The president and the House GOP are each caught in a bind. Although the two dilemmas spring from vastly different origins, they share a similarity. They both have to do with trust.
The president's bind is directly of his own making here. He has often and, it seems reflexively, mischaracterized and harshly demonized Republican policy differences with him. Now, with his preferred immigration legislation being supported by some Republican senators, and reform itself — if not necessarily the Senate's version of it — being supported by a number of House Republicans, the president has to rhetorically tread more carefully.
Yet, many Republicans have not forgotten his harsh rhetoric. The president has essentially accused the Republicans of being without scruples, ideals, morals, or concern for any of their countrymen except the very rich and well-connected, and then followed up these harsh characterizations with invitations to talk.
Worse, many Republicans in the House and Senate are deeply troubled the president's numerous unilateral executive decisions — in immigration law enforcement; his recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board; his administration's decision to change sentencing laws for drug defendants by withholding information about the amount of narcotics they are charged with having; the administrative expansion of the definition of what would count as "work", thus undermining the stricter definitions that were the basis of the Welfare Reform bill that President Clinton signed; and, most recently, several unilateral modifications of his health care act, specifically designed to bypass Congress.
A 2012 New York Times story on administration deliberations noted that, "[I]ncreasingly in recent months, the administration has been seeking ways to act without Congress."
The president's rhetorical meme "We Can't Wait" has been applied to several policy areas — his student loan initiative, his many economic plans, and his preferred immigration bill.
All reflect an impatience with the constitutional framework of checks and balances that every president has to grapple with and a presumption that his policy ambitions ought to trump them.
Speaking at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Dinner in 2011, the president said of immigration: "I'd like to work my way around Congress. But the fact is, even as we work toward a day when I can sign an immigration bill, we've got laws on the books that have to be upheld. But as you know as well as anyone that — anybody else, how we enforce those laws is also important." (Emphasis added)
Yes indeed.
A little over one year later, the administration put into effect its plan to suspend deportation proceedings against (and grant work permits to) illegal immigrants who came here before their 16th borthday (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). As the AP report on it noted, "The policy change, described to The Associated Press by two senior administration officials, will affect as many as 800,000 immigrants who have lived in fear of deportation. It also bypasses Congress." (Emphasis added)
Advocates for illegal aliens believe they will have further success by pressing the president to widen the scope of his administrative deferrals. And Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) worries that they are right. He has said, "I believe that this president will be tempted, if nothing happens in Congress, he will be tempted to issue an executive order like he did for the DREAM Act kids a year ago where he basically legalizes 11 million people by the sign of a pen."
Sen. Rubio is worried about what will happen if the House does "nothing" about immigration. That is possible, but unlikely.
A bigger worry is what the president will do after he signs the immigration legislation that reflects some of the House's views.
Next: Two Forms of Presidential Immigration Misconduct: Executive Action and Administrative Fiat
