Editorial: Obama’s disappointing immigration speech

[Karee 4,190]

Exactly as expected, the debate in Washington has ricocheted away from ending Congress’ stalemate on immigration reform and now seems singularly focused on how Republicans can thwart President Barack Obama over the executive order he announced Thursday night. Obama’s unilateral action backfired even before he outlined measures aimed at protecting millions of unauthorized immigrants from deportation.

Both sides are mishandling what should have been an opportunity for real progress on immigration: the Nov. 4 election result, which will put the GOP in control of both houses of Congress. This newspaper stands with Obama and his predecessor, President George W. Bush, in their efforts to pass a workable comprehensive immigration reform package aimed at addressing border security and the status of an estimated 11.7 million unauthorized immigrants in this country.

The stalemate in Congress must end, but animosity over Obama’s executive action virtually guarantees the opposite result. No matter how much we agree with Obama that bold action is necessary to fix the nation’s broken immigration system, provoking a bitter constitutional fight is a formula for failure.

The GOP firestorm includes threats to withhold votes on administration appointees, freezing funds and forcing a government shutdown. Impeachment is back on the table. None of this has anything to do with immigration.

Obama’s order also risks sending a dangerous message to thousands of would-be immigrants in Mexico and Central America. We know from the border crisis this summer that rumors travel quickly, prompting migration surges based on misinformation. Obama’s order could invite yet another surge because of the chance it will be interpreted south of the border as an all-clear signal. Laws enacted by Congress, after vigorous public debate, are the best way to minimize such misunderstandings.

Americans should not allow the shoddy political display in Washington to distract them from the real issues at stake here. Millions of people live in legal limbo in this country. Taxpayers are funding the public education of millions of children, but upon graduation from high school and college, those youths cannot legally work here.

The U.S. economy depends on low-cost immigrant labor to staff restaurants, hotels, farms, slaughterhouses, construction sites and maintenance crews. But employers must go through costly contortions to get around backward, outdated laws that ban them from hiring unauthorized immigrants.

The GOP emphasizes its pro-family stances, yet its approach here favors mass deportations with a blind eye to the devastating effects when migrant families are split apart. While emphasizing the rule of law is important, in most cases, the only law these immigrants are breaking is by being here in the first place — which is exactly what needs reforming.

Yes, Congress absolutely should respond to Obama’s provocation — not with threats and retaliation but by doing him one better. As Obama has said, it’s not the president’s job to rule by edict. The serious defects in our nation’s immigration laws are Congress’ job to fix.

Senate voices of dissent

“I believe his unilateral action, which is unconstitutional and illegal, will deeply harm our prospects for immigration reform. It will be deeply harmful to our nation’s tradition of the rule of law and deeply harmful to the future of our democracy.”

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, reacting to the president’s plan before it was announced Thursday

“If President Obama acts in defiance of the people and imposes his will on the country, Congress will act [in retaliation]. We’re considering a variety of options. But make no mistake. Make no mistake. When the newly elected representatives of the people take their seats, they will act.”

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who will assume the majority leader’s post in January

Source: http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20141120-editorial-obamas-disappointing-immigration-speech.ece

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The GOP emphasizes its pro-family stances, yet its approach here favors mass deportations with a blind eye to the devastating effects when migrant families are split apart. While emphasizing the rule of law is important, in most cases, the only law these immigrants are breaking is by being here in the first place — which is exactly what needs reforming.

Yes, Congress absolutely should respond to Obama’s provocation — not with threats and retaliation but by doing him one better. As Obama has said, it’s not the president’s job to rule by edict. The serious defects in our nation’s immigration laws are Congress’ job to fix.

Right on!

[UncleBeer 244]

One interesting item from the preznit's speech:

And to those Members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better, or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill.

First, what exactly is wrong with "questioning my authority"? If what he's doing is within the confines of the law, there won't be a problem, It's no crime merely asking about his 'legal justifications' for not enforcing existing laws.

Second, there are laws on the books already, which he's sworn to uphold. There's no need to "pass a bill", as there are already plenty of 'em, just waiting to be enforced. If he'd like them changed, it just so happens there's a procedure for that, and it doesn't involve throwing a tantrum, holding the country hostage 'til he gets what he demands, or issuing imperial edicts from on high.

Really, really poorly written speech.

[UncleBeer 244]

Also interesting: On the day of the preznit's amnesty speech, the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel issued a 33 page legal opinion stating in no uncertain terms that the preznit's amnesty stance had no legal founding. How'd this slip past Eric Holder?

The most interesting aspect of the legal advice President Barack Obama got on the immigration executive action he announced Thursday night may be what lawyers told the president he could not or should not do.

A 33-page Justice Department legal opinion made public just hours before Obama spoke concluded that he doesn’t have the legal authority to offer broad deportation relief to parents of so-called Dreamers—people who came to the U.S. illegally as children and won a reprieve from deportation in a program known as DACA that Obama created in 2012.

“As it has been described to us, the proposed deferred action program for parents of DACA recipients would not be a permissible exercise of enforcement discretion,” Justice Department attorney Karl Thompson wrote in the Office of Legal Counsel opinion.

The opinion also reveals, in a footnote, that Justice Department lawyers informally raised concerns about Obama’s initial 2012 DACA program before it was enacted.

Thompson’s legal memo about the new immigration initiatives warns the president against straying into areas untethered to policies or priorities Congress has set through legislation. “The Executive cannot, under the guides of exercising enforcement discretion, attempt to effectively rewrite the laws to match its policy preferences,” Thompson wrote. “An agency’s enforcement decisions should be consonant with, rather than contrary to, the congressional policy underlying the statutes the agency is charged with administering.”

A senior administration official said Thursday lawyers concluded that actions like protection for parents of dreamers were “not legally available” to the president, largely because it would be building one set of executive actions upon another.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The executive order does not grant deportation relief to DACA recipients. It grants relief to parents of children that are either US citizens or lawful permanent residents. DACA recipients are neither. But please don't let the facts get in the way.

Now here’s the thing: We expect people who live in this country to play by the rules. We expect that those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded. So we’re going to offer the following deal: If you’ve been in America for more than five years; if you have children who are American citizens or legal residents; if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes -- you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily without fear of deportation.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Senate voices of dissent

“I believe his unilateral action, which is unconstitutional and illegal, will deeply harm our prospects for immigration reform. It will be deeply harmful to our nation’s tradition of the rule of law and deeply harmful to the future of our democracy.”

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, reacting to the president’s plan before it was announced Thursday

Jonathan Fried, the immigration case worker for Senator Cornyn wouldn't even come to the phone and talk to me. He made the secretary tell me he wouldn't help me until after the case has been pending over a year.

Senator Cornyn don't care either. Just blowing smoke and lying. That's what these politicians do.

[GandD 5,966]

~~A few posts violating Moderation directive removed as well as a few quoting~~

[Janelle2002 3,865]

~~A few posts violating Moderation directive removed as well as a few quoting~~

Huh? Is this a dictatorship? Where are you when someone really wants you? Now when someone has a normal conversation you delete the post?

This is Obama style moderating.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Huh? Is this a dictatorship? Where are you when someone really wants you? Now when someone has a normal conversation you delete the post?

This is Obama style moderating.

Lucky for you you're both black AND female otherwise that right there would have gotten you some time in the VJ gulag right along with you-know-who...

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Lucky for you you're both black AND female otherwise that right there would have gotten you some time in the VJ gulag right along with you-know-who...

So you believe affirmative action just played a part in me not getting a time out?

And I asked a legitimate question. The other day I asked for a picture to be removed because it portrayed black people in a negative light and it was not. But because we were having a normal conversation it was removed. I don't think it is fair.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

So you believe affirmative action just played a part in me not getting a time out?

And I asked a legitimate question. The other day I asked for a picture to be removed because it portrayed black people in a negative light and it was not. But because we were having a normal conversation it was removed. I don't think it is fair.

No, I'm just playing with you. Call me a happy drunk and forgive me.

You should know by now that on VJ, there is absolutely zero rhyme or reason to moderation.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

No, I'm just playing with you. Call me a happy drunk and forgive me.

You should know by now that on VJ, there is absolutely zero rhyme or reason to moderation.

And you didn't pass me any? I was too tired to stop at the store. I'm going to start stocking my house with alcohol. Drown out this stupid process.

They'll delete our conversation.

any minute now....

No, he'll be here... any minute now.....

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

And you didn't pass me any? I was too tired to stop at the store. I'm going to start stocking my house with alcohol. Drown out this stupid process.

They'll delete our conversation.

any minute now....

No, he'll be here... any minute now.....

Come on over!! I have enough for bof' all three of us, LOL.

VJ is becoming so tiresome. I may hafta take up knitting soon.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Come on over!! I have enough for bof' all three of us, LOL.

VJ is becoming so tiresome. I may hafta take up knitting soon.

Hahahahahahaha you are hilarious. You are going to get yourself in trouble one day.

Too bad you are in Alabama. I would have had to take you up on that offer. Too bad they don't have alcohol delivery like they do for pizza.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Hahahahahahaha you are hilarious. You are going to get yourself in trouble one day.

Too bad you are in Alabama. I would have had to take you up on that offer. Too bad they don't have alcohol delivery like they do for pizza.

Sweetie, if they had THAT, I'd never leave home!!

As for trouble, I seem to find my fair share just fine. But it never lasts for long. I'm actually a nice guy at heart, and nice guys finish last...