“I want to like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) 92% (R-Florida). In fact, I want to love him. I want to support him for president.
I thought his debate performance was magnificent. He was clear, concise and consistent. It’s clear Rubio has a Reaganesque speaking and communications skills lacking in the DNA of most GOP candidates.
But I cannot.
While Rubio might have Reagan’s communication skills, he lacks Reagan’s core principled beliefs, particularly when it comes to federalism.
Rubio ran and was elected as an outsider. Yet within moments of arriving in the U.S. Senate he decided to hold hands and get into bed with liberal Democrat Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on immigration. That bothers me. No doubt. But what bothers me more is Rubio’s willingness to abandon principles to help big money donors and contributors even when they trample of core constitutional principles.
First, it is clear that Rubio has decided to play footsie with billionaire establishment donor Sheldon Adelson in order to win the “Adelson primary.” The winner of the “Adelson primary” can be the beneficiary of millions of dollars in political spending.
Adleson cares about three issues — Israel; a prohibition on Internet gaming and re-establishment federal power and regulation on marijuana policy. In two of the cases — Internet gambling and pot regulation — Adelson’s position runs counter to that of a limited federal government.
Gambling has always been regulated by the states. Each state has a different law and a different way of dealing with the issue. Hawaii and Utah have no legal gambling while other states allow everything from lotteries to riverboat gambling. Whether you support gambling or not, this is the proper way to regulate it — is in 50 state legislatures and not in Washington.
In comes Mr. Adelson. Adleson stood by and watched New Jersey and two other states legalize online gambling for their residents. Instead of pressing his case in Trenton and other state capitals, he turned to his friends in Washington to overturn these state laws. Mr. Rubio and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) 44% (R-SC) were willing to lend a helping hand, introducing legislation drafted by Mr. Adleson’s personal lobbyist.
During a recent radio interview, Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Michelle Minton noted that legislation proposed by Rubio and Graham would redefine intrastate commerce conducted by two parties on the Internet both within a state as interstate commerce to be regulated by the federal government. This radical expansion of federal power will limit Adelson’s competition — state regulated online gaming.
Then Rubio also declared war on Colorado and other states that have legalized marijuana. Rubio, in concert with the Adelson’s position, is the only GOP candidate willing to have the federal government enforce a war on pot, even against states that exercised their right to legalize the plant. So much for a limited federal government and granting power to the states.
It’s not just Adelson issues that Rubio is willing to sell his soul. At a recent gathering of libertarians, Rubio defended his stalwart support of the sugar subsidy by saying he would only oppose the subsidy when other countries abandoned their subsidy programs. Of course, the beneficiary of the sugar subsidy is the Fanjul Brothers, the most powerful sugar tycoons in the world. It’s no surprise the Fanjul family are political contributors to Mr. Rubio.
Rather than being a principled conservative, Rubio is more of a Simon Cameron conservative. Cameron is, of course, Lincoln’s Secretary of War who said, ” An honest politician is one who, when he is bought, will stay bought.” http://www.redstate.com/diary/dukefergus
Michelle Minton, is the Director of “Sindustry Studies” at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, where she promotes Liberty by defending the likes of gamblers, smokers, drinkers, junk food eaters, & insurance agents (basically one and the same).