Google+
Close
Rubio on the Race
He backs Romney, but seeks to quell veep rumors.

Senator Marco Rubio (R., Fla.)

Text  


Jim Geraghty

NRO: Each day, [CNN analyst] Jeffrey Toobin seems to come out with an assessment that looks worse and worse for the Obama administration. Obviously oral arguments are not the same as final decisions, and we don’t know what the final result will be, but are you surprised at how the oral arguments have gone? And could the Obamacare issue look different in November because the Supreme Court has said part of it or all of it has got to go?

Rubio: I believe Obamacare is unconstitutional, so I won’t be surprised if the court finds it to be unconstitutional. I can’t predict what they’re going to do. They’re very smart at justifying the positions they ultimately reach, even if it’s one I don’t agree with. I don’t know how they’re going to rule but I expect them to say that it’s unconstitutional, because I think it’s pretty clear that it is.

Advertisement
As a policymaker, I know for a fact that Obamacare has been horrible for our country, and we haven’t seen the worst of it yet. More and more Americans are going to lose their existing coverage. The costs of Obamacare are going to continue to climb. More and more states are going to be forced closer to bankruptcy, because Medicare rolls are going to expand. Fewer and fewer people are going to go into medicine or health care, because government will more and more be in charge of it. All of these repercussions are going to come to bear here fairly soon. The more we learn about Obamacare, the worse it looks. Regardless of what the Supreme Court does, we have to repeal and replace it.



NRO: I saw that you are offering what is being characterized as a revised or reformed version of the DREAM Act, and I notice the editors of the New York Times didn’t like it. I’m sure their lack of approval stuns you and has you all torn up inside. Could you walk us through your proposal and how it differs from previous versions?

Rubio: Well, we don’t have a formal proposal yet; all we’ve discussed is concepts. I think the vast majority of Americans understand that if you were four years old when you were brought here, you grew up in this country your whole life, and you’re now a valedictorian of a high school or are a high-achieving academic person, and have much to contribute to our future, I think most Americans, the vast majority of Americans find that compelling and want to accommodate that.

The problem is that all of the existing policy proposals that are out there like the DREAM Act create amnesty. They create incentives for illegal immigration, chain migration, and all sorts of problems. What I have said is that I believe we can deal with these kids and these circumstances without making all of the DREAM Act’s mistakes.

That’s what I have talked about. There’s no specific proposal, but I hope that it will be bipartisan, although I doubt it will be. As the New York Times has shown, writing an editorial denouncing a piece of legislation that doesn’t exist yet, the Democrats and the Left are terrified of losing this issue. They don’t want to solve this issue; they want this issue to remain out there because they want to use it as a political tool. If and when we are able to come up with a conservative-Republican alternative DREAM Act that deals with the issues of these kids without undermining our heritage as a nation of laws, when we do that, we are going to expose the political reality behind this.

There are many on the left who want this issue to stick around, because they want to use it for political gain. They’re not nearly as interested in solving it from a policy perspective. Not all — I’m not saying all of them. I’m sure there are many who legitimately want to address this issue. We’ll see soon enough who’s who around here.

— Jim Geraghty writes the Campaign Spot on NRO.



Text  


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

NRO Polls on LockerDome

Subscribe to National Review