Posted on 11/14/2014 8:02:21 AM PST by Kaslin
resident Obama is expected to act in the next few days to grant legal status to millions of illegal immigrants, fulfilling a promise he made before the election. Giving legal status to people who have lived and worked in the United States for a decade or more, paid taxes, kept out of trouble, contributed to their local economies, and raised children who are American citizens is the right and moral thing to do. But the right thing to do is not necessarily legal when it means bypassing Congress -- and Obama's decision has as much to do with politics as it does morality.
A majority of Americans favor legalizing undocumented immigrants who fit the profile described above, including a majority of Republicans in most polls taken on the issue over the past decade. Nonetheless, congressional efforts to pass legislation to accomplish this have been stymied by intense lobbying from anti-immigrant groups, with help from ratings-driven conservative media who rile up segments of the Republican base to make what is a nonissue for most voters into a major issue in some recent campaigns. It is a sad state of affairs, but it is one that cannot be fixed with a stroke of the president's pen.
In 1986, Congress passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which granted amnesty to some three million illegal immigrants present in the U.S. as of January 1, 1982. The law also created a bureaucratic nightmare of government overreach in the hopes of stemming future flows of illegal immigration.
Instead of adopting sensible market-based measures to increase the number of persons admitted legally to the U.S. and to create legal avenues for needed workers to migrate here, the law penalized employers for hiring undocumented workers, which did nothing to slow illegal migration. Worse, it made all employers -- including individuals who hire someone to clean their home, babysit their children or cut their grass -- into quasi-enforcement agents who must verify legal status by inspecting birth certificates, driver's licenses, Social Security cards and other documents and maintain copies of the documents for years.
It's a terrible law -- and one that is routinely flouted by ordinary Americans and that creates intrusive federal interference in the employment process for businesses. Nonetheless, it remains the law of the land. The president may drag his feet on enforcing its provisions -- though Obama's record of deporting more illegal immigrants than any president in U.S. history suggests he's not as lax as his GOP critics suggest -- but he cannot willy-nilly rewrite it on his own.
The president knows this. He's stated so numerous times. "If, in fact, I could solve all these problems without passing laws in Congress, then I would do so. But we're also a nation of laws," he said in 2013. So why is he ignoring his own understanding of his constitutional powers now?
My bet is that he hopes to goad Republicans into the kind of nasty rhetoric that dominated the Republican primaries in 2012 in hopes they'll once again alienate Hispanic voters. The GOP did much better than expected with Hispanics who voted in the midterm elections, especially in state races. Texas Gov.-elect Greg Abbott won 43 percent of the Hispanic vote and Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback won 47 percent. If Republicans can do this well in 2016, the White House will be winnable. But if they start talking about deportation, even self-deportation as Mitt Romney did, their path to victory is much narrower.
The status quo -- 11 million persons living in the shadows -- is inhumane and unproductive and undermines the rule of law. Something must be done. Those who oppose legalization ought to be put to the test. Do they want to see 11 million men, women and children rounded up, put in detention and sent "home"?
Some might say yes, until they realized the devastating toll it would take in their own communities: houses and apartments suddenly vacant; cars and other consumer goods unsold; crops rotting in the fields; a hike in the cost of meat, fruit, vegetables and just about everything else; mothers who have to leave their jobs for want of someone to care for their children. The effect of eliminating 11 million people from our economy would be the equivalent of wiping out all of New York and Los Angeles.
But if the president is cynical, the Republicans have hardly shown themselves to be profiles in courage. The American people deserve better from both parties. The president shouldn't go it alone -- but the Republicans must step up and do the right thing by enacting legislation.
I disagree with that foundational presumption.
Her name says it all. It is called “La Raza” for nothing.
You disagree, as do I, because there is no logic behind her completely subjective assertion.
She’s a racist, reconquista b****.
If Mexicans where poor white people that voted conservative, there would be a wall by now.
Tell me why the white republican voters, implied by this article, who would be susceptible to what Chavez calls ‘nasty rhetoric’ be any more racist for not welcoming millions of hispanic illegal immigrants than Chavez herself is for wanting them welcomed?
Skin tone politics makes no sense at all. Lowest form of political shenanigans.
Typical RINO; there's nothing legal about what Zero is doing.
Ah, the best friend of illegal immigrants shilling for them again. Go away, Linda.
Obama has never cared about politics.
He cares only about political power.
80% of the “about to be legal” immigrants will vote for the Democrat Party.
And the GOP leadership will do nothing serious to stop him because the GOP leadership, which we just reelected, wants Amnesty, too!
I am a naturalized citizen.I registered 1n December 1979 for the Republican Party. IO have never voted for a democrat and never will. President Reagan was the first president I voted for
That makes you part of the 20% of current immigrants who support the same principles and same cultural philosophy I support.
Unfortunately, you also have an incurable blindness to the political math.
The other 80% of immigrants support principles and a cultural philosophy that both of us reject.
Barack Obama would have lost California, Florida, Colorado, and Virginia - in other words, he would have lost the 2012 election - without the votes of naturalized immigrants.
I am completely astounded that you don't care about that.
Great point. We hear so many lies about how Latin American immigrants are “natural conservatives.” If that were true, then the Democrats would have built a wall to keep them out!
I’ve been trying to pick out the stupidest and most laughable of Linda “La Raza” Chavez’s arguments. I think it’s the one where we’re supposed to feel so sad about what those underprivileged, oppressed rich white liberals will have to go through if amnesty isn’t passed. Why, Mr. and Mrs. Parkington won’t be able to hire Juanita from Guatemala as their nanny for $5 an hour cash under the table! They’ll have to hire native-born American Jennifer and pay her a fair wage! Oh, the horror!
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.