Get PJ Media on your Apple

House GOPs Say Obama Has a Year to Prove He’d Be Trustworthy on Immigration

Game plan has an election-year component, not just a test of trust.

by
Bill Straub

Bio

February 9, 2014 - 12:37 am
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

WASHINGTON – House Republicans have proved unable to coalesce behind leadership plans for wide-ranging immigration reform, dimming prospects for getting legislation dealing with the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants passed this year.

Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho), who has played a central role in the ongoing immigration debate, said reports that GOP lawmakers were lining up behind principles staked out by House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) are “just not true.” Instead, there exists “overwhelming support for the idea of doing nothing this year.”

“I do think we need to address the issue, but I think when we take back the Senate in 2014 that one of the first things we should do next year after we do certain economic issues, I think we should address the immigration reform issue,” Labrador said.

Boehner appeared to substantially yield to the view of Labrador and others on Thursday, acknowledging to reporters that “it’s going to be difficult to move any immigration legislation” in 2014 as long as Republican House members maintain doubts over whether President Obama “can be trusted to enforce our laws.”

The speaker said he “never underestimated the difficulty in moving forward this year” but hoped to do so because “it’s been kicked around forever and it needs to be dealt with.” But continued GOP suspicions over White House motivations have rendered drawing the necessary support fruitless.

By all but throwing in the towel this session, Boehner joins Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, of Kentucky, who said there exists an “irresolvable conflict” between the massive reform measure that passed the upper chamber last year and the path being blazed in the House.

“I don’t see how you get to an outcome this year with the two bodies in such a different place,” McConnell said.

Despite the obvious setback, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Obama remains “optimistic about the prospects for comprehensive immigration reform in 2014.” The administration has detected “significant movement” within the House Republican leadership and believes the two sides can still work together to generate the necessary support.

“Nothing this important, nothing this comprehensive comes fast or easy in Washington,” Carney said. “This won’t be any different.”

House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, of Maryland, said his party initially reacted positively to efforts by the House GOP leadership to develop a consensus on immigration but it is now “somewhat disappointed” at the decision to throw cold water on the initiative.

“This is a question of what is morally right to do,” Hoyer said. “To fix a broken system that is breaking apart families, undermining our economy and abandoning what so many say is the right thing to do. So with all due respect to this, frankly, trying to distract us on this trust issue, this is not a trust issue. This is an issue of law and the administration’s performance both on border security and on enforcing the law in this respect, a bad law, a law that ought to be changed, a law that’s causing families to be torn apart.”

Congress for years has debated, thus far without resolution, the best way to deal with the ongoing problem of illegal immigration. Last June, the Democrat-controlled Senate passed its first major piece of immigration legislation since 1986 in a 68-32 vote with 14 of 45 Republicans offering support. The measure offers illegal immigrants who have resided in the U.S. since Dec. 13, 2011, an opportunity to seek provisional legal status that allows them to work but renders them ineligible for federal benefits. They must pay a penalty, taxes and a processing fee and can only apply for permanent status after 10 years. A new visa program for low-skilled workers would also be developed.

It also hikes border patrol ranks by 20,000 – almost doubling the contingent at a cost of $30 billion — and adds 350 miles of border fencing. It spends $4.5 billion on technical innovations intended to provide security personnel with full situational awareness along the southern border. And it implements an entry-exit visa program to keep tabs on visitors who overextend their stay as well as the so-called e-verify program to make employers aware of a potential worker’s immigration status.

House GOP leaders immediately dismissed the Senate package but vowed to offer alternatives that focused on border security while rejecting a path to citizenship. And instead of packaging the provisions together, House Republicans planned to change immigration law by voting on a series of bills. Leadership remains reluctant to package disparate immigration measures into one bill, a la Obamacare, which remains the focus of overwhelming GOP enmity. The chance of the chamber developing an omnibus measure is slight, with lawmakers instead preferring a piece-by-piece approach, breaking the initiative into several component parts, each to be voted on individually.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
"House GOPs Say Obama Has a Year to Prove He’d Be Trustworthy on Immigration"

Translation: 'We've put up with 5 years of your lies, so we're going to give you 1 year to prove you can tell the truth.'

Paint me crazy, but shouldn't we require him to be honest for at least the length of time he's been dishonest, i.e. 5+ years? (Although I realize there is a valid argument for much longer than that - I'm just counting the time he's been Prez). And by this logic (I also realize Congress doesn't act logically), they shouldn't trust him for the rest of the time he's in office.

ATTN House GOP: Vote for immigration reform - start typing your resumé.

29 weeks ago
29 weeks ago Link To Comment
Oh good grief.
What idiots.
Obama is not trustworthy, ever.
29 weeks ago
29 weeks ago Link To Comment
Whoa Boehner! That's tough. What are you gonna do if he does not heed your warning? Beat him with a wet noodle?

That reminds me of the older lady in the crowded subway: "You are so fresh! I give you 24 hours to stop touching me that way!"
29 weeks ago
29 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (43)
All Comments   (43)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
There is only one, and only ONE answer to this debate. Every illegal alien should be punished and every business who hired one should be punished even more. There is simply no point in creating any new enforcement mechanism if past enforcement mechanisms are not used. Its a joke to say otherwise for it means abandonment of the law and its replacement with....nothing. Indeed the only other alternative is to abandon entirely any immigration law and simply erase the American border except as a mere customs documentation barrier kinda like what exists between the individual states now.

Between Amnesty and Enforcement there simply is no compromise between these two. The reasons are patently obvious because both policies go the core of each differing advocacy group, business and political oriented globalists versus the people and their nation. On one hand are globalists of both communist and capitalist stripes and on the other patriots. On support the creation and maintenance of the state and local government and the other supports the construction and erection of a new global government to monitor all economic and thus political activity of the world. Thus, one group supports the maintenance of lawful liberty and the other supports the creation of bureaucratic regulation; one supports the Law of the United States, the other supports abandonment of the Law of the US and the creation of the regulated Global State.

Given the vast gulf between these two groups the policy which will involve the least violence and best hope for the rule of law and liberty is the one which implements the law not abandons it. If we seek to reestablish lawful liberty it will involve civil insurrection in parts of the country and the slow but inexorable reestablishment of law and order and with it arrest and prosecution of sizable chunks of our ruling class. But the alternative is worse. It means, if the law is abandoned and amnesty occurs, a future portending the vast redistribution upwardly of wealth and power in the hands of the few and the inevitable disintegration of other laws. In turn, will come the reaction of revolution, anarchy and civil war which will devastate North America and leave America profoundly changed and either the entire ruling class obliterated or the entire American people obliterated.

There is simply no way to compromise out of this situation. There is simply to entirely incompatible viewpoints of laws and states between these two visions representing pro-amnesty and its opponents pro-America. Given the vast numbers of armed and politically oriented Americans, the best the pro-Amnesty people could hope for is a temporary reprieve by accepting some sort of Republican sponsored semi-amnesty. But that in turn will cause a reaction of other Americans leading to the fracturing of the GOP. In turn, the Globalists will undoubtedly use that period to hide their design by giving citizenship to the masses of foreigners and constructing a type of Neo-Reconstruction on all of the states like Radicals did to the South after the War. But just like then that will result in ongoing civil insurrection and given its scale and lack of native support fail in more than the First Reconstruction and descend into all out Civil War. Thus, given these outcomes, those who consider themselves Patriots must in turn for the betterment of all humanity work to stop any sort of amnesty. Fight, fight for your lives.
28 weeks ago
28 weeks ago Link To Comment
And yea, whirlwinder! We need to return to our Founders formulas. The 10th amendment, properly applied, would eliminate more than fifty percent of government. "That government is best which governs least" is still and always will be true.What if Congress could not borrow? What if executive orders were(they are) unlawful? What if the franchise was restricted as it was in the 18th century? A one man one vote approach means that we allow the stupid, the ignorant, the criminal, the crazy,, the amoral, to select our legislators and political executives. Do we really want to do that?
28 weeks ago
28 weeks ago Link To Comment
But Obama cannot become trustworthy, over any time span. He is a sociopath, click on the diagnostic criteria if you will, lawless, a lover of genocidal abortion and homosexual perversion and any other form of evil which comes to hand. There is no cure for sociopathy, except, perhaps, a 2x4 with nails in the end. Confinement in an institution for the criminally insane is the most merciful course, particularly as far as it eliminates the potential for recidivism. The GOP know he can never be trusted on anything. His goals are plainly CFR goals; treasonous surrender of our Constitution and the freedoms it guarantees us, and our sovereignty, and the establishment of a global government presided over by the hegemony of the CFR: CEOs, the very rich, the amoral, international bankers and their minions;; reduction of world population to 15% of the present level,(they will have a corner on the funeral market), and an Orwellian milieu. Those congresspersons who are literate; some plainly are not, know all this, but are bought, extorted or just plain stupid. We have six SCOTUS justices who haven't a clue as to the difference between right and wrong. What we need is a leader who will quickly undo all that Obama has done, and then set all things right. It will be a time of payback for many, after generations of dependence, sloth and hedonism. But even if no one steps forward to lead in the essential reforms, sooner or later, history tells us, things will get to be so bad that the people will arise, en masse, turning lamp poles into gallows, and put an end to the greedy illegitimates now in control. Ah, well...
28 weeks ago
28 weeks ago Link To Comment
What's the position of these same House"Republicans" to Obama's "proving he can be trusted" by Unsealing documents he sealed as first significent act on taking the chair of "The Office of President"?

AND submitting for public scrutiny original documents usually necessary, adequate and authenticated in questions of law to assure, to prove, his "legal eligibility for the Office of President"? In compliance with the Law of the Land, e.g. Article II, Section 1, paragraph 5 of the Constitution?

The FUNDAMENTAL LAW, to which he, BH Obama, "freely" swore/affirmed oath to Uphold and Defend. Oath administered by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court THAT stands on that Legal Foundation.

Or isn't that as important as grandstanding a putative resistance to his habitual disrespect rising to contempt for not only the Law, but for the Legislature and Judiciary? And through that contempt the citizens they represent. At least theoretically.

His latest opinion that he need not care about laws as he can always sign an Executive Order to get what he wants.

As he did in SEALING documents from public review on first taking up the Office of President.
29 weeks ago
29 weeks ago Link To Comment
As usual Congress will do nothing to stop him (Obama).
28 weeks ago
28 weeks ago Link To Comment
A reform of immigration has multiple moving parts and very little to do with illegal aliens. We can solve the illegal alien problem with existing law being followed. Then we kick all illegals out of the country. The first step in immigration reform is to secure the border. Then we can address all of the other problems. One problem is to get rid of the idea that multi-culti cultures can live side by side. Ask the American Indians about that experiment. After returning all Mexicans to Mexico, the remainder need to be assimilated. As for Islam, they are here to conquer, believe it or not. Run them out of the country. Our country is pretty much done with immigration. We are a settled country and immigration should be very sparse.
29 weeks ago
29 weeks ago Link To Comment
Oh, for Pete's sake. This has NOTHING to do with trusting obama. That's nothing but a ruse. The truth of the matter is that Boehner and the rest of the gop grandees want amnesty and open borders. They've figured out that it's not going to work for them right this minute, so they've thrown up this lame smoke screen. They're only trying to buy time until they can figure out another way to repackage their unwanted wares and spin up another sales campaign. All you hear Boehner talking about is "getting this thing done". Well, we've seen what he wants to "get done" and no one who's actually affected by it, likes it. At the end of the day though, he hasn't changed a single note in his "borders no mas" tune.
29 weeks ago
29 weeks ago Link To Comment
Translation: "We're just going to lay low until after the election. Then, if we win, we will have more 'flexibility' ".
29 weeks ago
29 weeks ago Link To Comment
C'mon, let's be fair. I would give obama 1 year to be honest about ANYTHING!!!!!
29 weeks ago
29 weeks ago Link To Comment
He's already had 6 years - why wait 1 more for yet another dodge & punt?
29 weeks ago
29 weeks ago Link To Comment
“To fix a broken system that is breaking apart families... ." -Hoyer

Think of all the poor broken-up families of burglars and muggers and such—broken because our cruel laws insist they be imprisoned. Those children need their parents, too. Let's just do away with the courts and justice system so everyone can be happy. There, problem solved.

And I thought Dumb and Dumber was just a ridiculous movie, not a political documentary.
29 weeks ago
29 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 Next View All