• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

President Obama to announce executive action on immigration Thursday

So they just shouldn't try?

American said:
I don't know, may House Democrats don't like the policies being considered. Maybe Boehner knew his bills were DOA in the Senate with Senator NO as majority leader.
Click to expand...
 
UPDATE: Eighteen Democrats are going:

UPDATE: Flip-flop of the year? ....snip~

B21Anh_CUAAQUqU.jpg:large
 
How about starting somewhere...anywhere?

MMC said:
How about one that legalizes those here with a Permanent green card, No US Citizenship and No Right to Vote!

The Demos won't like it.....but tell them to man up. Is it about the people or their party's political aspiration? That's how the Repubs should set the argument up with all those That came here legally and followed the Law to gain their status and their Rights.


BREAKING: Amnesty Executive Order Announcement Coming Thursday in Prime Time Address

UPDATE: This could get awkward. JUST IN: Obama has invited senior lawmakers to dinner tonight at the White House to explain his #immigration decision, several aides say.

UPDATE: By the way, the Washington Post editorial board has already advised against this course of action. Oh well.

UPDATE: Republicans will not be attending the White House dinner tonight after all. Confirmed: Obama didn't invite top GOP leaders to attend his #immigration dinner tonight with senior Democrats.....snip~

BREAKING: Amnesty Executive Order Announcement Coming Thursday in Prime Time Address - Daniel Doherty


hmmm.gif
Click to expand...
 
Chaddelamancha said:
How about starting somewhere...anywhere?
Click to expand...


Looks like the Repubs are.



Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) suggests ways congressional Republicans can respond:

If the President announces executive amnesty, the new Senate Majority Leader who takes over in January should announce that the 114th Congress will not confirm a single nominee—executive or judicial—outside of vital national security positions, so long as the illegal amnesty persists.

This is a potent tool given to Congress by the Constitution explicitly to act as a check on executive power. It is a constitutional power of the Majority Leader alone, and it would serve as a significant deterrent to a lawless President. Additionally, the new Congress should exercise the power of the purse by passing individual appropriations bills authorizing critical functions of government and attaching riders to strip the authority from the president to grant amnesty.....snip~
 
The House has had over a year-and-a-half to work on immigration reform since the bi-partisan Sen. Rubio Act was passed.
Don't like it--pass your own Act--then go to Joint Conference--that is the Constitutional way.
And we all know the GOP is the party of the Constitution .
 
MMC said:
Looks like the Repubs are.
Click to expand...
Repubs have no intention of working on immigration reform.
And you know why--there is no consensus in the GOP for saying yes to something/anything on IR.
Just saying no and being obstructionists .
 
That won't be how the American people see it .
American said:
Obama probably figures he has nothing to lose and everything to gain. If the Congress does what McConnell says, Obama will be busy vetoing bills the next two years looking like an obstructionist.
Click to expand...
 
Ridiculous. So, instead of the proposing a response to immigration reform, the congressional republicans are going to respond by not confirming a singe nominee? Why not just propose their own immigration reform? The House has had over a year to response to the senate bill, but their response then was "Nope, not going to consider it."

MMC said:
Looks like the Repubs are.



Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) suggests ways congressional Republicans can respond:

If the President announces executive amnesty, the new Senate Majority Leader who takes over in January should announce that the 114th Congress will not confirm a single nominee—executive or judicial—outside of vital national security positions, so long as the illegal amnesty persists.

This is a potent tool given to Congress by the Constitution explicitly to act as a check on executive power. It is a constitutional power of the Majority Leader alone, and it would serve as a significant deterrent to a lawless President. Additionally, the new Congress should exercise the power of the purse by passing individual appropriations bills authorizing critical functions of government and attaching riders to strip the authority from the president to grant amnesty.....snip~
Click to expand...
 
Repubs wouldn't dare put the Dream Act up for a vote in the impotent House.
They know it would pass.

DEMs better get better at the messaging game and damned quick.
It's all the GOP has on us right now .

Chaddelamancha said:
So they just shouldn't try?
Click to expand...
 
Chaddelamancha said:
So they just shouldn't try?
Click to expand...

No, but let's step back and be a bit honest here...

There was a **** ton that BOTH parts of congress were just basically refusing to actually do. There's supposed to be conference committees for a reason, to hash out differences between the bills passed by both houses...but in multiple cases one side or the other just sat on an issue.

We have gone SIX YEARS into this president's term without substantial action on immigration other than his one other executive action. It strains credability and realistic expectaitons to suggest that he MUST act in the next two months on immigration. There's no significant, realistic, honest reasons why this must be done now as opposed to...say...four months from now.

If he was HONESTLY actually caring about having actual legitimate REFORM to immigration law, not simply changes to "enforcement", he'd not poison the well and continue doing what he's largely done over the past 6 years and left things as it was....and see what happens when a congress is seated that is more likely to actually put forward legislation that can pass both houses.

But this isn't about "getting something done" with immigration...this is about getting done what he wants with immigration. The house didn't roll over and capitulate to his desires when the Democrats were in the Senate, and there's undoubtably no chance that he's going to get what he wants with a Republican house AND senate, so he's now SUDDENLY deeming that he must act before the new congress is set. Why? Because once his executive action happens and things like social security numbers are begun to be handed out to people it becomes an extremely twicky sticky wicket legally speaking to remove such things. Meaning the Republicans, who would be likely to actually finally pass some immigration legislation here in a few months, would be hampered in what they could actually pass.

The "WAHHHHH THE REPUBLICANS DIDN'T PASS IMMIGRATION [that I wanted]" diversion is just that...a diversion. It's meant to disguise the fact that he's expecting people to believe that something he had 2 years of a democratic majority to get passed, and 4 years with half the congress to reach a compromise on, is suddenly extremely important to get done RIGHT NOW and can't possibly wait 4 months :roll:.

According to the SCOTUS, the Presidents power in terms of executive action is at it's absolutely WEAKEST when said action is against the implied or expressed will of Congress. Flat out suggesting he's doing this because Congress is choosing not to actually do anything about Immigration is DIRECTLY SUGGESTING that he's acting in a way that is imcompatible with the implied or expressed will of congress.

Obama was correct, this isn't a dictatorship, and "congress isn't passing the laws I want it to pass on things I think it should pass laws on" isn't a legitimate reason to start pushing executive actions on things where his authority is at its lowest to do so.
 
NIMBY said:
That won't be how the American people see it .
Click to expand...

Sure they will, Obama said his policies were on the ballot....and he lost.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: President Obama to announce executive action on immigration Thursday

A leaked email has stated that Obama will announce executive action on immigration this Thursday. Interesting to see what the exact details of the announcement will be. Expect the right to scream and yell, yadda yadda yadda. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

I think we all should wait and see what it all entails. I for one am not about to get all hyper about it. Now once I know what his executive is, than I may indeed get hyper or maybe not.
 
NIMBY said:
Repubs have no intention of working on immigration reform.
And you know why--there is no consensus in the GOP for saying yes to something/anything on IR.
Just saying no and being obstructionists .
Click to expand...

Oh...Republicans surely do intend to work on immigration reform...they just don't intend to work on it under Obama's terms. Too bad for Obama, eh?
 
Chaddelamancha said:
Ridiculous. So, instead of the proposing a response to immigration reform, the congressional republicans are going to respond by not confirming a singe nominee? Why not just propose their own immigration reform? The House has had over a year to response to the senate bill, but their response then was "Nope, not going to consider it."
Click to expand...


There are several ways to affect BO's Amnesty. Why don't he wait for the Next Congress to get that bill? Whats the Rush all of a sudden?

You must have missed McConnell saying let Congress legislate. Moreover just because the Senate Republicans jumped onto the Bill doesn't mean it will pass the House. There are Tea Party members.

Although.....for some reason. Many didn't notice that Rubio took the hit for his Proposed plan.
 
I get your point here that it doesn't have to happen right away and I don't disagree with that, but as far as I can see, it has been a year and a half since the senate bill was approved and went to the house for a vote. Boehner said they wouldn't vote on it, instead they would come up with their own bill. Where is that bill?

Zyphlin said:
No, but let's step back and be a bit honest here...

There was a **** ton that BOTH parts of congress were just basically refusing to actually do. There's supposed to be conference committees for a reason, to hash out differences between the bills passed by both houses...but in multiple cases one side or the other just sat on an issue.

We have gone SIX YEARS into this president's term without substantial action on immigration other than his one other executive action. It strains credability and realistic expectaitons to suggest that he MUST act in the next two months on immigration. There's no significant, realistic, honest reasons why this must be done now as opposed to...say...four months from now.

If he was HONESTLY actually caring about having actual legitimate REFORM to immigration law, not simply changes to "enforcement", he'd not poison the well and continue doing what he's largely done over the past 6 years and left things as it was....and see what happens when a congress is seated that is more likely to actually put forward legislation that can pass both houses.

But this isn't about "getting something done" with immigration...this is about getting done what he wants with immigration. The house didn't roll over and capitulate to his desires when the Democrats were in the Senate, and there's undoubtably no chance that he's going to get what he wants with a Republican house AND senate, so he's now SUDDENLY deeming that he must act before the new congress is set. Why? Because once his executive action happens and things like social security numbers are begun to be handed out to people it becomes an extremely twicky sticky wicket legally speaking to remove such things. Meaning the Republicans, who would be likely to actually finally pass some immigration legislation here in a few months, would be hampered in what they could actually pass.

The "WAHHHHH THE REPUBLICANS DIDN'T PASS IMMIGRATION [that I wanted]" diversion is just that...a diversion. It's meant to disguise the fact that he's expecting people to believe that something he had 2 years of a democratic majority to get passed, and 4 years with half the congress to reach a compromise on, is suddenly extremely important to get done RIGHT NOW and can't possibly wait 4 months :roll:.

According to the SCOTUS, the Presidents power in terms of executive action is at it's absolutely WEAKEST when said action is against the implied or expressed will of Congress. Flat out suggesting he's doing this because Congress is choosing not to actually do anything about Immigration is DIRECTLY SUGGESTING that he's acting in a way that is imcompatible with the implied or expressed will of congress.

Obama was correct, this isn't a dictatorship, and "congress isn't passing the laws I want it to pass on things I think it should pass laws on" isn't a legitimate reason to start pushing executive actions on things where his authority is at its lowest to do so.
Click to expand...
 
Where's the response bill from the House?

MMC said:
There are several ways to affect BO's Amnesty. Why don't he wait for the Next Congress to get that bill? Whats the Rush all of a sudden?

You must have missed McConnell saying let Congress legislate. Moreover just because the Senate Republicans jumped onto the Bill doesn't mean it will pass the House. There are Tea Party members.

Although.....for some reason. Many didn't notice that Rubio took the hit for his Proposed plan.
Click to expand...
 
NIMBY said:
Repubs have no intention of working on immigration reform.
And you know why--there is no consensus in the GOP for saying yes to something/anything on IR.
Just saying no and being obstructionists .
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean like they did back in Aug when BO threatened to Veto what they were going to send. Saying they made a bad bill worse. But only because they were limiting BO's future dabbling with this issue.
 
So Thursday is when he plans on breaking the law, huh?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: President Obama to announce executive action on immigration Thursday

A leaked email has stated that Obama will announce executive action on immigration this Thursday. Interesting to see what the exact details of the announcement will be. Expect the right to scream and yell, yadda yadda yadda. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Yeah! Shame on the Right for demanding the President of the United States not overstep his authority! Damn law-abiding Right Wingers!
 
Chaddelamancha said:
I get your point here that it doesn't have to happen right away and I don't disagree with that, but as far as I can see, it has been a year and a half since the senate bill was approved and went to the house for a vote. Boehner said they wouldn't vote on it, instead they would come up with their own bill. Where is that bill?
Click to expand...

Well you missed what they tried in August of this year, (the House) when BO's manufactured border crisis took place.



House GOP weighs tough new immigration bills.....


House Republicans pushed legislation on Friday that could clear the way for eventual deportation of more than 500,000 immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as kids and could address the surge of immigrants at the U.S.-Mexico border. After more than a year of inaction on the contentious issue of immigration, House GOP leaders were optimistic about securing tea party and other conservative support for two bills that Republicans can highlight when they return home to voters during Congress' five-week summer break.

The Senate passed a comprehensive immigration bill more than a year ago that would create a pathway for citizenship for the 11.5 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, tighten border security and establish new visa and enforcement programs. The measure has languished in the House despite calls from national Republicans, business groups, religious organizations and labor for lawmakers to act. The revised, $694 million border security bill would provide $35 million for the National Guard and clarify a provision on quickly returning unaccompanied minors from Central America to their home countries. Obama had requested $3.7 billion to handle the tens of thousands flooding into the United States.

To appeal to hard-core immigration foes, Republicans also toughened a companion bill targeting the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which President Barack Obama implemented in 2012 and Republicans blame for the flood of immigrants now. The bill states that the president cannot renew or expand the program, effectively paving the way for deportation of children brought to the U.S. illegally, according to several House Republicans. Even if the House passes the border bill, Obama's request for more money to deal with the crisis will go unanswered. The Senate blocked its version of a border security bill, and there are no plans to work out any compromise before Congress returns in September......snip~

House GOP weighs tough new immigration bills | CNS News
 
Chaddelamancha said:
I get your point here that it doesn't have to happen right away and I don't disagree with that, but as far as I can see, it has been a year and a half since the senate bill was approved and went to the house for a vote. Boehner said they wouldn't vote on it, instead they would come up with their own bill. Where is that bill?
Click to expand...
Apparently they haven't done one yet. But so what. If both houses cant agree on a particular law, then guess what? Nothing happens. There isn't some hidden clause in the back of the Constitution that reads: Should the House and the Senate fail to agree on a particular bill, the President may act in any way he sees fit. The Congress writes the laws, the president is supposed to faithfully execute them. Even Obama has said this over and over. Now he is changing his tune. While you might like what the president is doing, you should be wary of giving a president this type of authority. There will be a republican president someday you know, and I doubt you will be so eager to see him sign executive orders that disregard a democratic congress.
 
Fletch said:
Apparently they haven't done one yet. But so what. If both houses cant agree on a particular law, then guess what? Nothing happens. There isn't some hidden clause in the back of the Constitution that reads: Should the House and the Senate fail to agree on a particular bill, the President may act in any way he sees fit. The Congress writes the laws, the president is supposed to faithfully execute them. Even Obama has said this over and over. Now he is changing his tune. While you might like what the president is doing, you should be wary of giving a president this type of authority. There will be a republican president someday you know, and I doubt you will be so eager to see him sign executive orders that disregard a democratic congress.
Click to expand...

I would prefer that Congress writes the laws. And I don't support any President who acts carte blanche.
 
Paschendale said:
We are really going to have a big fight now in order to stop the government from addressing a national problem. Not even about which solution is best, just to prevent there being a solution at all. How did we go from two parties that have different policy, to one that thinks we should have a functioning government and one that doesn't?




It's not, actually. Those are just the Fox News talking points. The rest of the country recognizes that our borders are huge, understands that people walking north from Mexico accounts for less than half of illegal immigration, and actually just wants to integrate the people who are here. That's the majority opinion. Most Americans don't want to punish anyone. They just want things to work better.
Click to expand...

All of that is false, but the bolded is the biggest whopper. 57% are from Mexico alone, add in another 24% from countries south of that coming through Mexico. And don't try to wiggle out by saying a lot of them are overstayers, the vast majority of those are from south of our border as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom