Paul votes to table Cornyn border security amendment; amendment tabled 54-43

[supermario21]

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00159

Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---54
Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Cowan (D-MA)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Flake (R-AZ)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Hirono (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Paul (R-KY)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)


NAYs ---43
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Chiesa (R-NJ)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Enzi (R-WY)
Fischer (R-NE)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kirk (R-IL)
Lee (R-UT)
Manchin (D-WV)
McConnell (R-KY)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)

Not Voting - 3
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Risch (R-ID)
Rockefeller (D-WV)

So Rubio breaks with the gang of 8, Paul joins with McCain, Flake, and Graham. Many conservatives have been in favor of the amendment but Heritage said they were opposed to it because it was a "trojan horse" for the gang bill.

 

[Brett85]

Do you have any idea why Rand voted against this amendment?

 

[tsai3904]

Do you have any idea why Rand voted against this amendment?

Probably because it mandates ALL US employers to use E-Verify.

 

[supermario21]

He said this on the Andrea Tantaros Show. Interesting this pops up. Seems as if he's frustrated with the entire process now because nobody is interested in having Congress decide border enforcement. I think all the Cornyn amendment does is ramp up E-Verify, Biometric data, and hire more border patrol agents.

Sen. Rand Paul plans to support a filibuster of the Senate immigration bill unless it grants Congress more border security oversight, the Kentucky Republican said Thursday.
Paul does not plan to stand on the Senate floor for 13 hours straight like he did in March to protest President Barack Obama's drone policy, but he will withhold support for a motion to end debate on the bill, a procedural tactic that effectively could block the bill from seeing a final vote.
"Unless they change the bill, I will vote on the side of not ending the debate, which is essentially like a filibuster, but it's not the filibuster people think of," Paul said during an interview on the Andrea Tantaros Show.

Read more here: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...filibustering-immigration-bill-174049839.html

 

[supermario21]

Yep, talk about an anti-liberty amendment. Disappointed Cruz and Lee voted for it.

Cornyn’s RESULTS amendment forbids undocumented immigrants from obtaining permanent residency until four criteria are met: 100 percent surveillance of the southern border, a minimum 90 percent apprehension rate for illegal border crossings, an operational biometric ID system at air and sea ports, and implementation of E-Verify nationally. He says the measure is critical to ensuring border security.

 

[FrankRep]

Yep, talk about an anti-liberty amendment. Disappointed Cruz and Lee voted for it.

They just voted not to table the amendment.

 

[supermario21]

I know, but that amendment was worth killing. Let's do a bunch of self-congratulatory "security" steps while expanding the police state!

 

[JCDenton0451]

Yep, talk about an anti-liberty amendment. Disappointed Cruz and Lee voted for it.

If you're proposing a massive guest-worker program, E-verify is a must. Or else how you're going to monitor the workers who overstayed their visas?

 

[mwkaufman]

If you're proposing a massive guest-worker program, E-verify is a must. Or else how you're going to monitor the workers who overstayed their visas?

Government monitoring millions of people is outside of their purview and unconstitutional.

 

[Slutter McGee]

If you're proposing a massive guest-worker program, E-verify is a must. Or else how you're going to monitor the workers who overstayed their visas?

E-verify puts work, bureaucracy, and accountability of government regulations all on the employer instead of the government itself. That is not a good thing.

Slutter McGee

 

[JCDenton0451]

E-verify puts work, bureaucracy, and accountability of government regulations all on the employer instead of the government itself. That is not a good thing.

Slutter McGee

But what's your alternative? Open borders?

 

[garyallen59]

But what's your alternative? Open borders?

Yes. Open borders.

 

[Brett85]

Probably because it mandates ALL US employers to use E-Verify.

Ok, that's probably it.

 

[Brett85]

I'm still somewhat undecided on whether or not E-Verify should implemented at the state level, but I certainly don't support a one size fits all bill at the federal level that mandates that every business in the country use E-Verify. This isn't one of the enumerated powers given to Congress by the Constitution. I'm not sure why Lee and Cruz don't see that.

 

[helenpaul]

i hope he follows through on a filibuster. he needs to step away from the despised rubio and give us a viable alternative to the rubio establishment.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

If you're proposing a massive guest-worker program, E-verify is a must. Or else how you're going to monitor the workers who overstayed their visas?

Scrap the visa-system all together and have free-trade (e.g. free movement of goods, services, labor, people, etc.). There is no 'need' to monitor anyone, let alone immigrants. I guess we need to set up a system to monitor all foreign travelers and vacationers too right, because god forbid they over-stay their visa! Ha.

 

[jtstellar]

you can't have an open border and welfare state..

argue all you want how two wrong doesn't make a right but those offering open borders have a very different agenda and their intent is to couple it with welfare to buy votes.. if your principle is to advance liberty then that should exclude helping the enemies of liberty, which you are doing..

i love how dumbfucks think the way to advance liberty is to interpret the act to the shallowest degree possible, the most brainless act on the most thought less impulse = true defense of liberty lmao how about realizing we actually have enemies trying to sabotage the country and have a little fucking strategy.. you seriously want a bunch of people living under near dictatorship and gang violence who were recently polled as high as 70% anti-capitalistic to rule this country by votes? fuck your open border

 

[AlexAmore]

I think it's because this was immigration first, border security second (if at all), and Paul wants the exact opposite.