Speaking on “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” Rubio reiterated some of his concerns with the bipartisan bill that he helped author. He said that while most of the bill was in “perfect shape,” he would still insist on tougher border security measures.

“I think it’s an excellent starting point,” Rubio said. “I think 95, 96 percent of the bill is in perfect shape and ready to go.  But there are elements that need to be improved.  This is how the legislative process is supposed to work.”

RELATED: Does Marco Rubio support his own immigration bill?

The Florida Republican called for tougher border security measures and said that the bill needed those provisions in order to pass.

“The only way we are going to pass an immigration reform law out of the House and the Senate so the president can sign it is if it has real border security measures within it,” Rubio said.

However, when asked if he would vote for the bill as it is right now without added border security requirements, Rubio declined to answer.

RELATED: Opinion: Rubio and Cruz – GOP superstars  

“I don’t really want to get involved in these hypotheticals and ultimatums,” he said.

Rubio, a Tea Party favorite, is seen as playing a pivotal role in winning conservative support for the immigration overhaul.

“On virtually every other issue, I agree with many of the folks that right now are just not supportive of the immigration reform bill,” he said, saying he understands “why they are opposed to it.”

Both Cuban-Americans, Sens. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Ted Cruz, R-Texas, represent the young, multicultural new face of what could someday become a diverse and welcoming Republican Party.

Until then, they’ll be two of the most important Hispanic political players that many Latinos don’t much care for.

As an architect of the Senate’s compromise bill, Rubio — who in February graced the cover of Time magazine as “The Republican Savior” and “the new voice of the GOP” — would probably emerge unscathed if the reform measure fails in the Senate.

Oh sure, there were mini-freakouts recently when some liberal commentators — who had up to then expressed only an increasing admiration for Rubio’s evolving leadership on immigration — began to worry that Rubio would come out against his own bill.

And liberal Latinos had already started pitching fits when he began talking about not voting for his own bill unless more border security measures were included. The complaints started building when Rubio announced he’d be submitting an amendment requiring immigrants to prove they could read, write and speak English before earning a green card.

Yet Rubio — who fits a comforting narrative of charming, bilingual, pulled-himself-up-by-his-bootstraps, son of immigrants — enjoys a benefit of the doubt that will keep him in the good graces of both the general public and the Republican Party.

Ted Cruz? Not so much.

Aside from tea partyers who just couldn’t be happier to have a Latino in their ranks who’s as passionate about abolishing the IRS and repealing Obamacare as they are — Tea Party Nation recently proclaimed Cruz “an absolute American Hero” — the junior senator from the Lone Star State seems to turn people off wherever he goes.

Many Hispanics — even independent and moderate Republican ones — are horrified by him. Cruz gets slammed not only for his ultra-conservative political views and his inability to speak Spanish, but particularly for his belief that current and former immigrants living in the U.S. illegally should not be eligible for citizenship.

A recent Latino Decisions poll found that 69 percent of Hispanic voters view Rubio more favorably for stating that the 11 million unauthorized immigrants deserve compassion. Only 28 percent view Cruz more favorably in light of his anti-citizenship stance.

But personality matters in politics. If Cruz were more convivial — like, say, former Florida governor Jeb Bush, who holds much the same views on granting citizenship — it would be easier for Cruz to get away with sticking to his convictions. But the self-promoting, outspoken — some say arrogant — Cruz doesn’t have that kind of wiggle room.

Seen as a politically expedient figure, Cruz ticked off fellow Republican senators by openly criticizing them for their behind-the-scenes complaints of his strident anti-gun-control stance and filibuster threats in the weeks before the bill on background checks failed in the Senate.

A few months ago, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called Cruz a “wacko bird” for his brusque politicking on the Hill — a moniker Cruz has proudly adopted. Last week, Vice President Joe Biden described Cruz as some sort of politically absolutist bogeyman, who, along with Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., has the ability “to cower the bulk of the Republican Party in the Senate.”

Most of all, Cruz fails on that ever-important Republican stumbling block of “tone.” He seems constantly scowling and “mad as hell,” etc., etc.

Hey, some people like that. And, at times, it’s even warranted — but it’s hard to warm to.

Not that Cruz needs any warmth from the likes of moderates; he’s got plenty of gushing fans. And regardless of how much anyone dislikes his tone or apparent lack of esteem for his political elders, Cruz — like Rubio — conspicuously represents a community that so far has not been able to rise to superstar status as issue-movers or potential presidential candidates in the Democratic Party.

In this spotlight, Cruz and Rubio represent two fundamental truths: Republicans, like Hispanics, are an ideologically diverse bunch. And, no matter the outcome of this immigration reform battle, the profile of Latinos in American politics has been elevated.

Esther Cepeda is a syndicated columnist and an NBC Latino Contributor.

“Whether the infamous “47 percent remarks made by Romney or the ‘legitimate rape’ comments made by Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) during his Senate campaign, there were numerous examples of Republican leaders making statements that were terribly out of step with where voters – particularly young voters – stand,” says the report, “A Grand Old Party for a Brand New Generation.”

A high number of Latinos and other young adults could not relate to the Republican party’s message and rhetoric on a whole host of issues.

On the economy, “our focus on taxation and business issues has left many young voters thinking they will only reap the benefits of Republican policies if they become wealthy or rise to the top of a big business,” the study concludes.  In fact, only 3 percent of young voters think taxes on the wealthy should be cut while more than half (54 percent) think taxes on the wealthy should be increased. This is an issue, since one of the Republican party’s main mantras is to cut taxes on the wealthy. Yet 64 percent of young Latinos said they wanted to start their own business someday, so the CRNC says this is an area where their messaging could improve.

And blasting “big government” and portraying it as a bad thing is not resonating, the study found. For example, many young voters, and in particular young Hispanics, rely on federal student loans. “Many focus group members did think that Democrats were responding to the student loan crisis,” the report says.

Only one in four young people thought Romney’s economic policies would improve their job prospects, and 88 percent agreed with a government “safety net” that helps people get back on their feet while not encouraging dependency.  And on healthcare, “many of the young people in our focus groups noted that they thought everyone in America should have access to health coverage,” concluded the survey. In fact, even Latinos who were not in favor of abortion criticized the GOP for wanting to defund Planned Parenthood, according to the findings.

On social issues, half of the over 40 percent of young voters who believe gay marriage should be legal said they would not vote for a candidate who is against it, even if they agreed on other issues such as defense, taxes and immigration.

And on immigration, the interviews with young people showed it is a “gateway” issue: “for voters who are undecided but have a connection to communities affected by immigration policy, the issue can certainly turn voters away,” the report states. Three out of four young Americans said DREAMers should have a chance to gain legal status, and less than 20 percent of young people advocated deportation or jail time for undocumented immigrants.

Voto Latino’s Maria Teresa Kumar says these findings point to the fact that “the Republican Party has courted the extreme right when they suited them, and they lost control of the message.”  Moving forward, Kumar says, Republicans should encourage more moderate GOP members to run for office, and young Republicans and the party’s establishment should back them up.

The report’s conclusions echo the findings of a Republican National Committee (RNC) “Growth and Opportunity Project,” which resulted in the creation of expanded resources and outreach to target Latino and other voters. Responding to today’s report, RNC spokesperson Alexandra Franceschi – herself a young Latina – said “we are putting in place an expansive grassroots effort to develop new relationships in the Hispanic community – we will continue working tirelessly to gain the trust of the Hispanic community.”

Another young Hispanic, Hispanic Leadership Network’s Emily Benavides, said “it’s reports like these that reinvigorate our mission.”  HLN’s communication’s director adds she is confident that “moving forward, we will definitely be successful in our outreach; when it comes to center-right policies, we have shown this in the past, and will do this in the future,” Benavides adds.

When South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley announced her statewide steering committee, it was noted that Cuban-American member, Roan Garcia-Quintana, had ties to the Council of Conservative Citizens. (Garcia-Quintana was asked to resign by Haley after some of his comments surfaced, Haley said there was no room for “racially divisive rhetoric).  The CCC states one of their key principles is their opposition to “all efforts to mix the races of mankind”.

So let’s go with racist assumptions for a bit and accept that, as Heritage Foundation’s now unemployed eugenics economist Jason Richwine writes on page 74 of his dissertation, “The racial rank order of these differences is almost always the same, with whites intermediate and Asians and blacks at the extremes.  For example, magnetic resonance imaging has shown that Asians have larger brains than whites, who have larger brains than blacks.”

Well, fine if you insist. Then why is it that these smart Asians voted overwhelmingly for President Obama in 2012? Probably because you don’t have to be a genius to figure out the GOP’s Pavlovian enterprise, and Republicans who genuinely believe in the libertarian sound bites, like “illegal is illegal”, should ask why the Pew Research Center found that 67% of libertarians are male and 85% are white.

The answer is simple enough. The Democrats have done more to integrate Asians into positions of power within their party, and Republicans have done a great job reminding Asians that the foundation of GOP power lies in preserving the privileges of white males.

Meanwhile, the racial rot within the GOP runs deep. Garcia-Quintana’s biography states that he once worked for Ronald Reagan’s infamous pollster, Lee Atwater.  Atwater, who grew up in South Carolina, was an architect of the Southern Strategy, a marketing shell game that used coded language to win over racist voters without sounding racist.

Not surprisingly, Garcia-Quintana is also the Executive Director for the anti-immigrant group, Americans Have Had Enough Coalition, which claims Tom Tancredo as a former Honorary Chairman. Tom Tancredo recently announced he is running for Governor as a Republican.  Tancredo once gave an anti-immigrant speech at an event sponsored by AHHEC in a room for the League of the South, where he joined members in singing Dixie.

These League of the South folks, or LoSers, claim to be committed to recognizing a “natural societal order of superiors and subordinates”. Guess which people they think are naturally superior and which are naturally subordinate?

This is why these folks want so badly for the Jason Richwines of the world to be correct about their eugenics enterprise. To have their white Christian mythology validated by science would relieve them of the need to rectify their egalitarian language with the non-egalitarian social status of non-whites.

And this is why Latinos like Garcia-Quintana are particularly perverse.  When Richwine argued that Latinos are genetically inferior, he’s talking about folks like Garcia-Quintana; and Garcia-Quintana knows it. This has to really eat at the soul of a person who isn’t really white, or “naturally superior”, in the eyes of the very group he so very much wants to be a part of.

Garcia-Quintana proudly says, “he was made in Havana (Cuba) and raised in Savannah (GA)”, but to racists like the Council of Conservative Citizens, it doesn’t matter where you were born or raised or how committed you are to their cause.  All that matters is whether God made you as one of them.

Garcia-Quintana can never be one of them. God says so, and that has to hurt.

Stephen A. Nuño, Ph.D., NBC Latino contributor and an Assistant Professor in the Department of Politics and International Affairs at Northern Arizona University. He is currently writing a book on Republican outreach into the Latino Community.

So it goes as scandal-mania continues to grip Washington.  But there is an upside to the IRS, Benghazi, and Department of Justice controversies: out of the glare of the media spotlight, immigration reform has made steady progress.  Republican lawmakers have been able to burnish their conservative credentials by criticizing the Obama administration ­while they’ve continued to cooperate on one of its key legislative priorities.

“It’s like magic — you distract the audience while the real trick is being done — and I think right now, while Americans focus on President Obama’s unending difficulties, it’s good news for the Gang of Eight working on immigration,” Republican strategist Alex Castellanos told Bloomberg News.  He’s correct.  This past week, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed the “Gang of Eight’s” immigration proposal, and the House reached an agreement on its own immigration plan.  These steps forward on reform might not have happened without the IRS investigation dominating the headlines.

RELATED: Publicly and behind the curtain, the Gang of 8 held the strings on immigration bill

Consider that many of the opponents of reform have been busy elsewhere.  Conservative talk radio, which was credited with helping kill reform in 2007, has been abuzz about Benghazi, not “amnesty.”  Tea Party activists have been obsessed by the IRS hearings.  With the anti-reform crowd otherwise engaged, lawmakers have been able to get things done (one conservative website wondered if this was all part of a “fiendish” conspiracy by the Obama administration).

No wonder The Washington Post noted that, “If immigration reform passes, it will have received a major assist from Lois Lerner and the rest of the IRS.”

The scandals have also given conservative lawmakers cover to attack President Obama.  Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has slammed the White House’s “culture of intimidation.”  Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called the Obama administration response on Benghazi “insulting.”  Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) accused the Obama administration of a cover-up on Benghazi.

Yet all three of these senators are working with their democratic colleagues on immigration.  To appease their base, these Republican leaders must demonstrate that they are not allied with the president.  The scandals give them the opportunity to show that they are anti-Obama and pro-reform.

RELATED: Judge: Joe Arpaio’s office profiled Latinos

In the face of bipartisan support, the anti-reform movement has weakened.  An immigration report by the conservative Heritage Foundation imploded after its methodology was widely questioned and one of its authors was linked to racist remarks about Hispanic immigrants.  Americans for Legal Immigration (ALIPAC) organized a “national day of protest” against immigration reform on Tuesday, but few people showed up to their rallies.  In Washington State, one event drew just five protestors.

Meanwhile, a growing number of conservatives favor reform.  The right-leaning American Action Fund recently released a letter signed by over 100 conservative economists in support of immigration reform.

Yes, there is a downside to the scandals.  They’re eroding trust in government, at a time when the Obama administration needs to convince the public that it can secure the border.  And this honeymoon phase of immigration reform will not last forever.  Soon the “Gang of Eight” plan will be up for a full Senate vote, and it will face greater scrutiny.  Still, we are closer than ever to overhauling our immigration system, and polls consistently show that the public supports reform that includes a path to citizenship.

Every scandal has a silver lining.  The woes of the Obama administration have been a boon to progress on immigration reform – and that’s worth talking about.

RELATED: A veteran remembers his Memorial Day last year in Afghanistan

Raul A. Reyes is an attorney and member of the USA Today Board of Contributors.

Instead, the hidden hand of the Gang of Eight reached out and rejected her attempt to create an immigration preference for close relatives of citizens with an extreme hardship – the same force that had already derailed dozens of other proposals deemed to violate the delicate trade-offs made by the bill’s authors.

The gang – the four Republicans and four Democrats who forged the plan — held together “amazingly well under the circumstances,” said one member of the Judiciary Committee who was not part of the group. “It’s a very complex bill,” added Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.

The legislation that now goes to the Senate floor creates a 13-year road to citizenship for the estimated 11.5 million immigrants living in the United States unlawfully, establishes a new program to allow low-skilled workers into the country and sharply expands the number of visas for highly skilled workers.

It also mandates a costly new effort to secure U.S. borders against future illegal crossings and remakes the existing system for legal immigration.

RELATED: A veteran remembers his Memorial Day last year in Afghanistan

Beneath the surface lie dozens of difficult political bargains meant to balance the interests of members of the self-appointed Gang of Eight and various constituencies now welded into a coalition for the bill.

Fixing the precise standards for certifying that the U.S.-Mexican border is secure enough to permit other features of the bill to take effect was one such bargain. Setting the requirements, and rights, for those illegally in the country who will apply for “registered provisional immigrant status” was another.

Only four of the eight senators, two from each political party, are on the Judiciary Committee, but aides to all met privately in advance to review roughly 300 proposed amendments. Officials said there were few disagreements among the staff about which would have violated the basic bipartisan agreement and thus needed to be fended off at all costs.

The lawmakers themselves discussed a small number in meetings held either in the office of Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., or John McCain, R-Ariz.

Even though immigration legislation is a top priority for President Barack Obama, the White House was held at arms’ length. Administration officials were consulted about the feasibility of quickly establishing a nationwide biometric system to track immigrants, for example, but were not invited to the meetings.

It was only by accident that the public might have learned of the gang’s power.

Speaking into a microphone that he evidently did not realize would pick up his voice, Schumer asked an aide during one vote, “Do our Republicans have a pass on this one?”

In fact, for days, the two GOP Gang of Eight members on the committee, Sens. Jeff Flake of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, wound up opposing changes they might otherwise have supported – far more often than was the case with the Democrats, Schumer and Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois.

Among them were numerous attempts by other Republicans to toughen border security requirements before legalization can begin or to otherwise make provisional legal status harder to obtain.

RELATED: House immigration group solves key dispute

Still other proposals were reshaped to meet the conditions of the Gang of Eight, including one by Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont and John Cornyn of Texas, one the Democratic committee chairman, the other the Senate’s second-ranking Republican.

They wanted to change a provision providing $1.5 billion to deploy “additional fencing in high-risk border sectors,” proposing instead that the money go to “fencing, infrastructure and technology.” Officials said that ran afoul of the wishes of Sen. Marco Rubio, a member of the Gang of Eight, who had made construction of the fence a priority.

In the end, a compromise emerged, with $1 billion to be spent exclusively on fencing and $500 million available for that purpose or other infrastructure or technology.

In addition to Rubio, the gang members not on the Judiciary Committee are McCain and Democratic Sens. Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado.

The knowledge that the Gang of Eight would object caused some proposals to wither without a vote.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., prepared two gun-related amendments, but he had only one of them debated and withdrew it without a vote he was certain to lose.

On the other hand, amendments that the Gang of Eight decided didn’t threaten their measure or might strengthen it rose or fell based on other factors. The phasing in of the biometric system, a Republican suggestion, was a key one.

Hirono deferred on several of her proposals but chose a different course on a proposal to let U.S. citizens suffering from extreme hardship petition for a sibling or adult married child to immigrate.

“This is a tiny change and would be utilized only in the most sympathetic cases,” she said. She noted that as drafted, the legislation eliminated an existing preference for siblings eager to follow family members to the United States, a category that historically has tended to benefit immigrants from Asian nations.

RELATED: 5 things to know about where immigration reform is right now

“I understand that my amendment is in conflict with the agreement that the Gang of Eight reached on this bill,” she said, adding, “If they were not part of the Gang of Eight, I believe they would support this limited amendment.”

In the debate that followed, two non-gang Democrats on the committee, Sens. Al Franken of Minnesota and Chris Coons of Deleware, said they would support Hirono.

But Graham said an issue of overriding importance to him had been the bill’s establishment of a new system for legal immigration. “What I’m trying to do is have a family component within a merit-based immigration system, not turn immigration into chain migration family-based immigration…. And I will continue to insist on that for my participation,” he added.

Schumer and Durbin quickly closed ranks, saying they would reluctantly oppose Hirono’s proposal.

In a gesture to Graham and Flake, Durbin said the two Republicans had “stood by the agreement when it wasn’t easy politically. I feel duty-bound to do the same thing at this moment.”

Graham said he understood the vote was tough for Democrats. “Sen. Flake and I have been voting for six days” against proposals they might otherwise have favored, “so glad to have you on board,” he said.

Laughter filled the committee room.

Moments later, Hirono’s amendment was rejected 11-7, another in an unbroken series of victories for the Gang of Eight.

In a column entitled “When did we vote to become Mexico?,” Coulter says the recent talk of scandals for the Obama administration is just a distraction from Senators Marco Rubio, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham and John McCain “working feverishly to turn the country into Mexico.”

NBC Latino reached out to Coulter for comment on her thoughts on Latino immigrants and did not receive a response.

In the piece she says she prefers the way things used to be, when European immigrants weren’t outnumbered by Latinos.

RELATED: Pennsylvania governor: We can’t find Latinos to work for us

“For decades, Mexicans have been about 30 percent of all legal immigrants to the United States, while only a smidgen more than 1 percent come from Great Britain,” she says. “Is that fair? Granted, their food is better, but why is it the norm is to have nearly 30 times as many Mexican as British immigrants?”

Coulter questioned the need for poor Latin Americans immigrants who don’t have the tech background she says is needed for our current economy.

“Why can’t the country be more or less the ethnic composition it always was?” she said. “The 50-1 Latin American-to-European ratio isn’t a natural phenomenon that might result from, say, Europeans losing interest in coming here and poor Latin Americans providing some unique skill desperately needed in our modern, technology-based economy.”

Coulter referenced the Boston Marathon bombing as well.

“The reason a country’s average immigrant matters is that the losers never go home – they go on welfare,” she says. “Maybe if they had to work, immigrants wouldn’t have as much time to build bombs.”

Many online and on Twitter were shocked by Coulter’s words.

Ann Coulter says there are too many Latinos- I think there are too many people spouting hateful things like her.huff.to/13POIx6

— Andrea Martinez (@andreanoricel) May 24, 2013

“She is obviously playing to a very narrow base that still believes that being Latino in the United States will never be good for this country,” said Julio Ricardo Varela, the founder of Latino Rebels and an NBC Latino contributor. “It is beyond sad. This country needs less Ann Coulters.”

RELATED: Opinion: Where is the outrage about the police beating death of David Silva?

But the already drawn out process will only take more twists and turns before the possibility of eventual passage and there are important things to know about where comprehensive immigration reform stands right now.

The Senate Will Pass the Immigration Bill — Probably

Many have taken it as a foregone conclusion that the Senate will quickly pass the immigration bill now that the Senate Judiciary Committee has approved it, but Senator Landrieu, who chairs the Senate Small Business Committee, said not so fast.

“At some point, you’ve got to close the deal but we’re not anywhere near closing that deal. We’ve got to go through a process on the floor,” Landrieu said to Reuters.

Sylvia Manzano, a political scientist with polling firm Latino Decisions, says the bill will pass with more than 60 out of 100 votes, so better than along party lines. “Senators are responsive to a more moderate public, while members of the House have much more political latitude to be contrary,” she says.

The House May Take A Piecemeal Approach

While senator and “Gang of 8″ member Chuck Schumer  has said a piecemeal approach to immigration reform would be inadequate, the idea of passing smaller bills and leaving contentious parts of reform, like a pathway to citizenship, off the table for now appeals to many House members.

“Congressman Goodlatte has introduced and moved small bills,” says Angela Kelley, of the center-left Center for American Progress. “They may just move pieces of immigration reform, especially on the border enforcement part.”

Manzano says while this may anger some, it makes sense for many House members.

“They may say we will pass a DREAM Act but we’re not going to do this other stuff,” she says.

After Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor released a statement saying the House will move forward with its own version of immigration reform, Kelley says it’s because the House immigration negotiators have been struggling to come to bipartisan consensus.

“The House is in flux, the House Gang of 8,” she says. “It’s like a Taylor Swift song — they make up, they break up, but they’re clearly trying to overcome hurdles.”

RELATED: Mixed-status families, DREAMers tell Obama their personal immigration stories

Health Care for Undocumented Immigrants is a Major Sticking Point in the House

The comments from Rep. Raul Labrador, a member of the House Gang of 8 were notable for their intensity.

“What might be the story at the end of this year, at the end of this session, is that Obamacare killed immigration reform,” Labrador said Wednesday. At issue is whether undocumented immigrants on a pathway to citizenship would be eligible for health care subsidies from the affordable care act. House Republicans are vehemently against the idea and proposed language that Rep. Xavier Becerra, also a House immigration negotiator, said he could not support. 

Kelley says that like the high-profile issue of immigration benefits for same-sex partners, which didn’t make it into the Senate bill, health care issues are immensely important, but not something that will get enough support if it would stop comprehensive immigration reform. “We’re talking about human beings who get sick or get hit by buses,” she says. “But in the immigration debate, as much as I want to, we can’t take on all the existing challenges.”

Manzano says the mere existence of the debate creates a successful stereotype.

“It’s presumptuous that these people would not get health care from employers,” she says. “It’s a successful stereotype that all of these undocumented immigrants are going to be a huge burden.”

She says the debate is grounded in party politics.

“It’s more of a political tool for Republicans,” she says. “If they use the magic word Obamacare — as a party, you’re supposed to vote no.”

Differences Will Have to be Settled in Conference Committees

The Senate will do much of their work before the July 4 recess, which means that by July the House leadership will have clarity on how its caucus is reacting to what has been drawn up by the Senate, Kelley says.

That’s when conference committees, made up of Senate and House members would come together to “look at the totality of legislation before them,” she says.

“We know more about conference committees from civic lessons because it hasn’t happened all that often,” Kelley adds. “Both chambers will have to dust off government books to figure out how to do that.”

Final Immigration Reform Timetable: End of Summer? Fall?

In an exclusive interview with Telemundo in March, President Obama said immigration reform should get done by the end of summer. But Kelley says it doesn’t look likely with an August recess and conference committees likely. She says a much more likely target is sometime in the Fall and while she says immigration reform will happen, the timing won’t necessarily be music to the ears of advocates who wants passage as soon as possible.

“It will definitely get done before the end of 2013,” she says.

RELATED: iMarch for immigration reform launches with high-profile backers and social media prodding

Corbett has received criticism after comments he made last week made it onto YouTube.

He was asked by a moderator at the Philadelphia forum hosted by the Spanish-language newspaper Al Dia if he has any staff members that are Latino.

“No, we do not have any staff members in there,” he said. “If you can find us one, please let me know.” The moderator responded, ”I am sure that there are Latinos that…” before being cut off.

“Do any of you want to come to Harrisburg? See?” Corbett remarked.

Governor Tom Corbett’s spokesman, Kevin Harley, released a statement today regarding the governor’s comments, claiming this was the second time Think Progress, a liberal blog, took the governor’s statements out of context, adding:

“This is just another attempt by a liberal blog in Washington D.C. to malign the governor by taking comments out of context made during an hour-long interview with ‘Al Dia’ newspaper, based in Philadelphia.’’

On social media, some were surprised by the governor’s interview.

Wheres his Binders Full of Latinos “@tusk81: Corbett on no Latinos on staff: “If you can find us 1, pls let me know” thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/…”

— Omeed Firouzi (@OmeedFirouzi) May 22, 2013

Wow. RT @tusk81: PA Governor Corbett on why he has no Latinos on staff: “If you can find us one, pls let me know.” thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/…

— Latino Policy Forum (@latinopolicy) May 22, 2013

In response, the governor’s spokesperson pointed out in a statement sent to NBCLatino, “the facts are that Corbett has appointed numerous Latino-Hispanics in his administration cabinet, including Dr. Eli Avila, who served as Secretary of the Department of Health, as well as boards and commissions.”

When Hispanic Heritage Month began in 2012, Corbett said, “I commend the many social and economic contributions of Latino-Hispanics in our state and celebrate the rich and diverse culture of Pennsylvania’s fasting growing minority group,” noting that Pennsylvania’s 800,000 Latino residents represent approximately 6.8 percent of the overall population, Think Progress reports.

“It’s anybody’s guess to what’s going to happen in terms of sequence,” says Ricardo Ramirez, professor of political science at Notre Dame University. “House Republicans will have their own bill, the question is, is there enough interest in the Senate bill?”

Ramirez says the Senate bill going through the House will be a tall order. He says many Republicans will have to embrace the strategy of someone like former vice presidential nominee Rep. Paul Ryan, whose district isn’t impacted by immigration but who could face opposition if he were to represent Republicans again in a future primary election. Despite this, Ryan has come out in support of immigration reform.

There is also the issue of whether the Senate bill has any chance in the House at all after Rep. John Carter (R-Texas), who is among the eight immigration negotiators in the chamber, called the legislation “dead on arrival.”

Stanford University professor and Latino Decisions principal Gary Segura says the Senate bill still has life.

“It’s not the case that its dead on arrival,” he says. “A bipartisan House framework has been negotiated. The truth is both bills will be very similar,” he added, admitting that there will be fights and conference committees created to solve disputes between both bodies.

RELATED: Senate committee votes “yes” on comprehensive immigration reform, on to Senate floor

Segura says the House will be looking to define the path to citizenship and the accelerated Dreamer timetable, low-skilled guest worker policies, high-skilled worker rules, as well as e-verify employer enforcement and border security. All of these aspects are part of the Senate legislation he says, and the details will be haggled over.

Segura says the true obstacle to immigration reform in the House would have been the Hastert rule, which says no piece of legislation will be brought to the floor that does not command a majority of the majority.

“Boehner has abandoned it and under the current House majority the path to citizenship would not command the majority of Republican votes,” he says. “He’s violated it on a number of different occasions, so the sanctity of that position is nowhere near what it once was.”

An issue dividing the House was brought up by Democratic leadership on Monday, who expressed concern about language in a proposal meant to ensure that the government doesn’t pay for the health care of the 11 million undocumented immigrants on the path to citizenship.

“Folks in the Senate will soften on some of the language,” Notre Dame’s Ramirez says. “They may be OK with a waiting period regarding health care, but on the whole they will not be OK with ‘unless you are a full legal resident you won’t get health care.’ It would weaken some aspects of Obamacare and once you start excluding some people, it leaves open the possibility of excluding others.”

Segura says the motivations for a pivot on health care concerns are clear.

“It’s about allowing the immigration issue to get tied up in the Obamacare obsession on the GOP side of the aisle,” he says, adding that Democrats will likely lose on undocumented immigrants getting health care subsidies.

Both agree that passing comprehensive immigration reform through the house will require some cajoling by Republicans in favor of the legislation of GOP members who are on the fence. “It will be about to what extent Republicans lean on other Republicans, and Senators influence House members,” Ramirez says.

“You don’t have to move many, you just have to move enough that Boehner can bring the bill to the floor without facing revolution,” Segura adds.

RELATED: Mixed-status families, DREAMers tell Obama their personal immigration stories