S. 744 was a kick-a$$ bill, passed in 2013 in the Senate 68-32 in grand (and very rare) bi-partisan fashion. The increase in funding to the Border Patrol, technology and the Border Fence was massive. Yes, it had DREAM Act provisions and paths to citizenship, but it actually required the border to be more secure before any of those provisions kicked in. It had provisions for farm workers, families, codified the use of E-Verify and much, much more.
Why did it die in the House?
Ooooo, pick me, pick me!!
What's the big deal? Being that Obama is the first President ever to be "frustrated with Congress, he should be able to write any new laws he feels like. Just invoke the "frustrated with Congress" clause in the Constitution, and presto! I think it's great.
I think he should pass a law against being snarky and overly dramatic in online chat rooms.
I agree. Having to pass an intelligence exam to post in chat rooms is impractical and probably unconstitutional.
[He simply cannot. He is calling it prosecutorial discretion because even he knows he cannot but everyone here supporting him is basically being honest and saying the truth which is that enacting his own legislation is EXACTLY what he is doing and it is totally unconstitutional. And it sets a terrible precedent. It doesn't matter WHAT the substance of the thing he is doing is. You are basically supporting dictatorship.
Wasn't the precedent already set when Reagan did the same exact thing? Was it unconstitutional and a dictatorship when both Reagan and Bush #1 did the exact same thing? Or is it only unconstitutional because it's Obama doing the same thing? I just love when the right comes out with all the massive outrage calling things unconstitutional when their own heros did the exact same thing. Hypocrisy at its finest! If Obama is a dictator and a criminal for doing this, does that make Reagan and Bush #1 dictators and criminals too?
quote:
Didn't Congress have ample time to pass a bill and they failed?So basically the Congress has to pass any bill a President wants, or else?
Yes. Or else he will use his executive powers that are within his Constitutional right.
My God. It is his constitutional right to enact legislation himself when Congress won't. We really are on the road to perdition.
He's not "enacting legislation". He is acting within his authority as the chief executive of the United States. Something that all presidents do, and several have done specifically with respect to immigration when congress wouldn't.
http://www.businessinsider.com/reagan-and-bush-made-immigration-executive-orders-2014-11
Exactly. Why those on the other side act as if this is the first time time a president has done EA's baffles me.
If you are serious about the Constitution then you know that YES Congress can pass a law over the president's veto with 2/3 majority vote
Yes, I know. I said exactly that.
but NO the president CANNOT pass legislation if Congress refuses to or fails to for any reason. He simply cannot.
I agree he cannot pass legislation, by definition. And that is not what he is doing. He is issuing an executive order...something which presidents have done with respect to immigration 39 times since 1956. This one is not even close to the most wide-reaching such order with respect to immigration (that would be Bush 41).
Side note: if you care to look it up, you'll see that Obama is issuing executive orders at a lower annual rate than ANY president since Grover Cleveland (who left office in 1897).
And it sets a terrible precedent.
He is not setting precedent, it already exists.
You are basically supporting dictatorship.
Ridiculous. Chicken Little would be proud.
Great responses & rebuttal. Well written and clearly stated. I enjoyed reading your post.
Outrage + Internet = Unconstitutional
I think this equation should be taught in every high school civics class.
So the President has now enacted his solution to reforming immigration. Great!
He should be amenable now to cooperate with the new Senate and House when they send him a bill that focuses solely on border security.
Right? He has taken the action to get what he wants, claims he wants to work with Congress, so its time to prove it.
Congress should send him a border security bill and see if he signs it.
[Edited on 11/21/2014 by Fujirich]
I don't understand why there would be any controversy. The only ones who believe he is breaking the law are his Republican foes. All the research I've seen says he is acting within the laws of the Constitution. Didn't Congress have ample time to pass a bill and they failed? If they fail to do their job, why wouldn't he use executive action, especially if the Constitution permits him to do it?
Furthermore, the reform seems to play both sides of the aisle: one one hand he provides an easier path to citizenship for certain law-abiding, family-oriented illegals if they fit the criteria, while at the same time earning federal tax revenue from their back taxes. One the other hand, the dangerous illegals that don't contribute will be targeted and deported. And he's creating tougher border security and tougher deportation laws going forward for anyone who tries to enter, no matter what the criteria.
Seems fair and balanced to me.
They had more than ample time to pass a bill, or re-write one. The bill now that they so vehemently object to,
"It does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive -- only Congress can do that. All we're saying is we're not going to deport you."
Yet you can already see the partisan posse roundin' up their boys to defeat anything the President tries to do.
Getting back to talking to the adults on here, I think that the GOP controlled Congress will now try to create a bill that would appeal to Obama and the Dems. I believe that was the point of today's address, to get Congress moving.
I don't think the Republicans want to play fair, they could have produced an alternative to the bill that was presented last year, but they didn't, they just dug their heels in and refused to even allow a vote to be taken on it.
I didn't listen to his speech, but I'll wager very little was directed at hiring more Border Patrol agents, or punishing those who hire people here Illegally.
I put up a link to the video and a link to the text,
http://us.cnn.com/2014/11/20/politics/obama-immigration-speech-transcript/?
cid=ob_articlesidebarall&iref=obnetwork
"in the last six years illegal border crossings have been cut in half", and if they would have passed the bill that came up to be voted on last year, that would have doubled the number of Border Patrol agents, which would reduce it even more. The Republicans would not allow the vote, nor offer an alternative bill for consideration. Let's hope tey do better now.
Here is something China is doing regarding immigration issues with the US. They buy visas for their workers, but they do it as an investment so the workers will stay here and create jobs and business opportunities.
Congress should send him a border security bill and see if he signs it.]
Yeah, they should. Oh, wait...
S. 744 was a kick-a$$ bill, passed in 2013 in the Senate 68-32 in grand (and very rare) bi-partisan fashion. The increase in funding to the Border Patrol, technology and the Border Fence was massive. Yes, it had DREAM Act provisions and paths to citizenship, but it actually required the border to be more secure before any of those provisions kicked in. It had provisions for farm workers, families, codified the use of E-Verify and much, much more.
Why did it die in the House?
And I am still wondering if anyone can tell me what success looks like for securing the border.
[Edited on 11/22/2014 by gondicar]
So the President has now enacted his solution to reforming immigration. Great!
His "solution"? More chicken little BS. Great!
Getting back to talking to the adults on here, I think that the GOP controlled Congress will now try to create a bill that would appeal to Obama and the Dems. I believe that was the point of today's address, to get Congress moving.
I don't think the Republicans want to play fair, they could have produced an alternative to the bill that was presented last year, but they didn't, they just dug their heels in and refused to even allow a vote to be taken on it.
I'm guessing it would probably have passed with enough R's crossing party lines to support it. Boehner was probably afraid of this and therefore never presented the opportunity. He also has major problems with factions within his caucus of supporting him versus testing him. We saw plenty of this when debt negotiations were going on & the shutdown of the government facilitated by the leadership of Ted Cruz. Cruz seemed to have more influence over the House GOP than did Boehner.
What's the big deal? Being that Obama is the first President ever to be "frustrated with Congress, he should be able to write any new laws he feels like. Just invoke the "frustrated with Congress" clause in the Constitution, and presto! I think it's great.
I think he should pass a law against being snarky and overly dramatic in online chat rooms.
Good one. I laughed.
If the best folks can come up with is that other Presidents have done it too, that's unfortunate. Aren't we supposed to learn from mistakes and try not to repeat them? It's clear the steps Reagan and elder Bush took didn't fix anything, because here we are. Why not use the benefits of hindsight to make better decisions today, instead of an excuse to make another stupid decision?
[Edited on 11/22/2014 by alloak41]
I don't know, it was kind of fun to see Boehner whine...............
If the best folks can come up with is that other Presidents have done it too, that's unfortunate. Aren't we supposed to learn from mistakes and try not to repeat them? It's clear the steps Reagan and elder Bush took didn't fix anything, because here we are. Why not use the benefits of hindsight to make better decisions today, instead of an excuse to make another stupid decision?
People are claiming this is an unprecedented move, so precedents have been shown. Glad you are now agreeing that it is not unprecedented. As for being a stupid decision, that is a legitimate debate.
And I am still wondering if anyone can tell me what success looks like for securing the border.
Thanks goodness Sarah Pailin has weighed in to offer her insightful advice...
“If I were Obama I’d put all 11 million of these folks on boats and send them back to Mexico,” she opined. “The liberal media says it’s impossible to deport that many people. But I say we can do it if we have enough ships.
“Let’s commandeer all the cruise ships, all the fishing vessels and all the yachts those fat cat Obama donors own. And then let’s pack ‘em full of illegals and send these people on a one-way cruise to Mexico City.
“The long voyage back across the Mexican Ocean should give them plenty of time to think about how they shouldn’t be coming here to America and jeopardizing our freedom and prosperity by breaking our laws.”
http://dailycurrant.com/2014/11/20/sarah-palin-send-immigrants-back-across-ocean-to-mexico/
Thanks goodness Sarah Pailin has weighed in to offer her insightful advice...
“If I were Obama I’d put all 11 million of these folks on boats and send them back to Mexico,” she opined. “The liberal media says it’s impossible to deport that many people. But I say we can do it if we have enough ships.
“Let’s commandeer all the cruise ships, all the fishing vessels and all the yachts those fat cat Obama donors own. And then let’s pack ‘em full of illegals and send these people on a one-way cruise to Mexico City.
“The long voyage back across the Mexican Ocean should give them plenty of time to think about how they shouldn’t be coming here to America and jeopardizing our freedom and prosperity by breaking our laws.”
http://dailycurrant.com/2014/11/20/sarah-palin-send-immigrants-back-across-ocean-to-mexico/
Always good to hear from Sister Sarah. The wisdom & intelligence run deep. I continue to pray that somehow she'll run for President. We need someone with her skills.
If the best folks can come up with is that other Presidents have done it too, that's unfortunate. Aren't we supposed to learn from mistakes and try not to repeat them? It's clear the steps Reagan and elder Bush took didn't fix anything, because here we are. Why not use the benefits of hindsight to make better decisions today, instead of an excuse to make another stupid decision?
People are claiming this is an unprecedented move, so precedents have been shown. Glad you are now agreeing that it is not unprecedented. As for being a stupid decision, that is a legitimate debate.
Has nothing to do with whether I agree or not, it's what I'm hearing from Obama supporters far and wide.
The strongest argument against what Obama wants to do come from Obama himself. He's stated in the past a dozen times on tape that he can't do what he just did. I'd like to hear his explanation of why he did a 180 but I doubt we ever will.
Thanks goodness Sarah Pailin has weighed in to offer her insightful advice...
“If I were Obama I’d put all 11 million of these folks on boats and send them back to Mexico,” she opined. “The liberal media says it’s impossible to deport that many people. But I say we can do it if we have enough ships.
“Let’s commandeer all the cruise ships, all the fishing vessels and all the yachts those fat cat Obama donors own. And then let’s pack ‘em full of illegals and send these people on a one-way cruise to Mexico City.
“The long voyage back across the Mexican Ocean should give them plenty of time to think about how they shouldn’t be coming here to America and jeopardizing our freedom and prosperity by breaking our laws.”
http://dailycurrant.com/2014/11/20/sarah-palin-send-immigrants-back-across-ocean-to-mexico/
Always good to hear from Sister Sarah. The wisdom & intelligence run deep. I continue to pray that somehow she'll run for President. We need someone with her skills.
Since you're so much smarter, please explain why it's OK to reward millions of people for refusing to obey the Law.
As I have said many times in other threads the power is in the Presidency not in who controls Congress.
If the best folks can come up with is that other Presidents have done it too, that's unfortunate. Aren't we supposed to learn from mistakes and try not to repeat them? It's clear the steps Reagan and elder Bush took didn't fix anything, because here we are. Why not use the benefits of hindsight to make better decisions today, instead of an excuse to make another stupid decision?
People are claiming this is an unprecedented move, so precedents have been shown. Glad you are now agreeing that it is not unprecedented. As for being a stupid decision, that is a legitimate debate.
Has nothing to do with whether I agree or not, it's what I'm hearing from Obama supporters far and wide.
The strongest argument against what Obama wants to do come from Obama himself. He's stated in the past a dozen times on tape that he can't do what he just did. I'd like to hear his explanation of why he did a 180 but I doubt we ever will.
Well, if you read the articles discussing this, he said he couldn't implement the entire Dream Act on his own. But buy into all the conservative talking points..............
cant wait to see how many Juan Rodriguez and Hector Gonzalezes all use the same electric bill to prove they were here for 5 years.. Only Obama and the democrats think having criminals vouch for themselves is smart policy. Get ready for the next wave of beaners to start streaming across and immediately apply for welfare.
If the best folks can come up with is that other Presidents have done it too, that's unfortunate. Aren't we supposed to learn from mistakes and try not to repeat them? It's clear the steps Reagan and elder Bush took didn't fix anything, because here we are. Why not use the benefits of hindsight to make better decisions today, instead of an excuse to make another stupid decision?
People are claiming this is an unprecedented move, so precedents have been shown. Glad you are now agreeing that it is not unprecedented. As for being a stupid decision, that is a legitimate debate.
Has nothing to do with whether I agree or not, it's what I'm hearing from Obama supporters far and wide.
The strongest argument against what Obama wants to do come from Obama himself. He's stated in the past a dozen times on tape that he can't do what he just did. I'd like to hear his explanation of why he did a 180 but I doubt we ever will.
Well, if you read the articles discussing this, he said he couldn't implement the entire Dream Act on his own. But buy into all the conservative talking points..............
I'm sure as hell not buying into Obama's BS. That's asking to get burned.
Since you're so much smarter, please explain why it's OK to reward millions of people for refusing to obey the Law.
Not all Hispanics see this as a reward. As I mentioned earlier, if you come forward to claim your temporary 3-year amnesty, your status after the expiration date is up in the air, which can create an even larger risk of deportation than if you stayed in the shadows. Furthermore, if Congress, or a Republican President decides to squash the whole thing, all of the illegals who claimed their 3-year amnesty can all be deported, regardless of their criteria. Don't forget, if you come out of the shadows to claim amnesty, our government knows exactly where to find them should they be on the deportation list. This Hispanics I spoke to yesterday believe this is all smoke and mirrors by Obama, as a way to identify and track illegals for future plans of deportation. It is widely accepted among the Hispanic community that Obama has been anti-immigration throughout his administration, despite what his critics believe. Trust me, analyzing laws and policies is largely subjective and based on perception. An American's perception is very different from the perception of an illegal immigrant.
Thanks goodness Sarah Pailin has weighed in to offer her insightful advice...
“If I were Obama I’d put all 11 million of these folks on boats and send them back to Mexico,” she opined. “The liberal media says it’s impossible to deport that many people. But I say we can do it if we have enough ships.
“Let’s commandeer all the cruise ships, all the fishing vessels and all the yachts those fat cat Obama donors own. And then let’s pack ‘em full of illegals and send these people on a one-way cruise to Mexico City.
“The long voyage back across the Mexican Ocean should give them plenty of time to think about how they shouldn’t be coming here to America and jeopardizing our freedom and prosperity by breaking our laws.”
http://dailycurrant.com/2014/11/20/sarah-palin-send-immigrants-back-across-ocean-to-mexico/
Always good to hear from Sister Sarah. The wisdom & intelligence run deep. I continue to pray that somehow she'll run for President. We need someone with her skills.
Since you're so much smarter, please explain why it's OK to reward millions of people for refusing to obey the Law.
Ok, I'll bite.
I certainly don't know all of the best approaches & means to deal with the complexities. But I also don't think & talk in shallow sound bites like Sarah Palin. That's her playbook - no depth & no substance, and it has been since she hit the TV screen & talk circuit. Alloak, do you think think she's a sharp & intelligent woman on political issues? My thought is that there are people on this site who are wiser & smarter than she is.
The immigration situation is at a level where it is moronic to think that they will self deport (see Mitt Romney) or round them up & place them on ships to Mexico (see Palin). We could spend the next 100 years detaining and fighting, but at what cost and at what level of success. We have to deal with the situation at hand and look at bigger picture solutions. Illegals are here, and we can't deny that. But we need to think bigger picture.
It's inevitable whether you like it or not. You & your kind can go kicking & screaming, but just like gay marriage, a forward moving society changes views, and this will happen. The conservatives & GOP will jump on board in one shape or form eventually.
The GOP will realize the bind it is in. Appeal to the base & at the same time alienate immigrants & especially the Hispanic community and a changing and an open minded / sympathetic society. Votes matter & the GOP understands the quandary it is in and will realize it has to move at least a little. Satisfying people like you is not good enough. They will need bigger tent options to win national elections.
Good for business - Many of the businesses in this country depend on immigrant labor. Do you deny this? Just curious how many businesses owned & run by conservatives & GOP types employ immigrants & Hispanics? The US Chamber Of Commerce is behind immigration reform.
So alloak, I've answered your question. Now, I have questions for you.
What do you think we should do to solve this problem?
Do you think the GOP House will deal with comprehensive reform or just be the party that says, "No, No. No"?
Is the GOP answer to take Obama to court or impeach him? You think that's a winner?
Isn't the content of the reform most important?
I would rather he had done nothing. Rewarding Law Breakers is well, Horsesh*t. At least they were living in fear of being deported for wrong doing.
What do you tell the 100's of THOUSANDS, waiting in line to enter LEGALLY?
