Obama can end all deportation of illegal immigrants by himself (1 Viewer)

[StrikeS2k]

I think we should pass at least some type of immigration reform so these folks can get started on a more streamlined path to citizenship, and at the same time start enforcing border patrols and deporting an immigrant convicted of a crime. If someone can't follow the rules, then they can't stay.

We already did all of this. 1986. but the feds didn't enforce the border or go after businesses as they were supposed to. So you can understand why some of have a more hard nosed, let's get the border secured first, attitude about immigration reform this time around.

Yes let's spend more on the border that every foot of is already patrolled daily by both people and drones. Let's add so many border agents they can practically stand shoulder to shoulder instead of building a fence. Let's spend 30 billion on this while we try to cut 20 billion from Food Stamps because we just don't have the money.

Yes, because what you describe is the ONLY way to secure the border. God you're as bad as Tim.

30 billion in cost to fully militarize the border is what is in the bill that passed the Senate. It adds something like 20k border agents. It requires another 700 miles of the stupid fence be finished. Maybe you should read it before you comment further.

When I was younger, I felt that we should just kick out all the illegals. I realize now that such an idea is logistically impossible, at least concerning those already here. Reinforcing the borders shouldn't be particularly difficult, but as for the people already here, get them on the path to citizenship, but if they or a new immigrant commits a crime, they're deported and their citizenship process starts back at square one, if they're allowed back in.

We don't have to kick them out. Make it difficult for them to work here and the majority leave on their own. That's what was supposed to happen in 1986. But we've never had strong prosecution of employers of illegals. If we did that most would leave on their own. It's not that difficult.

 

[timschochet]

Any time NC Commish is compared to me that's a great compliment- not for him, but for me. Thank you.

 

[NCCommish]

I think we should pass at least some type of immigration reform so these folks can get started on a more streamlined path to citizenship, and at the same time start enforcing border patrols and deporting an immigrant convicted of a crime. If someone can't follow the rules, then they can't stay.

We already did all of this. 1986. but the feds didn't enforce the border or go after businesses as they were supposed to. So you can understand why some of have a more hard nosed, let's get the border secured first, attitude about immigration reform this time around.

Yes let's spend more on the border that every foot of is already patrolled daily by both people and drones. Let's add so many border agents they can practically stand shoulder to shoulder instead of building a fence. Let's spend 30 billion on this while we try to cut 20 billion from Food Stamps because we just don't have the money.

Or, we could come down hard on businesses that hire illegals or pay under the table. That seems much more practical and effective anyway.

I fully agree.

 

[NCCommish]

Any time NC Commish is compared to me that's a great compliment- not for him, but for me. Thank you.

I'm a fan of your work despite our disagreements.

 

[NCCommish]

I think we should pass at least some type of immigration reform so these folks can get started on a more streamlined path to citizenship, and at the same time start enforcing border patrols and deporting an immigrant convicted of a crime. If someone can't follow the rules, then they can't stay.

We already did all of this. 1986. but the feds didn't enforce the border or go after businesses as they were supposed to. So you can understand why some of have a more hard nosed, let's get the border secured first, attitude about immigration reform this time around.

Yes let's spend more on the border that every foot of is already patrolled daily by both people and drones. Let's add so many border agents they can practically stand shoulder to shoulder instead of building a fence. Let's spend 30 billion on this while we try to cut 20 billion from Food Stamps because we just don't have the money.

Yes, because what you describe is the ONLY way to secure the border. God you're as bad as Tim.

30 billion in cost to fully militarize the border is what is in the bill that passed the Senate. It adds something like 20k border agents. It requires another 700 miles of the stupid fence be finished. Maybe you should read it before you comment further.

When I was younger, I felt that we should just kick out all the illegals. I realize now that such an idea is logistically impossible, at least concerning those already here. Reinforcing the borders shouldn't be particularly difficult, but as for the people already here, get them on the path to citizenship, but if they or a new immigrant commits a crime, they're deported and their citizenship process starts back at square one, if they're allowed back in.

We don't have to kick them out. Make it difficult for them to work here and the majority leave on their own. That's what was supposed to happen in 1986. But we've never had strong prosecution of employers of illegals. If we did that most would leave on their own. It's not that difficult.

Again if this was the approach taken in this bill I would be all for it. Completely agree that the way to curtail this is to go after the people hiring.

 

[StrikeS2k]

I think we should pass at least some type of immigration reform so these folks can get started on a more streamlined path to citizenship, and at the same time start enforcing border patrols and deporting an immigrant convicted of a crime. If someone can't follow the rules, then they can't stay.

We already did all of this. 1986. but the feds didn't enforce the border or go after businesses as they were supposed to. So you can understand why some of have a more hard nosed, let's get the border secured first, attitude about immigration reform this time around.

Yes let's spend more on the border that every foot of is already patrolled daily by both people and drones. Let's add so many border agents they can practically stand shoulder to shoulder instead of building a fence. Let's spend 30 billion on this while we try to cut 20 billion from Food Stamps because we just don't have the money.

Yes, because what you describe is the ONLY way to secure the border. God you're as bad as Tim.

30 billion in cost to fully militarize the border is what is in the bill that passed the Senate. It adds something like 20k border agents. It requires another 700 miles of the stupid fence be finished. Maybe you should read it before you comment further.

When I was younger, I felt that we should just kick out all the illegals. I realize now that such an idea is logistically impossible, at least concerning those already here. Reinforcing the borders shouldn't be particularly difficult, but as for the people already here, get them on the path to citizenship, but if they or a new immigrant commits a crime, they're deported and their citizenship process starts back at square one, if they're allowed back in.

We don't have to kick them out. Make it difficult for them to work here and the majority leave on their own. That's what was supposed to happen in 1986. But we've never had strong prosecution of employers of illegals. If we did that most would leave on their own. It's not that difficult.

Again if this was the approach taken in this bill I would be all for it. Completely agree that the way to curtail this is to go after the people hiring.

I don't care how it's accomplished. We need control of our immigration policy and border before we pass some type of "comprehensive immigration reform." I don't agree with giving citizenship to everyone who happens to find a way across our border. It just perpeptuates the problem. We know there are ways to deal with the current illegals here. Let's do that and then we can talk about changes to our immigration policy.

 

[Slapdash]

Does anyone think this will actually pass?

 

[NCCommish]

I think we should pass at least some type of immigration reform so these folks can get started on a more streamlined path to citizenship, and at the same time start enforcing border patrols and deporting an immigrant convicted of a crime. If someone can't follow the rules, then they can't stay.

We already did all of this. 1986. but the feds didn't enforce the border or go after businesses as they were supposed to. So you can understand why some of have a more hard nosed, let's get the border secured first, attitude about immigration reform this time around.

Yes let's spend more on the border that every foot of is already patrolled daily by both people and drones. Let's add so many border agents they can practically stand shoulder to shoulder instead of building a fence. Let's spend 30 billion on this while we try to cut 20 billion from Food Stamps because we just don't have the money.

Yes, because what you describe is the ONLY way to secure the border. God you're as bad as Tim.

30 billion in cost to fully militarize the border is what is in the bill that passed the Senate. It adds something like 20k border agents. It requires another 700 miles of the stupid fence be finished. Maybe you should read it before you comment further.

When I was younger, I felt that we should just kick out all the illegals. I realize now that such an idea is logistically impossible, at least concerning those already here. Reinforcing the borders shouldn't be particularly difficult, but as for the people already here, get them on the path to citizenship, but if they or a new immigrant commits a crime, they're deported and their citizenship process starts back at square one, if they're allowed back in.

We don't have to kick them out. Make it difficult for them to work here and the majority leave on their own. That's what was supposed to happen in 1986. But we've never had strong prosecution of employers of illegals. If we did that most would leave on their own. It's not that difficult.

Again if this was the approach taken in this bill I would be all for it. Completely agree that the way to curtail this is to go after the people hiring.

I don't care how it's accomplished. We need control of our immigration policy and border before we pass some type of "comprehensive immigration reform." I don't agree with giving citizenship to everyone who happens to find a way across our border. It just perpeptuates the problem. We know there are ways to deal with the current illegals here. Let's do that and then we can talk about changes to our immigration policy.

Except there is no way millions are going back and you really wouldn't want them to. The GDP loss would be much bigger than people seem to think. Further the border is tighter than it ever has been and currently illegal immigration is at net zero.

 

[StrikeS2k]

I think we should pass at least some type of immigration reform so these folks can get started on a more streamlined path to citizenship, and at the same time start enforcing border patrols and deporting an immigrant convicted of a crime. If someone can't follow the rules, then they can't stay.

We already did all of this. 1986. but the feds didn't enforce the border or go after businesses as they were supposed to. So you can understand why some of have a more hard nosed, let's get the border secured first, attitude about immigration reform this time around.

Yes let's spend more on the border that every foot of is already patrolled daily by both people and drones. Let's add so many border agents they can practically stand shoulder to shoulder instead of building a fence. Let's spend 30 billion on this while we try to cut 20 billion from Food Stamps because we just don't have the money.

Yes, because what you describe is the ONLY way to secure the border. God you're as bad as Tim.

30 billion in cost to fully militarize the border is what is in the bill that passed the Senate. It adds something like 20k border agents. It requires another 700 miles of the stupid fence be finished. Maybe you should read it before you comment further.

When I was younger, I felt that we should just kick out all the illegals. I realize now that such an idea is logistically impossible, at least concerning those already here. Reinforcing the borders shouldn't be particularly difficult, but as for the people already here, get them on the path to citizenship, but if they or a new immigrant commits a crime, they're deported and their citizenship process starts back at square one, if they're allowed back in.

We don't have to kick them out. Make it difficult for them to work here and the majority leave on their own. That's what was supposed to happen in 1986. But we've never had strong prosecution of employers of illegals. If we did that most would leave on their own. It's not that difficult.

Again if this was the approach taken in this bill I would be all for it. Completely agree that the way to curtail this is to go after the people hiring.

I don't care how it's accomplished. We need control of our immigration policy and border before we pass some type of "comprehensive immigration reform." I don't agree with giving citizenship to everyone who happens to find a way across our border. It just perpeptuates the problem. We know there are ways to deal with the current illegals here. Let's do that and then we can talk about changes to our immigration policy.

Except there is no way millions are going back and you really wouldn't want them to. The GDP loss would be much bigger than people seem to think. Further the border is tighter than it ever has been and currently illegal immigration is at net zero.

This is where we disagree.

 

[NCCommish]

Does anyone think this will actually pass?

The House? No way. I don't think Boehner will break the Hastert rule for two reasons. One he would face a challenge for a speakership he only kept by a handful of votes. Two there is no deadline. The other things he did outside the Hastert rule had obvious deadlines with big consequences that this one doesn't. They'll get beat up for slow walking it in the next cycle but that is 18 months from now and large parts of the party have convinced themselves they only need white people.

 

[timschochet]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

 

[NCCommish]

This is where we disagree.

Just to be clear which part? The loss of jobs that would be occasioned by getting rid of 11 million or so consumers? The border being patrolled 24/7 pretty much foot by foot? Or the net zero part?

 

[NCCommish]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

A little inflation is good for everyone. And wage inflation drives demand. Demand drives supply needs. Supply needs drive hiring. it's a virtuous cycle well documented within the theory of Supply and Demand.

 

[timschochet]

Further tightening of the border will damage our relationship with Mexico, who in years to come will be one of our key trading partners. We need a more open border, not more closed.

In any case all this border talk is an excuse by the far right. No matter how secure the border is, they will NEVER agree to a path to citizenship. This is about xenophobia, not border control.

 

[StrikeS2k]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

Throw a few CEO's in jail for a year and see what happens.

 

[Slapdash]

Does anyone think this will actually pass?

The House? No way. I don't think Boehner will break the Hastert rule for two reasons. One he would face a challenge for a speakership he only kept by a handful of votes. Two there is no deadline. The other things he did outside the Hastert rule had obvious deadlines with big consequences that this one doesn't. They'll get beat up for slow walking it in the next cycle but that is 18 months from now and large parts of the party have convinced themselves they only need white people.

I'll continue to not follow very closely then. Good thing they have the SC to help with the bold.

Not sure it is possible to do immigration reform without a GOP president, they just won't allow it.

 

[timschochet]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

A little inflation is good for everyone. And wage inflation drives demand. Demand drives supply needs. Supply needs drive hiring. it's a virtuous cycle well documented within the theory of Supply and Demand.

Oh I don't necessarily disagree. Just be aware that hiring illegals under the wage scale will be an inevitable result.

 

[Slapdash]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

Really hate this bull####.

 

[StrikeS2k]

This is where we disagree.

Just to be clear which part? The loss of jobs that would be occasioned by getting rid of 11 million or so consumers? The border being patrolled 24/7 pretty much foot by foot? Or the net zero part?

Don't care about the loss of jobs, and doubt the impact would be as severe as you make it out to be. Don't agree that the border is secure. It MIGHT be more secure than it's been but we know it was woefully inadequately secure before so that's not saying much. It's certainly not "being patrolled 24/7". Maybe one small piece at a time is patrolled 24/7 but not the entire border. If it were no one would be getting through but they still do. As far as the net zero that may be true but only due to our down economy. When the economy improves they'll start crossing in large numbers again. And if we announce a path to citizenship that will create a large influx as well, just as it has every other times there's even been serious discussion about it.

 

[timschochet]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

Throw a few CEO's in jail for a year and see what happens.

How would that benefit society?

 

[timschochet]

This is where we disagree.

Just to be clear which part? The loss of jobs that would be occasioned by getting rid of 11 million or so consumers? The border being patrolled 24/7 pretty much foot by foot? Or the net zero part?

Don't care about the loss of jobs, and doubt the impact would be as severe as you make it out to be. Don't agree that the border is secure. It MIGHT be more secure than it's been but we know it was woefully inadequately secure before so that's not saying much. It's certainly not "being patrolled 24/7". Maybe one small piece at a time is patrolled 24/7 but not the entire border. If it were no one would be getting through but they still do. As far as the net zero that may be true but only due to our down economy. When the economy improves they'll start crossing in large numbers again. And if we announce a path to citizenship that will create a large influx as well, just as it has every other times there's even been serious discussion about it.

I hope it DOES result in a large influx but I doubt it. Our immigration laws one way or another have little effect on this. Our economy does. A large influx of new illegals will be a sure sign that things are booming again.

 

[StrikeS2k]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

Throw a few CEO's in jail for a year and see what happens.

How would that benefit society?

It would reduce the number of employers willing to hire illegals.

 

[NCCommish]

This is where we disagree.

Just to be clear which part? The loss of jobs that would be occasioned by getting rid of 11 million or so consumers? The border being patrolled 24/7 pretty much foot by foot? Or the net zero part?

Don't care about the loss of jobs, and doubt the impact would be as severe as you make it out to be. Don't agree that the border is secure. It MIGHT be more secure than it's been but we know it was woefully inadequately secure before so that's not saying much. It's certainly not "being patrolled 24/7". Maybe one small piece at a time is patrolled 24/7 but not the entire border. If it were no one would be getting through but they still do. As far as the net zero that may be true but only due to our down economy. When the economy improves they'll start crossing in large numbers again. And if we announce a path to citizenship that will create a large influx as well, just as it has every other times there's even been serious discussion about it.

The impact would be serious. 11 million immigrants represent about 1.5 trillion in GDP a year. They support thousands of jobs both directly and indirectly. There are today nearly 19,000 agents assigned to our southern border, there are towers, there are thermal imaging systems and there are drones on patrol 24/7. And we really achieved net zero immigration under Bush before the big economic collapse.

 

[humpback]

Further tightening of the border will damage our relationship with Mexico, who in years to come will be one of our key trading partners. We need a more open border, not more closed.

In any case all this border talk is an excuse by the far right. No matter how secure the border is, they will NEVER agree to a path to citizenship. This is about xenophobia, not border control.

 

[17seconds]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

Throw a few CEO's in jail for a year and see what happens.

They get new CEOs?

 

[Christo]

Does anyone think this will actually pass?

In the House? No way.

 

[NCCommish]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

A little inflation is good for everyone. And wage inflation drives demand. Demand drives supply needs. Supply needs drive hiring. it's a virtuous cycle well documented within the theory of Supply and Demand.

Oh I don't necessarily disagree. Just be aware that hiring illegals under the wage scale will be an inevitable result.

Not if people go to jail for doing it.

 

[timschochet]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

A little inflation is good for everyone. And wage inflation drives demand. Demand drives supply needs. Supply needs drive hiring. it's a virtuous cycle well documented within the theory of Supply and Demand.

Oh I don't necessarily disagree. Just be aware that hiring illegals under the wage scale will be an inevitable result.

Not if people go to jail for doing it.

Well I doubt that will ever happen. But if did happen, it wouldn't end the practice, it would simply make it more costly. Does throwing people in jail for selling drugs stop the selling of drugs?

 

[timschochet]

Further tightening of the border will damage our relationship with Mexico, who in years to come will be one of our key trading partners. We need a more open border, not more closed.

Yes I recognize this is an unpopular viewpoint, especially among people like you. But it's not only the realistic answer, it's not only beneficial to our society, it's also inevitable. Mark my words: in years to come, our borders will be more open, not less. Good, says I!

 

[timschochet]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

Throw a few CEO's in jail for a year and see what happens.

How would that benefit society?

It would reduce the number of employers willing to hire illegals.

How would that benefit society?

 

[StrikeS2k]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

Throw a few CEO's in jail for a year and see what happens.

How would that benefit society?

It would reduce the number of employers willing to hire illegals.

How would that benefit society?

 

[Christo]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

Throw a few CEO's in jail for a year and see what happens.

How would that benefit society?

It would reduce the number of employers willing to hire illegals.

How would that benefit society?

The answer to that question may be relevant to you. But lots of people believe that their right to control their environment outweighs any possible perceived benefit that may come from the loss of control.

 

[timschochet]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

Throw a few CEO's in jail for a year and see what happens.

How would that benefit society?

It would reduce the number of employers willing to hire illegals.

How would that benefit society?

The answer to that question may be relevant to you. But lots of people believe that their right to control their environment outweighs any possible perceived benefit that may come from the loss of control.

Exactly. I want business people to be able to control their own environment as much as possible. That includes being able to hire whom you choose.

 

[Christo]

Penalizing businesses that hire illegals under the table will not stop them. All OT will do is add to the cost of doing business; in effect it's a tax that will eventually be passed to the consumer.

Illegals get hired because minimum wage is an artificial price fixture, and thus creates a black market.

Throw a few CEO's in jail for a year and see what happens.

How would that benefit society?

It would reduce the number of employers willing to hire illegals.

How would that benefit society?

The answer to that question may be relevant to you. But lots of people believe that their right to control their environment outweighs any possible perceived benefit that may come from the loss of control.

Exactly. I want business people to be able to control their own environment as much as possible. That includes being able to hire whom you choose.

 

[timschochet]

Marco Rubio, who was the Republican face of this deal, is now very quiet:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/marco-rubio-turns-away-from-immigration-as-bill-s-prospects-flounder-20130716

Very depressing. When push comes to shove, no Republican in leadership is willing to challenge the Tea Party. None of them. They are going to allow this once great party to be taken over by populist loudmouths, and it will be accomplished with very little protest.

 

[bigbottom]

Marco Rubio, who was the Republican face of this deal, is now very quiet:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/marco-rubio-turns-away-from-immigration-as-bill-s-prospects-flounder-20130716

Very depressing. When push comes to shove, no Republican in leadership is willing to challenge the Tea Party. None of them. They are going to allow this once great party to be taken over by populist loudmouths, and it will be accomplished with very little protest.

He just got leapfrogged by Ted Cruz.

 

[timschochet]

Can Obama put through immigration reform on his own?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/atlantic-obamas-immigration-nuclear-option-stopping-deportations-unilaterally/article/2534921

According to the above article, immigration activists are urging President Obama, with the failure of the immigration reform bill, to simply sign an executive order that ends all deportation during his presidency. I think this would be awesome. Politically its a sure win for Obama and the Democrats, as it would further cause Latinos to be alienated from Republicans when they go ballistic (which they will, especially the Tea Party.)

But I don't care about that. It would simply be a wonderful thing. It would remove the fear of 11-15 million people that someday they might be forced to leave this country where they contribute so much, even perhaps forced to separate from their families. I really hope Obama has the courage to do this.

 

[msommer]

Can Obama put through immigration reform on his own?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/atlantic-obamas-immigration-nuclear-option-stopping-deportations-unilaterally/article/2534921

According to the above article, immigration activists are urging President Obama, with the failure of the immigration reform bill, to simply sign an executive order that ends all deportation during his presidency. I think this would be awesome. Politically its a sure win for Obama and the Democrats, as it would further cause Latinos to be alienated from Republicans when they go ballistic (which they will, especially the Tea Party.)

But I don't care about that. It would simply be a wonderful thing. It would remove the fear of 11-15 million people that someday they might be forced to leave this country where they contribute so much, even perhaps forced to separate from their families. I really hope Obama has the courage to do this.

Isn't thre a debt ceiling that will need adjusting soon? Maybe not smart stirring up a hornet's nest over this then

 

[timschochet]

Can Obama put through immigration reform on his own?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/atlantic-obamas-immigration-nuclear-option-stopping-deportations-unilaterally/article/2534921

According to the above article, immigration activists are urging President Obama, with the failure of the immigration reform bill, to simply sign an executive order that ends all deportation during his presidency. I think this would be awesome. Politically its a sure win for Obama and the Democrats, as it would further cause Latinos to be alienated from Republicans when they go ballistic (which they will, especially the Tea Party.)

But I don't care about that. It would simply be a wonderful thing. It would remove the fear of 11-15 million people that someday they might be forced to leave this country where they contribute so much, even perhaps forced to separate from their families. I really hope Obama has the courage to do this.

Isn't thre a debt ceiling that will need adjusting soon? Maybe not smart stirring up a hornet's nest over this then

With this group of crazy House Republicans, there's always a hornet's nest. There is no way to compromise with them over the debt ceiling; they're demanding that Obamacare be defunded. They're nuts. Obama is not going to get them to agree to anything. Might as well piss them off- what difference will it make?

 

[RCon]

Can Obama put through immigration reform on his own?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/atlantic-obamas-immigration-nuclear-option-stopping-deportations-unilaterally/article/2534921

According to the above article, immigration activists are urging President Obama, with the failure of the immigration reform bill, to simply sign an executive order that ends all deportation during his presidency. I think this would be awesome. Politically its a sure win for Obama and the Democrats, as it would further cause Latinos to be alienated from Republicans when they go ballistic (which they will, especially the Tea Party.)

But I don't care about that. It would simply be a wonderful thing. It would remove the fear of 11-15 million people that someday they might be forced to leave this country where they contribute so much, even perhaps forced to separate from their families. I really hope Obama has the courage to do this.

First, it wouldn't remove the fear that "someday they might be forced to leave this country". If a Republican is elected in 2016, he/she could simply rescind Obama's order.

Second, do you really want to continue setting precedents that POTUS can simply ignore Congress when he/she feels like it? Someday, a POTUS might issue an executive order that you don't like.

 

[RCon]

Can Obama put through immigration reform on his own?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/atlantic-obamas-immigration-nuclear-option-stopping-deportations-unilaterally/article/2534921

According to the above article, immigration activists are urging President Obama, with the failure of the immigration reform bill, to simply sign an executive order that ends all deportation during his presidency. I think this would be awesome. Politically its a sure win for Obama and the Democrats, as it would further cause Latinos to be alienated from Republicans when they go ballistic (which they will, especially the Tea Party.)

But I don't care about that. It would simply be a wonderful thing. It would remove the fear of 11-15 million people that someday they might be forced to leave this country where they contribute so much, even perhaps forced to separate from their families. I really hope Obama has the courage to do this.

Isn't thre a debt ceiling that will need adjusting soon? Maybe not smart stirring up a hornet's nest over this then

With this group of crazy House Republicans, there's always a hornet's nest. There is no way to compromise with them over the debt ceiling; they're demanding that Obamacare be defunded. They're nuts. Obama is not going to get them to agree to anything. Might as well piss them off- what difference will it make?

I was under the impression that the House did compromise the last time there was a debt ceiling debate, no? In fact, it could be argued that the GOP actually compromised significantly more than did the Democrats (not the rumors of all the compromises the Democrats were offering, but the policies on which they actually signed off).

 

[timschochet]

Can Obama put through immigration reform on his own?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/atlantic-obamas-immigration-nuclear-option-stopping-deportations-unilaterally/article/2534921

According to the above article, immigration activists are urging President Obama, with the failure of the immigration reform bill, to simply sign an executive order that ends all deportation during his presidency. I think this would be awesome. Politically its a sure win for Obama and the Democrats, as it would further cause Latinos to be alienated from Republicans when they go ballistic (which they will, especially the Tea Party.)

But I don't care about that. It would simply be a wonderful thing. It would remove the fear of 11-15 million people that someday they might be forced to leave this country where they contribute so much, even perhaps forced to separate from their families. I really hope Obama has the courage to do this.

First, it wouldn't remove the fear that "someday they might be forced to leave this country". If a Republican is elected in 2016, he/she could simply rescind Obama's order.

Second, do you really want to continue setting precedents that POTUS can simply ignore Congress when he/she feels like it? Someday, a POTUS might issue an executive order that you don't like.

Once it was done no Rebublican would ever reverse it- not on the ones already here.

 

[RCon]

Can Obama put through immigration reform on his own?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/atlantic-obamas-immigration-nuclear-option-stopping-deportations-unilaterally/article/2534921

According to the above article, immigration activists are urging President Obama, with the failure of the immigration reform bill, to simply sign an executive order that ends all deportation during his presidency. I think this would be awesome. Politically its a sure win for Obama and the Democrats, as it would further cause Latinos to be alienated from Republicans when they go ballistic (which they will, especially the Tea Party.)

But I don't care about that. It would simply be a wonderful thing. It would remove the fear of 11-15 million people that someday they might be forced to leave this country where they contribute so much, even perhaps forced to separate from their families. I really hope Obama has the courage to do this.

First, it wouldn't remove the fear that "someday they might be forced to leave this country". If a Republican is elected in 2016, he/she could simply rescind Obama's order.

Second, do you really want to continue setting precedents that POTUS can simply ignore Congress when he/she feels like it? Someday, a POTUS might issue an executive order that you don't like.

Once it was done no Rebublican would ever reverse it- not on the ones already here.

That makes no sense. You're suggesting Obama could sign an order stating his administration won't deport anyone. Another POTUS could, and probably would, easily state that his administration would start enforcing the immigration laws and would deport people caught here illegally. I seriously doubt that POTUS's order would be that they would enforce the rules for anyone who came post date N, but not enforce it for people who could prove they arrived pre date X.

Unless I misunderstand and you're suggesting Obama's executive order would grant amnesty and citizenship to those currently here. I'm pretty sure he doesn't have the power to do that.

 

[bigbottom]

Can Obama put through immigration reform on his own?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/atlantic-obamas-immigration-nuclear-option-stopping-deportations-unilaterally/article/2534921

According to the above article, immigration activists are urging President Obama, with the failure of the immigration reform bill, to simply sign an executive order that ends all deportation during his presidency. I think this would be awesome. Politically its a sure win for Obama and the Democrats, as it would further cause Latinos to be alienated from Republicans when they go ballistic (which they will, especially the Tea Party.)

But I don't care about that. It would simply be a wonderful thing. It would remove the fear of 11-15 million people that someday they might be forced to leave this country where they contribute so much, even perhaps forced to separate from their families. I really hope Obama has the courage to do this.

First, it wouldn't remove the fear that "someday they might be forced to leave this country". If a Republican is elected in 2016, he/she could simply rescind Obama's order.

Second, do you really want to continue setting precedents that POTUS can simply ignore Congress when he/she feels like it? Someday, a POTUS might issue an executive order that you don't like.

Once it was done no Rebublican would ever reverse it- not on the ones already here.

I don't think this is an amnesty order.

 

[bigbottom]

Can Obama put through immigration reform on his own?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/atlantic-obamas-immigration-nuclear-option-stopping-deportations-unilaterally/article/2534921

According to the above article, immigration activists are urging President Obama, with the failure of the immigration reform bill, to simply sign an executive order that ends all deportation during his presidency. I think this would be awesome. Politically its a sure win for Obama and the Democrats, as it would further cause Latinos to be alienated from Republicans when they go ballistic (which they will, especially the Tea Party.)

But I don't care about that. It would simply be a wonderful thing. It would remove the fear of 11-15 million people that someday they might be forced to leave this country where they contribute so much, even perhaps forced to separate from their families. I really hope Obama has the courage to do this.

First, it wouldn't remove the fear that "someday they might be forced to leave this country". If a Republican is elected in 2016, he/she could simply rescind Obama's order.

Second, do you really want to continue setting precedents that POTUS can simply ignore Congress when he/she feels like it? Someday, a POTUS might issue an executive order that you don't like.

Once it was done no Rebublican would ever reverse it- not on the ones already here.

That makes no sense. You're suggesting Obama could sign an order stating his administration won't deport anyone. Another POTUS could, and probably would, easily state that his administration would start enforcing the immigration laws and would deport people caught here illegally. I seriously doubt that POTUS's order would be that they would enforce the rules for anyone who came post date N, but not enforce it for people who could prove they arrived pre date X.

Unless I misunderstand and you're suggesting Obama's executive order would grant amnesty and citizenship to those currently here. I'm pretty sure he doesn't have the power to do that.

What he said.

 

[timschochet]

It wouldn't be an amnesty order but that's what it would effectively become, because it wouldn't be reversed. Please read the article I posted; it explains things better than I can.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

It wouldn't be an amnesty order but that's what it would effectively become, because it wouldn't be reversed. Please read the article I posted; it explains things better than I can.

Nothing in that Atlantic article says it couldn't or wouldn't be reversed by a future President.

 

[bigbottom]

It wouldn't be an amnesty order but that's what it would effectively become, because it wouldn't be reversed. Please read the article I posted; it explains things better than I can.

I read it. I don't agree with your conclusion.

 

[humpback]

It wouldn't be an amnesty order but that's what it would effectively become, because it wouldn't be reversed. Please read the article I posted; it explains things better than I can.

Shockingly, no it doesn't.

 

[RCon]

It wouldn't be an amnesty order but that's what it would effectively become, because it wouldn't be reversed. Please read the article I posted; it explains things better than I can.

I'm with the other guys. The article doesn't explain anything, it just provides conflicting quotes from various people. It definitely doesn't say that no future president couldn't/wouldn't reverse such an order.

That said, I'm not sure whether an executive order along these lines would be a political winner for either side. The people it would please all probably vote Democrat anyway, and the people it would piss off all probably vote GOP anyway.