Posted on 11/07/2014 4:45:42 PM PST by servo1969
President Barack Obama’s promise to roll back parts of the nation’s immigration laws is a constitutional “nuclear threat,” Republican Party chairman Reince Priebus said Friday.
Obama “is just throwing a barrel of kerosene on a fire if he signs an amnesty order,” Priebus told reporters at a Friday breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.
Priebus, the head of the Republican National Committee, also shifted the GOP’s public policy on immigration by downplaying the support for comprehensive immigration reform that it adopted after the 2012 presidential loss.
Obama’s failure to guard the border against Central American migrants this summer, he said, “created a situation that I think may have not existed before that episode that may have galvanized the country,” around the need for improved border security before other immigration issues.
Priebus’ sharp language shows that the GOP is confident it can win the political challenge created by Obama on Wednesday, when he reiterated his September promise to reduce enforcement of immigration laws by December.
“Before the end of the year, we’re going to take whatever lawful actions that I can take that I believe will improve the functioning of our immigration system,” Obama said in his post-election press conference.
Executive action by the White House, Obama said, “should be a spur for [congressional Republicans] to actually try to get something done.”
That something, he said, is an immigration bill that allows companies to hire more foreign professionals and also gives “an opportunity for folks who’ve lived here, in many cases, for a very long time … but aren’t properly documented … [to] get through a process that allows them to get legal.”
“You send me a bill that I can sign, and those executive actions go away,” he challenged the new GOP leaders in Congress.
Several polls show strong opposition to a unilateral executive amnesty.
The executive action would be a rejection of Americans’ Nov. 4 demand for more cooperation in Washington D.C., and create a constitutional crisis by challenging Congress’ authority to write the nation’s laws, Priebus said.
Obama’s threat, Priebus said, “in our mind [is] a nuclear threat to reject the basis of the separation of powers doctrine, to reject Article 1 and 2 [of the Constitution] within the power of the press.”
Obama’s threat is also a rejection of the midterm election results, Priebus said. ”What he’s essentially telling the American people is that he doesn’t give a damn about Republicans and Democrats working together … and to heck with getting along and working together in Washington.”
He’s “just throwing a barrel of kerosene on a fire if he signs an amnesty order,” he said.
Obama’s failure to enforce border protections has also changed the public’s view of the issue, Priebus said.
By failing to guard the border this year against the wave of 130,000 Central American migrants, “I think he’s unified the country and the electorate around one big principle — that we need to secure the border,” Priebus said.
“I think he created a situation that I think may have not existed before that episode that may have galvanized the country,” he said.
“Because of the president’s haphazard political game, that created an environment that will not allow the legislature to move forward unless people can be convinced that border is secure. … we’re talking about border security first,” before
“As to the immigration issue, I think it’s pretty clear — you know, comprehensive immigration reform’ has become a loaded language,” Priebus said. “It means something different to everybody that you ask.”
“Ultimately, immigration reform is a subject that most people in our party agree that we need to tackle,” he said.
Just say NO.
Priebus amnesty plan means 100 years of democrat rule.
His plan can not be undone by the next President.
We don't need "immigration reform," you clueless moron!
Well, yes, we do.
For one thing, illegal entry into the country should be a felony -- instead of a misdemeanor, as it is now classified.
Crush this viper obama now. He must be removed from office.
Exactly. First, its a losing issue to just do nothing. The immigration system, even for those doing it legally, is messed up. There is too much bureaucracy. Second, he's right....it means something different to everyone you talk to. Third, some here want to deport every illegal....and while that would be preferable...its a killer politically. Wanna make sure the dems are in power for the next 40 years? Do that. If that's the hill you (generic you...not you okie) wanna die on...go for it...but know this: YOU WILL DIE THERE. The GOP will because a super minority party if they do that...and that's a fact.
So yes, we need immigration reform. We need to 1) Secure the border first. A clean bill (and we need EVERY bill to be clean. No amendments...no poison pills...no pork) that just addresses border security. 2) Deal with those who have been here a while. Put them at the back of the line...but make it possible. 3) Deport every criminal. Period.
We have to do something...that's what the people want...even if the first step is to enforce the laws on the books. The very first question asked of the new AG when you goes to her hearings is "Will you enforce the laws that are on the books? Do we have your word you will?"
Priebus, No Compromise on Amnesty! Stand tall, we have your
back on this issue.
After all said and written nothing out there to stop him,
There is a practical way to minimize the deportation problem.
First, enforce the employment rules regarding illegal immigration. Second, pass legislation requiring people to prove citizenship (or legal residence) before they can qualify for federal assistance programs.
With those two steps, a massive number of illegals re-cross the river.
The remainder can be dealt with.
Glad you mentioned that....and frankly...I forgot that option in my post. I have long thought that self deportation was the answer. Make employers face incredible fines for employing illegals. Make it not worth the cost of doing business.
I was at Buffalo Wild Wings the other day and while we waited on out table I read the stuff on the wall posted about E-Verify and the work rules. It basically said that even if you are hear illegally its not a reason for you to be fired.
That has to change.
Not the least among legal Hispanics. La Raza, et al is simply not representative of the settled legal Hispanic community. As a group, they're not interested in having their wages undercut by illegals, nor do they support giving any citizenship that they earned - either by following the rules or by virtue of multiple generations born in this country.
A third action would also be advisable: The "anchor baby" interpretation of the 14th Amendment has got to go.
Children borne of parents who are in the U.S. legally should qualify for citizenship, but not those borne of parents here illegally.
Whether this would take an act of Congress or an amendment to the Constitution, I don't know. It's certainly fair game for the Article V movement.
I like the idea of enforcing the laws we currently have. What good are new laws if the existing laws are ignored. It seems to me they would be ignored as well.
I think if zero goes ahead with the executive order it is going to cost them a lot in 2016. If I were a rat I would be nervous and quite possibly outspoken about it.
We will see
If amnesty is “Nuclear” what are the Repubs going to do when it happens? What is their deterrent?
Now that the Republicans control both Hoses, all it takes is a Joint-Resolution of both branches to now give Congress an independent standing to challenge the President’s unilateral “legislative” order and get it fast-tracked to the Supreme Court. This will move like a rocket in the court process since it involves a clear violation of the doctrine of separation of powers. So Priebus needs to shut up or put up.
I don’t really see what Obama is even offering. Only a moron would take obama at his word and assume he wont go ahead and do it anyway even if you made his lawless executive action more lawfully with an act of congress.
Obama is basically telling republicans do it or I will, and some of them are incredibility buying that threat and volunteering to jump off the cliff for Obama.
If nothing else this shows the sheer supitity of said republicans and the naive dept of the Leftist cultural control over the D.C. Area.
If we have learned anything over the last few election cycles is that Obama does not and will not negotiate, it is his way or the highway, and almost all of us prefer the highway.
The legal truth is Obama should be impeached for breaking federal law with lawless excucive orders. Politically we have to push Obama in to making that case for us more clear to the American people.
There is a better way the house needs to break down the bills into individual parts and vote on each of them one by one to put everyone on record.
Naturally amnesty should fail but a law mandating the swift return of runaways to their parents should be put before Obama with the political charge of kidnapping should he refune to enforce it.
Minors are not elegable for immigration without their parents. Keeping them here is kidnapping plain and simple. That fact should be an easy sell
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.