Immigration Advocates Will Urge Obama Executive Order if Reform Fails

Leave a comment

This is from NewsMax.

Obama will do what ever he can do to insure millions of new voters

for the DemocRats.

We have seen Obama has disdain for The Constitution.

When Obama gave Congress and their staff subsidies to help them with

the costs of Obamacare.

So personally I will not be surprised by Obama signing an

Executive action/ order granting some kind of amnesty to illegals.


If immigration reform sputters in the deeply divided U.S. Congress, supporters are planning to push President Barack Obama to act on his own to help 11 million illegal aliens, lawmakers and immigration advocates said.

Immigration law experts, some senators and House Democratic aides speculated that if Congress cannot agree on a wide-ranging immigration bill this year, Obama could use his executive authority to stop deporting parents of children living in the United States illegally.

Many of those children have won temporary reprieves on deportation and broadening the protection to their parents would be a way of keeping immigrant families together.

Navigating around Congress comes with plenty of drawbacks, though, since anything Obama could do would not be as lasting as enacting a law. Furthermore, he could not use his own powers to make sweeping changes, such as creating a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented.

Any such measures are certain to provoke a reaction from Republicans. But immigrant groups would argue that some action from the White House is better than putting up with existing conditions.

Obama also could sidestep Republican opposition to legislation by helping a broader spectrum of illegal residents who have been in the United States for prolonged periods, say 10 years or more, for temporary legal status if they have clean records.

“You could make a persuasive policy argument that those are the people who have most fully sunk roots into communities, most convincingly demonstrating they’re contributing in the labor market,” said Doris Meissner, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute. “Many are paying U.S. taxes and raising families in their adopted country.”

With Congress in a five-week recess and many Republicans balking at “amnesty” for those living in the United States illegally, chances are worsening for passing a comprehensive immigration bill this year, even with the Senate’s bipartisan backing in June for such a measure.

“There’s a huge degree of effort and support going into immigration reform and if it fails (in Congress), all of that effort and support will turn right back on the administration to do something for constituents that have been hurting and are important to the president,” Meissner said.

Senior Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, who voted for the Senate-passed bill, told Reuters, “There are a lot of people speculating” about the demands for Obama to act unilaterally if legislation fails.

Republican Senator Marco Rubio, who helped write the Senate bill, concurred, saying, “I have always suspected that’s a real possibility.”

But Hatch and Rubio both warned Obama against taking matters into his own hands, even if legislation fails.

Bill Hing, a University of San Francisco professor who specializes in immigration law, said in a telephone interview: “I think it’s going to begin … with just huge pressure on the administration to cut back on its Secure Communities” program.

Controversial among city and county governments, this federal program gathers fingerprints and other information from local law enforcement that can be used to identify undocumented people.

Hing said the program has been aggressively used by the administration and the result has been the deportation of many for minor violations such as traffic infractions.


After spending most of his first term as president refusing to use his executive powers to ease deportations of illegal immigrants, Obama flexed his presidential muscles in mid-2012. With his campaign for re-election gearing up, he had his Department of Homeland Security temporarily halt deportations of undocumented children who were brought to the United States by their parents, often at a very young age.

Seeing the effectiveness of that executive action and the absence of successful legal challenges, Obama could be emboldened to expand it with the stroke of his pen.

Presidential action may be the least desirable outcome for supporters of immigration reform, however, because it is a temporary remedy that can be reversed by future presidents and because there are only limited steps that can be taken.

“The importance of legislation is that it’s a permanent fix,” said Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum. He also said Obama could not order a “pathway to citizenship” for the 11 million but could ease their short-term deportation fears.

Legal status leading to citizenship is a key demand of immigration groups as they seek passage of legislation.

Executive branch action also would not create more high-tech visas or new categories of temporary work permits. The Senate legislation would accomplish those things, much to the pleasure of U.S. business.

Further complicating matters, Obama would have to make a political calculation before acting, assessing the potential impact of any administration directives on 2014 congressional elections.

For now, backers of immigration legislation do not want to acknowledge this executive branch avenue since it detracts from their message that Congress will manage to pass a bill this year.

“I don’t want to even entertain that thought,” Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican who helped write the Senate-passed bill, said of potential Obama action.

Senator Charles Schumer, the leading Democratic author of the bill said, “I’m not even going to get into that,” and insisted he is “more optimistic every day” of legislation passing the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

Even the White House tried to squelch speculation. “The only way to fix this problem is for Congress to pass comprehensive reform. There are no other options,” a spokesman said.

Any steps by Obama likely would prompt an outcry from Republicans who would again accuse him of trampling the Constitution by deciding which laws he was going to enforce and which ones he was going to ignore. That was their reaction in mid-2012.

“I think the White House has to be careful,” Hatch said. “They’ve been doing an awful lot of unilateral legal action without authority and if that keeps up, the president is going to find himself in real difficulty.

Read Latest Breaking News from
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!


Congress Prepares $100 Million Bipartisan Flu Tax

Leave a comment

This is from The Weekly Standard.

 New taxes being considered on again.

This tax is in addition to the Obamacare taxes.

Is this purpose of this tax ti discourage people from

getting flu shots ?


Congress is preparing to take action on a bipartisan proposal to raise taxes on flu vaccines. This is not a tax on the wealthy, but rather on a broad swath of Americans, or at least those who choose to be immunized against the flu.

In February, identical bills were introduced in the House and Senate to add seasonal flu vaccines to the IRS code as taxable. The legislation would exact a 75¢ per dose tax on any “vaccine against seasonal influenza.

” Given that the Centers for Disease Control projects that 135 million doses of flu vaccine will be used this year, the government’s take on flu vaccines alone is over $100,000,000 per year.

Along with taxes on other vaccines, this tax would fund the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund.  The fund is a “no-fault alternative to the traditional tort system for resolving vaccine injury claims that provides compensation to people found to be injured by certain vaccines.”

However, the fund is by no means in the same kind of trouble that other government “trust funds” are.

The balance in the fund (as of November 2012) was more than $3.5 billion. Since the program’s inception in 1988, the fund has paid out only $2.5 billion in 25 years for cases involving all vaccines, not just the flu vaccine.

This means the balance in the fund could conceivably last another 25 years with no further tax revenue.

The House bill (H.R. 475) was submitted on February 4, by Republican Jim Gerlach with Democrat Richard Neal co-sponsoring, and the Senate version (S. 391) was submitted by Democrat Max Baucus and co-sponsor Republican Orrin Hatch.

The same legislation had been introduced in the 112th Congress just months ago.  The House version died in committee, but the Senate version actually passed by unanimous consent the day it was introduced.

Now, a posting on the Senate website reports that the Senate has reached an agreement on the current legislation. Although this flu season is winding down now, the tax could easily be in place by next winter if the House follows suit and the president signs it:

The Senate reached an agreement that if the Senate receives H.R.475 from the House of Representatives and the bill is identical to the text of which is at the desk, then the bill be read three times and the Senate proceed to a vote, at a time to be determined by the Majority Leader in consultation with the Minority Leader, with no intervening action or debate. H.R.475, a bill to amend the internal Revenue Code of 1986 to include vaccines against seasonal influenza within the definition of taxable vaccines.

As is the case with all government “trust funds,” there is no cash set aside to pay out claims. According to the November 2012 report on the vaccine trust, the $3.5 billion balance is invested in “US Treasury Securities.” In other words, financing a portion of the $16.5 trillion national debt.


Manchin-Toomey deal could allow gun owners, sellers to carry, sell across state lines

1 Comment

This is from Fox News Politics.

While the ability for gun owners,sellers to carry across

state lines would be great.

But this does not out weigh the back ground checks at

gun shows.

Senators Manchin and Toomey have violated their oath

to protect and defend The Constitution with this deal.


The deal between Sens. Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey on the gun-controlled legislation scheduled for formal Senate debate next week could make it easier to carry concealed weapons across state lines.

The provision is part of the deal Manchin, D-W.V., and Toomey, R-Pa., reached earlier this week on background checks for gun buyers and will be among the first parts of the legislation that senators will consider.

The provision is similar to the Interstate Commerce Reform Act of 2012, which was sponsored by two Republicans — Rep. Steve Scalise, Louisiana, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, Utah. The legislation failed despite strong support from the National Rifle Association.

The proposal essentially grants states “reciprocity” regarding concealed carry provisions.

In other words, the provision would grant gun owners the right to obtain a firearm and a concealed-carry permit in their home state, then use the permit to carry and conceal the firearm in another state.

Though many states have laws on buying  firearms and concealed-carry permits, the federal provision, if adopted, could trump state laws.

The amendment states the gun owner must have been granted the permit within the past five years. However, a handful of states routinely grant lifetime permits.

The amendment also could give similar rights to firearms dealers, allowing them to sell in states beyond the one in which they were originally licensed.

Passing gun-control legislation has become a major part of President Obama’s second-term agenda since the December 2012 shootings at a Connecticut elementary school in which 20 first-graders and six adults were killed.

Americans appear to support some form of background checks to keep guns out the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, according to polls.

However, further gun control legislation has faced stiff opposition on Capitol Hill, with many Republicans and moderate Democrats saying voters in their home districts do not support such efforts.

Proposals to ban semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity gun magazines have already been taken out of the legislation.

A Republican-backed effort to block the Senate debate was defeated this week, opening the way for the full debate. However, even if the Senate passes some form of legislation, the proposal would also face tough votes in the Republican-controlled House.

Read more:


Sen. Daniel Inouye dies at 88

Leave a comment

This is from The Daily Caller.


I missed reporting the death on Senator Inouye on Monday.

Senator Daniel Inouye was a World War ll veteran and Medal of Honor recipient.

Daniel was a member of the Nesi 442nd Regimental Combat team. 

Rest in Peace Valiant Warrior.


Hawaii Sen. Daniel Inouye died Monday of respiratory complications at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. The nine-term Hawaii Democrat was 88 years old.

Inouye had been hospitalized since December 6.

Rep. Jeff Miller, Chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, issued a statement on Inouye’s passing late Monday.

“I am saddened by the news this evening of Senator Inouye’s passing. He was one of the last World War II veterans in Congress, and a leading veteran advocate for more than 50 years,” Miller said.

“His selfless service to our nation dates back well before his time on Capitol Hill, where in hard battle on the fields of Italy in 1945 his actions resulted in being bestowed the Medal of Honor. With his passing, we remember the bravery and dedication of the Greatest Generation, and with each day that sets, we mourn all who battled through this life to find reward in the next.”

Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch released a statement praising Inouye as well.

“I was honored to serve with Danny my entire service in the United States Senate, but even more so privileged to call him my close friend,” Hatch said.

Inouye served in the Senate for five decades, dating back to 1962. A towering political figure in both Washington and his home state of Hawaii, Inouye served as the most recent chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriations.

Multiple Democratic senators on the appropriations committee had disparaged Inouye during his hospitalization, suggesting that he was an ineffective committee leader who had stayed in the Senate “too long.” (RELATED: Anonymous Dems attack ailing senator)

Read more:



%d bloggers like this: