Wall Street Journal
By Laura Meckler and Kristina Peterson
January 10, 2015
Late
last year, Republicans decided to fund the Homeland Security department
only through February in hopes of using the agency’s funding as a lever
to force change on
immigration once the GOP controlled both houses of Congress. But the
bill will need 60 votes to clear the Senate, meaning at least six
Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents would have to vote yes.
That
looks to be nearly impossible. A survey of several Democratic senators
who have been critical of the executive action found most saying they
would not support the
effort.
“I’m
not looking for a political fight. I’m looking to solve a problem,”
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D., N.D.) said in a statement. An aide said the
senator is likely to oppose
any Homeland Security spending bill that blocks the executive action.
Sen.
Angus King (I., Maine), is also opposed, said his spokeswoman, Kathleen
Connery Dawe. “Sen. King does not support the House bill to defund the
president’s executive
action on immigration,” she said. “Withholding funds from the
Department of Homeland Security would be particularly dangerous at a
time of worldwide terrorist threats.” An aide to Sen. Claire McCaskill
(D., Mo.) said she believes “the only responsible way
for Republicans to supersede this executive order is to finally
consider, debate and vote on comprehensive immigration reform.”
An
aide said Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) would likely vote against the
House bill, and a spokesman for Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.), who
voiced concerns about executive
action this fall, said she opposes defunding Mr. Obama’s November
action.
An
aide to Sen. Jon Tester (D., Mont.) said the senator is opposed to
using the Homeland Security budget to roll back the executive order. Mr.
Tester said in a statement:
“If the House had passed the comprehensive, bipartisan immigration bill
that the Senate passed a year and a half ago, we wouldn’t be having
this conversation right now. I wish the president wouldn’t have gone out
on his own, but threatening the Department
of Homeland Security’s budget doesn’t solve the immigration crisis or
strengthen our borders.”
None
of the Senate Democratic offices interviewed indicated they would
support the move, but one, Sen. Joe Donnelly (D., Ind.), was
noncommittal. “Senator Donnelly will
take a look at any immigration-related proposals as they come forward,”
a spokeswoman said.
Of
course, even if the measure passed both houses, the plan was certain to
draw a presidential veto, and neither house has the votes needed to
override that.
The
package taking shape in the House was an expansive pushback on Mr.
Obama. It would kill his plan, announced in November, to temporarily
shield millions of people from
deportation, primarily parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents
who have been in the U.S. for at least five years. It would also kill a
2012 program that offered similar shelter to people brought to the U.S. illegally as children—a sharp turnout from
two years ago, when leading House Republicans were discussing a GOP
version of the Dream Act, which offers a permanent legal status for this
group.
In
addition, the plan would roll back Mr. Obama’s directive to prioritize
deportation of recent border crossers and those with serious criminal
records—a policy that gives
a measure of security to illegal immigrants who do not meet those
criteria. It was also expected to revive the Secure Communities program,
which uses local law enforcement to hold illegal immigrants who they
encounter. In November, Mr. Obama ratcheted that
program back.
In
the House, Republicans said the prospect that the bill would falter in
the Senate should not preclude them from trying to pass their favored
approach now.
During
a private meeting of House Republicans on Friday morning, “there was a
lot of discussion about not worrying so much these days about the
Senate,” said Rep. Mick
Mulvaney (R., S.C.).
“Let’s
quit trying to second guess what the Senate’s going to do and let’s do
our job and then work it out from there,” said Rep. Matt Salmon (R.,
Ariz.).
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment