Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

The Three Reasons Republicans Might Actually Impeach Obama in Spite of Themselves

F6, these are the two i had from yesterday. Neither digested, yet.

By Brian Beutler @brianbeutler
July 30, 2014

A fairly ironclad rule of modern American politics holds that after a president has been president long enough, a faction of his political opposition will begin calling for his impeachment. A corollary holds that the president’s party will use that appetite for impeachment to raise money.

It is also true that presidents don’t want to be impeached, and opposition leaders don’t want to introduce frivolous or unsupportable articles of impeachment, which means for the most part we’re talking about a mutually beneficial pandering ritual for activist voters.

But for three interlocking reasons, the latest production of the ritual—the one that's unfolding right now—is much more interesting and potentially combustible than the one that unfolded during George W. Bush’s second term, when Democratic legislators introduced articles of impeachment and Republican campaigners used the spectacle of impeachment to raise money and increase turnout ahead of the 2006 midterm.

1) Republicans are more reactionary than Democrats

In the 1990s, the Republican establishment was skeptical about shutting down the government and impeaching President Clinton, but went ahead and did both of those things. Upon Obama’s election, we were assured that Republicans had learned their lessons and wouldn’t be repeating either mistake. But last year Republicans shut down the government once again in spite of themselves. And though House Speaker John Boehner hasn’t allowed conservative hardliners to walk him into a political cul-de-sac in the nine months since the shutdown, Obama will be president for two and a half more years.

2) Obama will be president for two and a half more years

For all their agonizing about Obama’s putative lawlessness, nothing he’s done so far has been tyrannical enough to invite impeachment, or so it seems. And if Obama never does anything again, it stands to reason he won’t be impeached. But Obama’s not planning on doing nothing. Most importantly, he intends to take more executive action to curtail deportations .. http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/barack-obama-immigration-legal-questions-109467.html .. of low-priority unauthorized immigrants. When he announces his plan, the Republican appetite for impeachment will grow in proportion to the scope of the policy. If it’s a very broad action, more conservatives and Republicans will call for impeachment, testing Boehner’s control over his conference.

3) Boehner doesn’t have a great deal of control over his conference

There is no comparing Boehner’s influence over House Republicans to Nancy Pelosi’s influence over House Democrats. This has been evident for quite some time. It is evident, too, in their disparate responses to questions they’ve both faced about impeachment. On Tuesday, whether he intended to or not, Boehner left the door wide open, when he told reporters, "We have no plans to impeach the president. We have no future plans. … It's all a scam started by Democrats at the White House." That is … not entirely true .. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/us/politics/impeachment-on-gop-lips-animates-base-of-democrats.html?_r=0 . And it's remarkably less Shermanesque than Speaker-in-wait Pelosi’s statement .. http://www.nytimes.com/cq/2006/11/08/cq_1916.html .. after Dems won the House in 2006: “I have said it before and I will say it again: Impeachment is off the table.”

If Boehner had “current” or “future” plans to impeach Obama, Republicans wouldn’t be wasting valuable time filing an unusual lawsuit .. http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118652/boehners-obama-lawsuit-proves-obama-isnt-lawless .. against him. But that lawsuit is meant to strike a balance that allows the GOP to channel its base voters’ resentment of Obama into midterm election victories without indulging their toxic, procedurally extreme tendencies. In that sense it’s best seen as a reflection of a real and growing (or soon-to-grow) desire to take it all the way. And as the entire White House political team is fond of noting, Boehner had “no interest in seeing a government shutdown” one week before he did it anyway. Republicans really are more liable to go where danger lies than Democrats.

In that sense, when Democrats at the White House, and congressional leaders like Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, play up the possibility of impeachment, they aren’t just pandering to liberals and raising money .. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/speculation-on-a-house-gop-bid-to-impeach-obama-boosts-democrats-fundraising/2014/07/28/d0f9b33c-1685-11e4-85b6-c1451e622637_story.html . They’re scraping at the stitches binding Republican leaders and party activists. And there’s no downside. The more firmly Boehner protests, the more dejected a significant segment of the right .. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/07/25/morning-plum-only-republicans-and-conservatives-support-lawsuit-against-obama/ .. becomes. But the more wiggle room he leaves himself, the more the issue lingers over national politics in a way that damages Republicans nationally. Under the circumstances Boehner’s protestations are a sign of real frustration, and perhaps that he’s starting to recognize that the lawsuit was ill conceived.

Still, I’m not convinced that Democrats, including Obama, are eager to Jedi mind trick Boehner into actually impeaching Obama so much as they want the stench of impeachment to trail Republicans everywhere they go. I suspect they’ll be able to strike that balance up until Obama announces his deportation relief plan. After that, things get murky. But if Democrats truly welcome impeachment, particularly over something as politically crosswired as immigration, then Obama will go as far as he believes the law allows him to go, and let the chips fall where they may.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118895/obama-impeachment-talk-reflects-reactionary-republican-politics

===

Amid Roiled Landscape Of Border Politics, Obama's Plans May Change

By Mara Liasson

Originally published on Thu July 17, 2014 7:40 pm

The Obama administration's request for more funds on immigration could get a congressional vote soon. Meanwhile, the crisis at the border is complicating Obama's plan to take unilateral action to ease deportations. The politics of immigration are shifting quickly.

Copyright 2014 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/.

Transcript

ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:

On the topic of immigration, especially child migrants, Congress could vote as early as next week on the Obama administration's request for more funds and flexibility. Meanwhile, the crisis at the border is affecting the larger debate about immigration reform. And it's complicating President Obama's plans to take unilateral action to ease deportations of immigrants who've been here illegally for years. NPR's national political correspondent Mara Liasson reports.

MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: Immigration politics are volatile and complex, but until the flood of children on the border, immigration reform looked like a long-term winner for Democrats and a long-term loser for Republicans. But recent polls show that like any other chaotic situation from the Middle East to the VA, this one has taken a toll on Mr. Obama. A new Pew poll shows that only 28 percent approve of the way he's handling the border situation. That's why, says immigration reform advocate, Simon Rosenberg, the president needs to get the border under control fast.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

SIMON ROSENBERG: How this crisis gets resolved will dictate the next chapter in this ongoing debate. I think it's jumbled everything, and a lot will depend on whether or not the president looks like he's done a good job. And if he's handled this well, he's going to have a lot more political space with the public.

LIASSON: The White House is operating on two tracks. It's trying to resolve the immediate border crisis - in some cases that means accelerating deportations. Meanwhile, it's planning to move on the broader immigration problem. The administration is considering the legal and political ramifications of having the president take unilateral action to ease deportations for a whole other group of illegal immigrants - people who've been in this country for years.

Some Democrats have wondered whether the president could hurt his party if he uses his executive authority to offer wider deportation relief this fall before the midterm elections. But White House officials say there's no reason to delay. They point to polls that show public support is as strong as ever for providing a path to legal status for workers currently in the U.S. illegally. The White House plan remains as the president outlined it in a Rose Garden speech last month.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: If Congress will not do their job, at least we can do ours.

LIASSON: With immigration reform blocked in the Republican House, Mr. Obama promised to act on his own, just as soon as his Attorney General and Homeland Security Secretary finish their review.

OBAMA: I expect the recommendations before the end of summer, and I intend to adopt those regulations without further delay.

LIASSON: There is a wide range of unilateral actions the president could take to build upon the action he took in 2012, when he used his executive authority to protect the dreamers - young people in college or the military who were brought here illegally as children. Beyond the dreamers, Mr. Obama could decide to provide temporary relief from deportation for the parents of dreamers, or people who work in certain industries or meet other criteria. What would be the reaction to such a move? It's hard to game out. There's no polling on how people would feel if the president unilaterally created a temporary worker program all by himself without congressional approval. There could be a huge backlash.

Daniel Garza, a conservative proponent of immigration reform, says the dreamers are a special case. Garza says most Americans will not feel the same way about other groups of illegal immigrants.

DANIEL GARZA: There's a lesser sympathy for the adults who have violated immigration law than there is for the children. I think people understand that children are brought here on their own. And I'm someone who is for immigration reform.

LIASSON: But Frank Sharry, an immigration reform advocate on the left, has a different analysis of what would happen if the president moved on his own to give large numbers of illegal immigrants relief.

FRANK SHARRY: I think that the combination of the thrills and reaction among Latinos and Progressives and Democrats will be equaled by the howls from the Republicans. And I think quite frankly, it will permanently cement the reputation of the Democrats as for immigrants and for the changing American electorate and Republicans as against it.

LIASSON: Sharry thinks if the president does move to expand deportation relief, he would force Republicans to say whether those immigrants should go back into the shadows or be deported right away. And he would unavoidably intensify the current debate about executive overreach.

SHARRY: It would be a bold move. It would create a huge reaction from the Republicans. It would protect millions of people and lead to a better quality of life. And the question is - is he brave enough to do it and what would be the political fallout?

LIASSON: Brave enough or foolish depending on your point of view. Widespread deportation relief is the kind of presidential action that could have long-lasting effects on the president's party and his legacy. But in the midst of the current crisis on the border, it's hard to determine if those effects would be positive or negative. Mara Liasson, NPR News, Washington. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.

http://kwbu.org/post/amid-roiled-landscape-border-politics-obamas-plans-may-change