Rubio tries to out-hawk and outfox Cruz

This latest exchange was instigated by Rubio and comes in the wake of the deadly terrorist attacks that were carried out in Paris on Friday by operatives and sympathizers of the Islamic State. In an interview Monday, the Florida senator said Cruz “weakened national security” by supporting legislation that diminished a domestic intelligence program designed to thwart terrorist plots on the homeland that was implemented in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Related Story: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2575923

Rubio elaborated on his singling out of the Texas senator during a brief interview with reporters Tuesday on Capitol Hill after attending a classified briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Cruz was among several congressional Republicans who earlier this year voted to rein in the National Security Agency’s domestic surveillance powers. “We have a race for commander in chief and this is the most important obligation of a president is to keep our country safe,” he said.

Cruz hammered right back, charging that Rubio was desperate to change the subject from immigration. Last week, it was Cruz who struck first when he said during an interview that Rubio was weak on immigration and supported amnesty for illegal immigrants. Cruz highlighted Rubio’s role as a key negotiator of the bipartisan “gang of eight” comprehensive immigration reform bill cleared the Senate in June of 2013 but later stalled in the House.

“It is not surprising that Marco’s campaign wants to change the topic from Marco’s partnership with President Obama to push a massive amnesty program. I understand politically why they want to change the topic from that but I don’t think their efforts are going to be successful,” Cruz told reporters, after chairing a Judiciary subcommittee hearing focused on law enforcement.

Ben Carson and Donald Trump still pace the Republican field in state and national polls. But Cruz and Rubio are in second place and have separated themselves from the rest of the pack, accelerating a rivalry that could determine the nomination. Both 44-year-olds are knowledgeable and fluid when discussing foreign policy matters, they are in a position to surge as Republican voters look for expertise and steadiness in a commander in chief and take a closer look at Carson and Trump. The former often appears ill-informed and unprepared; the latter can sound incoherent and has expressed isolationist tendencies.

National security was a salient issue in the Republican 2016 primary even before the Paris attacks. Most GOP contenders regularly criticize Obama on the stump for using the term “violent extremism” rather than “Islamic extremism” amid vows to extinguish the Islamic State. The lines are guaranteed applause generators. Indeed, Republican voters have harbored concerns about the rise of the Islamic State and the threat of domestic terror strikes since the midterm campaign of 2014.

So Paris might only serve to elevate Republican voters’ concerns about the homeland. Rubio is a committed foreign policy hawk, resisting calls to overhaul the NSA’s mass data collection program even when it was unfashionable in conservative circles. But the combination of events explains the politics behind Rubio’s decision to use this moment, and this topic, to get the jump on Cruz without waiting to be attacked first, as had been his practice in this campaign.

“National security was the No. 2 issue after the economy, and this will heighten concern, although the economy may still remain the top concern,” Republican pollster David Winston said. “The expectation from the electorate around national security is that a candidate has a clear, well thought out doctrine. This is not an issue where the electorate accepts doing things on the fly.”

Without question, Rubio believes he has the advantage on this issue. He might.

The Floridian has been a consistent supporter of robust U.S. leadership around the globe, bolstered by an increase in defense spending and more latitude for American intelligence agencies tracking terrorists. Rubio warned that the U.S. was hamstringing its ability to prevent terrorist attacks this past spring during the Senate was debate on the USA Freedom Act, the bill that curtailed the NSA’s ability to collect telephone numbers for use in potential future investigations.

Voters could side with him in a race that is in part defined by the threat of another Sept. 11, 2001-style terrorist attack carried out by Islamic radicals. Many Republican policy makers side with Rubio’s argument that limiting the reach of the NSA was a mistake that harmed national security.

“The Snowden leaks were very damaging, and then Congress moved to fix a program that wasn’t broken. I supported the Freedom Act because it was the only way to keep the [data collection] program going,” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said. The Freedom Act passed a Republican Congress and was signed by Obama amid revelations about its reach that were leaked by former NSA analyst Edward Snowden.

Cruz also qualifies as a hawk, but has attempted to strike a middle ground between Rubio and libertarian-leaning Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky. Paul, an ardent opponent of the Patriot Act under which the NSA’s original data collection program operated, declined to support the Freedom Act on the grounds that it allows the government to violate the Fourth Amendment against illegal search and seizures.

Cruz hasn’t been shy about it; it fits his campaign strategy of trying to unite all factions of the Tea Party movement under his banner, including the sect that has previously supported Paul and his father, former Rep. Ron Paul of Texas. Cruz is still expected to come out on the positive end of a primary campaign that hinges more on national security. The question is whether he ends up with the upper hand against Rubio.

Some Republicans say he could, especially if the immigration issue becomes conflated with homeland security vis-à-vis terrorism.

“Immigration is no longer an economic or cultural issue,” GOP pollster Frank Luntz said. “It’s now about the safety and security of the country. That benefits Ted Cruz because he comes from a border state and was an active supporter of this argument before the [Paris] bombing.”