurs to me that Rand Paul might’ve incorrectly cited the fictionalized version of Jaime Escalante instead of the real-life version, who only managed to pass two students in his first AP Calculus class.

    2. “How do I reach these keedz!”

      1. “They deekomposing in my laahker”

    3. I loved the South Park episode that parodied that movie.

      Cartman: Abortion isn’t wrong…abortion is the ultimate form of cheating. You’re cheating nature itself. Why do rich white girls get ahead in life? Because they get abortions when they’re young. They get pregnant, but they still want to go to college, so, whatever, they just cheat. They cheat that little critter in their belly out of a chance at life.

      1. Bill Belicheeek.

  4. I don’t know about aliens backing Rand Paul, but Bat Boy wouldn’t have.

    Bat Boy endorsed Al Gore, fer Christ’s sake.

  5. “If nothing else, the exercise will complicate narratives that Paul and/or the Tea Party is reflexively hostile to immigrants”

    Are all members of the Tea Party Randheads? The first manifestation of Tea Partiness occurred while Bush was still president, when he tried to “ram” through immigration reform. Didn’t Rick Perry sink his run for the the Republican nomination for claiming to feel sorry for illegal immigrants? Didn’t Mitt win by saying he’d make illegals so miserable they’d self-deport? Haven’t Republicans in states like Alabama set out to do exactly that? Doesn’t Ann Coulter still get applause by bashing immigrants? Doesn’t whining about the biased press make you sound like Newt Gingrich?

    1. After getting spanked by Obama in the last election, I think the Republicans are in panic mode–especially regarding immigration.

      They think they lost because of their stance on immigration, gay marriage, etc., and they probably did.

      They’re afraid what’s happened to the Republicans in California is going to happen to them. There are still some die-hards out there, but if you can’t hold on to power without jettisoning the anti-immigrant hate, they’ll jettison the anti-immigrant hate.

      It’s hard to get in the way of abortion rights and keep the money spigot on for your constituents and your donors–when you’re not in power because you couldn’t keep your mouth shut about immigration for a while.

  6. The first manifestation of Tea Partiness occurred while Bush was still president, when he tried to “ram” through immigration reform.

    No, the first manifestation was when Ron Paul had a Tea Party moneybomb for his presidential campaign.

  7. The first manifestation of Tea Partiness occurred while Bush was still president

    Wait a second, wait a second. I thought the Tea Party was just a racist reaction against a black man in the White House?!

  8. So does Rand still want to repeal birthright citizenship? Unless he’s had a major change of heart on that, I’m not sure how he expects to get the support of people who he doesn’t think should be voting to begin with… Otherwise, I imagine the Rand Paul campaign to be about as popular as a gun shop run by Dianne Feinstein.

  9. Space visitor’s shocking revelation Obama’s birthplace: Uranus!

    There’s a poop joke there someplace.

    Also … RACIST!

  10. Sounds like some stupid stuff man!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.