Krauthammer: "I Would Oppose The Bill" If Border Security Is Just A Goal And Not A Requirement | RealClearPolitics

Krauthammer: "I Would Oppose The Bill" If Border Security Is Just A Goal And Not A Requirement | RealClearPolitics
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Well, if the problem doesn't exist why do we have 11 million illegals in the country? And why did the CBO, in reporting on the economic effects of the bill before the Corker amendment, say that it will reduce illegal immigration only by a quarter and estimate that in ten years after the passage of the bill will have 5 million new illegal immigrants? That's why you have to have enforcement. 

But the key issue is what do you measure here, inputs or outputs? What the bill does, a bit of shock and awe, it picks a number out of a hat, a huge number of new agents, again, without any explanation of why 20,000. Why not a 100,000? It's all about inputs. We heard Corker say we're going to spend a ton of money on this. 

Well, we double the per capita spending on education in the last 30 years, and test scores have gone down. Inputs are irrelevant. What matters is output, and that's the key issue here. The Cornyn amendment says the path to citizenship begins when we know that we have 100% awareness of the border and 90% interdiction. It doesn't start otherwise. 

You have to measure that you've actually stopped the river and you've turned it into a trickle. And what the argument of the others is, in the Corker amendment, is know that that's going to be a goal. A goal is meaningless. It's got to to be a guarantee. And I think it ought to hinge entirely on that. If it's a goal, I would oppose the bill. If it's going to be a requirement that you don't start the path until you have 100% awareness and 90% interdiction, as the Gang of Eight had promised us a month or two ago, I would say if it doesn't have that, oppose it. (Special Report, June 20, 2013)