Posted on 11/18/2014 10:20:04 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The biggest problems that were facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all, and thats what I intend to reverse when Im President of the United States of America.
Senator Barack Obama, March 31, 2008
The latest from apologists for President Obamas planned decree to unilaterally amnesty perhaps 5 million illegal aliens is that Reagan and Bush Sr. did it, so whats the problem?
Its interesting that the anti-borders crowd seems to have conceded the point I made in August that most past executive grants of status to illegal aliens were the consequence of foreign crises in the illegals home countries and thus not relevant to the current discussion. These were, as Ross Douthats trenchant column pointed out Sunday, modest, clearly defined populations facing some obvious impediment (war, persecution, natural disaster) to returning home.
So the fallback position of those claiming precedent is to grasp at two actions taken by Reagan and the elder Bush that came in the wake of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) amnesty.
Nice try.
The Reagan administration action that amnesty advocates point to is simply irrelevant to the current case and trumpeted only because Reagans name is attached to it. In what was a legitimate exercise of prosecutorial discretion shortly after passage of the 1986 law, INS announced that as a practical matter it would look the other way under certain circumstances with regard to minor children both of whose parents received amnesty but who did not themselves qualify for the amnesty. It granted no work permits, Social Security numbers, or drivers licenses. In the context of trying to implement the convoluted IRCA amnesty, I might well have done the same thing.
George H. W. Bushs 1990 family fairness policy is at least somewhat germane, in that it provided for renewable voluntary departure (i.e., amnesty) for certain spouses and children of amnesty beneficiaries, including work authorization. But it is no precedent either, for three main reasons:
First, its size and scope. Despite claims at the time that as many as 1.5 million illegal aliens might benefit from the policy, the actual number was much, much smaller. In 1990, Congress passed legislation granting green cards to legalization dependents in effect codifying the executive action Bush had taken a just few months earlier. That (lawful) measure actually cast the net wider than Bushs action, and yet only about 140,000 people took advantage of it less than one-tenth the number advocates claim. Scale matters here; Bushs action cannot meaningfully be described as a precedent for Obamas scheme that would be 30 or 40 times larger.
Second, both Reagans and Bushs moves were cleanup measures for the implementation of the once-in-history amnesty that was passed by Congress. In other words, it was a coda, a tying up of loose ends, for something that Congress had actually enacted, and thus arguably a legitimate part of executing the law which is, after all, the function of the executive. Obamas threatened move, on the other hand, is directly contrary to Congresss decision not to pass an amnesty. In effect, Bush was saying Congress has acted and Im doing my best to implement its directives, while Obama is saying Congress has not done my bidding, so Im going to implement my own directives.
Finally, in the same 1990 immigration law that codified Bushs family fairness directive, Congress rejected further ad hoc presidential amnesties by creating Temporary Protected Status (TPS). The various unilateral actions presidents had taken to amnesty small groups of illegal aliens over the years Extended Voluntary Departure and Deferred Enforced Departure were among the Orwellian euphemisms deployed were clearly seen as abuses of the discretion which Congress granted the president. TPS was intended to limit that discretion in granting legal status, including work permits, to illegal aliens, by limiting such grants to clearly specified circumstances such as when a country suffered an earthquake or hurricane and imposing specific procedures upon the executive. And to make certain that future executive actions didnt simply become a means of naturalizing entire populations of illegal aliens, the TPS law requires any bill addressing naturalization of TPS recipients has to pass the Senate with a 60 percent super-majority.
It is absurd for Obama to claim that the very executive overreach that prompted Congress to impose these limits established a precedent for even greater executive overreach today.
Whatever their merits, the Reagan and Bush measures were modest attempts at faithfully executing legislation duly enacted by Congress. Obamas planned amnesty decree is Caesarism, pure and simple. Precedent isnt the right word for the Obama crowds invocation of Reagan. The right word is pretext.
Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies.
” unilaterally amnesty perhaps 5 million illegal aliens “
Is there even ONE conservative in the media that will use the 15-20 million figure?
Reagan didn’t sign the Simpson-Mazzoli Act into law?
/johnny
He did.
Why would Reagan give amnesty? Did he think that they would start voting R out of gratitude?
It depends on what parameters Obama uses to grant executive amnesty. The rumor is that he will amnesty everyone who has US born children in the family.
Yes, Reagan did sign the amnesty law in 1986.
He was promised “border security” by the dems, which of course never happened.
Reagan later said signing that bill was the biggest mistake of his presidency.
Not that I’ve seen. I still say it’s more like 25 to 40 million also.
If we don’t have ten million in California alone, I miss the mark by a mile.
Do you realize over 90% of the births in the Los Angeles County run hospitals are to illegal immigrants?
The major high schools in near downtown are full of the children of illegal immigrants.
I know of at least four and perhaps five half billion dollar edifices down there that are filled with illegal immigrant children.
Yep with a “B”. They cost over $500 million to build, each.
That would be 15 million, easily.
Robert F Kennedy High School $578 million LINK
” Not that Ive seen. I still say its more like 25 to 40 million also.”
15+ million would qualify if narrowly defined.
” If we dont have ten million in California alone, I miss the mark by a mile.”
LaRaza claims 8.5 million illegals in California (2014)
” Do you realize over 90% of the births in the Los Angeles County run hospitals are to illegal immigrants?”
Sure. We PAY them big time to have children on welfare.How many 20 year old illegal females have you seen with 3 or 4 children?
Neither did Clinton.
Bush Jr., supported widely by conservatives, tried to ram shamnesty down America's throat. His policies included changing banking laws and withdrew all semblence of immigration enforcement in order to set off a new wave of illegals crossing into our country.
In this regard, Obama is no different than George W. Bush.
It's my take, that these schools are filled almost exclusively with illegal immigrant children.
I went to several water polo matches at the RFK school. There the other team's member said, "There are too many Whites on that team." Our team was probably 80% Hispanic.
I hadn’t heard La Raza’s estimate, but I’m sure that fluctuates depending on which group they are addressing. If it will gain the cause anything, they’ll blow up the figure or claim it’s really next to zero. It just depends.
Easy to prove how committed the Democrats are to the principle that a President can make illegals into legal residents. Next Republican President just say that any Japanese, German, Baltic and British citizens who have the price of a plane ticket will be given Amnesty when they get here. If he’s going to make 20 million Democrats, we will need to balance them with 20 million new Republicans. We can start bringing in Chinese by the hundred million, and when they get a load of taxes, affirmative action and welfare, they will definitely vote Republican.
” After a firestorm over the $197.5 million Newton North High School in Massachusetts, Mayor David Cohen chose not to seek re-election and state Treasurer Timothy Cahill reined in school construction spending.”
I graduated from Newton North in 1972. This campus was built for 3800 students. My home town is like Bel Air, or Brentwood. Wealthy folks, who still spent only 40% per square foot what L.A. spent here. Sickening! And all for mostly illiterate, unmotivated illegals!
Not just a California problem any longer. Folks, our nation is slipping, or perhaps more accurately has slipped away...
” I hadnt heard La Razas estimate, but Im sure that fluctuates depending on which group they are addressing.”
11000 Wilshire, Westwood.
If we don’t stop this amnesty, we are finished. The only question will be how long it takes for complete collapse.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.