Rubio suddenly in no rush on immigration

By A.B. Stoddard - 04/01/13 02:06 PM ET

It's always darkest before the dawn or Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is losing his nerve. Proponents of immigration reform are exhilarated: A deal is close at hand after years of disagreement, with organized labor and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce walking away from the negotiating table late Friday mutually pleased with a guest-worker compromise. Yet on Saturday, Rubio sent Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy a letter urging more hearings and warning against a "rush to legislate." 

Then Sunday morning Easter morning no less Rubio sent out an unsubtle statement to the press titled "No final agreement on immigration legislation yet" in which he voiced his concern that "this process cannot be rushed or done in secret."

That was a surprise to his fellow Gang of Eight members from both parties in the Senate, who have met with Rubio and other immigration reform advocates continuously in recent months. Although Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Rubio's announcement Sunday was technically correct — that Rubio was "correctly pointing out that the language hasn't been fully drafted" — he still described the group's work as nearly complete, saying, "We have substantive agreement on all the major pieces now between the eight of us."

Everyone knows Rubio is in a political corner, but if he disagrees with something the Gang of Eight has decided on, he clearly didn't tell them. Rubio has 2016 presidential hopes and he once was a Tea Party hero and cannot afford to move too close to the center if he hopes to survive a GOP primary, the angling for which has already begun. But he was the one who started the immigration push, and at this point the momentum is likely to build no matter how much he tries to slow it. 

As Rubio struggles to buy more time, President Obama and the backers of reform, who not only have seen a Congress fail to legislate at all in recent years but also know the midterm campaigns begin months from now, want to move ahead immediately. Rubio will have to decide just how much he truly wants reform.

CAN CONGRESS PASS IMMIGRATION REFORM WITHOUT RUBIO? AskAB returns Tuesday April 2. Please join my weekly video Q&A by sending your questions and comments to askab@thehill.com.Thank you

 Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/291243-rubio-suddenly-in-no-rush-on-immigration#ixzz2PQlUR5rQ Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

Rubio wimps out at CPAC

By Brent Budowsky - 03/14/13 06:00 PM ET

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) demonstrated in his speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference meeting that he lacks the toughness and political courage to be elected president in 2016. By running like a frightened rabbit from his own immigration proposals and refusing to champion them in his speech, Rubio suggests he has nothing to fear except his base itself. If Rubio could not handle this speech, he's gonna have a tough time in roughhouse Republican presidential primaries, and he will look like shredded wheat if he ever faces the inside fastball of the formidable Hillary Clinton if this mismatch ever comes to pass.

As I understand Rubio's points in his CPAC speech, he gave a passionate defense of platitudes about American exceptionalism and a fiery oration supporting the good old American family. Presidents are made of sterner stuff than this. What will he do when negotiations get tough in the Senate if he is so afraid of the GOP base that he treated his major legislative priority with the enthusiasm that Count Dracula treated the cross?

I like and respect Rubio, but what I saw at CPAC was a nice man not nearly ready for presidential prime time and a Republican Party not nearly ready to compete for Hispanic votes when the rubber meets the road.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/288267-rubio-wimps-out-as-cpac#ixzz2PQoGJiHB 
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

Meet the Twenty-eight Lawmakers Who Have Quit ALEC This Month

Zaid Jilani 

April 26, 2012  

Editor's Note: This article was first published by RepublicReport.org.

The exodus of major corporations from the corporate front group American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has made headlines nationwide as the group’s agenda has been increasingly scrutinized by the general public.

Zaid Jilani

Zaid Jilani is Communications and Outreach Coordinator for United Republic. He is the former Senior Reporter-Blogger for...

Editor Greg Cromer Major NAN ORROCK

But as these corporations have fled ALEC, there has also been one other little-noticed exodus from the group: that of legislators. Source Watch and Keystone Progress have been tracking the defections of lawmakers. Here are 28 who have left so far:

- Sen. Nan Orrock (D-GA): “As a member of the American Legislative Exchange Council for several years, having joined ALEC with the primary goal of better understanding the corporate-dominated organization, I know first-hand that ALEC is not the innocuous organization it claims to be.” [4/17/12]

- Sen. Greg Cromer (R-LA): “‘It has been brought to my attention that there have been meetings and/or activities with ALEC staff members within the state of Louisiana that I have not been privy to,’ Cromer wrote in his resignation letter that went out as an email to key lawmakers and staffers.” [4/17/12]

- Sen. Mike Colona (D-MO): “‘Their agenda is radical and wrong for Missouri. I was a member and saw firsthand the sort of extreme legislation they push on state legislators around the country,’ Cromer said in a statement to the organization “Progress Missouri.” [4/12/12]

- Pennsylvania Reps. Kate Harper (R), Sandra Major (R), Mark Mustio (R), Harry Readshaw (D), and Sen. John Pippy (R) [4/26/12]

- Sen. George Muñoz (D-NM) [4/20/12]

- Rep. Ted Vick (D-SC): “Recent revelations concerning ALEC’s funding sources from radical elements have proven to be the final straw for me. ALEC has become too partisan and too extreme.” [4/24/12]

- Nebraska Senators Danielle Conrad (D), Tony Fulton (R), Health Mello (D), and Jeremy Norquist (D)[4/26/12]

- Texas Democratic Party Reps. Alma Allen, Armando Martinez, Dawnna Dukes, Hubert Vo, Harold Dutton, Chente, Quintanilla, Eddie Rodriguez, José Menéndez, Ruth Jones McClendon, Eric Johnson, Tracy King, Ryan Guillen [4/2012]

- Rep. Jennifer Selig (D-UT) [4/9/12]

- Rep. Kevin Van De Wege (D-WA): “My membership status is increasingly becoming a divisive issue this year, and I prefer to put my time and energy into efforts that unite our district rather than divide it.” [4/11/12]

We applaud these legislators for leaving the corporate front group, which has been responsible for pushing destructive special interest legislation, from climate change denial in schools, to anti-union and anti-consumer bills, to the controversial Voter ID and Stand Your Ground laws.

Zaid Jilani 

April 26, 2012  

Hagel: No budget cuts off-limits

By Jeremy Herb - 04/03/13 12:51 PM ET

  

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on Wednesday said no budget cuts will be off-limits as the Pentagon looks to tighten its belt. “We need to challenge all past assumptions, and we need to put everything on the table,” Hagel said in his first major policy address, according to prepared remarks.

Speaking at National Defense University at Fort McNair, Hagel defended his review of the military’s strategy, which he ordered shortly after taking over at the Pentagon. He said the military must look at change “that involves not just tweaking or chipping away at existing structures and practices but, where necessary, fashioning entirely new ones that are better suited to 21st century realities and challenges.”

Hagel said the biggest fiscal challenges facing the Pentagon are not declining or flat-lined budgets, but the “growing imbalance” of how money is spent internally.

“It is already clear to me that any serious effort to reform and reshape our defense enterprise must confront the principal drivers of growth in the Department’s base budget namely acquisitions, personnel costs and overhead,” he said. Hagel’s speech comes one month after across-the-board sequestration cuts took effect, occurring just two days after he was sworn in as defense secretary. With no budget deal on the horizon between the White House and Congress, how Hagel and the military tackle sequestration has the potential to be a major part of his legacy at the Pentagon.

The military already issued a new strategic guidance in 2012, after the Pentagon’s budgets over the next decade were reduced by $487 billion under the Budget Control Act. With sequestration, $41 billion will be cut in 2013 and $500 billion could be reduced in the next decade, which senior military leaders have said would require the Pentagon to change its new strategy and scale back ambitions. Hagel said Wednesday that the department’s new strategic review should come with options so the military can be prepared if there is a budget deal to reverse sequester or if the cuts do persist for years.

“We cannot simply wish or hope our way to carrying out a responsible national security strategy and its implementation,” he said. “The Department must understand the challenges and uncertainties, plan for the risks and, yes, recognize the opportunities inherent in budget constraints and more efficient and effective restructuring.”

Hagel talked about streamlining the military’s command structures, paring back the “world’s largest back-office” and examining the number of active-duty service members. He touched on the need for a more cost-effective acquisitions process and avoiding the major cost overruns that have plagued weapons programs like the F-35.

But he also emphasized that the military is not a business.

"The military is not, and should never be, run like a corporation," Hagel said. "But that does not mean we don’t have a good deal to learn from what the private sector has achieved over the past 20 to 30 years."

The moves Hagel discussed Wednesday are among the most common cited by budget cutters who say that the Pentagon can achieve the level of cost savings required under sequestration. Hagel did not get into many specifics in his address, saying that he did not want to prejudge the strategic review that’s currently under way.

“It could turn out that making dramatic changes in each of these areas could prove unwise, untenable or politically impossible,” Hagel said. “Yet we have no choice but to take a very close look and see how we can do all of this better.” Hagel’s first chance to lay out specifics will come next week, when the Pentagon unveils its 2014 budget request. Pentagon officials have said the budget won’t include the $50 billion reduction in 2014 that would be required if sequester is not changed. The budget is expected, however, to include long-term cost savers including base closures and increases in healthcare fees — both of which were roundly rejected by Congress during the 2013 budget process.

Hagel also made a pitch Wednesday for more “flexibility” to deal with sequestration, something military officials had been hesitant to request back before the cuts went into effect. “If we get time and flexibility to implement savings, we could limit the impact of spending reductions on force structure and modernization while still making a significant contribution to deficit reduction,” Hagel said.

“By contrast, the cuts required by sequester afford neither time nor flexibility. These quick and dramatic cuts would almost certainly require reductions in what have long been considered core military capabilities and changes in the traditional roles and missions among the uniformed services,” he added.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/budget-appropriations/291663-hagel-nothing-off-limits-as-pentagon-budgets-get-cut#ixzz2PQem1EMH 
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook