What will/should Obama do before the year is out?
How will/should Republicans try to stop him?
Obama should seize the opportunity to finally have comprehensive immigration control and make Reps show that their talk about wanting to do so is more than just talk. But that means that the bill will have have a strong and clear protective component and a very serious plan to take control of the border. But he will probably squander that opportunity and issue some EO, thereby assuring gridlock to continue.
There is one benefit of him not issuing a EO that cannot be overstated" Congressman Luis Guiterrez’s head might explode like a mosquito on meth.
Just wanted to add that it’s a very good thing that AZ and NM retained Rep. Governors. So, 3 of the 4 states on the border will at least try to police illegal immigration, as much as they can.
Wow. Just saw that Oregon rejected going driver’s licenses to illegals. Didn’t expect that.
Obama will focus on issues that can be achieved with a republican controlled congress…domestic energy and foreign policy issues. He’s like every other president in their lame duck years…less concerned about gridlock and more concerned about making meaningful accomplishments for his legacy.
Obama Should: Obama should greatly expand the visas and green cards available to people immigrating legally, by having USCIS reinterpret some of the key provisions of the law. He should also take a number of steps that are expressly contingent and will remain in place until Congress passes comprehensive immigration reform that makes it possible for an ordinary person in Mexico or Guatemala to immigrate to the US. These stopgap measures should include extending deferred action protection to all people married to US citizens, who immigrated before the age of 18, whose children are US citizens, and to farmworkers. He should also cancel the secure communities program and deauthorize all federal-state partnerships.
Obama Will: Obama will do almost none of these things. He may mildly extend DACA and take some timid steps toward visa expansion.
GOP Should: Pass comprehensive immigration reform. Challenge Obama’s executive actions in court. Hold hearings on the lawfulness of Obama’s executive decisions, and on the economic consequences of expanding lawful immigration.
GOP Will: Hold hearings on how immigrants are smuggling ebola-laden ISIS fighters into the US, and we have to immediately put tanks and F-22s on the border. Bluster about unconstitutionality but not really do anything about it, because they don’t actually want to restrict executive authority in a way that might be binding on a Republican president. Refuse to pass immigration reform because if they do they will lose primary battles to men who claim that the illegals is stealing our jobs.
Voters will always forgive Republicans for not actually doing anything about illegal immigration because they say things like “we must defend our borders”. Voters will always believe Democrats are soft on immigration even when they actually adopt much tougher policies, because they don’t oversimplify the issues in the name of good soundbites.
They forgive them because the Dems consistently refuse to allow Step 1 to occur: Secure the Border.
If Dems were smart that would agree with Reps and actually DO this, then put the onus on the Reps to be fair and wise about the rest of immigration reform.
It’s not that we don’t want to. But do you know how hard it is, with all the Portuguese frogmen paddling over to sneak into Delaware?
The OP is two good questions but I wonder about a third: how many (and which) Democrats are going to block anything the President brings forward with the cooperation of the Republicans? IMHO I see too many in our Party getting ready for 2016 by basically saying “President Who?” and that hurts.
Why is this in the Elections forum?
I figured it fit in here somewhere…“elections and electoral politics, including strategy and tactics, political parties, individual races, political news, and politicians and public figures.”
Why don’t you want it here?
Yesterday Obama said that anything he would do could be undone by a comprehensive bill. I very much doubt the truth of that but it does give him cover.
“If you like your policy, you can keep it!”
Touche. Immigration issues, that is.
Because the election is over. Threads about what sitting officials will or might do should go in GD.
We already have F-22s (and F-35s and F/A-18s and Harriers) and tanks on the border - at MCAS Yuma and at the Army’s Yuma Proving Ground, plus the stuff up the road in Tucson’s Davis-Monthan Air Force’s Base, we just need to adjust the bombing and firing ranges.
And the radioactive stuff they want to bury at Yucca Mountain? Just sprinkle liberally along the border.
(nobody listened to my suggestions when I first made them 30 years ago either)
Ahh, but while the new members of Congress have been elected, they haven’t yet been seated/aren’t presently sitting officials.
Oh sure, now you want ebola-laden ISIS fighters coming over the border and making dirty bombs?! What are you, a Fox News stockholder?
It makes 'em easier to track and spot in the dark - “Bright at night, line up in my sights”.
I don’t think it’s surprising at all. Democrats are deluding themselves on immigration, with the help of carefully crafted polling that takes advantage of the public’s compassion.
THe public supports legalizing the undocumented population IF we actually fix the system. Doing things for that population in the absence of such fixes is vehemently opposed, even in liberal bastions like Oregon.
What did it was a massive scare campaign flooding the airwaves that brought up visions of hoards of immigrant terrorists on airplanes…which was an outright lie since the bill specifically forbade the use of the I.D. for airline travel. Ain’t free speech grand?
I trust you will attempt to police all threads that seem to violate your rule equally.
Actually, this issue is all about electoral politics. From the Washington Post:
"Now some are questioning whether that decision was an example of the Obama administration playing politics with public information.
Even before Tuesday, the administration said it was waiting until after the elections to deal with immigration reform so that any losses would not be blamed on the Democrats’ proposal. For some, removing the apprehension statistics — which both parties could use to criticize U.S. immigration laws — was a political move."