To fight amnesty, say no to a long-term budget deal

According to several reports, President Obama is poised to announce a plan to issue work permits to 4.5 million or more illegal immigrants. This move should throw a major kink into the plan of congressional Republican leaders to pass a long-term budget deal during the lame duck session.

The Republican leadership’s desire for a long-term deal is not surprising. No sensible Republican wants another government shutdown. Moreover, other things being equal, it’s arguably in the Party’s interest (though also arguably not) to clear the decks of budget squabbles in order to enact substantive legislation.

But Obama’s aggressive immigration posture means that unless Republicans are willing to accept amnesty by executive fiat, they should not pass a long-term budget deal.

Why? As Mark Krikorian explains, although Congress cannot cannot stop Obama’s passive abuse of discretion — e.g., exempting the vast majority of illegal aliens from immigration enforcement — it can try to use its “power of the purse” to prevent active abuses — e.g., issuing permits, Social Security cards, and driver’s licenses to illegal aliens — that would be politically irreversible.

Harry Reid will not agree to any funding riders prohibiting Obama from issuing work permits to illegal aliens. But in the next session of Congress, Republicans could pull out the Homeland Security budget (rather than fold it into an omnibus funding bill for the whole government) and attach a rider that prohibits DHS from issuing such permits.

Obama will veto this action. However, when he does, only DHS will be subject to a “shutdown.”

Moreover, says Krikorian, the shutdown will not be harmful. Law enforcement personnel — the Border Patrol, the Secret Service, the Coast Guard, ICE, and the TSA — will continue to perform their duties because they are “essential.” By contrast, the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) — which would be charged with issuing various papers to illegal aliens — might shut down.

Accordingly, Republicans should not agree to a long-term budget deal. Instead, they should approve a short-term Continuing Resolution. By doing so, they will leave the new, Republican-controlled Congress in a position to attempt to undermine Obama’s amensty at the beginning of 2015.

The Democrats will squwak. But if the GOP is willing to keep spending unchanged (for a few months only), the Dems will probably go along in the end. If not, they clearly would be to blame for shutting down the government, and of doing so on behalf of amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Try thinking further inside the [constitutional] box now that Obama is thinking so far outside that box

Look for what Congress can do completely independent of the executive:

Compact clause would let multiple states design unified actions against their common problem given approval by Congress alone. And although I'm doctor, not a lawyer, so not sure, I believe Congress could restrict or regulate judicial oversight over that. I doubt California and a few other lefty strongholds would join such a Compact, but a fair chunk of the country might be helped. Because state participation would be voluntary, and most people won't understand it, this would be easier to sell... to our cowardly leadership.

If they want to floor it and be as bold as Obama they could use an undisputed Congressional power even public school grads recognize. Declare "War" on the problem. This is difficult, because the enemy is non-traditional and requires a careful definition. But to say it is impossible to declare "war" on illegals is an insult to congressional history and imagination; put some Ways and Means staffers on it! Tax law proves they can target ANYTHING.

It would take a fair amount of political willpower to win such a vote, although I'd argue it would take less than Obama's unilateral action it is intended to correct. And many have referred to the illegals as invaders; officially naming them so would receive more than token approval. Alas getting such action through our alleged leadership is less likely than Obama quiting his war on us.

But I can dream further. Congress should use the several appropriate other Article I, Section 8 enumerated powers "to make rules concerning captures," "to make rules for the government and regulation of land and naval forces," "for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union" (i.e. giving the states the authority to execute the laws Obama refuses to execute,) "to establish" a uniform rule of naturalization" (i.e. different than Obama's usurpation of their Article I powers). By carefully setting such rules a "war" on illegals could be a civilized, relatively non-violent affair and the rights of legals, Hispanic or otherwise, could and should be well protected. Note all of this is based completely on Article I, Obama is irrelevant. All that is required of the Executive branch is obedience.

And having Congress declare the agenda this way offers some advantages. With the illegals officially deemed "enemies" their supporters hazard new titles "in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." Government officials, state or federal, knowingly providing welfare, tuition, health care, etc. to illegals would fit a normally hard to fulfill Congressional standard. A standard that is explicitly an exception to the Congressional immunities clause. Only Obama (and Biden?) would be immune. Congress (still alone) might want to tweak the penalties for that, as Article III explicitly allows. "Captured" illegals would be kept in "POW" camps awaiting return to their original homes. There's no bail from POW camps. The POW camps would need to meet Geneva standards, but anything fancier would be by Congressional, not Judicial, decree. Much thought should go into the details before undertaking such a large response. You have to be sure it is worth the political risks and no better option was available.

The RINO's are desperately, desperately trying to reach across the aisle and work with Obola. Obola keeps saving the RINO's from committing suicide with his narcissitic, idiotic actions that even the RINO's can't go along with.

If only Obola had the sense of an amoeba, he'd be so much further along with his plans to destroy America, it's unbelievable.

On ObolaCare, all he had to do was make a couple of concessions and he would have had RINO's scrambling aboard. Where would the GOP be today, if they couldn't be seen as opposing ObolaCare.

Obola's Children's Crusade bringing in tens of thousands of children from Central American radicalized public opinion against "immigration reform", which cost his party dozens of seats. In spite of that, the RINO's still want to do a deal with Obola. But he's giving them the back of his hand to such a degree, that even they, the sniveling weasels they are, can't go along with it.

Now, this is incompetence, destroying the chances of accomplishing your goals out of emotional fits of pique. Some liberals are now suspecting that Obola is a Republican Mole out to destroy their party for decades. Hehe.

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.