So, since Congress refused or refuses to act, President Obama did not, or doesn't. Last night, at 8:00pm EST, for approximately 15 minutes, he laid out some steps that he could legally take through an Executive Order, that would help about 5 million immigrants in their quest to become law abiding citizens of this great nation we call THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Although this order will not be enough to include all immigrants, it is a starting point. This order will force the hand of Congress to act on this issue and PASS A BILL.
Their are those who say our President, that's right OUR PRESIDENT, is acting like a tyrant, an emperor, a monarch or even an Imperial President because of his use of Executive Orders. But, let's take a look at history. President Obama has signed 193 orders, President George W. Bush signed 291, President Clinton signed 364, President Reagan signed 381.....President Franklin Roosevelt signed over 3,700. President Obama has signed fewer executive orders than 17 of his predecessors. Some of the arguments in how the modern day presidency is imperial are:
- As staff numbers increased, many people were appointed who held personal loyalty to the person holding the office of president, and who were not subject to outside approval or control.
- A range of new advisory bodies developed around the presidency, many of which complemented (critics suggest rivaled) the main cabinet departments, with the cabinet declining in influence. The National Security Council and the Office of Management and Budget are prime examples.
- The Senate does not "advise and consent to" appointments to the Executive Office of the President (with only a handful of exceptions), as it does with cabinet appointments. A corollary of this is that EOP personnel may act independent of, without regard for, and without accountability to Congress.
- The Presidency relies on powers that exceed the Constitution. The extent of foreign policy and war powers of the Presidency are questioned. Also the extent of Presidential secrecy is questioned.
- The plebiscitary Presidency is a Presidency that is accountable only during elections or impeachment rather than daily to the Congress, the press and the public. This has been considered evidence of an Imperial Presidency.
So, if Congress wants to continue to sit back and do nothing, then it is high time that someone has the GUTS to do something in which they were elected to do, not once, but TWICE!!! And Congress, just in case you have forgotten, any legislation that you pass regarding immigration will supercede any executive orders signed by OUR President. And for those who desire to double check my numbers, I have attached the website by which you can.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php
You bring some very avid points up. If Congress really disagrees with the actions so much then they have the check and balance to nullify it. I agree it is wrong to call Obama a dictator.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on all of this post. We live in a country where the people who are supposed to help the citizens sit and argue in an attempt to keep anything from happening. There are systems that need to be fixed and if the president can do that and help people who have been ignored for so long, then he should do what he can.
ReplyDeleteThe problem people have isn't with the number of executive orders but with the content of them. George Bush could have issued 1,000 executive orders on why he thinks roses are the best flower and I wouldn't care. If he issued one that was against the law, then I would.
ReplyDeleteYou see, the thing about our government is that we have something called a separation of powers. As in, only the legislature can legislate, only the courts can interpret the law, and the executive branch must execute the law. The executive branch cannot change a law duly passed by the legislature the legislature cannot pass a law that is unconstitutional or the courts will strike it down.
As of right now we have duly passed immigration law. You might not like the law, it might be inconvenient, frankly it doesn't matter. The law is the law and if you don't like it you can petition your legislators to change it. The executive branch cannot change a law passed by Congress, period. It is unconstitutional and a violation of his oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution. Just because the president doesn't like the law, doesn't mean he can change it.
I am trying to be as explicit as possible. Executive orders cannot legally supersede laws passed by Congress. By using an executive order to change the law he is breaking the law. If Congress passes a law saying that an immigrant must follow a series of steps to become a legal citizen and the president says "Nah, I don't like that law, you don't have to follow it." (which is what he is doing), then the president is breaking the law, period. You cannot honestly be trying to defend someone who is blatantly breaking a law legitimately passed by Congress can you?
Imagine if George Bush made an executive order saying something along the lines of: "Yeah, I don't like the Civil Rights Act, you guys don't have to follow it anymore." Would you defend him then? If you are defending the illegal actions by a president now, you must realize that at some point in the future, there will be a person elected president who you do not like. Are you okay with them changing laws on a whim? By saying that you are okay with a president changing a law he does not like, you are essentially saying that you are okay with the next 40 presidents changing laws they do not like. Once an executive branch has the power to do something, it never gives it up. Are you really willing to tell me that you trust the next 40 presidents to never abuse that power if Obama is allowed to? I think not.
Obama also said more than five times before this that he does not have the power to change immigration law through an executive order. The only reason he is now saying he has the power is because of Democrats lost big in the midterms and they want to gain latino voters. But you don't have to take my word for it, here are the videos of him saying that he doesn't have that power. Its kinda hard to defend a president breaking the law when he has said many times before that if he used an executive order he would be breaking the law.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehH8KMIxntQ