Obama to announce executive order on immigration

[bedstuy]

The president shouldn't being doing this by executive action, that's for sure. I'm not sure what he's up to this week -- it sounds like he's trying to disrupt the narrative. Every time he pulls something else out of his sleeve (net neutrality, climate change treaty, immigration) that becomes the story. Otherwise, what would everyone have been talking about this week? How the Republicans swept the election and how bad of a shellacking the president's party took. I think he's trying to mix things up and take people's minds off the election.

The Republicans should just pass whatever immigration bill they can get through the Senate, and tell Obama to either sign it or veto it. If he vetoes it, they can say he preferred his own executive actions to Congressional legislation on the exact same topic, which wouldn't give him much of a leg to stand on. He pretty much has to sign whatever immigration bill Congress sends him now.

Why not?  If it's sensible policy and he has the legal authority, why not?  If Congress doesn't like it, they can change the law.  That's how government is supposed to work. 

[bedstuy]

The president shouldn't being doing this by executive action, that's for sure. I'm not sure what he's up to this week -- it sounds like he's trying to disrupt the narrative. Every time he pulls something else out of his sleeve (net neutrality, climate change treaty, immigration) that becomes the story. Otherwise, what would everyone have been talking about this week? How the Republicans swept the election and how bad of a shellacking the president's party took. I think he's trying to mix things up and take people's minds off the election.

The Republicans should just pass whatever immigration bill they can get through the Senate, and tell Obama to either sign it or veto it. If he vetoes it, they can say he preferred his own executive actions to Congressional legislation on the exact same topic, which wouldn't give him much of a leg to stand on. He pretty much has to sign whatever immigration bill Congress sends him now.

Why not?  If it's sensible policy and he has the legal authority, why not?  If Congress doesn't like it, they can change the law.  That's how government is supposed to work.  

Did you feel that way when Dub sat in the Oval, bedstuy? Be honest.

I can't say for sure.  I wasn't even old enough to have a nuanced opinion during much of the Bush administration.  But, I would hope I wouldn't make these pathetic, pearl-clutching arguments about "how dare the President act like he's the chief executive!!??"  My problem with Bush is that he made bad decisions, not that he was an imperial President.  A good President isn't squeamish and timid about using their power.  The real distinction is that Obama is a sensible politician with ideas on how to improve this country.  Bush was a disaster on policy grounds, Obama has been one of the best modern Presidents on policy grounds.

So, yeah, these Republican arguments are pathetic and dishonest.  If you love the idea deporting the people who cut the grass and mop the floors in this country,  and you love the Iraq War and all of Bush's horrendous far-right policies, fine.  But, don't act like Obama doesn't the full authority of his office.  Republicans constantly seem perplexed that Obama acts like he's the President, rides around in Air Force One and lives in a big mansion in DC.  Guess what?  You have a black, liberal Democrat President.  Get over it.

[bedstuy]

Republicans, let's just get this straight:  This is not illegal or unprecedented.  We currently have statutes on the books which give the executive discretion.  Obviously, you can't give the executive total discretion to just make up laws, but you also can't write a 500 million page immigration statute to cover every possible eventuality.  There's some middle ground and Congress has decided in the past what that balance is.  They can change the nation's immigration laws if they so choose, but they have no ground to just sit back and whine about how Obama doesn't have the same priorities as them, within this system created by the immigration statutes.  

Look at it this way, the President can prioritize resources towards deporting certain people and not others. Your local police can choose to focus on murder cases or catch every jaywalker.  Within this middle ground of enforcement of laws, there is tons of grey area.  But, that's why we have elections to decide who we think has the best judgement to make those calls within the grey area.  We decided on Obama, get over it.

[bedstuy]

Well, I don't know. On the one hand, Congress not doing what you want does not mean Congress is broken.

The problem with strong executives and "accountable government" is, where is the stability? One could easily see a Republican president issuing all sorts of bold policies, such as repealing Social Security, then a Democrat comes in and issues an order reinstating it, plus single payer universal health care, which we have for some years until the next Republican comes in and repeals it all again.

If the people are polarized and do not agree, it seems that a better solution would be compromise. After all, that is what you do in a relationship, no?

The President can repeal statutes.  What on earth are you talking about? 

Obama doesn't need to do what Congress wants.  Congress doesn't need to do what Obama wants.  Obama's executive action is just enforcing existing laws in a different way, within his discretion.  If Congress doesn't like this executive action, they can pass a law.  That's the main thing a legislature is supposed to do, remember?  The legislature passes laws, that's in the Constitution.  The part where they file frivolous lawsuits and go on Fox News to whine and moan is not.

Obama is doing what the executive does.  Congress instead just wants Obama to unilaterally give in to their whining and frivolous lawsuits.  Let's be honest, you don't want Obama to compromise, you want him to knuckle under. 

[bedstuy]

How does one define 'protect the border'?  We already have record number of agents and immigration is already at a net zero. Plus almost half of the illegal immigrants flew here and overstayed their visas. The 'secure the border first' thing is a red herring. But even still the Senate comprehensive bill threw a few more billion at the border to appease, so why wasn't that good enough?

"Secure the border," is just empty rhetoric to appeal to people with a panoply of vague ethno-nationalist concerns.  If we just passed an immigration bill that legalized the American reality, while using the technology of 1998 like E-Verify, we could secure the border with half the current border enforcement budget. 

Make no mistake, this is all about people who think Hispanics are somehow different than the Germans, Irish, Italians, Jews and Chinese and others who became Americans en masse in years past.    There are plenty of legitimate immigration questions, like family based vs. skills based, how to simply the process, how to guard against terrorism and criminal activity, etc..  Instead, we're agonizing over the pigment of people's skin and how to punish people who came here 20 years ago.