- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,909
- Reaction score
- 11,003
- Location
- New Jersey
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Yahoo News - via AP said:WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama plans to highlight a positive side of the immigration debate by presiding over an Independence Day citizenship ceremony for service members who signed up to defend the U.S. even though they weren't American citizens. A total of 25 members of the Armed Forces will spend the Fourth of July as American citizens after the deputy secretary for homeland security delivers the oath of allegiance at a White House ceremony on Friday. The group includes 15 active-duty service members from the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, along with two veterans, one reservist and seven spouses, the White House said. They represent 15 countries.
The politically divisive immigration issue is earning renewed attention after the influx of tens of thousands of unaccompanied children from Central America who, under U.S. law, must be sent back across the border to their home countries. That has upset advocates of overhauling U.S. immigration policy who want Obama to allow the children to stay.
At the same time, Obama blames House Republicans for delaying action on an immigration overhaul. A comprehensive measure the Senate passed last year has been blocked by House leaders who also have done little to advance legislative proposals of their own. Obama announced earlier this week that, as a result of lawmakers' inaction, he will pursue non-legislative ways that he can adjust U.S. immigration policy without waiting for Congress to act.
Obama to pitch immigration at citizenship ceremony
The President cannot legally legislate without the cooperation of Congress (both houses). The question becomes why isn't the President attempting to bring the parties together on this issue? Immigration reform is widely accepted in both GOP and Democratic circles as requiring a comprehensive overhaul, yet Congress and the President seem to be caught up in petty "tit for tat" actions such as the Senate holding legislation from being brought to the floor which passed the House, and the House holding legislation passed by the Senate doing the same thing. The President has an opportunity to compromise and work with both, be the adult in the room, but chooses instead to go off on his own without Congress. The SCOTUS has shown that such actions have consequences and may be over turned in the future. By not working with Congress and negotiating a compromise the President furthers the political divide - the question is, to what end?