Speaker Boehner vows House response to Obama’s immigration policy changes |

Speaker Boehner vows House response to Obama’s immigration policy changes

Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) denounces the executive order on immigration made by U.S. President Barack Obama during a statement on Friday, Nov. 21, 2014, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.

The political war over President Obama’s controversial policy changes on deportation escalated Friday as congressional Republicans vowed to derail his efforts.

“We’re working with our members and looking at the options available to us,” House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said, “but I will say to you the House will, in fact, act.”

The House Homeland Security Committee announced plans to hold a hearing in response to Obama’s executive action. The panel said it will meet on Dec. 3 to hear testimony from Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, who helped formulate Obama’s plans.

Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, who chairs the panel, said he plans to use “every tool at my disposal to stop the president’s unconstitutional actions from being implemented, starting with this oversight hearing.”

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., a leading opponent of the president’s action and the likely incoming chairman of the Budget Committee, accused Obama of refusing to enforce the law and promised to use budgetary measures to prevent funding for the implementation of the new immigration rules.

Speaking at the Heritage Foundation, Sessions said such action is necessary because Obama “granted amnesty to 5 million people, and he did it by basically saying, ‘I’m not going to enforce the laws of the United States of America.’ ”

“He ignored the interests of the American people, the American workers, recent immigrants who have been here and are looking for jobs in a time of unemployment. He undermined, in my view, the moral integrity of immigration law. And even the constitutional separation of powers.”

Sessions is leading the effort to keep government funding on a short leash in the new year, when Republicans take over the Senate and control both chambers of Congress, making it easier to get clear majorities for his preferred line of attack.

Sessions dismissed the immigration reform bill the Senate passed last year, saying: “Politicians will pass anything that sounds good about immigration as long as it doesn’t change anything, as long as it won’t work.”

But there are those in the GOP who worry that the anger may be playing into the president’s hands.

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., said a growing group of Senate Republicans is coalescing around a more tempered rebuttal to the president: passing a series of standalone immigration bills in the coming months and demonstrating to voters that the party can govern.

“Put legislation on the president’s desk,” Flake said. “We could do bills on border security, interior enforcement, mandatory E-Verify, and address high-tech workers and guest workers.”

Limiting funding would require a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate, and it would almost certainly draw a veto from Obama, which, critics say, would lead to a possible shutdown of some federal agencies.

Boehner declined to spell out how Republicans would counter the executive actions, which extend protections to roughly 4 million undocumented parents of legal citizens and young immigrants brought here illegally when they were children.

Obama went to Nevada on Friday to tout his executive orders on immigration at a high school in Las Vegas, where he issued a call for reform shortly after the start of his second term.

“Nearly two years ago, I came here, Del Sol High School, right in this gymnasium … and I said that the time had come for Congress to fix our broken immigration system,” he said.

Obama argued that lack of action by the GOP House is what forced his hand on taking unilateral action.

“The fact that a year and a half has gone by means that time has been wasted,” Obama said. “And during that time, families have been separated. And during that time, businesses have been harmed. And we can’t afford it anymore.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.