Sen. Rand Paul talks immigration reform and his plan to balance the budget in 5 years

March 20, 2013

Writer

Senator Rand Paul has been blowing up in the headlines since his epic thirteen hour filibuster a few weeks ago. His CPAC speech received praise from the more conservative wing of the GOP, he's being labeled as a future leader of the part, there have been a few hints around a possible presidential run in 2016, and, most recently, he has introduced a few bill proposals.

This morning the Senator joined Glenn on radio to discuss a few of those proposals, his immigration bill and his budget proposal. Glenn kicked the discussion off with the immigration bill.

Yesterday, after Rand spoke at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce to discuss comprehensive immigration reform, the mainstream media started buzzing about the Senator allegedly taking being for amnesty — a "path to citizenship". Glenn gave Senator Paul a chance to set the record straight.

"Help me out on the 'path to citizenship', because that is a red light for a lot of people," Glenn questioned.

"I think a lot of that was misreported yesterday," Senator Paul responded, "because in my speech to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce that never came up, the word 'citizenship'."

True. In fact, the only time Rand Paul mentioned "citizenship" was when he was referring to himself as a teenager, "not being a model citizen".

"We didn't mention citizenship, but what my amendment is called is Trust But Verify. Which means, in the past we've been snookered into doing immigration reform with the promise that border security's going to come later. I think conservatives, if they want conservatives to be part of this and if they want us to support immigration reform, we have to have a guarantee," Sen. Paul continued. "We have to have a verifiable guarantee of border security. So in my amendment what has to happen is each year there are certain border security targets that have to be medicine. An investigator general looks at this, the border patrol looks at this, and does a report. We're going to have the governors of each of the border states look at this as well. And then that report comes back and has to be voted on. The big difference is it has to be voted on by congress. The bipartisan commission is saying, oh, the president will issue a report. But that, to me, means a rubber stamp and not much. So ours is mostly about ensuring border security."

Sen. Paul clarified that he does not want to create any new path to citizenship.

"The only thing new is we're saying that if you're here and you've been here and you're working and you want to work and you don't want to get welfare, we'll give you a work visa. If you're here and you have a work visa, you can get in the same line that already exists for citizenship. This isn't a new line. This is like the same line if you're in Mexico City and you want to come to this country, you get if line," he said.

Not shockingly, this is what everyone in the mainstream media is getting wrong. The media is making the reform amendment sound like Senator Paul is proposing that everyone will become a citizen, which is absolutely not the case.

"You know, one of the things I repeat in my speeches all the time as Milton Friedman stated, you can't have open borders in a welfare state," the Senator said. "And we've got the welfare state. So do you have to have a secure border. You also have to have a secure border for national security reasons."

According to Senator Paul, his amendment is for conservatives do want some kind of reform, but refuse to vote for any unless there is a guarantee that the border is going to be secure.

"We have serious problems," Glenn started. "First of all, the door to citizenship is too narrow. It's not that it is open. They are coming through the windows, not through the door. So the door is too narrow. We have to make the ‑‑ we have to make the path to citizenship to come into this country from another place easier. Because we want new people to come. It replenishes us and it makes those of us who have forgotten what it's like to be an American, or what an honor it is to be an American, it refreshes that. It's important. But nobody trusts anybody in Washington on the border because they all say they are going to do something and they don't."

Rand Paul confirmed Glenn's point by explaining that most of the people who are in the country illegal came so that way because legal immigration is not working. A million workers came in to pick crops last year, but only 65,000 work visas were given. The agricultural work visa program has to be fixed.

Glenn transitioned to Senator Paul's budget plan which is being released today.

"We're going to balance the budget in five years," Rand told Glenn. "We do it by downsizing government. Basically sending a lot of powers and money back to the states and the responsibility for education which has always been a state function, send it back to the states."

Five years — that's half the amount of time that Paul Ryan's plan. Ryan's budget actually doubles the budget of 2002 and adds another 3.4% increase per year over the next ten years. Yet the Democrats are somehow calling it "draconian". What does Sen. Paul's plan do that makes it so much more efficient?

"The Ryan budget goes from the growth of government of 5% a year to a growth of government of 3.4% a year. So government still grows under his," Senator Paul explained. "In ours we go ahead and eliminate some departments. We eliminate the Department of Education, most of the Department of Energy, most of the Department of Commerce."

Music to Glenn's ears.

Senator Paul went on to explain that they're taking things like the Department on Energy and cutting the federal loans to the Kennedy & Kaiser types, along with the DOE loans to companies like Solyndra and BrightSource. He is eliminating the government's role in paying for corporate CEOs around the world to make trips across the globe to make business deals.

"The average CEO makes about 7 million a year, why does the American taxpayer have to climb around on U.S. Government jets," Sen. Paul said.

Sen. Paul went on to explain where else his plan makes cuts:

"Well, basically Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Commerce. A lot of the Department of Commerce is corporate welfare and I think we as Republicans need to show that we're not the party of just big business. We're the party that says, you know what, we're going to cut government waste even if it helps, you know, rich business friends of ours and not be just this crony type of government.

And then Housing and Urban Development really has torn down more houses than it's built. The government can be involved but I think at a local level. Probably Habitat For Humanity has done more for building houses than HUD has done in its entire existence."

His budget also removes the waste from Social Security and Medicare. With S.S. they reduce spending through means testing, gradually raising the age. His plan for Medicare allows every senior citizen to have the same health plan that congress does.

"It saves a trillion dollars over ten years and it also allows us to have a sustainable entitlement program, basically fixes Social Security for 75 years," Sen Paul explained. "And then if that's not enough for you, Glenn, we have one more thing. We do a flat income tax of 17% which gives a $600 billion stimulus to the economy and allows for, you know, we estimate somewhere between 8 and 12 million new jobs."

Rand Paul's flat tax is 17% with an exemption for the first $50,000. So, it's graduated in that anyone making under $50k wouldn't pay an income tax.

"I will tell you if this would have been Romney's plan, we would be calling him president today," Glenn responded after hearing Rand's plan.

Glenn also warned that he was going to get slaughtered in the press — and not just from the left. He thinking the Senator should expect for attacks from the progressive Republicans as well.

"Look at how many people lose power here," Glenn stated. "I mean, this is the kind of thinking that America needs."

"The real problem, the reason why we're not getting to this, is so many Republicans are trapped into this idea that tax reform has to be revenue‑neutral" Sen Paul responded. "I want tax reform to leave more money in the hands of those who earned it and more money in the states in which people live — because that's the only economic stimulus that's ever worked and that's leaving money in the hands of the people who earn it."

Both Glenn and Sen. Paul emphasized how out-of-control the federal government's spending is, and how ridiculous their's and the media's reaction has been to the sequester.

"They had a St. Patty's Day party at the White House but they are going to cancel the Easter egg hunt," Glenn pointed out. "And if they think that this is going to be ‑‑ I mean, I love this. The media and everybody is trying to make this into a big deal and wasting time on Capitol Hill to try and get these things reinstated. Why? Are you kidding me? The president says he doesn't have time to enforce the laws, you know, on pot. So we're going to put ourselves into some sort of constitutional crisis where, you know, whose law do you enforce? Do we enforce all of the laws, some of the federal laws, none of the federal? You don't get into that and he's arguing about the stupid Easter egg roll?"

"Here's the thing, Glenn. He's releasing criminals that we're in captivity that were immigrants that were felons. So he's releasing these criminals because he says he's saving money. But the federal government last year had $117 billion that was unaccounted for, improperly spent. They are not exactly sure where it went. They say the defense department or the Pentagon, $25 billion could be saved just simply by doing an audit. They say $7 billion in the Pentagon is spent on things that have nothing to do with the military. Or national defense. And yet he can't ‑‑ says he doesn't have enough money to keep people in prison. So it's inexcusable," Sen. Paul said.

Senator Paul is optimistic though, he believes the majority of Americans are waking up to the hypocritical actions of the current administration.

"I think it's backfiring on him. I think the American people are going to see that he's playing games and letting go criminals. And I think he's going to have repercussions for that."

Another issue that is likely to backfire on this administration is their attempt to send a German family seeking political asylum back to German — after they were ruled on favorably in court. Glenn explained this situation, which he discussed yesterday on radio, to Sen. Paul.

"All they were trying to do was homeschool their children in Germany, but there is a law done by the Nazis. It's an old Adolf Hitler law that was never removed from the book that says you cannot homeschool your kids. They were going to take their kids away. So they moved here to the United States, they did it the right way, and they asked for political asylum," Glenn explained. "They won in court, and this administration is now arguing in court that homeschooling your children is not a basic human right."

"Well, you know, I'm a big fan of homeschooling and you've just given me an idea," Sen. Paul responded. "I think maybe we'll see if we can file an amicus or a friend of the court on their behalf and see if we can get involved with that because one member of my staff back in the Seventies when he was a kid was home schooled and his parents in Kentucky were given a year in prison for homeschooling and while their case was still pending the appeal, we got the law changed in Kentucky. So in the 1970s it was illegal to homeschool and much of America. But we've changed those laws. And if the president thinks that homeschooling is something that can keep you out of the country, we're going to make sure he knows otherwise."

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep