DACA Was Only One Part of Obama's Seizure of Congressional Power
The
DACA program being terminated by AG Sessions was a Federal program
started by President Obama. The program was promoted as an
administrative strategy to provide eligible youth relief from
deportation. Since the entire issue has been clouded with political
rhetoric it’s important to look at its legal and constitutional status.
The
DACA program was started when on November 20, 2014 President Obama
issued an Executive Order. It’s important to note that the US
Constitution does not allow any president to set immigration policy.
Since the DACA EO was directed to delay deportation of illegal
immigrants it clearly falls under the authority of the Immigration and
Naturalization Service, and those Federal rules can only be passed by
Congress. The Constitution clearly
states in Article I Section 8 clause 3 that only the Congress shall
have power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” It
further states that all legislative powers shall reside in Congress,
which shall be composed of a House of Representatives and a Senate.
The
power to establish any rules regarding immigration do not reside in the
office of President and never have. So, at this point the question is
moot: President Obama did not have any authority to issue a DACA order
through any “executive action.”
President Obama himself stated twenty-two
times that he has no authority over issues of immigration. This then
means he can’t unilaterally change any immigration laws. But President
Obama’s entire presidency was an exercise in executive overreach, and
several of the changes he made to immigration law were overturned by the
Supreme Court.
It’s
important to understand that whether or not one agrees with what
President Obama does about immigration is irrelevant: he has no
authority under the Constitution to write or rewrite, or amend, the
rules of immigration passed by Congress such as the 1996 Illegal Reform
and Immigration Responsibility Act. What President Obama frequently did
during his presidency was go around Congress and write his own laws by
changing the application of existing law through new regulations and
rules. He has no more authority to change laws through bureaucratic
rule changes than he does to pass a law.
But
this was something he established immediately in his first term. The
$800 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), designed to
work around existing Federal laws, was clearly established to enable
President Obama and his private army of appointed bureaucrats to rewrite
existing laws. The Act states,
on page two, “The Presidents and the heads of Federal departments and
agencies shall manage and expend the funds made available in this Act so
as to achieve the purposes specified in subsection (a)…”
While
this one sentence seems innocent enough, consider that the department
heads were then appointed by President Obama as “czars.” These czars
were discussed by Judicial Watch in a special report published
September 15, 2011. The report states “the number of czars that have
been appointed by the President, or by others in his Administration,
appears to total 45…there are as many as 18 other unfilled or planned
czar positions.”
These czars were clearly appointed by Obama to spend money on policies chosen by President Obama. In addition, in 2011, 56% of
the Federal budget was dedicated -- pre-spent -- on mandatory
programs. This includes the entitlement programs that earn the
Democratic Party the votes of program-dependent voters throughout the
US. So, between the czars, ARRA act money and mandatory spending,
President Obama’s party had seized the will and consent of the voters
and used the czars to both choose public policies and pay for them. At
the same time, he refused to negotiate with Republicans on a budget.
The Republican House after 2010 was forced to just go along with
existing mandatory spending programs and through this strategy,
President Obama seized control of the Congress as well, even though his
party didn’t have majority control. This is perhaps unprecedented in US
history -- just as the illegal immigration strategy is unprecedented.
The
DACA act is just one of many hundreds of major programs. The strategy
President Obama used to create DACA, while unconstitutional, is minor
compared to the trillions of dollars spent on the mandatory programs
already established to keep his party in control of policy and the
national budget.
It’s
no coincidence that the nation’s credit rating was downgraded after
Congress passed the Budget Control Act of 2011, which didn’t control the
budget in 2012 or in the future. In fact, the budget of the US
continues to spiral out of control. Its major component now is
mandatory spending, spending that goes on automatically, without the
voters having any influence as to how their will and consent, as
expressed in national elections, is realized through appropriations.
The
Democratic Party’s control of the US Government in Washington is now
effectively a fact. Since no one, under existing practices, will bring
mandatory spending under control, the DACA policy can be seen as just
one more usurpation of the power of Congress to control the rules of
naturalization. The far bigger issue is the impact the growing debt,
interest payments taxpayers are forced to pay, and loss of control they
have over Congress has in dismantling the role voters have in the
functions of the Federal government.
There’s
no doubt that Barack Obama, the unknown candidate from Chicago, was put
into office to promote the Democratic Party’s control of US government
at all levels, since all units of government, from the smallest town to
the largest state, now heavily depend upon mandatory spending. This
does not bode well for the ability of voters to control the direction of
government or for the US to remain a government that is, in Lincoln’s
words, “of the people, by the people and for the people.”
DACA program being terminated by AG Sessions was a Federal program
started by President Obama. The program was promoted as an
administrative strategy to provide eligible youth relief from
deportation. Since the entire issue has been clouded with political
rhetoric it’s important to look at its legal and constitutional status.
The
DACA program was started when on November 20, 2014 President Obama
issued an Executive Order. It’s important to note that the US
Constitution does not allow any president to set immigration policy.
Since the DACA EO was directed to delay deportation of illegal
immigrants it clearly falls under the authority of the Immigration and
Naturalization Service, and those Federal rules can only be passed by
Congress. The Constitution clearly
states in Article I Section 8 clause 3 that only the Congress shall
have power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” It
further states that all legislative powers shall reside in Congress,
which shall be composed of a House of Representatives and a Senate.
The
power to establish any rules regarding immigration do not reside in the
office of President and never have. So, at this point the question is
moot: President Obama did not have any authority to issue a DACA order
through any “executive action.”
President Obama himself stated twenty-two
times that he has no authority over issues of immigration. This then
means he can’t unilaterally change any immigration laws. But President
Obama’s entire presidency was an exercise in executive overreach, and
several of the changes he made to immigration law were overturned by the
Supreme Court.
It’s
important to understand that whether or not one agrees with what
President Obama does about immigration is irrelevant: he has no
authority under the Constitution to write or rewrite, or amend, the
rules of immigration passed by Congress such as the 1996 Illegal Reform
and Immigration Responsibility Act. What President Obama frequently did
during his presidency was go around Congress and write his own laws by
changing the application of existing law through new regulations and
rules. He has no more authority to change laws through bureaucratic
rule changes than he does to pass a law.
But
this was something he established immediately in his first term. The
$800 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), designed to
work around existing Federal laws, was clearly established to enable
President Obama and his private army of appointed bureaucrats to rewrite
existing laws. The Act states,
on page two, “The Presidents and the heads of Federal departments and
agencies shall manage and expend the funds made available in this Act so
as to achieve the purposes specified in subsection (a)…”
While
this one sentence seems innocent enough, consider that the department
heads were then appointed by President Obama as “czars.” These czars
were discussed by Judicial Watch in a special report published
September 15, 2011. The report states “the number of czars that have
been appointed by the President, or by others in his Administration,
appears to total 45…there are as many as 18 other unfilled or planned
czar positions.”
These czars were clearly appointed by Obama to spend money on policies chosen by President Obama. In addition, in 2011, 56% of
the Federal budget was dedicated -- pre-spent -- on mandatory
programs. This includes the entitlement programs that earn the
Democratic Party the votes of program-dependent voters throughout the
US. So, between the czars, ARRA act money and mandatory spending,
President Obama’s party had seized the will and consent of the voters
and used the czars to both choose public policies and pay for them. At
the same time, he refused to negotiate with Republicans on a budget.
The Republican House after 2010 was forced to just go along with
existing mandatory spending programs and through this strategy,
President Obama seized control of the Congress as well, even though his
party didn’t have majority control. This is perhaps unprecedented in US
history -- just as the illegal immigration strategy is unprecedented.
The
DACA act is just one of many hundreds of major programs. The strategy
President Obama used to create DACA, while unconstitutional, is minor
compared to the trillions of dollars spent on the mandatory programs
already established to keep his party in control of policy and the
national budget.
It’s
no coincidence that the nation’s credit rating was downgraded after
Congress passed the Budget Control Act of 2011, which didn’t control the
budget in 2012 or in the future. In fact, the budget of the US
continues to spiral out of control. Its major component now is
mandatory spending, spending that goes on automatically, without the
voters having any influence as to how their will and consent, as
expressed in national elections, is realized through appropriations.
The
Democratic Party’s control of the US Government in Washington is now
effectively a fact. Since no one, under existing practices, will bring
mandatory spending under control, the DACA policy can be seen as just
one more usurpation of the power of Congress to control the rules of
naturalization. The far bigger issue is the impact the growing debt,
interest payments taxpayers are forced to pay, and loss of control they
have over Congress has in dismantling the role voters have in the
functions of the Federal government.
There’s
no doubt that Barack Obama, the unknown candidate from Chicago, was put
into office to promote the Democratic Party’s control of US government
at all levels, since all units of government, from the smallest town to
the largest state, now heavily depend upon mandatory spending. This
does not bode well for the ability of voters to control the direction of
government or for the US to remain a government that is, in Lincoln’s
words, “of the people, by the people and for the people.”
