Earlier this week, President Obama laid out his plans for immigration reform. The Washington Post makes Obama's plan easy to digest: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/11/22/flow-chart-who-qualifies-for-obamas-immigration-offer/
They also have the full text of the speech:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/transcript-obamas-immigration-speech/2014/11/20/14ba8042-7117-11e4-893f-86bd390a3340_story.html
Of course, this has made big news, and not because of the reforms and what they entail. Not because they were widely broadcast, either. In fact, the only station that aired it was a Spanish-language news station. Apparently, people would rather watch Bones than learn about our government. Nice going, America. No, Obama's plan made headlines for one reason, and one reason alone: he plans to act unilaterally, without Congress, to get this plan into action.
Naturally, this is a pretty big issue. Not immigration. Immigration is a big issue, of course...but I digress. But Obama's choice to outline his plan for reform right after the midterm election raises some eyebrows. Nine days after he joked about sharing some Kentucky Bourbon with Mitch McConnell and working with the Republicans in Congress, there's this. In his speech, he asks Congress to give him legislation to work with. And in all honesty, Congress very well may throw together some legislation - you know, because the GOP will be in control once January third rolls around. Let's be realistic: Obama isn't going to want to put whatever the Republicans hand him into action. He timed this quite well - he beat the Republicans to the punch. He put this out there. And if the Republicans develop a plan that's more conservative than Obama's plan, they'll take an even further hit in the ever-crucial Latino vote. Needless to say, Congressional Republicans are royally pissed off. They're stuck between a rock and a hard place now, and whatever happens will probably make them look bad. At any rate, they're not going to sit down and let Obama put his plan into action without a fight. And so, the Republicans are saying that Obama's plan is in violation of the Constitution and an overreach of executive power. So let's take a look at that: is Obama's plan to act without Congress in violation of the Constitution? If we're going to be literal, yes - there is no explicit statement in the constitution for executive orders in general. But as we know, every president in American history has issued executive orders. And the past three Republican Presidents - Bush Junior, Bush Senior, and even Reagan himself - ordered parallel legislation to what Obama plans to implement, letting some individuals in the country illegally stay. So what's the issue here?
The issue here is that executive orders are technically supposed to be passed in accordance with Congress. I say technically, of course, because there's no set standard for Executive Orders. That aside, I highly doubt the Republicans in Congress had any intention of going against Reagan when he acted before they gave consent. I imagine many of them said, "Whatever you desire, O Supreme Reagan!" Jokes aside, there was no real issue in those cases, because Congress didn't care very much about what the president was doing. That's not the case in today's overly partisan society. At the end of the day, Congress's issue has very little to do with immigration. They don't want Obama walking all over them. That's why they're making a stink. But how will they react? I don't think even they know how. Maybe there'll be another government shutdown. Maybe they'll sue him. Maybe they'll pass legislation that directly conflicts with Obama's plan, which would cancel out his executive order. To the disappointment of extremists like Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin, impeachment almost certainly won't happen. As I've mentioned in the past, there's a rift between the moderate wing of the party and the extreme right. John Boehner and Mitch McConnell may be right-wingers, and they may be willing to fight against Obama, but the overwhelming odds are that they won't go that far.
The thing is, this may not be the best thing for Democrats in the long run. If Obama goes through with this and isn't stopped, it'll create a precedent. The president will have much more power and much wider control. And there may very well come a day, if this happens, where a Republican president chooses to pass sweeping orders against abortion, or gun control, or a number of hot-button topics. I'm not saying that it's going to happen, but I'm saying that checks and balances aren't a bad thing. We don't want one individual to become too powerful. Because we all know what happens when that sort of thing happens.
No comments:
Post a Comment