Agree or Disagree with funding the DHS. Agree or Disagree with the Executive Actions which focused on using available funds to remove illegals committing violent crimes instead of exhausting all resources removing children and illegals easily found. If people want a simple, one size fits all, program for dealing with illegals, it already exists. Increase the funding and personnel to expedite the processes which have been in place.
Like it or not, at this time, however, one’s opinion about the Executive Actions and Executive Orders do not matter because they are currently locked inside the judicial process and not running in the field.
What matters is that last night the House with the 1 week bill simply kicked the matter down the road again.
It matters because will an extra week change what they already believe?
Admittedly they are truthful in that a shutdown would still keep the vast majority of DHS employees on the job. They neglect to say, however, that these employees would not be paid until Congress authorized funding. My question was and is will Members of the House provide no interest loans from their personal pay to these DHS employees? All I hear is a cricket serenade in the city and ad hominem attacks from “conservative” pundits.
Perhaps the pundits may have contributed to the chirping or stridulation to show off my fancy public schooling education, but with CPAC in town Members of Congress had more important matters. We’re almost 2 months into the 1st session of the 114th Congress, and they have been in session 25 days of the 54 + days they could have been meeting. With elections less than 2 years away, there is a need to fundraise before it is too late to seek reelection or another office.
Anyone has a right not to respect Barack Obama as a person, but should we display a lack of respect for the office of the President of the United States of America?
I know, some will say that this President does not respect the Constitution. Perhaps, and I have written previously about the most common and effective ways to counter Executive Orders and Executive Actions that earlier Congresses utilized when they felt a President had overreached the authority of the office.
Personally, I proffer that Barack Obama is similar to the other Presidents in my lifetime and historically more like previous Presidents than different.
What is different, and I wonder about are the Constitutional understandings historically for Congress to leave so many decisions up to the courts. Think about it. In 1789 the states ratified the Constitution, and in 1791 the amendments which we call the Bill of Rights became a part of the document. It was a decade following the Bill of Rights when the wheels began turning for a dramatic decision given 2 years later, a dozen years following the Bill of Rights, in 1803. Chief Justice John Marshall and a unanimous Supreme Court rendered the decision in Marbury v. Madison. Unrealized at the time, the idea of judicial review had been established.
Today, it seems as if Congress does not seek judicial review, but is abdicating its power to legislate to the courts. Likewise it seems that Congress on a number of occasions such as with the sequester cuts decided to abdicate its power of the purse to the President instead of making tough and unpopular decisions.
Perhaps that is in the best interest of Congress. The Supreme Court has been favorable to Congressman and other elected officials with decisions such as that rendered in Citizens United v. FEC in 2010.
Has our legislative process changed?
Although I do argue differences, for simplicity here I’ll accept arguments that Citizens “leveled” the playing field with groups such as labor unions.
My question is, and it does not matter if ideologically one leans left or right, has the playing field tilted to such a degree that our elected officials no longer hear the thoughts of people like you and me as we exercise our individual rights?
Below are an article and gateway for additional thoughts and resources.