In this week’s Freedom Minute, CFIF’s Renee Giachino discusses the Constitutional crisis set up by President Obama’s unilateral action on immigration and the lasting damage to the separation of powers that will result if left unchecked by Congress.
There has been no shortage of commentary in recent weeks and months addressing the illegality of President Obama’s planned executive action on immigration. Even Obama himself, despite his plans to announce a sweeping new executive order on immigration tonight on prime-time television, has argued that circumventing Congress and acting unilaterally would be illegal.
In fact, Fox News’ “The Kelly File” dug up some 25 instances in which Obama said so on camera over the last several years.
President Barack Obama went to Texas this week, and all he got was a few million dollars in campaign donations amid a bipartisan smackdown.
Obama was in the Lone Star State to help fundraise for various liberal candidates and causes as part of a much larger effort to ‘Turn Texas Blue’ for Democrats.
But his performance outside the rubber chicken circuit angered officeholders across the political spectrum.
The issue is Obama’s refusal to visit Texas’ southern border where tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors are streaming into the country and causing a humanitarian crisis.
“I don’t know whether he heard what I said,” Texas Republican Governor Rick Perry told Sean Hannity. After being ignored by Obama for months, Perry finally got a brief face-to-face with the president aboard Marine One.
Perry urged Obama to deploy the National Guard to the border as a national security measure. Obama demurred. “A leader acts,” Perry said, “and what I haven’t seen out of this president are actions that make me think he understands what’s going on.”
Henry Cueller agrees. The Texas Democratic congressman says that Obama’s refusal to visit the border and get a firsthand account of the situation risks creating his own ‘Katrina moment;’ a reference to George W. Bush’s slow response to a hurricane disaster that quickly sunk his presidency.
Prior to this Texas Democrats had been gearing up to capture the state’s top political offices. The 2014 election was supposed to be a milestone. But with Obama’s failed policies and lackluster performance hurting its credibility, it looks increasingly like a tombstone.
Of all the troubling aspects of the Obama presidency, none is more dangerous than the President’s persistent pattern of lawlessness, his willingness to disregard the written law and instead enforce his own policies via executive fiat.
That’s the lead of a new report out by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) documenting what he argues are more than 75 legally suspect executive actions and “other abuses of power” by the Obama Administration.
The report, entitled The Legal Limit Report #4: The Obama Administration’s Abuse of Power, was first obtained by The Daily Caller and can be viewed below:
In an interview with Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly that aired on Super Bowl Sunday, President Obama declared that there was “not even a smidgen of corruption” with regard to the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups.
The American people are not buying it.
According to a Fox News poll released last week, a whopping 64 percent of registered voters, including a majority of Democrats, think the targeting scandal does suggest corruption at the IRS. A mere 27 percent don’t view the IRS’s targeting as corrupt.
When questioned about whether Congress should continue to investigate the IRS scandal, an even greater majority says “Yes!”
Majorities of Republicans (83 percent), independents (72 percent) and Democrats (60 percent) agree lawmakers should persist until they ‘feel they know the truth.’
CFIF’s Renee Giachino explains how President Obama’s push for higher taxes, bigger government and expanded welfare programs is the wrong approach to help the greatest number of people climb the economic ladder.
As we anticipated in last week’s Liberty Update, the U.S. Supreme Court announced today that it will hear legal challenges to ObamaCare this term. As we also noted in that commentary, the issue broadly boils down to whether an explicit provision of the Constitution will be rendered meaningless and effectively read out of the document itself.
That is not hyperbole. Our Founding Fathers didn’t randomly insert provisions into the Constitution for no reason whatsoever. Rather, they crafted that document to design a federal government of limited, enumerated powers and to safeguard individual freedom to the greatest extent possible. Accordingly, they intentionally included the Commerce Clause of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution to empower Congress “To regulate Commerce with Foreign Nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” ObamaCare, however, does not merely “regulate commerce among the several states.” Rather, it compels commercial activity from every citizen, and punishes inactivity on the part of any individual.
Anyone asserting ObamaCare’s validity must therefore answer this question: If the Commerce Clause somehow permits forced commercial activity and prosecution of inactivity, what possible hypothetical federal mandate would it not permit? Such a result would void a specific clause within the text of the Constitution because no limiting principle would remain. That, in turn, would mean that no other provision remains safe in such a brave new world.
Hopefully, at least five Justices respect the Constitution enough to not remove yet another thread from its fabric. Should the Court fail, however, the fight will not be finished. The job will simply fall upon us as individual citizens to effectuate the individual freedoms that too few elected and appointed officials seem to respect.
This morning, the Labor Department announced that the U.S. unemployment rate climbed again to 9.1% this month, up from 9.0% in April. Just as alarmingly, the net number of jobs created was only 54,000, down from 232,000 in April. In addition to deteriorating from the previous month, both numbers fell well below the expectations of economists, who had anticipated a decline in the unemployment rate to 8.9%, and 160,000 net new jobs. This also means that in the 27 months since Obama signed his unprecedented government spending “stimulus,” unemployment has only climbed from 8.2% to 9.1%, even though the Administration projected that he would have it down to 6.5% by now. By way of comparison, in the same 27 months following the effective date of President Reagan’s tax cuts in January 1983, unemployment plummeted from 10.4% to 7.3%. The facts speak volumes.
Current commentary on the 2012 presidential race, including here at CFIF, centers primarily on the strength of the germinating Republican field. The more Barack Obama weakens between now and November 2012, however, the easier the task for whoever emerges from the GOP race. On that note, two new polls should have Team Obama sweating. In the first, Rasmussen reports that Obama only leads “Generic Republican” by one point this week. With most discussion of that generic Republican field focusing on its supposed weakness, that is significant. In the second, CNN reports that 48% of respondents state Obama’s presidency has been a failure to date, while only 47% rate it successful. The fact that CNN polled all adults, rather than registered voters or likely voters, is all the more reason for him to worry.