How Marco Rubio won on immigration



Marco Rubio made a giant gamble by going all-in on the immigration debate in the Senate. And he won — big time.

As the highest profile Hispanic Republican elected official in the country, this wasn’t a fight that Rubio could sidestep. If he had tried to take a lower profile role, he would have been called out for ducking the issue. Knowing he was going to get pushed into the fight, he jumped in.

Rubio methodically did everything he personally could to make sure that the certain opposition of some faction of conservatives did not paralyze the effort to pass the bill. What Rubio understood from the start was that the key to the bill succeeding was not convincing every Republican to vote for it. Rather, he sought to keep the opposition somewhat muted outside of the Senate and filibuster-free inside the chamber.

Rubio faced down his critics with regularity — doing appearances with conservative talk radio hosts like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh and on Fox News Channel. Rubio even went to the Senate floor in the final days of the immigration debate in the Senate to rebut some of the most common attacks on the bill.

The idea — forwarded by Rubio’s critics — that he will be pilloried for his support of immigration reform is based on this false premise: That Republican primary voters won’t support someone who, on a high profile issue, feels differently than they do.

People predicting doom for Rubio in 2016 over immigration tend to cite Mitt Romney’s struggles to move beyond the healthcare law he signed in Massachusetts as governor. Yes, there is no question that Romney’s past position on healthcare hurt him among conservatives in 2012. But, consider:

• There was already a storyline about Romney as a flip-flopper left over from the 2008 campaign when he changed positions on abortion. The healthcare law in Massachusetts played into the idea that Romney would say whatever fit the political moment. Rubio doesn’t have that issue.

• Romney never really got his message on healthcare right. He constantly insisted that his plan was good for Massachusetts but that it shouldn’t be replicated nationally — and never really explained why. Rubio has a clearer message: Keeping the status quo on immigration in place is far worse than the alternative he backed.

• Romney won the Republican primary.

Politicians who have failed to sell an issue position where they stand apart from their party almost always fail because they come across as inauthentic. Principled opposition can be sold — as long as it is genuinely principled.

Part of the appeal of someone like Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, for example, is not that he lines up exactly with the Republican base but rather he backs his contrary issues with genuine conviction. Opposing the use of drones is not an issue that wins Republican primaries, but Paul’s filibuster on the issue was the single most important moment in the already-started 2016 race so far this year.

Rubio will offset much — though not all — of the criticism that will come his way from conservatives by standing on principle, insisting that he thought it was the right thing to do for the country (and the Republican Party) and acknowledging that not everyone is going to agree with him on every issue.

Then there are the obvious benefits Rubio gets from his involvement in immigration.

• The major donors of the GOP — the men and women who serve as building blocks for financing presidential campaigns and write big checks to super PACs — want immigration reform. Rubio is not only on their side but now their chief advocate.

• The 50,000-foot narrative about Republicans over the past several years is that they are increasingly insular and unwilling to compromise. Rubio, by dint of his role in the Gang of Eight, can present himself as something quite different than that stereotype. Obviously that helps him with independents if he gets to the 2016 general election but we wouldn’t underestimate the number of Republicans who also might be looking for a new message/messenger come 2016.

• Rubio is now not just a Hispanic Republican senator but a Hispanic Republican senator who played a key role in trying to reform the immigration system. If ever there was a Republican candidate who could make a convincing case to Hispanics as to why they should at least consider voting GOP, Rubio is the one.

There is good and bad in any major legislative move by a politician as high profile as Rubio. But, the bad here can be counteracted and the good outweighs it anyway. Count Rubio as a winner on immigration — no matter what (if anything) the House does next.

Chris Cillizza covers the White House for The Washington Post, writes The Fix, its politics blog, and anchors political reporting for PostTV.

Read more Other Views stories from the Miami Herald



    Judge has faith in the law, and in human potential

    I am a circuit judge in Miami-Dade County serving in the criminal division. Every day, I make decisions about whether to release defendants who are awaiting trial and whose families rely on them for basic needs; whether to grant requests by victims of domestic violence to remove stay-away orders that keep their families apart; and whether to sentence convicted defendants to prison, house arrest or probation.



    There’s got to be a better way to seat judges

    When I think of the traits that are essential for someone to be a good judge, I immediately identify characteristics such as legal ability and understanding of legal principles, courtroom experience, record and reputation, temperament and community involvement. As a Miami-Dade County voter, and as someone who has served on several endorsement panels for various organizations, I have serious concerns about the quality of the candidates that are running for this very important post. I also have reservations about the election process through which we are selecting the members of our lower courts.

Jack Orr cast the only vote in the Florida Legislature in support of school integration.


    A man of vision, principle — and flaws

    It was 1956, and the Florida Legislature was considering a bill to get around the U.S. Supreme Court ruling barring racial segregation in schools. Only one of the 90 House members voted against the bill — a young lawyer from Miami named Jack Orr.

Miami Herald

Join the

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Miami Herald uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here.

Have a news tip? You can send it anonymously. Click here to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald.

Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

  • Marketplace

Today's Circulars

  • Quick Job Search

Enter Keyword(s) Enter City Select a State Select a Category