News Briefing for Thursday, November 20, 2014


Immigrants baffled by lapse

“ is working better, but immigrants are running into what looks like an obvious slip-up. Call it the green card glitch: The website has no clear path to upload the government identification document that shows they are legal U.S. residents, and entitled to benefits under President Barack Obama’s health care law. It’s a baffling omission, say consumers and counselors assisting with this year’s sign-up drive. “It doesn’t list the green card as an option to upload,” said Elizabeth Colvin of Foundation Communities, an Austin, Texas, group that serves low-income people, including many immigrants. There’s a way to upload copies of other types of documentation, Colvin said, but not green cards. “The limited list of documents is confusing people and needs to be updated to include all accepted documents to verify identity,” she added. Administration spokesman Aaron Albright said a fix is in the works. The issue does not affect all applications from immigrants, he said, but certain cases where eligibility is unclear. “We are working to make it clear that consumers with any type of immigration issue can upload any form that is requested, including a copy of their green card,” said Albright. That can’t happen fast enough, said Angel Padilla, health policy analyst for the National Immigration Law Center. “These are the same type of glitches that immigrant families encountered last year during the first open enrollment.” Reaching immigrants, particularly Hispanics and Asians, is a priority as the administration seeks to increase the number of people signed up for subsidized private health insurance through federal and state exchanges. Latinos are the largest pool of immigrant applicants, and many hesitated to sign up last time. A total of about 7 million people are now enrolled, and Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell has set a target of 9.1 million for 2015. Though that would represent a 30 percent enrollment increase, it’s well below the 13 million that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had forecast for 2015. The markets are for people who don’t have access to coverage on the job. Compared with last year’s website dysfunction, the green card glitch is just an irritant, something that requires extra effort from certain applicants and that may cause additional anxiety.”

Legal immigrants report issues with signups

“While immigrants say their experience with has improved with time, a select group has reported troubles with verifying their eligibility for Obamacare, according to the Associated Press. Immigrants seeking to verify their eligibility are able to enter their green card numbers into the website, but advocates say the process is causing issues. “The limited list of documents is confusing people and needs to be updated to include all accepted documents to verify identity,” Elizabeth Colvin of Foundation Communities, a group in Texas serving low-income people including immigrants, told the AP. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services says the issue is only being experienced by a small group of customers, but emphasize that they’re working to fix the issues involved.”

Glitchy All Over Again: HealthCare.Gov Still Doesn’t Accept Green Cards


Two Obamacare insurers caught overstating number of doctors in network

“Two California health insurers selling policies through President Obama’s healthcare law were caught listing doctors in their directories that weren’t actually accepting their plans. A five month long investigation conducted by the California Department of Managed Health regulatory body concluded that Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield of California not only failed to maintain an accurate listing of doctors participating in their networks, but also used that inaccurate information in promotional materials intended to bring in new enrollees. The investigation was launched in response to “numerous consumer complaints” about difficulty finding accurate information on in-network doctors in plans sold through Covered California. The DMHC found that 12.5 percent of physicians listed in the Anthem Blue Cross online directory were no longer operating at the provided location while another 12.8 percent were not willing to accept Obamacare patients. Blue Shield customers didn’t fare much better, as 18 percent of their directory listings contained inaccurate location information, and another 8.8 percent of doctors were not accepting Blue Shield’s Covered California plans at all. Anthem and Blue Shield have acknowledged problems with their healthcare directories and are in the process of fixing them. However, they contend that the methodology of the study was flawed. DMCH spokesman Rodger Butler said a follow up investigation will be conducted in six months to monitor progress. The troubling report comes as the re-enrollment deadline for those insured by Covered California plans approaches in early 2015. So far over 1.3 million Californians have chosen health care plans through the Obamacare and Covered California hopes to enroll another half a million people by the Feb. 15 deadline.”


Tapper: Gruber exposes explicit Obama lie on ObamaCare; Update: Video fixed

“Last night, Noah posted the 2-minute video from American Commitment on Gruberama that he called “positively enraging.” Not too many media outlets have responded to this story very well, but Jake Tapper at CNN has been an exception to that rule. Today, Tapper offers a four-minute video that not only will enrage but enlighten on exactly why Jonathan Gruber’s remarks are a story, and why the White House denials of connections to Gruber are another story in themselves. Both speak to credibility, and on both Gruber and ObamaCare, Barack Obama has none at all:

One video to explain Jon Gruber and Obamacare


The Gruber Attack [Video for Health Care Compact]


Gruber’s PR People Refuse University Request to Repost His Video

“A public-relations firm representing Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber is refusing university requests to repost videos of the MIT professor’s explosive remarks. On Monday, the University of Rhode Island removed a October 2012 video of Gruber, in which the professor explained how the law was written to “exploit” the American voters’ “lack of economic understanding.” Observers cried foul, claiming the university was attempting to censor material that could prove harmful to the Affordable Care Act or the Obama administration. But on Wednesday URI said that, after reviewing their contract with Gruber in the wake of an Associated Press request for the video, they found they did not have the rights to post the video on their own university website. They removed the video and contacted W. Colston Leigh, a PR firm representing Gruber in his speaking engagements, to request permission to repost the professor’s speech. The PR firm denied that request without explanation. Wesley Neff, the president of W. Colston Leigh, did not respond to a request for comment. The University of Pennsylvania also removed a Gruber video from their university website earlier this month, in which he mocks the “stupidity of the American voter.” That video, however, was quickly reposted following a firestorm of criticism. It is unclear if that university signed a different contract with Gruber or his representatives. UPenn’s Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics did not respond to a request for comment.”


O’Reilly On Jonathan Gruber: “The Supreme Court Is Taking Notes”


Gruber’s contract with Vermont ends after missteps on ObamaCare pile up

“Following an embarrassing string of missteps, Vermont has stopped paying controversial economist Jonathan Gruber for his work on the Affordable Care Act. A spokesman for Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin said Wednesday that the state would no longer pay the ObamaCare architect. “As the Governor and I have said, the comments by Mr. Gruber are offensive, inappropriate and do not reflect the thinking of this administration or how we do things in Vermont,” Lawrence Miller, said Wednesday in a statement. “As we have also said, we need solid economic modeling in order to move forward with health care reform.” Miller continued that he told Gruber, “that I expect his team to complete the work that we need to provide the legislature and Vermonters with a public health care financing plan. I’ve informed Mr. McGruber that we will not be paying him any further for his part in completing that work.” Gruber’s original contract with the state was worth more than $400,000. He’s already been paid $160,000. The news about Gruber was made public at an informational session for Vermont’s legislators.”


‘Dumbstruck’ Bob Schieffer Says Gruber Should Repay $400K Obamacare Lucre


Obamacare Official Calls Attempt ‘Cruel And Uncaring March’

“A top Obamacare official called the effort to launch last year’s utterly unusable a “cruel and uncaring march” in emails to top U.S. tech official Todd Park, who’s denied knowing much about the website at all. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ Michelle Snyder, second only to agency chief Marilyn Tavenner, wrote to former U.S. Chief Technology Todd Park several times about Tavenner’s bitter and demanding attempts to launch on time — “no matter what,” according to Fox News. “Just so you know [Tavenner] decided in January we were going no matter what,” Snyder wrote to Park in September 2013, according to emails obtained by Fox News. “Hence the really cruel and uncaring march that has occurred since January when she threatened me with a demotion or forced retirement if I didn’t take this on.” “Do you really think [Tavenner] has enough understanding of the risks to fight for a delay — no and hell no,” Snyder told Park in September, before launched. Park said in congressional testimony to the House Oversight Committee in 2013 that he doesn’t “actually have a really detailed knowledge base of what actually happened pre-Oct. 1. … I am not even familiar with the development and testing regiment that happened prior to Oct. 1.”



Kasich defends Medicaid expansion, Common Core on Republican governors panel

“If Ohio Gov. John Kasich really is running for president, he accomplished one goal today at the Republican Governors Association meeting. He stood out from the crowd. In his first public appearance at the two-day event, Kasich wound up getting both the first and last words before hundreds of GOP backers in a ballroom of the gated Waldorf Astoria resort during a high-profile panel discussion involving four other governors mentioned as potential presidential candidates. And he wound up as the only one to defend Common Core, advocate Medicaid expansion and say he is open to the possibility of eventual citizenship for immigrants currently in the country illegally. The panel with Kasich, moderated by Meet The Press host Chuck Todd, included Govs. Mike Pence of Indiana, Rick Perry of Texas, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Scott Walker of Wisconsin. The other four all questioned stances advocated by Kasich – while being careful to add that they weren’t criticizing any governor doing the best for his state. But since Kasich’s policies are generally more moderate than the others’ on the stage, Todd often went to him to get a different point of view. And the Ohio governor usually delivered. For instance, while the others were bashing President Barack Obama’s reported plan to change the legal status of several million immigrants, Kasich called on GOP leaders to work with the president to find common ground – even with his mistaken plan to effect change unilaterally. Kasich told Todd he wouldn’t oppose eventual citizenship after a “laborious and tough process” because “we’ve got to think about what’s going to bring about healing…Everybody in this country has to feel as though they have an opportunity.” Nobody else on the panel used anything close to that language. Perry called Obama’s plan “unconstitutional,” Jindal labeled it “the heighth of arrogance,” Walker characterized it as a “cynical ploy” to divert Americans’ attention away from GOP electoral successes, and Pence criticized the president for moving “without the consent of the governed.” With Todd spending about half of the 75-minute session on immigration, Kasich took issue with some of the sharp-edged comments.  “We don’t need to poison any more wells,” he said. “We’ve got to be careful with the rhetoric because you get too far out on it, and people don’t want to deal” like he and other GOP leaders did with President Bill Clinton to balance the budget in the late 1990s. Kasich called the immigration controversy “emblematic of the overall tone we hear in America today. The country is just too divided. It’s ‘you got your stuff and I got my stuff.’” Kasich also chided critics who dub the Common Core as “Obamacore.” He said it is local school officials who are developing the curriculum – with parental input – to bring students to the national education standards at the heart of the program, which was sparked by the governors themselves. “There’s nobody from Washington or in Columbus telling the local school districts what the curriculum ought to be,” Kasich said. “I think it makes common sense.” On the expansion of Medicaid – which funds health care for the poor and disabled – Kasich said the billions in federal money Ohio got through Obamacare has freed up state and local cash to help additional people. “I’m proud of what we’ve been doing for people who’ve been living in the shadows, living under a bridge,” said Kasich, while adding that he strongly opposes Obamacare itself. Pointing out that President Ronald Reagan also expanded Medicaid, Kasich said health care has improved in Ohio since the expansion about a year ago to those making up to 38 percent over the federal poverty level.”




Nearly half oppose Obama immigration action

“Nearly half of all Americans are against President Obama’s soon-to-be-released plan to unilaterally protect millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation. A NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released Wednesday found that 48 percent oppose Obama taking executive action on immigration policy, compared with 38 percent who support the plan. The remaining 14 percent of respondents said they had no opinion or were unsure of the president’s action. Obama is expected to announce his immigration plan on Friday at a school in Las Vegas. The survey found that 63 percent of Democrats approve of the president taking executive action, versus 11 percent of Republicans and 37 percent of independents. The president is expected to grant as many as 5 million undocumented immigrants reprieves from deportation and issue work permits for many of them.”


Americans Oppose Obama’s Executive Amnesty By 10 Points

“Almost half of Americans, 48 percent, disapprove of President Obama’s decision to grant executive amnesty to an unknown number of illegal immigrants, according to a new NBC News poll, while just 38 percent support the idea. The full poll will not be released until tonight, and Obama will not announce the specifics of his amnesty plan tomorrow, but NBC News has shared the wording of their executive action question with Townhall: There are a number of problems with this question: 1) Obama will not be signing an “executive order” tomorrow. Not all executive actions are “executive orders.” For example, Obama’s first executive amnesty program, the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, was not done by “executive order.” 2. That first sentence completely primes the respondent into thinking Obama’s executive action is perfectly normal. After all, the question asserts as fact that “a president … can put some regulations into effect that do not require Congressional approval.” No mention is made of whether the presidential action is actually supported by Congressional statute. And Obama’s executive amnesty is absolutely not supported by statute. Obama is citing his executive “prosecutorial discretion” power as the legal basis for this amnesty. Congress has never empowered the president to unilaterally choose which groups of illegal immigrants he will enforce the law on, and which groups he will give amnesty to. 3. Since Obama’s executive action is based on inherent presidential power and not Congressional statute, there is no law Congress could pass “to take its place.”  Here is how a question on Obama’s immigration action should be worded: “President Obama has unilaterally created a new executive immigration program without any input from Congress. The program gives work permits and Social Security numbers to many illegal immigrants and requires most states to give them driver’s licenses too. Do you support or oppose this new program?” That would be a fair question. Hopefully other news organizations will hit closer to the truth.”


NBC poll: Executive amnesty is… pretty unpopular with just about everybody


Obama Faces Skeptical Public on Immigration Action — WSJ/NBC Poll

“President Barack Obama faces headwinds as he sets out to sell his executive action on immigration to the public, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll finds, even as public support for legalization of undocumented immigrants remains high. The survey found 48% of Americans disapprove of him acting alone on immigration, vs. 38% who approve. Among Latinos, 43% say they would approve of him acting alone, vs. 37% who oppose. The executive action, set to be announced later this week, is expected to offer a temporary legal status to several million people living in the U.S. illegally who have deep ties to the country, such parents of U.S. citizens. The question about executive action didn’t offer these details.”


NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll Shows Latinos Divided On Executive Amnesty

“A NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released Wednesday shows that a plurality of Americans do not support President Obama’s plan to take unilateral executive actions on illegal immigration. But more surprisingly, even Latinos — the community that is supposedly the chief benefactor of such an action — are divided on executive amnesty.  According to the poll, 43 percent of Latinos support the president’s plan, but 37 percent are opposed. By contrast, 48 percent of all Americans oppose executive amnesty, while 38 percent support the action. Fourteen percent say they don’t know or aren’t sure. When it came to the Latino response, NBC took the unusual step of casting doubt on its own poll. “The sample size here is small (just 110 Latino respondents),” they note, “so the numbers have a high margin of error.” The Wall Street Journal’s report did not include a similar disclaimer. Some have called the poll’s wording biased. Townhall’s Conn Carroll points out that the question’s first sentence told respondents that ”executive orders are actions taken by a president that can put some regulations into effect that do not require Congressional approval.” Carroll charges that section “completely primes the respondent into thinking Obama’s executive action is perfectly normal,” not illegal and unprecedented as Republicans claim.”



“A new NBC/WSJ poll shows that 37 percent of Latinos actually oppose President Obama’s expected executive amnesty while only 43 percent support it. That was enough for NBC’s Mark Murray to add a disclaimer to the results, pointing out the small sample size of Latinos in the poll. “The sample size here is small (just 110 Latino respondents), so the numbers have a high margin of error,” he wrote in an official report on the poll. Surprisingly, only 63 percent of Democrats support Obama’s decision while only 11 percent of Republicans support it. Thirty-seven percent of independents support his upcoming decision.”


Obama Spokesman Admits Amnesty Is Unpopular

“President Barack Obama knows his national amnesty is unpopular, White House spokesman Josh Earnest admitted Tuesday. The president is acting because “it is the right thing do, not because the polls are telling him its an extra-popular thing all around the country,” he said after a reporter cited a Nov. 18 poll which showed 48 percent opposition and 38 percent support for the president’s planned policy. The admission came at the tail-end of a press conference where Earnest tried to minimize the drama of the president’s unprecedented amnesty. Back in 2006, Obama admitted that large-scale immigration is unpopular, but called for progressives to create an election-winning black-Latino alliance. In his press conference, Earnest also hinted at splits within the Democratic Party. Obama has invited 18 Democratic Senators and House members to the White House for a Wednesday evening talk about the planned amnesty. “There continues to be a couple of lingering policy decisions that have to get locked down,” he said. The Democrats “will have a robust opportunity [to debate] about the decisions he’s made,” he said, adding that “the vast majority of the decisions have been made.”


Obama’s Made the Case against Executive Amnesty—Repeatedly


Obama’s Immigration Evolution in 60 Seconds (video)


Bret Baier: Obama’s Past Statements On Illegality Of Executive Amnesty ‘Pretty Devastating’ [VIDEO]





“Representative Henry Cuellar (D-TX) said that President Obama “sure has changed his mind” on whether he can implement his planned executive amnesty on Tuesday’s “Kelly File” on the Fox News Channel. “The president sure has changed his mind about what he can do and what he can do now” he declared, adding that he does think President Obama does have the power to go forward with his planned executive action, arguing “I’m just basing it on what I’ve seen other presidents in the past do, [on] the topic of executive orders. For example, Ronald Reagan and President Bush One also used the executive orders right after the 1986 law where certain people were going to be deported where they also allow[ed] a reprieve, they didn’t impose the classification, but to allow a reprieve from deportation.” Cuellar also stated, “personally, I prefer that we do a bipartisan, legislative approach where both Democrats and Republicans, sit down together, like President Reagan and the Democrats did in 1986,” but he re-iterated “in a very eerie way, when President Reagan was the president, the Senate had passed an immigration bill, the House did not pass it. So, he then took the executive order, same facts that we’re seeing here.”


Obama to host 18 Democrats, no Republicans, for immigration dinner

“President Obama will host numerous lawmakers at the White House for dinner Wednesday to brief them on the eve of announcing executive action on immigration reform. However, he didn’t invite any Republicans. White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Obama would have dinner later Wednesday with 18 Democratic lawmakers to discuss immigration. When asked why Obama wouldn’t break bread with GOP leaders, Earnest replied, “We’ve had any number of countless conversations with Republicans.” “If it were only dinner that was required,” he added when pressed on whether Obama was preventing compromise with Republicans. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Robert Menendez, D-N.J., are among those who will dine at the White House. Republicans were not happy about their exclusion from the dinner. “Yet another shining example of bipartisanship from this president,” quipped a senior House GOP aide. The White House has not released the full roster of those who will attend the dinner. In a prime-time address to the nation Thursday, Obama will announce executive action that spares up to 5 million undocumented immigrants from deportation. The overwhelming majority of those people are parents of children who are American citizens or legal residents, not so-called Dreamers.”

Obama Has Dinner With Pro-Amnesty Democrats, Does Not Invite Any Republicans

“President Obama is spending Wednesday night having dinner at the White House with Democratic congressional leaders ahead of his executive amnesty announcement Thursday. Obama will brief Democrats on his amnesty plan including Senate Minority Leader-elect Harry Reid and his party leadership members Sens. Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer and leading immigration advocate Bob Menendez. Republicans were not invited. “If it were only dinner that was required,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said at his press conference Wednesday when asked why there would be no Republicans at the dinner. Earnest would not reveal what the amnesty plan specifically entails. The White House will not publicize its legal justification for the amnesty action until after Obama announces it.”


Obama to unveil immigration plan Thursday night

“President Obama will outline his executive action to protect up to 5 million undocumented immigrants from deportation during a televised speech Thursday night and travel to Las Vegas Friday to promote the initiative. “Everybody agrees that our immigration system is broken. Unfortunately, Washington has allowed the problem to fester for too long,” Obama said in an online video posted Wednesday of his 8 p.m. address to the nation. “So what I’m going to be laying out is the things I can do with my lawful authority as president to make the system work better even as I continue to work with Congress and encourage them to get a bipartisan, comprehensive bill that can solve the entire problem. The White House has signaled to allies that Obama will defer deportations for the parents of children who are American citizens or legal residents, linking the measure to the amount of time such individuals have spent in the U.S. Such provisions would not be applied to the parents of Dream-Act eligible immigrants. The White House is holding a briefing for Senate Democrats on Thursday, at which point immigration is likely to be discussed. Obama will issue his executive action in the face of staunch opposition from Republicans. They argue the president lacks the constitutional authority to issue such a sweeping executive order and that such an action would derail the prospect of bipartisan compromise on Capitol Hill. “If ‘Emperor Obama’ ignores the American people and announces an amnesty plan that he himself has said over and over again exceeds his constitutional authority, he will cement his legacy of lawlessness and ruin the chances for congressional action on this issue — and many others,” said Michael Steel, a spokesman for Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.”

Obama to announce immigration actions in Thursday address

“President Obama will announce his executive actions on immigration in a prime-time address to the nation on Thursday night. “Unfortunately, Washington has allowed the problem to fester for too long,” Obama said in a video posted to the White House’s Facebook page. “And so, what I’m going to be laying out is the things I can do with my lawful authority as president to make the system work better, even as I continue to work with Congress and encourage them to get a bipartisan, comprehensive bill.” Obama has invited Democratic leaders to the White House on Wednesday night for dinner to discuss the action he’ll take, along with a “couple other priorities,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said. In all, 18 members of Congress were invited to the White House, according to Earnest. Aides for House Speaker John Boehner (R) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) say they weren’t invited to the dinner. Obama said the 8 p.m. address will be followed by a trip to Las Vegas, where he’ll speak at Del Sol High School on Friday. The speech at Del Sol would provide a symbolic bookend on the president’s push for immigration reform. During a speech at the school in January 2013, he declared repeatedly “now is the time” for Congress to enact immigration reform. “We can’t allow immigration reform to get bogged down in an endless debate,” Obama said in the speech. “We’ve been debating this a very long time.” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said during an appearance at the National Press Club on Wednesday that the president’s announcement would happen “in the coming days.” “Legislative action is always preferable,” said Johnson. “But we have waited for Congress to act, and the Congress has not acted. The president has waited.” Johnson said the executive action would be comprehensive and would include border security measures.  It’s unclear exactly what executive actions Obama will announce. Multiple reports have suggested he is poised to dramatically expand his deferred action program, allowing the parents of children who are legal residents or citizens of the United States to avoid deportation proceedings and receive work permits. Obama might also expand the eligibility for the current deferred action program, which allows immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children to remain in the country and work. The president is also poised to expand how the federal government issues specialty visas for high-tech workers. In total, an estimated 4 million to 5 million illegal immigrants could be eligible for the program.”

Obama to announce executive action on immigration Thursday in primetime speech

“President Obama, following through on his vow to sidestep Congress, will announce in a prime-time TV speech Thursday the executive actions he will take to change U.S. immigration law. Obama will make his announcement, expected to protect roughly 5 million illegal immigrants from deportation, from the White House at 8 p.m. EST.”

Obama to announce immigration action Thursday

Obama to Announce Executive Action in Thursday Prime-Time Address

“Obama is expected to block deportations of parents of U.S. citizens or legal residents and focus deportations on convicted criminals, according reports last week by Fox News and the New York Times. Both the Times and Politico reported he would shield about 5 million people from deportation.”

President Obama to Announce Major Immigration Executive Action Thursday

Obama Will Announce Immigration Action in Primetime (Video)

Obama to Detail Immigration Plans in Address on Thursday

“President Obama will speak to the nation in a prime-time address on Thursday, asserting his authority to protect up to five million undocumented immigrants from deportation, the White House said, and setting in motion an immediate confrontation with Republicans about the limits of a president’s executive powers. In a video posted on the White House website Wednesday afternoon, Mr. Obama said that he would deliver the 8 p.m. speech from the White House to announce “steps that I can take to start fixing our broken immigration system.” “Everybody agrees that our immigration system is broken,” Mr. Obama said in the video. “Unfortunately, Washington has allowed the problem to fester for too long. What I’m going to be laying out is things that I can do with my lawful authority as president to make the system work better even as I continue to work with Congress and encourage them to get a bipartisan, comprehensive bill that can solve the entire problem.” The president will travel to a Las Vegas high school on Friday to rally support for his actions and to detail the impact of the move in a state where Hispanics are a growing and politically powerful constituency, he announced in the video. He invited key lawmakers to the White House on Wednesday evening to talk about his immigration plans. Mr. Obama has said for months that he would act to revamp the nation’s immigration enforcement system if Republicans continued to block a legislative overhaul that would enhance border security, increase legal immigration and provide a path to legalization for many of the 11 million people living illegally in the United States. The actions Mr. Obama is expected to announce will not go that far. But they will remove the threat of deportation for the parents of children who are citizens or legal permanent residents of the United States. He will also provide new guidance for the nation’s immigration enforcement agents and revamp the legal immigration system to provide more opportunities for high-tech workers from other countries. As many as four million immigrants living in the country illegally will get a reprieve from deportation under a new program similar to one that already protects undocumented people who were brought to the country as children, according to people who were briefed on the announcement by senior White House officials. The immigrants must have lived in the country for at least five years and have no criminal record.”

Obama: I Will Be Making An Announcement on Immigration Policy Tomorrow

Obama to Make Executive Action Announcement Thursday Night

Breaking: Obama to announce sweeping executive amnesty in Thursday night address

President Announces He Will Act Alone On Immigration

Obama to sign executive order on Thursday night despite Republican opposition.

Obama to unveil immigration plans Thursday


Obama Turns to Facebook to Announce Big News


Obama to announce immigration order in Las Vegas on Friday

“President Barack Obama plans to announce an executive order in Las Vegas on Friday to address immigration reform, CNBC has confirmed. Another source familiar with the situation told CNBC that Obama could yet give a broader outline on an immigration order on Thursday and add detail on Friday. The president has been long expected to make an announcement that would protect up to five million unauthorized immigrants from the threat of deportation and provide work permits. Partisan fighting erupted in the summer over how to address the increased flow of unaccompanied minors from Central America at the U.S. border with Mexico. Obama has asked for $3.7 billion to address the border crisis. In the summer, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, however, passed a measure that only gave Obama a fraction of what he sought and made it easier to deport the young migrants arriving at the border, a provision opposed by Democrats and immigration advocates. In the end, Congress adjourned without a final bill. The Democratic-led Senate last year passed a broad overhaul of immigration with support from some Republicans that boosted border security, increased visas for legal immigrants and a provided a path to citizenship for immigrants illegally in the country. But the Republican-controlled House balked at acting on any broad measure and House Speaker John Boehner informed Obama earlier this year that the House would not act in 2014. That led Obama to declare he would act on his own by issuing executive orders.”



Obama To Announce Amnesty To Latino Audience In Las Vegas

“President Barack Obama will pitch his unilateral amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants on Friday at a mostly Latino high school in Las Vegas. Del Sol High School will provide him with a cheering crowd because 58 percent of the students are Latino. The location will also aid his ally, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who faces a tough election in 2016, and who needs the support of Latino-dominated unions in the city. Obama reportedly will unveil the amnesty in a prime-time announcement on Thursday. That will maximize his persuasion, and minimize the media’s opportunity to quiz him about the fairness of the amnesty to Americans and its legality. The Las Vegas venue will also keep Obama far away from reporters as he announces the plan to award work permits to millions of illegals, and also, reportedly, to offer citizenship to several hundred thousand foreign professionals if they compete for jobs sought by debt-burdened American students. The announcement is a big risk for Obama and the Democratic Party, mostly because Americans strongly oppose Obama’s immigration policies by a ratio of three or four to one. Already, Obama’s push to wrap immigrants into the Democratic Party’s progressive-led coalition is pressuring GOP leaders and legislators in a more populist direction. That’s creating tension with the donors on Wall Street, who favor large-scale immigration.”


IMMIGRATION SHOWDOWN: Protesters To Meet Obama In Las Vegas

“Statewide tea party protests are being planned in Nevada to greet President Barack Obama’s announcement of executive action on amnesty. The president will announce his executive amnesty plan Thursday night at 8 p.m. in a primetime address to the nation. Obama will then speak at Del Sol High School in Las Vegas Friday with Senate Minority Leader-elect Harry Reid. Las Vegas Tea Party organizer Karen Steelmon sent the message out to supporters that statewide protests are being planned. “LOCATION TENTATIVELY AT DEL SOL HIGH SCHOOL ON E. PATRICK NOT VERIFIED…..KEEP FRIDAY OPEN TO PROTEST AT A MOMENTS NOTICE….DETAILS WILL BE POSTED HERE AS SOON ARE THEY ARE RECEIVED…..WE WILL COORDINATE PROTESTS STATEWIDE….”


Earnest On How Much Immigration Executive Orders Will Cost: “You’re Welcome To Ask”

“White House press secretary Josh Earnest evades answering questions from RCP White House correspondent Alexis Simendinger on how much his planned unilateral immigration reform executive orders will cost, how long it will take to implement, and when lawmakers and the business community will be filled in on the details.

ALEXIS SIMENDINGER, REALCLEARPOLITICS: When we get briefed, or we get information, will there be budgetary numbers attached to it? Will we be able to understand more what the projected cost or what the budgetary effect will be?

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE: Well, I don’t know if those numbers will be produced, but you are certainly welcome to ask about them. We’ll see if we can get you some answers.”


Earnest: Obama “Has Sought To Maximize The Use Of His Authority” With Immigration Action

“MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN: You’ve heard [Assistant to the President and Director of Domestic Policy Council] Cecilia Muñoz say a couple of times that the president will go as far as he can under the law.  Obviously we don’t know exactly what’s going to be in this, but would you stand by that, and has the president decided to go as far as he can under the law?

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE: Well, we will have an opportunity to talk about that a little bit more. I think it is fair to say that what the president asked the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to do is to examine what was in the law, and to compile or at least formulate a strategy for maximizing the authority that’s vested in the executive branch to try to address as many of these problems as possible. There may be some people who based on their own reading of the law believe that the president could have done more. That’s why I would hesitate to use the formulation that you repeated there. But I think, by any measure, upon reviewing the actions that the president has chosen to take, an impartial observer would conclude that the president has sought to maximize the use of his authority to try to solve these problems. And frankly, I think the American people expect the president of the United States to do. To use every element of the authority that’s available to solve problems.”



“In a video released by the White House, President Obama previewed his upcoming announcement on his planned executive actions on immigration reform. Obama confirmed reports that he would announce his plans on Thursday evening followed by an event at a high school in Las Vegas to highlight his executive action. “Everybody agrees that our immigration system is broken, unfortunately Washington has allowed the problem to fester for too long,” Obama said in the video, filmed with the president sitting on the desk in the Oval Office. “So what I am going to be laying out is the things that I can do with my lawful authority as president to make the system work better.”


Clinton says Obama on firm ground on immigration


White House readies immigration legal defense

Court and historical precedents eyed as bolstering case for unilateral action.


White House: We Can’t Give Details Of Obama’s Immigration Plan

“White House press secretary Josh Earnest said that he can not provide details of Obama’s planned executive action. “I can once the proposal is laid out,” Earnest said when asked at a press conference Wednesday afternoon when he can provide details of Obama’s immigration proposal. Obama is expected to announce an immigration executive order before the end of this week. Although the administration has focused its talking point on a plan to grant work permits to an estimated three to four million people immediately among other reforms, the actual details of the plan have never been confirmed. Senate Democratic leaders signed off on executive amnesty in a letter to Obama this week.”


Gutierrez Plays the Obamacare Defense: Voters Will Love Amnesty Once Obama ‘Explains’ It

“The Democratic lawmaker spoke on Wednesday with MSNBC’s Ed Schultz, who pointed out that Americans disapprove of Obama’s unilateral amnesty plan by a ten-point margin. “Well first of all, the American people have not been explained [sic] what kind of executive authority, and what the implications are for tens of millions of American families across the nation,” Gutierrez said. “I think once the president has an opportunity to explain it, those numbers are going to go up.” The argument echoes those made ad nauseam by Obamacare supporters, who insisted for years that a concerted effort to explain the benefits of the law would turn around public opinion, which has been against the law since it was passed in 2010. Obamacare is now even more unpopular than it was four years ago.”


Democrats face major challenges in selling executive action


Immigration activists make last-minute push

Advocates want to see more than 5 million spared deportation.

“A coalition of national religious leaders and immigrant-rights activists are planning a conference call Thursday morning – ahead of Obama’s scheduled 8 p.m. address – to insist that the number of people covered be increased., a Latino grassroots group, vented in a statement that the 5 million figure “would not even deal with half of the problem we currently face.” “The fact of the matter is that Republicans will show no mercy regardless of whether it is a comprehensive or partial solution,” said the group’s executive director, Arturo Carmona. “This week, the president has a historic opportunity [to] right his previous betrayals of the Latino community and lead the Democratic Party and Latinos back together.” And even though the full scope of Obama’s decision won’t be public until the address Thursday, several immigration advocates are already making their disappointment known. In an office near downtown Washington, Lorella Praeli on Wednesday told young immigrant activists who had flown in from across the country that parents of so-called Dreamers, or those brought illegally as minors to the United States by their parents, would likely not be protected under Obama’s plan. Including Dreamers’ parents had been a focus of aggressive lobbying by the young advocates.”


Immigrants wait, hope, plan for Obama order

“Obama said he’ll reveal the long-awaited order on Thursday. Alex Galvez, an immigration lawyer in Los Angeles, said he’s going to need to add phone lines to keep up with the demand. Orange County, California-based immigration lawyer Annaluisa Padilla said she’s getting twice as many calls as usual since buzz intensified over the plan, which would also grant the immigrants work permits. “It’s like the golden ticket,” she said. “Everybody who is calling my office is asking how can I get a work permit under Obama’s program? I am like, there is no Obama program yet.” Obama is expected to take executive action to protect many of the estimated 11 million people in the country illegally from deportation after Congress failed to pass an immigration overhaul. Republicans are vehemently opposed to the president’s likely actions, with some conservative members threatening to pursue a government shutdown if he follows through on his promises to act on immigration before the end of the year.”


DHS sec’y: Obama immigration plan ‘comprehensive’

“Homeland Security Secretary Jeh (jay) Johnson says President Barack Obama’s executive immigration actions will be comprehensive and include border security measures. Johnson says the administration came up with a variety of changes to the immigration system that he believes are not only legal but needed in light of inaction by Congress on immigration. Johnson spoke briefly about the president’s plan during an event at the National Press Club on Wednesday. He didn’t provide any details about Obama’s plan, saying he didn’t want to get out ahead of the president’s announcement. Johnson also says more clarity is needed for internal directives outlining how immigration authorities decide which immigrants living in the country illegally should be deported. He didn’t provide details.”


DHS secretary says country could face new surge of illegals

“Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson warned Wednesday that the country could face another spike in illegal immigration as the U.S. economy picks up and as seasonal patterns change, though he said they have made major progress in combatting the surge of illegal immigrant children that wrong-footed his department earlier this year. “We’re determined that we need to do more ourselves for border security,” Mr. Johnson said in a speech at the National Press Club sponsored by Democratic group NDN. “I’m concerned about the possibility of another rise in illegal migration.”


Obama’s Plan Could Shield Four Million


Obama’s Executive Order Could Be 100 Times the Size of Its ‘Precedent’

“He calculated that the semi-relevant Bush 41 program may have granted legal status to about 140,000 people — since that’s the number who ended up getting green cards after Congress made recipients of the program eligible for them. Obviously not of the same scale as the presidents’ action. But the difference actually seems to be even more dramatic, Mark points out on the Center for Immigration Studies’ website: As of January 1991, eight months after the Bush executive action had been announced, it was reported that 44,000 people had gotten legal status through the program. Even with a little wiggle room, Mark notes, this would make Bush’s program’s effect not much more than 1 percent of the potential scale of President Obama’s action, which is estimated to offer legal status to 4 to 5 million illegal immigrants. Now, it’s possible that the president’s plans won’t be taken advantage of by all eligible, so this is not a precise comparison. But I’ve composed a sophisticated infographic to give readers a sense of relative scale:”


Report: No Obamacare For Illegal Immigrants Under Obama’s Amnesty

“While President Barack Obama is getting ready to issue executive amnesty this week, administration officials are promising they won’t give the newly legalized immigrants access to Obamacare. Anonymous administration officials are saying ahead of Obama’s Thursday evening prime-time address on his executive amnesty that illegal immigrants will “most likely” be treated the same way as DREAMers — illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children, The New York Times reports. Because they won’t be granted full legal status by the amnesty, neither the 5 million illegal immigrants affected by the expected executive action nor DREAMers are eligible for Obamacare coverage or subsidies. But Health and Human Services secretary Sylvia Burwell said recently she would like to expand Obamacare eligibility to the group. “I think everyone probably knows that this administration feels incredibly strongly about the fact that we need to fix that” DREAMers can’t enroll in health insurance on Obamacare exchanges, Burwell said on a webcast with Latina bloggers. “We need to reform the system and make the changes that we need that will lead to benefits in everything from health care to economics to so many things — a very important step that we need to take as a nation.” Immigration advocacy groups have been pushing the administration to extend Obamacare eligibility to illegal immigrants for years, since the White House first announced in 2012 that it wouldn’t unilaterally extend Obamacare eligibility to DREAM-eligible youth.”


Obama’s immigration move expected to leave out millions of childless adults


What’s in Obama’s immigration plan

“The most far-reaching component of the president’s plan is to keep about 5 million people living in the U.S. illegally from being deported. An estimated 4 million of them would qualify for relief based on having children who are citizens or legal residents or because of the length of time they have been in the country, multiple sources familiar with the president’s plan confirmed. It’s not clear whether the president would require those being shielded from deportation to have lived in the country for five or 10 years, timelines previously reported. However, those awarded deportation reprieves would not be eligible for Obamacare benefits, sources confirmed. Millions of undocumented immigrants also would receive work permits, perhaps the most controversial provision of the executive action. Republicans argue that such measures would take jobs away from unemployed Americans. Notably, the work permits would not be granted to family members of so-called Dreamers, young illegal immigrants who entered the country after they were born. Among the other provisions of Obama’s blueprint is the replacement of Secure Communities, a law-enforcement program that checks the fingerprints of all inmates with the Department of Homeland Security to verify their immigration status. Obama is also expected to issue an unknown number of additional H1-B visas, something long sought by Silicon Valley and technology companies. Politico first reported those measures on Wednesday. Obama will announce his plan during a prime-time speech to the nation Thursday and then travel to Las Vegas to promote his actions on Friday. The initial details of the executive action sent ripple waves across Washington Wednesday, with Republicans insistent that Obama had already killed any hope of bipartisan compromise with GOP leaders ahead of the new Congress convening in January. “What incentive do we have to work with him?” complained one Republican Senate aide. “He is just doing whatever he wants. It doesn’t matter what the country wants.” An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released Wednesday found that nearly half of all respondents didn’t support Obama addressing immigration through executive order. Just 38 percent of those surveyed endorsed his approach.”


Obama’s announcement coincides with Latin Grammys

“President Obama’s announcement Thursday night of his plans to overhaul the nation’s immigration system is scheduled to happen at an opportune time — at least if the White House is hoping to reach a captive audience of Hispanic television viewers. Obama’s 8 p.m. Eastern time announcement will come at the start of the second hour of the 15th annual Latin Grammys, which begins at 7 p.m. Thursday on Spanish-language TV network Univision. At least 9.8 million viewers tuned in to all or part of last year’s telecast, meaning Univision defeated CBS, Fox and NBC that night. Univision says it will postpone part of the awards show to air Obama’s speech, while the big four TV networks, ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC, currently have no plans to air the address. Told about the scheduling coincidence by a pack of reporters, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) the second-ranking GOP senator, said, “Talk about a major pander.”


White House targets immigration rollout at Latino viewers

“President Barack Obama’s announcement of executive action on immigration won’t air on the four major broadcast TV networks, but it will reach the audience the White House cares most about: Hispanics. Univision is delaying its live telecast of the Latin Grammys to give airtime to Obama at 8 p.m. EST, meaning that millions of viewers tuning in to catch the start of the 15th annual airing of the award show will instead hear from the president on one of the most important issues for Latinos in the United States. The award show drew a total of 9.8 million viewers last year, including 1.2 million adults age 18-34, according to Nielsen. Telemundo will also adjust its programming for Obama’s speech from the White House, with a half-hour special examining his announcement. CNN, Fox News and MSNBC are also expected to air the president’s remarks live.”


Ron Fournier On Executive Amnesty: ‘A Lot’ Of Hispanics ‘See This As Pandering’ [VIDEO]

“We’re missing the big picture here,” he told the panel. “We’re all assuming Hispanics are going to be for this. If right now if we don’t have a majority of Hispanics who want him to do this by fiat, we could very much have in the next election the same thing that happened in this election. Of course, Hispanics are not going to vote for Republicans, but they could stay home. A lot of them already see this as pandering.” “Why, when he had of the control the Congress, why don’t he give them immigration reform that was durable? Or why not give bipartisan immigration?” Fournier asked. “…Hispanics know when they’re being pandered to and they’re being used politically, and they can see through this.”



“National Journal Senior Political Columnist and Editorial Director Ron Fournier said that the president’s planned executive order on immigration could cause the 2016 election to be like the 2014 election with low turnout among Hispanics on Wednesday’s “On the Record” on the Fox News Channel. “We’re all assuming Hispanics will be for this. If right now if we don’t have a majority of Hispanics who want him to do this by fiat, we could very much have in the next election, the same thing that happened in this election. Which was, of course, Hispanics are not going to vote for Republicans, but they could stay home. They see, a lot of them already see this as pandering…Hispanics know when they’re being pandered to and they’re being used politically, and they can see through this” he declared.”


Networks won’t air Obama speech

“Three major networks will not air President Obama’s prime-time address Thursday outlining his executive actions on immigration. Officials with ABC, CBS and Fox confirmed to The Hill that Obama’s 8 p.m. speech from the White House will not be carried on their networks. CNN reported that NBC would not be carrying the address either. Cable news networks are expected to carry the address, as is the Spanish-language networks Univision and Telemundo.

A source at one of the major networks told The Hill that the White House did not officially request prime-time coverage on the networks Thursday, a big night for ratings given popular shows on several networks, including ABC’s “Shondaland” schedule of shows created by producer Shonda Rhimes. The White House also downplayed the fact that the high-profile immigration address won’t be aired live on the big broadcast networks. “It’s not unusual for us to have off-the-record conversations with news organizations about events at the White House,” a White House official told The Hill. The official declined to elaborate but said the White House was “confident” the primetime address would garner “ample attention” from the media. November is a sweeps month for the broadcast networks, which might have made them less excited about handing over valuable prime-time real estate to the White House. Ratings during the month-long evaluation period are used to dictate advertising rates.”


CBS, NBC and ABC Were Not Asked to Air Obama’s Big Immigration Speech — This Might Be Why

“CBS, NBC and ABC were not asked to air President Barack Obama’s primetime announcement on immigration policy, CNN media reporter Brian Stelter reported Wednesday. Univision however, will air the speech, as will cable news channels. Stelter suggested this meant maybe the president is “not going all the way” in his announcement. “Maybe he’s trying to speak to a more niche audience,” the reporter said.”


White House hits TV networks for skipping immigration address

“The White House is exasperated with the major broadcast networks – ABC, CBS and NBC — for skipping out on President Barack Obama’s Thursday primetime address on his executive actions on immigration. “In 2006, Bush gave a 17 minute speech that was televised by all three networks that was about deploying 6000 national guard troops to the border. Obama is making a 10 minute speech that will have a vastly greater impact on the issue. And none of the networks are doing it. We can’t believe they were aggrieved that we announced this on Facebook,” a senior administration official told POLITICO. When the president wants to make a primetime address, White House officials will reach out to the big networks like ABC, NBC, and CBS, to gauge whether they would consider running the speech live before putting in a formal request for airtime. But on Wednesday morning, with plans underway for a Thursday night address on Obama’s plans to issue executive actions on some of the most sweeping immigration reform in decades, those feelers came back with a negative report. None of the major networks wanted to take time away from their primetime programming for Obama’s 8p.m. speech. So the administration did not send out a formal request to the networks and took to Facebook to publicize the speech with a special video message from Obama along with a link to the livestream. To be sure, the media landscape is a much different place now than it was in 2006. Smartphones and tablets that could play a livestream were nearly nonexistent. Facebook was barely a few years old. Nevertheless, the White House resents the networks’ new calculus.”


Some Senate Democrats balk at Obama’s unilateral immigration approach

“Several Democratic senators are uncomfortable with President Barack Obama’s decision to use executive action to make immigration reform, raising the possibility of open, bipartisan resistance to his plan. The senators, most from conservative states, objected to Obama’s unilateral approach, saying on Wednesday that they preferred Congress to take the lead with legislation. Democrats should try again to work with Republicans in Congress to set reforms in law, many said. No Democrats went so far as to say they were ready to break with the president, but several were critical of his go-it-alone approach. “I wish he wouldn’t do it,” Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia said. “I think we ought to work through this process, and with the new elections and the results of the elections, we ought to try in January to see if we can find a pathway to get something accomplished.” Republicans, who after midterm election gains will take control of the Senate in January, have uniformly condemned Obama’s plan to give deportation relief to as many as 5 million undocumented immigrants. They are considering ways to resist. Any defections in Obama’s own party would make that resistance bipartisan, further isolating the president and potentially making it even more difficult to pass other items on his agenda. If six or seven Democratic votes in the new Senate joined Republicans, they would have the 60 needed to block the executive order and force Obama into a politically embarrassing veto. Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri said she supported comprehensive immigration reform but was concerned by Obama’s plan. “I have to be honest, how this is coming about makes me uncomfortable, I think it probably makes most Missourians uncomfortable.”


Boehner’s Office: Obama’s ‘Amnesty’ Plan Cements His Legacy of ‘Lawlessness’

“A move by President Obama granting “amnesty” to some illegal immigrants would ruin the chances of Congress acting on immigration and other issues, a spokesman for U.S. House Speaker John Boehner warned on Wednesday. “If ‘Emperor Obama’ ignores the American people and announces an amnesty plan that he himself has said over and over again exceeds his constitutional authority, he will cement his legacy of lawlessness and ruin the chances for congressional action on this issue – and many others,” Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said in a statement emailed to reporters. Obama is expected to announce details of his executive action on immigration in a Thursday night speech, sources close to the administration said. Boehner and other House Republicans have voiced vehement opposition to any unilateral action by the president to ease immigration policy.”


GOP Lawmaker: ‘Remove The Fence From Around The White House’

“To make a point about the Obama administration’s stance on a fence across the southern border, one Republican lawmaker jokingly suggested in a congressional hearing Wednesday that the president should remove the fence protecting the White House. Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert made the comments during a House Judiciary Hearing Wednesday with Joseph Clancy, the acting director of the U.S. Secret Service. As lawmakers questioned the acting director about the recent fence jumpers at the White House, Gohmert connected the problem to border issues. Gohmert told Clancy that if Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano thinks building a fence on the border is “worthless,” than it would be consistent for the administration to be against a White House fence too. “I would think if the administration is going to be consistent,” Gohmert said, “it’s now time to remove the fence from around the White House. Because if it isn’t good enough for our border, it should not be good enough for the White House.” Making clear he wasn’t being completely serious, Gohmert told the director: “I would ask you to consider that consistency and also consider the fact that maybe there really is some real virtue in having a fence that slows people down.”

GOP Lawmaker: ‘Remove The Fence From Around The White House’

“To make a point about the Obama administration’s stance on a fence across the southern border, one Republican lawmaker jokingly suggested in a congressional hearing Wednesday that the president should remove the fence protecting the White House. Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert made the comments during a House Judiciary Hearing Wednesday with Joseph Clancy, the acting director of the U.S. Secret Service. As lawmakers questioned the acting director about the recent fence jumpers at the White House, Gohmert connected the problem to border issues. Gohmert told Clancy that if Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano thinks building a fence on the border is “worthless,” than it would be consistent for the administration to be against a White House fence too. “I would think if the administration is going to be consistent,” Gohmert said, “it’s now time to remove the fence from around the White House. Because if it isn’t good enough for our border, it should not be good enough for the White House.” Making clear he wasn’t being completely serious, Gohmert told the director: “I would ask you to consider that consistency and also consider the fact that maybe there really is some real virtue in having a fence that slows people down.”


Mia Love: “It looks more like a dictatorship” when Obama unilaterally decides to grant amnesty


LePage Adds Personal Note in Attacking Obama Immigration Plan

“Maine GOP Gov. Paul LePage Wednesday reacted strongly, and with a personal note, to news that President Barack Obama was soon to announce his plan to take executive action to shield millions of immigrants from deportation. “It’s very shameful,” said Mr. LePage, who said he had followed existing immigration procedures to spend 11 years and $80,000 to secure a green card for a young Jamaican, now 29 years old, who he calls his adopted son. “I should have just told him to go to Mexico and jumped the fence,” said Mr. LePage, who was here attending the semiannual meeting of the Republican Governors Association. Among the other Republicans there who criticized the impending Obama move was Gov-elect Larry Hogan of Maryland who said the White House should not be setting immigration policy unilaterally. “You should really get the input of Congress and the American people,” he said. Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback also criticized the move, saying that Mr. Obama would be wiser to move piecemeal immigration law changes through Congress. “The way to do this is to go for narrow shots,’’ such as expanding agricultural worker or high technology worker visas, Mr. Brownback said. “You’ve got to work with Congress.” Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said the president was demonstrating “arrogance,” and he should work with Congress on changes to immigration laws. “I hope there will be Democrats of conscience who will stand up and say this is wrong,” Mr. Jindal said about unilateral action. “The president can’t simply choose to ignore the law. There is a separation of powers for a reason.” Mr. Jindal said that more needs to be done to secure America’s borders, while efforts should also be made to assist those who want to come to the U.S. legally.”


GOP Governors Mostly Hostile on Obama Immigration Executive Action

“Asked specifically about a pathway to citizenship, Christie said he would share his thoughts on that issue: “If I run for president.” Other governors weren’t shy and didn’t hesitate to critique the president, with Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal calling it “absolutely an overreach of power.” “This is not how the president should be doing this. If he wants change then he should go to the House, go to the Senate and pass a bill changing the law. He’s not the first president to ever disagree with Congress, but he is becoming the first president to consistently throw a temper tantrum and ignore Congress time and time again,” Jindal said in an interview with ABC News. Indiana Gov. Mike Pence–also considering a possible run for the White House—said the president is acting without the “consent of the governed.” “I think it would be a profound mistake for the president to overturn America’s immigration laws with a stroke of a pen,” Pence said. Gov. Perry, also considering attempting another run in 2016, said he sees a “very real possibility” that his state of Texas sues the president over his executive action, something the man who will take over for him in January, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, has already been saying. Perry noted that he believes if the president does move forward he could even endanger his party’s chances of regaining power in Washington, saying it would be sticking a “a finger in the eye of the American people with no thought about it.” “I think the president is taking a major, major political chance with what he’s doing,” Perry said at an RGA session with four other possible 2016ers including Wisconsin’s Gov. Scott Walker, Ohio’s Gov. John Kasich, Pence and Jindal. “He’s putting his party in jeopardy, and I think he’s putting members of the Senate and the House in jeopardy,” Perry said.”


Immigration Has Republican Governors Seething and Facing Practical Challenges

“…The new legal protections that the president is poised to bestow on five million illegal immigrants Thursday will immediately thrust the issue back to the states, forcing dozens of governors who vigorously oppose the move to contemplate a raft of vexing new legal questions of their own, like whether to issue driver’s licenses or grant in-state college tuition to such people…Many of them seethed visibly over the issue. Gov. Rick Perry of Texas accused the president of “sticking his finger into the eye of the American people” after an election that gave Republicans control over both houses of Congress. Several governors threatened legal action to block the measure. “I would go to the courts,” said Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin. “This is illegal.” Mr. Perry called a lawsuit against the Obama administration “a very real possibility.” But amid the promises of retaliation and obstruction, many of the governors began to confront the sheer complexity of the new legal landscape for millions of their residents. Gov. Sam Brownback of Kansas said that his Republican-controlled State Legislature would never stomach the concept of issuing driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, even after Mr. Obama had given them worker permits and shielded them from deportation. “That would be very difficult in our state,” he said. For some of the governors, the issue took on a strikingly personal dimension. Gov. Paul R. LePage of Maine recalled the difficulty that he and his wife had encountered obtaining a green card for the Jamaican teenager they have taken into their home. “It took us nearly 11 years,” he said. “Why should everybody just get one tomorrow?” Asked if he would embrace greater legal standing for immigrants in Maine, such as worker permits, after Mr. Obama issues his measure, Mr. LePage swatted away the idea as “unacceptable.” He then added, “I am fighting it, not helping it.”


“Republican governors slam Obama’s immigration “mistake”







“Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) denounced President Obama’s planned executive amnesty as “unconstitutional and illegal” after the president revealed that he would announce his planned action on Thursday evening. “I believe his unilateral action, which is unconstitutional and illegal, will deeply harm our prospects for immigration reform,” Cornyn said on the floor of the Senate on Wednesday. “It will be deeply harmful to our nation’s tradition of the rule of law and deeply harmful to the future of our democracy.” Cornyn also cast doubt on the legality of Obama’s upcoming decision, reminding the Senate that the president himself has said on multiple occasions that he does not have the power to grant executive amnesty. “I know the White House counsel’s office is preparing a convoluted legal case to justify the president’s actions,” he said. “Most Americans will correctly view this as an abuse of power.”


Republican Paul Ryan calls Obama immigration order a ‘partisan bomb’

“U.S. Representative Paul Ryan, the Republican Party’s leading voice on fiscal policy, warned on Wednesday that President Barack Obama’s looming immigration order is a “partisan bomb” that will sour his relations with Congress on a range of issues, including tax reform. Ryan, just chosen as the next chairman of the powerful tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, told Reuters in an interview that the move would signal that Obama intends to battle congressional Republicans for advantage in the 2016 election rather than work with them to reach compromises. “I think it would do great damage in his relations with Congress,” Ryan said of an expected Obama move to allow millions of undocumented immigrants to remain in the United States. “If he chooses to do this, we will see this as a move for him to play 2016 politics, to try and help his party versus our party, instead of working and coming to common ground with Republicans in 2015 to get things done, which is what I think the voters told us they want in this very last election.”


Republicans: Exec Action Timing Sends Divisive Signal

“Miffed that President Barack Obama plans to announce his immigration actions while they are strapped in at 30,000 feet en route to their home districts, congressional Republicans say the timing shows that the president has no regard for their input. Obama intends to lay out the details of his immigration order at 8 p.m. Thursday, five hours after the House plans to wrap up voting and as many legislators will be making their way home for a 10-day recess. “It is exactly calculated,” said Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, a member of the House Judiciary Committee. “The president — at least his staff — has taken a look at what time the planes take off from Dulles and Reagan, and they’ve looked at what time we will be recessing here. When most of the members are wheels up, that’s when he does his announcement.” Obama said Wednesday afternoon that he plans to “continue to work with Congress” on a comprehensive overhaul of the immigration system after his order is unveiled. But Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., said the scheduling of his delivery sends a message contrary to a willingness to compromise.

“The first move out of the box is one of division, instead of unification — one of defiance, rather than saying: ‘Let’s work together. Let’s see what we can do,’” Coburn said. “It’s poor leadership.” Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., said the president’s choice of timing is “really kind of an ‘in your face’ to Congress” and that it is “backward” to seek common ground on a legislative overhaul of the immigration system after taking executive action. House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said the president’s promise of trying to find compromise on immigration legislation rings hollow. “In the next Congress, his executive order would be just as effective or ineffective. But he wasn’t willing to give a chance to have an actual negotiation on what could become law,” Issa said. “You don’t poison the water and then talk about drinking it.” Issa noted that the immigration announcement will coincide with televised coverage of the Latin Grammy Awards Show — a move he said is “the height of arrogance.” “This is just a political stunt,” the chairman said.”



“Republican House members are calling on President Obama to work with Congress to pass immigration reform instead of moving forward with his expected executive amnesty. In a letter to Obama dated Tuesday, nearly three dozen Republicans lawmakers — led by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) — argue that executive action would hurt efforts to legislate the issue. “While Congress certainly understands the need for reforms to the current system, it is imperative that we work together to pass legislation that improves our immigration system, increases border security, and disincentives undocumented immigration from illegally entering the United States,” they write. “Any unilateral action taken by the Administration will impede our efforts.”

The lawmakers referenced a Nov. 5 statement Obama made when asked about his executive actions following a Democratic shellacking in the midterm elections. “I’ll be reaching out to both Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and other Republican as well as Democratic leaders to find out how it is that they want to proceed. And if they want to get a bill done — whether it’s during the lame duck or next year — I’m eager to see what they have to offer,” he said, after asserting his plans to continue moving forward with executive actions before the end of the year.

According to the members, Obama needs to work with Congress now and not hurt the prospect of immigration reform via the legislative process. “We asked that you deliver on your word and allow Congress to debate and vote on a bill for you to sign. We strongly encourage the Administration under your leadership, to work with the 114th Congress to pass sensible, long-term reforms to address our nation’s immigration issues. Our nation’s immigrants deserve concrete policies that become law after thorough discussions,” the lawmakers concluded.”



“It would be “a slap in the face” to Americans if President Obama moves forward with executive amnesty, House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul (R-TX) warned Wednesday. “The latest indications that you will take executive action on immigration later this week are a slap in the face to the American people and the Constitution,” the chairmen wrote in a letter to Obama Wednesday, noting Democrats’ recent defeat in the midterm elections and polls showing Americans oppose executive actions on immigration. Reports indicate that Obama will announce his executive actions on immigration as soon as Thursday, and Republicans are currently working on ways to combat what they expect to be his unconstitutional actions. Goodlatte and McCaul — whose committees oversee immigration law and border security, respectively — stressed to Obama that should he move forward, his actions would exacerbate the problem of illegal immigration.

“In the past, we have seen the surge in illegal immigration that comes when amnesty is promised and the enforcement of our immigration laws is ignored. With more than 11 million unlawful immigrants already in the United States, the answer to our immigration crisis is not to invite more illegal immigration,” the chairmen wrote. The pair further argued that circumventing Congress to change laws is not constitutional, and called on Obama to abandon his plans for unilateral action on immigration to work with Congress. “Instead of proceeding with ill-advised executive action, we implore you to work with Congress to enact legislation to address our broken immigration system. We strongly urge you to respect the Constitution and abandon any unconstitutional, unilateral executive actions on immigration,” they wrote, going on to call on Obama to work with them to secure the border and work on interior enforcement of immigration law. Without a cooperative effort from Obama however, the two chairmen warned they would “be forced to use the tools afforded to Congress by the Constitution to stop your administration from successfully carrying out your plan.”




Republicans outraged by Obama’s immigration plan

“Republicans on Capitol Hill began to lash out at President Obama Wednesday after he announced plans to unveil executive actions on immigration in a primetime address Thursday evening.  “The president is throwing this nation into a crisis and we have an obligation to do our duty, here, and in the Senate,” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) told reporters. Obama purposely timed the announcement, King said, to coincide with lawmakers leaving Washington Thursday for Thanksgiving recess. King said he’s staying behind in Washington to deal with the issue.  “I decided in an instant, I’m staying,” he said. King laid out three steps the House could take to respond to Obama, including a resolution of rejection, censuring Obama and defunding the order to prevent its implementation. He stopped short of supporting impeachment.

“I don’t want to go down that path. We have lived through that and it put the nation through a lot of trauma,” he added. Some Republicans expressed frustration that Obama invited only Senate and House Democrats to dinner Wednesday evening to huddle before the announcement. Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said the fact that Republicans were not invited signals that Obama is creating “the beginning of a political campaign” that provokes “partisan warfare” and not a bipartisan agreement. “Why would you do this on the eve of Thanksgiving, going into holidays, unless you want to create a political fight?” Cole asked. “I mean I’m mystified by the political calculus.” Republicans should have been included in Wednesday’s dinner, said Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.). “I think that’s endemic of how the president has run his office,” she said. “He has been unwilling to reach out to Republicans.” Bachmann called Obama “cynical” for issuing the order after the midterm elections when so many Democrats faced tight reelection races. “He chose not to do this before the election because he knew his party would take an absolute drubbing at the polls,” she said. “In all likelihood, Scott Brown would have won his race in New Hampshire. In all likelihood, that would have caused Ed Gillespie to win in Virginia.” Bachmann and King both support the push to defund Obama’s immigration action through legislation that’s separate from a main government spending bill to avert a full government shutdown. While Rep. Steve Stivers (R-Ohio) said he’s “bothered when somebody tries to pass laws through executive actions,” he said it’s not worth another government shutdown. “I don’t advocate that. I think that is a mistake,” he said. Defunding the action through the appropriations process “is a hard place to solve this problem,” he added, but “not impossible.”


‘Emperor Obama’ Warned Against Immigration Executive ‘Amnesty’

“With the White House appearing near to announcing a broad executive amnesty in the coming days, a spokesman for Speaker John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, warned of blowback. “If ‘Emperor Obama’ ignores the American people and announces an amnesty plan that he himself has said over and over again exceeds his Constitutional authority, he will cement his legacy of lawlessness and ruin the chances for Congressional action on this issue — and many others,” said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel. Steel has also noted the numerous times that President Barack Obama has said he doesn’t have the authority to stop deportations on his own without Congress.”

Boehner Spokesman Warns ‘Emperor Obama’ Against Friday Immigration Action

“A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) labeled President Barack Obama as “Emperor Obama” on Wednesday, after the White House leaked to reporters that the president would act unilaterally on Friday to amend U.S. immigration laws. “If ‘Emperor Obama’ ignores the American people and announces an amnesty plan that he himself has said over and over again exceeds his constitutional authority, he will cement his legacy of lawlessness and ruin the chances for congressional action on this issue – and many others,” Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said.”

GOP: ‘Emperor Obama’ would ‘ruin’ chances of immigration overhaul in Congress

“House Republicans are warning President Obama to refrain from taking executive action on immigration policy, which White House officials said will happen on Friday. “If ‘Emperor Obama’ ignores the American people and announces an amnesty plan that he himself has said over and over again exceeds his constitutional authority, he will cement his legacy of lawlessness and ruin the chances for congressional action on this issue, and many others,” said Michael Steele, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. Boehner has issued several public warnings to Obama about taking executive action on immigration, telling the president the move would make it impossible for Congress to work with him on a broader reform plan. Reports indicate the president may use executive action to spare millions of illegal immigrants from deportation and provide them with work permits and other legal benefits.”


Obama Rebuffs Boehner Warning on Immigration Action


Grassley Says Obama’s Immigration Action Worse Than King George


Sheriff Makes Social Media Plea To Obama to Forgo Amnesty

“Sacramento County, Calif. Sheriff Scott Jones is taking to social media to deliver a message to President Obama about securing America’s borders, telling the president that “deferred action or amnesty is deferring this crisis. It is not reform, it’s simply giving up.” In a YouTube video posted yesterday on the official Sacramento Sheriff account, Jones addresses President Obama, saying that he recently buried one of his deputies following the deadly shooting of two Northern California law enforcement officials. The man accused in the killings, Marcelo Marquez, is an illegal immigrant who had previously been deported a number of times. “I understand the integral role that the undocumented population plays in our national and state economies,” Jones says. “The problem I have is I can’t tell which ones are good and which ones are evil, and neither can you. By their very definition they are undocumented.” “Untracked, untraced and unaccounted for  – there is no way to know which of the 12 million undocumented persons in this country are good or bad. Don’t you think there should be some way of knowing, or at least some way to track [them]?” he asked. “This is not about racism  – it is about an increasingly violent and uncertain world in which we are inadequately protected,” Jones continues. “Mr. President, my request to you today can simply be stated: make immigration reform a priority. I do not care which reform you choose. Pathway to citizenship, guest work program, or any of the other innovative programs that currently exist.” “But deferred action or amnesty is deferring this crisis. It is not reform, it’s simply giving up. It does nothing to make America or the undocumented population any safer.” Jones continues: “For any facet of immigration reform to work our borders must be secure. So what possible reason could there be for not starting on this immediately?” he asked. “An American patriot, Ronald Reagan, once told Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev to ‘tear down this wall,’ to preserve democracy and secure safety and freedom for a nation,” Jones said.

Mr. President, Build Up This Wall!

“Meanwhile, while everyone is talking and pontificating, our country continues to see an influx of illegal immigrants. While many, heck, I’ll even give you “most” of those illegal immigrants are good, hardworking people looking for a better life, not all of them are. We already have enough problems with crime in here in this country without having to import more criminals, but that is exactly what we are doing by allowing the influx to continue unchecked. What does some dumb street cop know about illegal immigrants? Well, a lot actually, since I deal with them on a weekly if not daily basis. Like I said before, most of them are good folks, but not all of them are. The problem this country has is that it is impossible to tell the good from the bad by just looking at them, which is why we need to prevent their entry until they can be checked. The illegal immigrant population in our jails continues to grow. And do not confuse that growth to mean they are there for being illegals, they are there for committing other crimes. You see, being an illegal immigrant in the State of California is not a crime we can arrest you for. The only way you end up in a CA jail is by committing a felony. That is not new, but what is new is the Obama administration’s orders to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to not deport those individuals any longer. Sheriff Scott Jones of Sacramento, CA just released a video letter in which he specifically addresses President Obama, and calls on him to secure our borders.  Sheriff Jones, two weeks prior to the release of this video, had the unwelcome, unwanted job of burying one of his own deputies, Deputy Danny Oliver, who was killed by an illegal immigrant with a significant criminal history, who had been deported several times in the past, who should have never been in this county, but was here anyway.”



“Bexar County, TX Sheriff Susan Pamerleau (R) argued that focusing on the “humanitarian” aspects of illegal border crossings has “created vulnerabilities,” specifically taking “the emphasis away from the criminal factor” on Wednesday’s “Laura Ingraham Show.” “We certainly support humanitarian efforts for those who are oppressed and appear on our borders, but the singular focus on humanitarian issues created vulnerabilities, which, with all the focus on undocumented immigrants and undocumented children, took the emphasis away from the criminal factor” she said. Pamerleau added that illegal immigration “taps out resources for social services, puts a burden on that, and also takes away from funding that’s needed to make sure that we keep that border safe,” and reported that her county has seen massive amounts of gang violence, with “over 600” identified gang members in the county’s jail from up to 42 different gangs.”


MSNBC’s Wagner to Axelrod: Obama’s Immigration Executive Action Will End 2008 Promise Of Bipartisanship


CBS’s Major Garrett Grills Earnest: Is Obama Deliberately Goading GOP into Shutdown?

“CBS’s Major Garrett grilled White House press secretary Josh Earnest over the timing of President Obama’s decision to enact executive amnesty tomorrow, speculating that the president may be deliberately setting the decision against an upcoming congressional vote to fund the government.  Garrett noted that the continuing resolution set to expire on December 11 may be jeopardized by Republican opposition to the White House’s imminent executive amnesty. “Which is the president’s more preferred priority?” he asked Earnest. Earnest dismissed the question, saying it’s too early to tell what steps the GOP will take. But Garrett pressed on. “By the president’s own timing, he intended to do this — he made a public promise to do this — in September, and then delayed it, signaling to everyone that the timing of this is completely fluid,” he said. “It is discretionary. It’s at the president’s discretion.” “So in that sense, putting it up against a continuing resolution and a government shutdown scenario is also a discretionary decision of the president’s,” Garrett continued. “It seems like he’s putting it right next to these other things.” “That’s not the intent,” Earnest assured reporters. “This is not an effort to provoke a standoff here. . . . Are both parties responsible for the fact that both of these things are happening in relative close proximity? Probably? . . . But regardless of when the president decided to move forward on this action, I’m confident that there are plenty of senators that would’ve found a way to raise a ruckus about this.”


Obama Lays Down Immigration Gauntlet


Liberals and Caesarism

“When conservatives and moderates criticize this unilateralism, as I did earlier this week, we tend to get three responses from liberals. None of them make Obama’s plan sound any better. The first is that if Republicans dislike this step so much, they should pass their own bill through Congress. Jacob Weisberg takes this line in Slate. But just passing any old immigration bill would not stay the president’s hand. If Congress passed the immigration-enforcement bill the House voted for in 2005, Obama would almost certainly veto it and proceed with his plans. What these critics are saying is that Republicans should keep Obama from acting on his own by giving him exactly what he wants. This is, of course, Obama’s own argument as well. It’s an argument that has nothing to say to people who think that presidential rewrites of the law, and threats thereof, have no place in our constitutional order — which is to say that it’s not a good-faith response. . .”


Obama’s Immigration Move: Sliding Towards the Rubicon


Obama’s Unilateral Amnesty Really Will Be Unprecedented – and Unconstitutional

“According to the Associated Press, as well as House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Reps. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., and Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., President Barack Obama’s plan to provide executive amnesty to more than five million illegal immigrants is no different than unilateral actions that were taken by Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. However, this claim plays a bit fast-and-loose with history and fails to explain the significant difference between Obama going against the will of Congress, which considered and rejected the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act on several occasions, including when both houses of Congress were controlled by the president’s party, and Reagan and Bush who made administrative corrections designed to carry out congressional intent. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress exclusive authority to “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization ….”  And it is the president’s constitutional duty, under Article II, Section 3, to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed ….” In 1986, Congress passed the Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA), which provided a general amnesty to almost three million illegal immigrants.  According to the Associated Press, Reagan acted unilaterally when his Immigration and Naturalization Service commissioner “announced that minor children of parents granted amnesty by [IRCA] would get protection from deportation.”  In fact, in 1987 former Attorney General Ed Meese issued a memorandum allowing the INS to defer deportation where “compelling or humanitarian factors existed” for children of illegal immigrants who had been granted amnesty and, in essence, given green cards and put on a path towards being “naturalized” as citizens.  In announcing this policy, Reagan was not defying Congress, but rather carrying out the general intent of Congress which had just passed a blanket amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants.”


President Obama To Move Ahead With Immigration Reform By Executive Order

“Public opinion be damned. Tomorrow night in a prime time speech, the President will unveil his plan to shield up to five million illegal immigrants from deportation. By expanding the Dreamers program to adults –a move that the President said in 2013 he felt would be unlawful but has now clearly changed his mind about – these immigrants would be given work permits and, for all intents and purposes, welcomed to America lawfully. It should be noted that immigrants who are granted amnesty will apparently not be eligible for health benefits under the Affordable Care Act, just like the Dreamers who were granted legal status in 2012. Nevertheless, it doesn’t take away from the fact that President Obama is moving ahead on a course that lacks the support of Congress or the American people. New polling from Rasmussen shows that a majority of voters oppose the President’s unilateral approach to immigration reform. Fifty three percent oppose protecting the five million illegal immigrants in question without Congressional approval. And 55% think that Congress should challenge this action in court, mirroring similar numbers from over the summer.”



“Columnist George Will argued that President Obama’s planned executive order on immigration was “institutional vandalism” on Wednesday’s “Special Report” on the Fox News Channel.

“I think this is institutional vandalism that we’re seeing here. after 9/11, the FBI and other law enforcement authorities said we are going to have to devote fewer resources to bank robbers for example and more to fighting terrorism because of scarce resources. This is very different, the president is nullifying a law, he’s not doing so because he says we have scarce resources, he never mentions that because, they’re not in fact. He is rather saying, that something radical has changed and he doesn’t say what that is from the years of 2009 and 2010, when he had the majorities in congress that would have enabled him to do whatever he wanted. he’s not citing as we did after Tienanmen Square, allowing a category of immigrants from China to stay here and then go back, or Haiti after the earthquake, he’s not citing that at all. He’s not even citing any legal opinion from the office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice that would explain why he’s doing this. He’s doing this because he thinks he can. And it is nullification, it’s not enforcement discretion within any meaningful sense” he said.”


Government Shutdown Not Necessary to Block Obama Action on Illegal Immigrants, Republicans Say

“Republican lawmakers are discussing methods designed to use the power of the purse while avoiding another government shutdown — something all parties insist they want to avoid. “I have not actually heard any conservatives say that [a shutdown] is an option,” one conservative Senate aide told The Daily Signal. “No one is making the case for that. I don’t think anyone wants to see that. No one is angling for that and no one thinks it’s necessary. We can attain our goals without doing that.” One option under consideration by leadership of the House Appropriations Committee is to pass a bill to fund the government until next fall but have the new Congress look to rescind funding next year from agencies that carry out any executive order by Obama on immigration. Another option: Pass two separate funding bills — a short-term bill holding back funding for immigration enforcement agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security and another measure funding the rest of the government for a full year. Conservatives continue to push their own strategy of passing a clean, short-term bill through what is called a “continuing resolution.” That would allow lawmakers to come back to the spending fight early next year, after the GOP assumes control of  the Senate as well as the House.”


Senate Republicans Up in 2016: No Shutdown Over Immigration


Republican governors urge Congress to avoid shutdown over immigration


The Appropriators Strike Back

Congressional spenders vs. conservatives on Obama’s executive amnesty


Rescission is not the answer to executive amnesty

“Noah wrote at length last night about the GOP’s battle strategy going into the immigration fight ahead. He focused quite a bit on avoiding a shutdown, and while many of our readers disagree on this point, there does seem to one area of consensus. The most likely path to putting executive amnesty on hold until more forces can be marshaled will be through the appropriations process, not some mythical bill achieving conservative goals which the current president will never sign. However, as Quin Hillyer noted at The Corner, there are disturbing reports showing up, such as this one from Conn Carroll, which indicate that Appropriations Chairman Hal Rodgers is leaning towards a rescission strategy. In this scenario, the GOP would move forward with passing an omnibus bill which fully funds the government without a fight – including money which Obama would use for amnesty – and later push through a bill rescinding the funds for the aforementioned amnesty.”

Rescission? But Of Course!

“Unlike my friend Quin, I am not the slightest bit surprised that the GOP may use the Theater of Rescission to playact “opposition” to Obama’s executive amnesty for millions of illegal aliens. As Quin and Eliana report, that gambit has been floated by Representative Hal Rogers of Kentucky, the Republican establishment factotum who chairs the House appropriations committee. As I have been noting for years now, this is what Republicans do: They devise schemes that enable Obama’s ruinous policies but that can be masqueraded as opposition to those policies. Usually it’s the cloture game. Even with a Senate minority, Republicans have often had enough votes to stop Obama initiatives from passing because of the 60-vote requirement for ending debate. But a few Republicans would peel off to give Democrats the 60 they need for cloture. Republicans tell you they’ve done this is so they can get to a vote on the merits and register their opposition. But as they know, once debate is closed, passage is assured because the measure only needs 51 yea votes at that final stage. At that stage, Republicans cynically vote nay. In effect, they make sure both that the bill passes and that they can tell the folks back home they voted against it. And then there was the debt-ceiling chicanery. This was an unconstitutional scheme devised by Republican leaders who knew the GOP’s conservative base was demanding that they use the power of the purse to rein in Obama’s runaway deficit spending; the leaders were nevertheless determined to authorize additional trillions of debt (having run up trillions of debt themselves when they were in charge during the Bush years). Naturally, they wanted to be seen as opposing what they were actually enabling. So they devised a cockamamie process in which Obama was invited to “propose” debt increases that Congress could purportedly only object to by a “disapproval” resolution. Obama could then veto that resolution – a veto that could be overridden only by an impossible two-thirds supermajority Republicans knew could never be mustered. This camouflaged the fact that not a dime in debt spending authority can happen in our system without congressional approval. In effect, Republicans ceded their constitutional authority over debt spending to the executive, assured that trillions of dollars in additional debt would be imposed on future generations of Americans, but made sure they’d be able to vote against what they were approving not once but twice (in the disapproval resolution and the futile veto override). They’d then wave those nay votes at their constituents as proof of their bitter opposition to Washington’s astronomical debt.”

Will the GOP use “rescission” to counter Obama’s immigration executive action?


Three Ways the GOP Might Respond to Obama’s Executive Action



“The first step, King proposes, would be a resolution expressing disapproval of Obama’s order and his authority to issue it. “Then, we’ll see how the president acts. If he reacts to that and decides that Congress is actually going to control the president, then maybe we don’t need to do anything else,” he said. With Obama presumably unswayed by the non-binding legislation, the House would then move to censure the president, a formal act of reprobation short of impeachment. Censure has no formal articulation in the Constitution but has been used a handful of times throughout U.S. History. “That’s more personal, it’s more direct. It holds him accountable for the anticipation that he will again violate the oath office,” King said. The third step is to use Congress’ power of the purse to “cut off all funding to implement or enforce any unconstitutional executive decision,” something that presumably must come in January once the next Congress has convened and Republicans control the Senate. King said that a funding battle needn’t occur over the entire swath of appropriations bills: “It would be possible for the House to go forward on some of the appropriation bills that don’t effect our border security and enforcement and send that over to the Senate and see what they will do to try to keep this government operating.” King’s plan is the latest proposal offered by Republicans scrambling to determine their response to what will be a significant departure from precedent in size and scope for unilateral presidential action. With angst building among conservatives about Obama’s order, senior GOP Republicans are warning instead of their own party’s potential overreach.

“Thoughtfully,” said Rep. Steve Stivers (R-OH), a close ally of Speaker John Boehner’s, when asked how Republicans should respond. For emphasis, he repeated the word twice.

“What we need to do here is be careful about changing the issue. The issue is what the president is doing, both the way he is doing it and what he’s doing. If we start playing the CR game or the government shutdown, that actually changes the discussion and it penalizes the rest of the American people for what the president does. We ought to be thinking of ways to shut down the president not shutdown the government,” said Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK), a senior member of the appropriations panel.”


Decisionmaking Guide on Defunding Amnesty (good)



“Conservatives say that Republican leaders, including House Speaker John Boehner and incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, will be “complicit” in President Barack Obama’s planned executive amnesty if they don’t pull out all the stops to block him. They warn that chaos is around the corner if that’s how it goes down, even though they’d much rather have Republican leaders fight the president alongside them. “Fight or be complicit in lawlessness,” Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton told Breitbart News, is the message to congressional GOP leaders on Obama’s amnesty. If Republicans move forward with the plan from House Appropriations Committee chairman Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY) to fund the entire government—including Obama’s executive amnesty, which the president is set to announce on Thursday night—in an omnibus spending bill, a Senate GOP aide told Breitbart News conservatives will spread chaos across Washington. “If Obama announces executive amnesty and the House passes an omnibus with no language blocking it, there will be no Senate vote, because conservatives will burn down the Capitol,” the aide said. When asked to clarify if he was serious they’d burn the building to the ground—or if he was speaking metaphorically—the aide said “open rebellion.” Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), one of many Republicans conference-wide who will be helping lead the charge to force Boehner to stop Obama, told Breitbart News that Republicans must stand and fight—and that they can and must win. “Even though around three-quarters of voters this year opposed the idea of executive amnesty, President Obama is apparently going to announce his new royal amnesty decree before going to Las Vegas to promote it,” Gohmert said, adding: Perhaps ‘Caesar’s Palace’ is an appropriate venue for the American Caesar’s regal proclamation that gambles away jobs for Americans. As an equal branch of government where legislation must originate, Congress must either fight it or we will be complicit in this amnesty as royal subjects and the democratic republic will be gone. Now is the time that Republicans need to stand strong for the principles for which the majority of American voters sent them to Washington. Dissatisfaction with the White House and Senate over amnesty issues was a significant reason the American people added Republican seats in the House and Republican control of the Senate. Congress must protect the Constitution and the American public from such a decree from Mt. Olympus that declares a state of lawlessness in America.”


Senator’s Perilous Warning on What Could Follow Obama Immigration Order: ‘You Could See Violence’

“Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) issued an ominous warning Wednesday, warning violence could break out after President Barack Obama announces executive action on immigration Thursday. “The country’s going to go nuts, because they’re going to see it as a move outside the authority of the president, and it’s going to be a very serious situation,” Coburn said on USA Today’s “Capital Download” program. “You’re going to see — hopefully not — but you could see instances of anarchy. … You could see violence.”


5 Lessons From the Obamacare Battles the GOP Can Apply to Immigration


Rick Perry: ‘Very Real Possibility’ Texas Sues Obama Over Executive Amnesty

“Texas Gov. and possible GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry said that Texas might sue the Obama administration over its impending executive order that will reportedly allow nearly five million illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. without penalty. Perry made the remarks to NBC’s Chuck Todd during the Republican Governor’s Association annual meeting in Boca Raton, Fla. Wednesday afternoon. “I think that’s probably a very real possibility,” Perry said while appearing on a panel with other possible 2016 candidates Scott Walker, Mike Pence, John Kasich, and Bobby Jindal. According to POLITICO’s Jake Sherman, Perry also said the cost of illegal immigration is “extraordinary,” adding that the Lone Star State spends $12 million a month to secure the porous southern border.”




Liberals Can’t Justify Obama’s Amnesty

“President Barack Obama is planning to rewrite immigration law in the guise of exercising “prosecutorial discretion.” In other words, he’s going to ask federal agencies not to enforce the laws on the books and hand work permits to millions of illegal immigrants. When conservatives and moderates criticize this unilateralism, as I did earlier this week, we tend to get three responses from liberals. None of them make Obama’s plan sound any better. The first is that if Republicans dislike this step so much, they should pass their own bill through Congress. Jacob Weisberg takes this line in Slate. But just passing any old immigration bill would not stay the president’s hand. If Congress passed the immigration-enforcement bill the House voted for in 2005, Obama would almost certainly veto it and proceed with his plans. What these critics are saying is that Republicans should keep Obama from acting on his own by giving him exactly what he wants. This is, of course, Obama’s own argument as well. It’s an argument that has nothing to say to people who think that presidential rewrites of the law, and threats thereof, have no place in our constitutional order — which is to say that it’s not a good-faith response. The second response is that the president has to act because the system is broken. Nathan Pippenger, writing at Democracy’s blog, argues that the president is striking a mighty blow against “the normalization of dysfunction.” This is very different, he says, from saying that the president should act whenever he doesn’t get his way. But he never explains the alleged difference. The closest he comes is to complain that House Republicans haven’t held a vote on the Senate immigration bill and that they haven’t followed through on promises to pass one of their own. I tend to think that the House’s failure to pass a deeply flawed Senate bill is a sign of the political system’s health, even if the status quo isn’t anybody’s ideal. But let’s assume for the sake of argument that the bill is worth enacting. The House’s failure to go along doesn’t give the president a license to do what he pleases. Pippenger suggests that the presence of millions of illegal immigrants in our country may constitute a “crisis,” but doesn’t fully endorse the idea. He was right to stop short. Illegal immigrants and the rest of us have managed to put up with this — again, admittedly less-than-ideal — situation for years. The president himself decided that action could wait until after the election. There’s no justification for dispensing with the normal mandate that legislation is required for major policy changes. The alternative isn’t for the president to “surrender.” It’s for him to accept the limits of his constitutional authority. Which gives us the answer to Ed Kilgore’s question, in the Washington Monthly, of how long the president should wait: forever, or until he has real legislative authorization, whichever comes first.”


Democratic Senator: GOP Concerns Over ‘Emperor Obama’ Are ‘Laughable’ [VIDEO]

“Appearing on MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reporting,” Democratic New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez said that Republican’s concerns about President Obama’s executive power grab were “laughable.”

MITCHELL: [Speaker John] Boehner’s statement said, for instance, his spokesman said “if ‘Emperor Obama’ ignores the American people and announces an amnesty plan… that he himself has said over and over again exceeds his constitutional authority, he’ll cement his legacy of lawlessness and ruin the chances for congressional action on this issue and many other.’ Now, I don’t know how you break this down, obviously it’s not amnesty. But ‘Emperor Obama’ there, obviously fighting words.

MENENDEZ: Look, this is laughable. This is the same Republican Party who in 2006, 2007, 2010, 2013 and in the House of Representatives controlled by the Republicans in 2014 refused to act on immigration reform. So they have an antidote to their concern about executive action. It’s called passing legislation. It’s called offering votes on their own form of immigration reform, even if it’s different than the overwhelmingly bipartisan Senate bill. But they failed to do that.”


Amnesty Supporters on White House Facebook Page: ‘F*** All You White People,’ We Win

“Illegal aliens and their supporters are declaring victory on the White House’s Facebook page over Obama impending amnesty executive order. But more than simply whoopin’ it up over our Dear Leader’s latest tyrannical seizure of power, they are specifically calling out “White people”.

Remember that this is the official White House’s page, right under Obama’s announcement of the order, expected Thursday. And the White House is allowing clearly racist comments like the ones below. As of this print, not a single one of these comments were removed. Racist comments by pro-illegal alien activists litter the page. Here are just a few:”


Illegal Aliens In Ohio Setting Up Fake Businesses To Get Car Tags [VIDEO]

“Illegal aliens in Ohio are fraudulently setting up fake businesses in order to obtain car tags and license plates, Columbus, Ohio’s WSYX reports. By setting up the fake companies, the illegal aliens are taking advantage of a loophole in Ohio law that has different documentation requirements for registering personal vehicles and commercial vehicles. By applying for a commercial vehicle registration under a business name, illegal aliens can provide any type of identification. That is much easier than registering a personal vehicle, which requires a driver’s license, state-issued ID, or a Social Security card. “Is this your vehicle?” WSYX’s Tom Sussi asked a Mexican national through a translator during his investigation. “Yes,” the man said, admitting that he does not own a business, though his car is registered under a company called DNR Services. “What is DNR Services?” Sussi asked.”


Va. Tech yanks funding for conservative group over Bay Buchanan immigration speech

“A conservative group at Virginia Tech is fighting back after a student-run group pulled its funding following a speech on illegal immigration by former Treasury Secretary Bay Buchanan. Young Americans for Freedom, which co-sponsored the speech by the conservative pundit and sister of former presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan with the school’s College Republicans, is appealing a decision made by the university’s Student Budget Board. The board denied the group funding for an already-scheduled speech by (former GOP presidential candidate) Herman Cain, as well as all other aid for the rest of the year. “It is an outrageous effort on the part of these students to control speech to determine what is said and how it’s said,” said Buchanan, who described the standing-room-only Oct. 28 event as featuring spirited debate by both sides. “It is a great right to be able to speak our mind and make our arguments passionately and listen to the other side.”




Ryan: Obama Immigration Action Would Hurt Tax Overhaul Prospects

“Add a tax overhaul to the list of things Republicans say would be less likely after President Barack Obama’s planned executive action on immigration. Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) warned in an interview that such an action, which is expected to come Thursday, “would definitely hurt, that’s for sure.” “If the president chooses to pre-empt congressional authority, it’s clear to us he’s choosing polarization and politics and focusing on 2016….He’s going to chew up a lot of time, blow a lot of political capital [and] take relations with Congress to a new low,” Mr. Ryan, the next chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, said Wednesday. White House aides disagreed, pointing to recent remarks in which Mr. Obama said disputes on issues such as immigration shouldn’t poison the well on other efforts, including a tax overhaul. “The fact that I disagree or Republicans disagree with me on a certain set of issues doesn’t exclude us working together on a whole range of issues where we do agree,” Mr. Obama said at a press conference in Burma on his recent Asia swing. “They’re interested in tax reform – so am I. Let’s get to work.”


How GOP’s play on spending could backfire


Taxpayers Billed $358k For Obama To Attend MSNBC Host’s Wedding

“Congratulations everyone, you paid for President Barack Obama to attend an MSNBC host’s wedding. Obama ran up a $358,490.90 bill to attend liberal MSNBC host Alex Wagner’s wedding, according to Judicial Watch. Wagner married Sam Kass, the White House chef and senior adviser for nutrition policy, who is a friend of the Obama’s. U.S. taxpayers picked up the $1.5 million tab for Obama’s Labor Day weekend excursions, which included a $537k trip on the fundraising circuit and a $653k trip to Wisconsin for “Laborfest 2014,” according to the report.”


Report: EPA Paid Employees $1 Million While They Were On Leave… Sometimes For Years

“Want to earn money while on vacation? Go work for the Environmental Protection Agency, which paid eight employees more than $1 million while they were on administrative leave, in some cases for years, according to a government watchdog report. The EPA’s inspector general found that “eight employees totaled 20,926 hours and cost the government an estimated $1,096,868” while on paid leave. Each employee “was on extended administrative leave for four or more months,” the IG reported, adding that “four of the eight employees” were on leave for more than a year. Not only that, the employees who took huge amounts of leave time also got automatic raises — despite their being paid to do no work. “The EPA’s major time and attendance issues and management failures are no longer surprising, just pathetic,” said Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter. “Reforming their policy will be top of our agenda with the new conservative majority.”


Online Sales Tax Measure May Snag in House

“Though the Senate appears ready to pass a second bill allowing states to require online retailers to collect sales taxes on purchases made by their residents, House leaders seem intent on keeping the issue out of an end-of-Congress rush for action. The Senate passed legislation (S 743) in May, sponsored by Wyoming Republican Michael B. Enzi, to allow the tax collections and Enzi has another measure (S 2609) queued up on the floor that would combine the sales tax provisions with an extension of the popular moratorium on state and local taxes on Internet access for 10 more years, until November 2024. Supporters of the measure hope for final action by the end of the year. The House, though, is more difficult for them. Republican leaders back an extension of the Internet access tax moratorium, but Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio and Judiciary Chairman Robert W. Goodlatte of Virginia want to handle the issue separately from online sales taxes. Earlier this month, a Boehner spokesman said the Senate sales tax bill is as good as dead. The access tax moratorium is set to expire, along with government funding, on Dec. 11, but House leaders might attach it to another stopgap spending bill or legislation to continue expiring tax breaks.”


Democrats: Go big on the economy in 2016

“Democrats say the main lesson of the November election is simple: Go big on the economy. Party officials attending a daylong conference Wednesday hosted by the Center for American Progress said Democrats failed to make a forceful pitch to middle-class voters on issues like economic opportunity, stagnant wages and rising college costs — and suffered the consequences. “Too many Democrats did not offer a progressive vision, particularly around economic issues,” said New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, pointing to his successful 2013 mayoral campaign as a model. “This year, around the country, I think there was an unwillingness on the part of so many candidates to bluntly define the problem and say, ‘Here are the potential solutions.'” The mayor said the election should serve as a “cautionary tale” as the party prepares for 2016 on the need for a “clear, blunt aggressive economic message.” Headlined by Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the conference followed an Election Day drubbing for Democrats, who surrendered control the Senate and lost ground to Republicans across the nation. Democrats have said too many candidates distanced themselves from President Barack Obama, who is unpopular in many regions, and ran campaigns that targeted specific voters like women, Latinos and young people but lacked a coherent message on the economy. “Not standing up for the things you believe in is not really a good idea,” said Tom Steyer, a California billionaire who spent millions in support of environmental causes.”


Obama signs bill to revamp federal child care aid

“Federally subsidized child care providers will have to conduct criminal background checks on their workers and undergo a yearly inspection under legislation signed into law by President Barack Obama on Wednesday. Obama said the first revamping of the government’s chief child care program in nearly two decades will improve safety and the quality of child care, plus give working parents more peace of mind. Lawmakers gave final approval to the legislation Monday in a rare bipartisan agreement for a Congress that’s been dominated by partisan strife.”


No, the Program That Gave Us Solyndra Is Obviously Not Profitable


The 2014 Tax Revolt

The voters spoke loud and clear on taxes.


Price of Thanksgiving dinner is up over last year, but don’t blame the turkey


NBC has nothing to say about Al Sharpton’s $5 million back-tax problems

Silence of the Schumer

“It wasn’t so long ago Chuck Schumer was obsessing over the idea that the tax code was being abused for partisan purposes. Back in March 2012, he and six fellow Democratic senators wrote the IRS demanding more scrutiny for 501(c)4 groups who claimed they were involved in “social welfare” but were “devoted chiefly to political election activities who operate behind a facade of charity work.” Later, the IRS started singling out conservative organizations for special treatment and delay. But times have changed. Now we have a story in The New York Times about an individual deeply involved in politics who has a 501(c)4 that, as the Times puts it, appears to rank “among the most delinquent nonprofit organizations in the nation.” The individual: the Rev. Al Sharpton. His organization: the National Action Network, which has failed to pay payroll taxes over the years. Sharpton says this wasn’t intentional but stemmed from a dispute on how to classify some independent contractors. Nonetheless, Sharpton still flies first class and collects a nice salary from NAN as he zips between New York, Ferguson, Mo., and Washington, DC. As the Times also reports, it’s the “kind of practice by nonprofit groups that the United States Treasury’s inspector general recently characterized as ‘abusive’ or ‘potentially criminal’ if the failure to turn over or collect taxes is willful.”




Americans Don’t Want Obama Leading on Policy — WSJ/NBC Poll

“The American people don’t want President Barack Obama to take the lead on enacting policy, according to the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll out Wednesday, but they remain supportive of some of his key initiatives, such as a higher minimum wage. By a clear 56% to 33% margin, those surveyed don’t want Mr. Obama to take the lead role in setting policy, preferring that Congress take the lead role. Mr. Obama’s approval rating remains low, though at 44% his number has rebounded by four percentage points since its nadir in August and September. To be sure, this is fairly typical. American presidents have trailed Congress on this question since the WSJ/NBC poll began asking it in 1994. Only once since then did the American people want the president to take the policy lead: In January 2002, when George W. Bush had record popularity in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington, but before the Iraq war escalation truly began. But the 56% who now want Congress to take the lead role in policy making is a high water mark in the poll’s history. The WSJ/NBC poll found Americans are pleased that the Republican victories in this month’s midterm elections were broadly viewed as a rebuke to the president – 53% said they feel positive about the idea that “fewer people were elected who support President Obama’s legislative agenda.” Only 41% said they feel badly about candidates who back Mr. Obama’s agenda losing.”


Americans Foggy on Climate Change Steps — WSJ/NBC Poll

“They want President Barack Obama and Congress to do something to limit carbon emissions, but when presented with an option to do so, they don’t like it, according to the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll out Wednesday. The poll found 59% said they support addressing climate change by setting specific targets to limit carbon emissions. But the same survey found far less support for the government mandating private companies limit their greenhouse gas output if it meant paying more for utility bills. To that question, 49% disapproved when informed of a potential hit to their pocketbook. Only 47% approved. That’s a substantial drop in support from just this summer, when in June 57% said they would back mandatory greenhouse gas limits even if it meant higher utility rates. Just 39% opposed it then.”



George Will: Obama ‘Greatest Builder Of The Republican Party Since Ronald Reagan’ [VIDEO]

“Appearing on “Special Report” Wednesday night, Will told host Bret Baier that Obama has become the “greatest builder of the Republican Party” since Reagan. Will: “Barack Obama once said that he wanted to be as consequential in his own way as Ronald Reagan was. He is in this sense: he is the greatest builder of the Republican Party since Ronald Reagan. Today, there are many fewer house Democrats, many fewer Democratic Senators. Many fewer governors. The Republican Party controls more state legislative chambers than at any time in its history. There are 149 southern Congressional districts. Understanding the south is the 11 states of the confederacy, plus Oklahoma and Kentucky. Of the 149, 110 of them are Republican. I mean, they are just — the numbers are appalling what has happened under this man. now, this is the guy who said on the eve of the 2010 shellacking they took, ‘don’t worry, you’ve got me.’ In 2014, their problem was they had him as an enormous weight in their saddles.”


The Incredible Shrinking President


Limbaugh: Is Senate GOP Leadership Weakening Jeff Sessions Influence for His Obama Opposition?

“On his Wednesday broadcast, conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh questioned the leadership of the U.S. Senate in alleging that it was behind a push for Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) to supplant current Senate Budget Committee ranking member Jeff Sessions as the chairman of that committee in the new Senate next year. According to Limbaugh, it is possible that Republican leaders in the U.S. Senate wanted Sessions out of the way as to not be a check against President Barack Obama as he will have very influential role in determining how Congress will use the power of the purse string. Partial transcript as follows (courtesy of “The Rush Limbaugh Show”):

LIMBAUGH: There’s been all this talk — prior to the election, a little bit after the election — that Republicans had a plan. Maybe defund this. Maybe not permit some of it to be funded, paid for. Use the power of the purse. But it is clear the Republican Party leadership doesn’t want to engage in any way.  Impeachment’s off the table, and if you listen to the Republican leadership, you just don’t hear a lot of energy devoted to the idea of not allowing Obama the money necessary to implement this.  There’s another development here that will cast further light on this.  Jeff Sessions is the chairman of the Budget Committee in the Senate.  Jeff Sessions is also the most eloquent, consistent, outspoken critic of illegal immigration, amnesty.  He is writing op-eds. He is delivering effective speeches from the floor of the Senate.  He’s just all over.  He has been tireless in his characterization of the danger that this portends to the country, to the future. In a way, Jeff Sessions has actually been a lone voice in the Senate.  There have been others, of course. Ted Cruz comes to mind, and Mike Lee.  Well, the other bit of news today is that the Republican leadership in the Senate wants to kick Sessions off the budget committee and take the chairmanship away from him and give it to Mike Enzi of Wyoming.  And, if that happens, that pretty much tells us everything we need to know about what’s going to happen with the Republicans in the Senate. If the most effective, the most tireless, the most committed, the most eloquent anti-amnesty spokesman in the Senate is to be removed from his Budget Committee chairmanship — that is where the power of the purse would be used.  And it would obviously be assumed that Sessions would be in favor of denying the administration the money necessary to implement this amnesty.  So the story is out there that they want to get rid of Sessions and remove him from the Budget Committee chairmanship and put Mike Enzi in there.  Mike Enzi is a nice guy, but he’s not a babbler.  So if the leadership wants to get Sessions out of the way — and again, it’s just a news story.  I’ll get the source for you here as soon as I take the break.  That alone tells you where the Republican leadership mind-set is on this.  They want to take out the one primary voice of opposition to this and remove him from his position as chairman of the Budget Committee.  That pretty much tells us that there isn’t gonna be any opposition to Obama.  So no impeachment and probably limited use of spending denial, power of the purse.


LIMBAUGH:  Okay, the website on the Mike Enzi/Jeff Sessions story is “With Democrats control the White House for another couple of years, there are few tangible benefits for Republicans controlling the Senate.  Undoubtedly the most consequential advantage of Senate control is that Republicans will fully run the budget process,” unless, of course, they punt it next month.  They could punt it by agreeing with the Democrats who have just been voted out to do a full-year budget next month.  That would mean they’re just eliminating one of the two years they have to impact the federal budget.  But that’s a side issue for now.  “The most consequential advantage of Senate control is that Republicans will fully run the budget process, the ultimate check on executive authority that is more important now than ever with a president who has a wanton disregard for the law. “As such, the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee will play a pivotal role in holding this [Regime] accountable.  Nobody is more qualified to serve in that role than the current ranking member, Jeff Sessions.”  He’s not the chairman now.  He’s the ranking Republican on the Budget Committee, and it would be natural to assume that, as the ranking Republican, he would become the chairman next January when the Republicans take over.  However, there are these convoluted seniority rules, and they might result in Sessions not being the chairman but rather Mike Enzi.  Now, as the ranking member, the minority member on the Budget Committee the past few years, “Senator Jeff Sessions has effectively used budget point-of-orders to tactically block big spending bills, he has fought terrible budget deals proposed by both Republicans and Democrats, and he has served as a one-man think tank and stalwart against amnesty and in defense of the nation’s borders, sovereignty, workers, and taxpayers.  “Indeed, in an era when the budget process will be the last recourse against Obama’s lawlessness, there’s nobody more qualified to serve as budget chair than Jeff Sessions. But this thought process all assumes that other Republicans value the leadership qualities that Sessions has exhibited.  According to Congressional Quarterly, Mike Enzi is planning to challenge Sessions for the chairmanship.”Even though Enzi has not served as ranking minority member on the budget committee or led publicly on any budgetary issue, his seniority would bump Sessions from the position if he seeks it.  And it’s yet another example of why the seniority system is a poor method for determining leaders.”  So Enzi wants it. It looks like it’s his if he wants it because of seniority.  But my point here is: Why does Enzi want it?  You gotta go behind closed doors to the leadership.  Here’s a simple way to look at this: If the leadership wanted Sessions to have that chairmanship, he would have it.  This is the only reason they wanted to win the damn election, is they wanted their precious Senate committee chairmanships, because it puts them in charge of the money for whatever number of years they’re there. This is what they all wanted.  Not wanting Jeff Sessions there is, to me… Somebody’s gonna have to correct me if I’m wrong. But if this is right, and if the Republican leadership doesn’t want Sessions running the budget committee, it means they don’t want anybody fighting Obama, pure and simple.  At least for the leadership.”


Gruber Makes His First Appearance In A Political Ad [VIDEO]

“Call it getting Grubered. A new political ad has come out tying Louisiana U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu to embattled MIT economist Jonathan Gruber. “Senator Mary Landrieu sold Obamacare to us the Washington way, with false promises and deception. And Obamacare’s chief architect admits it,” begins the Freedom Partners Action Fund entitled “Deception,” which was published on Wednesday. Landrieu faces Republican Bill Cassidy in a Dec. 6 run-off. “Lack of transparency…the stupidity of the American voter,” the ad quotes Gruber, “that was really critical to getting the thing to pass.” Comments made by Gruber, considered to be a key adviser on Obamacare, have surfaced recently showing him saying that Obamacare was passed by tricking American voters.”


Hagel: There’s never been a more difficult time to lead the United States


There Are Two Ways To Fight ISIS: The Right Way, And Obama’s Way


Grand jury decision on Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson could come Friday