Skip to footer

Can immigration reform pass? Five senators to watch.

Immigration reform will pass the Senate before the Fourth of July, Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) of Nevada has vowed. Here are five key senators (or groups of senators) that will be pivotal during the two weeks of debate.

5. Rand Paul (R) of Kentucky

Jacquelyn Martin/AP
Sen. Rand Paul (R) of Kentucky speaks at a forum on immigration organized by the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles and the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference Wednesday in Washington.

  • By David Grant Staff writer

Senator Paul is a bit of an immigration wild card. 

Paul has gone to great lengths to say he wants immigration reform to pass, including speeches to two Hispanic groups touting the need for reform that includes a pathway to legal status for the nation’s undocumented immigrants. 

At the same time, the 2016 presidential contender has pinned his support for the Senate bill on two enormous changes: requiring the Congress to certify that the border is secure before the undocumented can obtain permanent legal status and stripping out a provision requiring photographs to be used to help verify employment authorization at the workplace. 

Paul’s libertarian-minded philosophy is more amenable to many of the policy changes in immigration reform than many of his Senate colleagues. However, Paul’s usual Senate allies and fellow conservative up-and-comers, Sen. Ted Cruz (R) of Texas and Sen. Mike Lee (R) of Utah, are vociferously opposed to the bill, as are a host of deeply conservative activist groups that typically back the junior Kentucky senator. 

That leaves Paul in an intriguing position.

If he opposes the bill, perhaps over the fact the Senate is unlikely to approve his two requirements, it would leave Rubio out on a limb among rising conservative Senate stars (and present the opportunity for fireworks in a future GOP presidential primary).

If he votes for the bill, Paul would draw a bright line between himself and some of his staunchest allies while proving he’s not just talking about broadening the GOP’s appeal to minority groups.

5 of 5
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.