Posted on 11/13/2014 9:12:51 AM PST by Kaslin
The words "deportation relief" jumped out at me from Greg Sargent's Washington Post blog posting titled "Get ready for a titanic battle over immigration." Those two words seem so benign compared with "amnesty" -- the preferred usage in the GOP lexicon -- but that is their meaning.
President Barack Obama was dangling a promise to issue an executive order to shield millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation before the end of the summer; the order would be so big, an aide boasted, that Republicans might try to impeach Obama. Then the White House had to revise the promise -- with a new plan to act after the midterm elections. This is a pledge the White House should delay again. As a lame-duck Congress convenes, it would be a big mistake for the president to legalize the presence of millions of undocumented immigrants with the stroke of a pen.
Now the president has to deal with a cold wind come to Washington. The latest Gallup poll shows that a modest 36 percent of voters have a favorable view of the Democratic Party. Republicans enjoy higher numbers -- 42 percent -- for the first time since 2011. It's time to back off. As Obama himself famously said, "elections have consequences."
House Speaker John Boehner told reporters, "I've made clear to the president that if he acts unilaterally on his own outside of his authority, he will poison the well, and there will be no chance for immigration reform moving in this Congress." Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell warned that an executive order would be "like waving a red flag in front of a bull."
Some Democrats are pushing for the president to sign a big order now and seal the party's hold on Latino and Asian voters. An ABC News/Washington Post exit poll found that 64 percent of midterm voters favor a policy to allow employed undocumented immigrants to apply for legal status. So these partisans may think that a White House action would enhance their standing with most voters.
If so, I don't think the good feelings would last long. After the president signed his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals to shield from deportation undocumented immigrants who came here as children, there were 68,000 unaccompanied minors apprehended at the border in fiscal 2014. Then polls showed that 53 percent of Americans wanted the government to speed up deportation of asylum seekers. What happens if the president, by the stroke of a pen, legalizes the presence of millions of undocumented adults? You make something legal, you get more of it. Surge 2.0.
Obama argues that though he prefers to work with Congress, "what we can't do is just keep on waiting." He doesn't have to wait; he can work the issue -- for once.
In two years, there will be a new president, perhaps a Republican. Do Democrats want to have bolstered the argument that presidents may act unilaterally -- and bypass laws passed by Congress -- because they cannot get Congress to play along?
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley warned this summer about an "uber-presidency": "The president's pledge to effectively govern alone is alarming, and what is most alarming is his ability to fulfill that pledge. When a president can govern alone, he can become a government unto himself, which is precisely the danger the Framers sought to avoid."
House Speaker John Boehner told reporters, “I’ve made clear to the president that if he acts unilaterally on his own outside of his authority, he will poison the well, and there will be no chance for immigration reform moving in this Congress.”
Why? If obama acts unilaterally Congress will curl into the fetal position and cry? What does that mean? Why can’t this Republican Congress function whether obama acts or not? Why don’t Republicans already have a plan? What have they been doing?
The Constitution-in-liberals’-minds does *not* “say” that the President cannot decree taxes. Chief Justice John Roberts may be expected to declare the “executive order” to be a tax.
And so convoluted - ignoring the principles of original intent and enumeration of powers - the Supreme Court will continue to back government by executive and “judicial” decrees.
” Why don’t Republicans already have a plan? What have they been doing?”
The answer to your question is setting in a big box under Hairy Reed’s desk. Have you just woken from a 4 year coma?
Actually, Elections to Not Have consequences as evidenced by yesterday’s 7-2 SCOTUS decision to approve Gay Marriage in the State of Kansas.
Obama appointments, G.W. Bush appointment, Clinton appointments, a H.W. Bush appointment and a Reagan appointment all voted for Gay Marriage.
Elections have no consequences except oppress.
I do not think this outcome is a slam dunk.
In fact its counter intuitive. Native born asians and latinos have no reason to want millions more illegals flooding into their communities taking their jobs and utilizing their resources. Unless they're willing to overlook all of the negative consequences simply in order to have more folks in the country who look like them (and not much more in common).
I'm sure there are such racists as there are in any community, but those people likely vote democrat already.
They'll change their tune if there's a Republican President. And they'll change it back the next time there's a rat. HYPOCRISY is the mother's milk of politics.
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.