.jpg)
Marco Rubio has quickly
ascended to a major figure of the GOP and is seen as a potential candidate for
the presidency in 2016 but will he really be the change that Republicans need
in order to become electorally viable again? The Carnage Report doesn’t think so
and here’s why. In lieu of President Obama’s re-election and convincing defeat of
Mitt Romney, the penny had dropped for Republicans across the land; the GOP had
to change in order become electorally viable. The party had long relied on the
southern strategy to win the Whitehouse and the 2012 election put paid to
classic republican election strategy of being hard where Democrats were soft.
Republicans for years ignored
demographics the Democrats have learned to perfect their sales pitch to and
have won lost presidential elections because of it. Taking stock of the
Democrats appeal to a wider demographic and the fact that democrats and indeed
the country is looking to see if the GOP can change its positions or at least
be able to bargain with, with immigration reform sure to be the litmus test as
it is clearly one of the president’s key
policy priorities.
There are signs that the GOP
may be changing with Louie Gohmert, A Texas congressional republican who is as
right wing as it gets and was against Affordable Healthcare, stating publicly
that temporary workers (who are mostly immigrants) should have their healthcare
paid for by their employers[1].
However, while it does represent some progress, Gohmert motivation for backing this
measure was his anxiety over “immigrants benefiting from tax-payer funded
health care programs” in knowledge of the fact that immigrants receiving state
benefits are less than popular[2].
This kind of logic also informs
the GOP sudden push for their members to embrace immigration reform in an
attempt to attract Latino voters to the party. Marco Rubio popularity is fuelled
by this need to make some progress on immigration despite the fact that Marco
Rubio is quite conservative on the immigration reform. Upon the news of a leak of
the Whitehouse’s draft immigration reform bill that would reportedly “offer
more than 11 million undocumented immigrants a pathway to residency”, Marco
Rubio stated empathically that should its bill reach the floor of congress “the
bill would be “dead on arrival” and called the bill “half baked and seriously
flawed”[3].
Rubio also implied that bill is unfair due to the bill allows for “special
pathway” that favors illegal immigrants despite the fact that Rubio has
proposed an immigration bill quite similar to the bill drafted by the
Whitehouse. The bill mimics the Whitehouse draft bill as it supports the “pathway
to residency” clause he outright criticised in the Whitehouse’s version[4].
It can easily be presumed that Rubio
bowed to party pressure as fellow republicans publicly attacked the Whitehouse
bill with Rand Paul seeing the plan as “untenable” stating that the “bill won’t
pass”[5].
Rubio’s position on Israel is
no real surprise but his commitment to Israel counterproductive plan to make Jerusalem
it capital was confirmed when on a visit to the country, Rubio revealed he saw
Jerusalem as “…the capital or Israel”[6]. Israel has made plans (‘E1 development’) to
further encroach into the west bank by building new settlements on land that is
seen by many that, if successful, it would make the two-state solution
impossible as a policy choice[7].
Israel unveiling of it plans to
increase settlements in the West Bank drew widespread criticism including from
numerous member states of the EU, UN, and even the United States[8].
A spokeswoman from the US State Department expressed that the United States “was
deeply disappointed that Israel insists on continuing this pattern of
provocative action”[9].
The spokeswoman continued to point at the continued hypocrisy of Israeli
Leadership as she rightly noted that “Israeli leaders continually say that they
support a path towards a two-state solution, yet these actions only put that
goal at further at risk”[10].
However in the face worldwide
criticism of their expansion policy regarding the West Bank, Israel has
continued its controversial plans to build settlements with the housing the
state “issuing tenders for hundreds of housing units in the West Bank
settlements of Karnel Shomron and Efrat”[11].
Despite the consternation towards Israel’s settlement plans, Rubio contradicts
the position of his own country by siding with Israel’s isolating and conflict inducing
position looking to beef up his foreign policy profile by stating his views “on
some of the nation’s (Israel) thorniest issues”[12].
While photo ops with Shimon
Peres and Benjamin Netanyahu may help his foreign policy profile, Rubio has
supported a position that the people of Israel are clearly split on and may
even like to see slow down or stop completely. According to ThinkProgress’s
Hayes Brown, “Fifty-four percent of respondents were in favor of a Palestinian
state, with only 38 percent opposed”[13].
In an survey taken by 600 Israelis,
contrary to Israel’s well-earned reputation as a militarized country, 81.9% of
Israels “think settlements should be the first source of budget cuts”, even
among the Israel’s strong right wing contingent there is majority support for “diverting
funds from settlements to help balance the budget”[14].
However for all the encouraging
polls suggesting that the people of Israel would like to see an ease in the
building settlements and military conflict, the hopes of this happening are
depressing to say the least with a decisive “54 percent of those polled believe
that a peace deal with the Palestinians is impossible”[15].
The country, as far as support for settlements are concerned, has no definite
position with Support and opposition “split in half, with 43 percent opposed
and 43 percent in favour”[16].
With the evidence available, It
was unwise for Rubio to take a position on an contentious issue and is a reliable
sources for the international to pour condemnation on Israel and further
isolate a country already low on friends and high on military intent.
[1] I.
Volsky, 2013, Right-Wing Congressman Suddenly Embraces Ahealth Care…For
Immigrants, http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/02/05/1543681/right-wing-congressman-suddenly-embraces-a-health-care-mandatefor-immigrants/
[2]
Ibid
[3] K.
McDonough, 2013, Marco Rubio threatens White House leaked immigration bill would
be “dead on arrival”, http://www.salon.com/2013/02/17/marco_rubio_threatens_white_house_leaked_immigration_bill_would_be_dead_on_arrival/
[4] C.
Joseph, 2013, Marco Rubio Rejects His Own Immigration Proposal, Because of
Barack Obama, http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2013/02/marco_rubio_rejects_his_own_im.php
[5]
Fox News, 2013, Republicans rip Obama immigration plan ; Rubio calls it ‘dead
on arrival’, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/17/report-bill-would-set-8-year-path-to-residency/
[6] A.
Esenten, 2013, Visting Senator Marco Rubio:Of Course Jerusalem I Israel’s
Capital, http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/visiting-u-s-senator-marco-rubio-of-course-jerusalem-is-israel-s-capital.premium-1.504963
[7] H.
Sherwood et al, 2012, Israel stands by settlements plan despite growing
diplomatic crisis, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/03/uk-may-recall-israel-ambassador-settlement
[8] Y.
Benhorin, 2012, US: Israel Settlement Plans Provocative, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4321795,00.html
[9] Ibid,
Quoted by Benhorin
[10]
Ibid, Quoted by Benhorin
[11]
Ibid
[12]
S. McLaughlin, 2013, Israel stop a boost to Marco Rubio’s foreign policy
profile, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/20/israel-stop-a-boost-to-marco-rubios-foreign-policy/
[13]
H. Brown, 2013, POLL: Israels Support Palestinian State But Split On Settlements,
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/01/04/1398041/israelis-support-two-state-split-settlements/
[14]
A. Zeiger, 2013, Poll: Israels say defunds settlements to balance budget, http://www.timesofisrael.com/poll-israelis-say-defund-settlements-to-balance-budget/
[15] H.
Brown, 2013, POLL: Israels Support Palestinian State But Split On Settlements, http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/01/04/1398041/israelis-support-two-state-split-settlements/
[16] Ibid
No comments:
Post a Comment