Obama defends plan to act on immigration: CBS interview

Hatuey · Nov 10, 2014

"The minute they pass a bill that addresses the problems with immigration reform, I will sign it and it supersedes whatever actions I take," Obama said in the interview.

"And I'm encouraging them to do so ... on parallel track we're going to be implementing an executive action.
"But if in fact a bill gets passed, nobody's going to be happier than me to sign it, because that means it will be permanent rather than temporary."

The ball is now in the Republican court. They don't need a supermajority to pass a bill. Harry Reid's ridiculous stunt a few months ago ensured that. They don't need bipartisan approval. They just need to get a bill passed and I think they should drag Obama through the coals for taking this particular stance. If Republicans pass a bill and it goes against his latest statements, they can show that he wasn't interested in immigration reform. He was interested in his vision of immigration reform being passed. If there are unconstitutional parts, it can be taken to the courts just like Arizona's laws. However, this particular stance is definitely one Obama shouldn't have taken.

Jango · Nov 10, 2014

Hatuey said:
Obama defends plan to act on immigration: CBS interview

The ball is now in the Republican court. They don't need a supermajority to pass a bill. Harry Reid's ridiculous stunt a few months ago ensured that. They don't need bipartisan approval. They just need to get a bill passed and I think they should drag Obama through the coals for taking this particular stance. If Republicans pass a bill and it goes against his latest statements, they can show that he wasn't interested in immigration reform. He was interested in his vision of immigration reform being passed. If there are unconstitutional parts, it can be taken to the courts just like Arizona's laws. However, this particular stance is definitely one Obama shouldn't have taken.

Why? Why does it have to be that way? What you posted sounds like this:

along with this too:

Why can't a great immigration bill be passed by itself? Why must politicalhackery get involved? To score points? Yeah, let's keep perpetuating what isn't working, as partisanship has gridlocked Washington.

Hatuey · Nov 10, 2014

Jango said:
http://24.media.tumblr.com/a54be30fed882808d79fc843a000e6e0/tumblr_mqrof29gM81szj14io1_400.gif[IMG]

Why? Why does it have to be that way? What you posted sounds like this:

[IMG]http://www.senseimarketing.com/Portals/0/images/risk-1.jpg[IMG]

along with this too:

[IMG]http://www.gamevain.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/battleship_board_game.jpeg[IMG]

Why can't a great immigration bill be passed by itself? Why must politicalhackery get involved? To score points? Yeah, let's keep perpetuating what isn't working, as partisanship has gridlocked Washington.[/QUOTE]

I'm arguing that Obama took a defiant stance on this issue, and has opened the door for Republicans to pass a bill he may not like. Do you think that's beyond the possibilities what will happen?

Kal'Stang · Nov 10, 2014

Any immigration bill that is passed had better be solely about strengthening laws against illegal immigration. Otherwise all that we're doing is perpetuating and encouraging more illegal immigration and it will NOT solve the problems that illegal immigration causes. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm sick and tired of our government putting bandaids on problems and kicking them down the road so much that there's an infection and gangrene before its ever actually solved.

Hatuey · Nov 10, 2014

Kal'Stang said:
Any immigration bill that is passed had better be solely about strengthening laws against illegal immigration. Otherwise all that we're doing is perpetuating and encouraging more illegal immigration and it will NOT solve the problems that illegal immigration causes. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm sick and tired of our government putting bandaids on problems and kicking them down the road so much that there's an infection and gangrene before its ever actually solved.

I'm convinced that Republicans will put some sort of provisional amnesty alternative on the table. They did so back in January. It included the immigrants being allowed to legally reside in the country as long as back taxes were paid and they had no need for welfare. They really don't have that many options. Any hard ass anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric and whatever grounds Bush made for the hispanic vote in 2004 will disappear in 2016 and that damn near guarantees a Democrat POTUS.

House Republicans Just Announced Their Plans For Immigration Reform: ‘Get Right With the Law’ | TheBlaze.com

One of the great founding principles of our country was that children would not be punished for the mistakes of their parents. It is time to provide an opportunity for legal residence and citizenship for those who were brought to this country as children through no fault of their own, those who know no other place as home. For those who meet certain eligibility standards, and serve honorably in our military or attain a college degree, we will do just that.

Rather, these persons could live legally and without fear in the U.S., but only if they were willing to admit their culpability, pass rigorous background checks, pay significant fines and back taxes, develop proficiency in English and American civics, and be able to support themselves and their families (without access to public benefits).

The way it works, Obama and Republicans have shot each other in the foot. Obama is going to look terribly if he doesn't sign a bill passed by Republicans. Republicans will look just as bad if they decide to ignore the policies they wanted to establish.

Kobie · Nov 10, 2014

Jango said:
Why can't a great immigration bill be passed by itself?

That would never happen, but Hatuey is right. Obama bit off a bad piece here, and he's gonna have to live with it.

VanceMack · Nov 10, 2014

I think he is DESPERATE for the republicans to pass legislation...ANY legislation. I think he has put himself on the hook and knows what his limitations are with regard to Executive Orders.

The simple fact of the matter is that the Immigration laws are NOT broken. We bring in over a million legal immigrants every year. We also bring in people on student and work visas. The problem is not with the existing law but with the lack of enforcement of existing law. Enforce the law (secure borders, enforce deportation laws, and punish US citizens that hire illegal immigrants) and the problem with illegal immigration takes care of itself. The only thing that needs to be 'fixed' is the problem with the 20-30 million illegals already here. There is a lot of room for a workable solution there. 1-kill all social security payments to illegal citizens. 2-Offer some form of a temporary card giving the illegal immigrant a worker visa status with a fine for breaking the law. If they are working, pay them on the books and tax them appropriately-maybe even impose a green card tax to pay for their illegal status fine. 3-Kill all social security taxes but also social security for Green card recipients. 4-Tax the HELL out of wire service transactions which involve sending US dollars to foreign countries. 5-Anyone willing to comply with the new laws, then make their kids that were born here US citizens. 6-Anyone that refuses to comply is at risk for deportation. 7-Anyone that is arrested involved in criminal enterprise is tried and punished for their crimes and after they serve their sentence are IMMEDIATELY deported. 8-Anyone that is deported and sneaks back in illegally should be hit with a minimum 10 year prison sentence.

Lots of room for maneuvering. It isnt logical to attempt to round up and deport 20 million illegal immigrants. It doesnt make fiscal sense. It doesnt make sense from a relationship perspective either.

I would also promote the hell out of the FACT that the people that are here are here by their choice because their home country is such a gigantic ****hole. They should RECOGNIZE that fact, APPRECIATE the opportunity, respect the opportunity, or get the **** out and stay out.

Jango · Nov 10, 2014

Kobie said:
That would never happen, but Hatuey is right. Obama bit off a bad piece here, and he's gonna have to live with it.

And that's the main problem, the one that needs to be certainly addressed as vigorously as possible. And just because the President set the table it does not mean that the Republicans have to sit down, let alone, eat what's served.

Jango · Nov 10, 2014

Hatuey said:
I'm arguing that Obama took a defiant stance on this issue, and has opened the door for Republicans to pass a bill he may not like. Do you think that's beyond the possibilities what will happen?

Of course not, nothing good will come of the situation and it's because of partisan politics.

Hatuey · Nov 10, 2014

VanceMack said:
I think he is DESPERATE for the republicans to pass legislation...ANY legislation. I think he has put himself on the hook and knows what his limitations are with regard to Executive Orders.

The simple fact of the matter is that the Immigration laws are NOT broken. We bring in over a million legal immigrants every year. We also bring in people on student and work visas. The problem is not with the existing law but with the lack of enforcement of existing law. Enforce the law (secure borders, enforce deportation laws, and punish US citizens that hire illegal immigrants) and the problem with illegal immigration takes care of itself. The only thing that needs to be 'fixed' is the problem with the 20-30 million illegals already here. There is a lot of room for a workable solution there. 1-kill all social security payments to illegal citizens. 2-Offer some form of a temporary card giving the illegal immigrant a worker visa status with a fine for breaking the law. If they are working, pay them on the books and tax them appropriately-maybe even impose a green card tax to pay for their illegal status fine. 3-Kill all social security taxes but also social security for Green card recipients. 4-Tax the HELL out of wire service transactions which involve sending US dollars to foreign countries. 5-Anyone willing to comply with the new laws, then make their kids that were born here US citizens. 6-Anyone that refuses to comply is at risk for deportation. 7-Anyone that is arrested involved in criminal enterprise is tried and punished for their crimes and after they serve their sentence are IMMEDIATELY deported. 8-Anyone that is deported and sneaks back in illegally should be hit with a minimum 10 year prison sentence.

Lots of room for maneuvering. It isnt logical to attempt to round up and deport 20 million illegal immigrants. It doesnt make fiscal sense. It doesnt make sense from a relationship perspective either.

I would also promote the hell out of the FACT that the people that are here are here by their choice because their home country is such a gigantic ****hole. They should RECOGNIZE that fact, APPRECIATE the opportunity, respect the opportunity, or get the **** out and stay out.

If I had a dollar for every suggestion in this post that will be included in a potential bill, I'd have enough for a coffee from 1999. The party of low taxes isn't going to 'tax the hell out of' wire transfers. Have you actually seen their suggestions? They have nothing to do with what you're stating except for maybe enforcing the laws.

joG · Nov 10, 2014

Hatuey said:
Obama defends plan to act on immigration: CBS interview

The ball is now in the Republican court. They don't need a supermajority to pass a bill. Harry Reid's ridiculous stunt a few months ago ensured that. They don't need bipartisan approval. They just need to get a bill passed and I think they should drag Obama through the coals for taking this particular stance. If Republicans pass a bill and it goes against his latest statements, they can show that he wasn't interested in immigration reform. He was interested in his vision of immigration reform being passed. If there are unconstitutional parts, it can be taken to the courts just like Arizona's laws. However, this particular stance is definitely one Obama shouldn't have taken.

The question is, what a bill should say. I do not think there is much consensus on the matter. Even what basis ie should it be a rational or emotional solution should be chosen appears in doubt.

webrockk · Nov 10, 2014

Call his bluff. Let HIM SHOW the nation how little respect he has for the US Constitution, the separation of powers, and The People's choices in representation. JUST DON'T start talking about impeachment when/if he does pen-and-phone the nation's immigration laws....

because that is EXACTLY what he and Democrats are shooting for.

Declan · Nov 10, 2014

There isn't much he can do by executive order and for conservatives to be complaining about Obama wanting to prioritize exporting gang members and felons over people who are neither is about as unprincipled as one can be unless their guiding principle is "What can a say bad about a black person today and hide my prejudice."

The only immigration reform that will work will have to include a system for workers to work their way in place to a Visa and for there to be more work Visas that corresponds to the demand for labor, particularly low skill labor. Giving the INS more discretion in setting those limits based on changing market needs instead of taking an act of congress would be a good step. Our current system discourages foreign investment in the US as it makes it harder for the foreign corporation to get visas for their management to move back and forth because of the limits on visas. In addition the quota system when it comes to Mexico is outdated. It is just not realistic to think that people will wait a decade or more to enter the US to be with their family when they can jump the border. It would also be beneficial to have an online process that allows certain types of people to move more freely back and forth to their country of origins without the slow INS paperwork process. Similar to the talk of expediting frequent flyers with pre-clearance to the security checkpoint, they should deploy a system where certain workers can move back and forth more readily when circumstances warrant without the need to reapply for entry. We could, for instance, have a stable of field workers, construction workers, etc, who could come and go as needed when needed instead of having them squatting in the US between seasons/jobs.

Samhain · Nov 10, 2014

Hatuey said:
Obama defends plan to act on immigration: CBS interview

The ball is now in the Republican court. They don't need a supermajority to pass a bill. Harry Reid's ridiculous stunt a few months ago ensured that. They don't need bipartisan approval. They just need to get a bill passed and I think they should drag Obama through the coals for taking this particular stance. If Republicans pass a bill and it goes against his latest statements, they can show that he wasn't interested in immigration reform. He was interested in his vision of immigration reform being passed. If there are unconstitutional parts, it can be taken to the courts just like Arizona's laws. However, this particular stance is definitely one Obama shouldn't have taken.

By stating a new law would "supersede whatever action I take", isn't he admitting that his actions aren't kosher? If Congress can write a law to override his action, then it wasn't an action that he was privy to make in the first place.

VanceMack · Nov 10, 2014

Hatuey said:
If I had a dollar for every suggestion in this post that will be included in a potential bill, I'd have enough for a coffee from 1999. The party of low taxes isn't going to 'tax the hell out of' wire transfers. Have you actually seen their suggestions? They have nothing to do with what you're stating except for maybe enforcing the laws.

I'm not a member of that party. I'm offering solutions as I see them.

Kal'Stang · Nov 10, 2014

Hatuey said:
I'm convinced that Republicans will put some sort of provisional amnesty alternative on the table. They did so back in January. It included the immigrants being allowed to legally reside in the country as long as back taxes were paid and they had no need for welfare. They really don't have that many options. Any hard ass anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric and whatever grounds Bush made for the hispanic vote in 2004 will disappear in 2016 and that damn near guarantees a Democrat POTUS.

House Republicans Just Announced Their Plans For Immigration Reform: ‘Get Right With the Law’ | TheBlaze.com

The way it works, Obama and Republicans have shot each other in the foot. Obama is going to look terribly if he doesn't sign a bill passed by Republicans. Republicans will look just as bad if they decide to ignore the policies they wanted to establish.

Unfortunately you're probably right. Which pisses me off to no end. I'm working my ass off to try and give my kids a better life than I have and illegal aliens will be getting a leg up on them.

Zyphlin · Nov 10, 2014

Harry Reid did open the door for using reconcilliation on every single cockimamy bill possible as long as you tie it some way or somehow to the tax code or the budget in even the flimsiest or tertiary of purposes. However, I stand by my belief that such a precedent should be ignored...except for the repealing the law the precedent was set in order to pass...by this Republican congress. This is not a tool that should be used to completely destroy the notion of a fillibuster. I feel the same way in regards to Reids horribly authoritatirn rules regaridng amendments. Republicans need to roll back these things and change course on those precedents, and they need to make their case to the American people as to why they're doing it and exactly WHAT Reids horribly authoritarian senate was previously doing.

Republicans need to call the Presidents bluff, and they should attempt to find about 7 democratic senators to leech off for immigration reform that is primarily focused on border security, enforcement of laws against businesses, and some means of dealing with the people here that doesn't result in full ciitzenship rights now or in the near future. Even if they can't, they need to pass and show that this is the President using his executive authority to unilaterally push things, ignoring the results of the election, with the Democratic minority in the Senate keeping congress from passing any actual law.

However...the President and Administration should be given ZERO input on the shaping of this law. Shut them out entirely. If the Obama Administration wanted to work with he new congress he can wait and then do so. If he takes executive action in the 2 months before they come into power then he should be froze out entirely. Its been six years since he's came into power, yet for some reason it can't possibly wait 2 or so months?

Erod · Nov 10, 2014

I don't know a single person, Republican or Democrat or other, that is clamoring to forgive or legalize a single immigrant who is here illegally.

This will hurt EVERYBODY. In fact, it will most hurt the very people that vote overwhelmingly for the party that is trying to do this to them.

Other than trying to fortify the Democrat party, what possible benefit is there for any American who's just trying to support themselves and their families?

It does nothing but water down our individual power. Nothing more.

Why is Obama so hell-bent on this when almost NOBODY supports him on this?

cpwill · Nov 10, 2014

Hatuey said:
I'm arguing that Obama took a defiant stance on this issue, and has opened the door for Republicans to pass a bill he may not like. Do you think that's beyond the possibilities what will happen?

That is an interesting notion. I had not considered it, tbh.

However, Reid only got rid of the fillibuster for appointments. Not laws. I'm thinking the actual effect will be to force Democrats to fillibuster a bill that their base will not support, but that will risk getting some of them into trouble come 2016. That could be a way for Republicans to flip the maps' natural advantage to Democrats a little bit and/or split the Democrat party and force Obama to veto his own people.

Interesting.

Erod · Nov 10, 2014

cpwill said:
That is an interesting notion. I had not considered it, tbh.

However, Reid only got rid of the fillibuster for appointments. Not laws. I'm thinking the actual effect will be to force Democrats to fillibuster a bill that their base will not support, but that will risk getting some of them into trouble come 2016. That could be a way for Republicans to flip the maps' natural advantage to Democrats a little bit and/or split the Democrat party and force Obama to veto his own people.

Interesting.

The politics of it will be interesting as the mainstream media will try to claim this as a Republican scheme, when in fact, this is Obama painting his party into a corner by insisting on a policy that Democrat voters do not support to begin with.

Zyphlin · Nov 10, 2014

Frankly, for those here I'd like to do something like this....

Illegals in this country have 1 year after the legislation becomes law to make themselves known and report to the government. These Illegals are given 3 options, baring a felony on their record (in which case it's simply deportation):

Option 1

Those that come forward are given a temporary work visa that expires 3 years after the legislation becomes law. Routine check in's with the government during that time span is required. If a check-in is missed by [X] amount of days then you're visa is terminated. At the end of the Visa period you must leave the country. Failure to do so disqualifies you from ever applying for any means of entrance legally into this country again. If the individual adheres to the Visa requirements and leaves at or before it's expiration date, they must wait 1 full year before they are legally allowed to apply for another method of entry into the country, including citizenship.

Option 2

Those that come forward must leave the country but suffer no consequences for their current time here with matters of the law related to their immigration status. They can then immedietely apply for any legal means of entering into the country, including citizenship.

Option 3

Those illegals who can show they were brought here as children will have an additional option to enlist in the military for a 6 year time period. At the end of which they will be granted full citizenship. The childs parents, and any siblings under the age of 18, are allowed to legally remain in the United States during the time of his service. Upon completion of his surface, they are granted permanent residency but can never apply for citizenship. Sibilings over the age of 18 must also enlist or take one of the other two options.

So summary:

- Up to 3 year long Work Visa, with a one year waiting period after leaving before they can come back or apply for citizenship
- Immeidetely leave, but able to immedietely apply for legal entry or citizenship
- If brought here before being a 18, but now over 18, enlist for 6 years and give temporary/potential permanent residency to your parents and siblings under the age of 18. Citizenship after full 6 years for enlisted individual, no citizenship for the family members ever allowed.

After the 1 year period is over, any who didn't come forward are SOL. Significant penalities on businesses who hire illegals, purposeful persuing and searching for illegal individuals still here in the country, and deportation of them when they're found regardless of whether or not they have had other offenses. If you didn't come forward in that first year then we are trying to get rid of you, no if and's or butts.

That would be my "compromise" idea in terms of how to deal with those that are still here.

Kal'Stang · Nov 10, 2014

Samhain said:
By stating a new law would "supersede whatever action I take", isn't he admitting that his actions aren't kosher? If Congress can write a law to override his action, then it wasn't an action that he was privy to make in the first place.

No, Congress has always had the power to override a EO through legislative action. That doesn't necessarily mean that the EO a POTUS makes isn't "kosher". It just means that Congress wanted a more permanent solution put in place.

That said I do believe that any EO that Obama makes in regards to immigration will in fact be illegal due to the fact that pre-existing laws are already in place via past congresses. He doesn't have the power to override those. Although he certainly already has before and was never brought up short by it due to partisan politics and politicians not caring about laws they don't agree with. Instead of repealing those laws and replacing them the proper way they'd rather just ignore them to push their own agenda's.

Hatuey · Nov 10, 2014

cpwill said:
That is an interesting notion. I had not considered it, tbh.

However, Reid only got rid of the fillibuster for appointments. Not laws. I'm thinking the actual effect will be to force Democrats to fillibuster a bill that their base will not support, but that will risk getting some of them into trouble come 2016. That could be a way for Republicans to flip the maps' natural advantage to Democrats a little bit and/or split the Democrat party and force Obama to veto his own people.

Interesting.

I think Reid opened the door for the filibuster of laws to be done away with too. Democrats proved that these rules don't matter much if the party in charge doesn't like them. So what is stopping Republicans to change the rules again?

Roadvirus · Nov 10, 2014

Kal'Stang said:
Any immigration bill that is passed had better be solely about strengthening laws against illegal immigration.

Agreed. But a bill that strenghtens enforcement of current immigration laws (including improving border security) will have to be first. None of this **** where it's one giant bill full of everything and it ends up being done half-assed or just plain ignored.

Once enforcement and border security issues are addressed to a satisfactory level, then we can talk about some kind of bill of legalization with requirements.

cpwill · Nov 11, 2014

Hatuey said:
I think Reid opened the door for the filibuster of laws to be done away with too. Democrats proved that these rules don't matter much if the party in charge doesn't like them. So what is stopping Republicans to change the rules again?

:shrug: presumably only their awareness that one day they, too, will be in the minority.

Obama defends plan to act on immigration: CBS interview

Hatuey

Rule of Two

Jango

Hatuey

Rule of Two

Kal'Stang

Hatuey

Rule of Two

Kobie

VanceMack

Less like the tiger...more like the lion.

Jango

Jango

Hatuey

Rule of Two

joG

webrockk

Active member

Declan

Samhain

VanceMack

Less like the tiger...more like the lion.

Kal'Stang

Zyphlin

Erod

cpwill

Erod

Zyphlin

Kal'Stang

Hatuey

Rule of Two

Roadvirus

Heading North

cpwill