GOP-led House votes to repeal ObamaCare - Bill to undo Obama immigration actions, fund DHS fails in Senate test vote

WASHINGTON –  The House voted Tuesday to repeal the Affordable Care Act, getting Republicans on record in favor of overturning the law for the first time since the party took control of Congress.

The bill passed on a 239-186 vote. 

President Obama already has threatened to veto the legislation — and like past bills to repeal ObamaCare, it is unlikely to go far under the current administration, despite Republicans now controlling the Senate and having a bigger majority in the House.

But the vote serves as an opening shot in the 114th Congress’ efforts to chip away at the law. Several lawmakers have introduced bills to change or undo parts of the Affordable Care Act, and some could garner bipartisan support. 

“We need health care reform that makes the system more responsive to patients, families and doctors — reforms that preserve and protect the doctor-patient relationship. Right now, ObamaCare is moving our health care system in the exact opposite direction where the American people are paying more and getting less,” Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., said in a statement after the vote. “In the House of Representatives, we are saying we need to get rid of this law that’s not working and focus on solutions that will embrace the principles of affordability, accessibility, quality, innovation, choices, and responsiveness.” 

Prior to the vote, Obama questioned the logic behind it.

“So my understanding is the House scheduled yet another vote today to take health care away from folks around this table,” Obama said during a meeting with 10 people who have written him letters about how the ACA has helped them.

He added, “I’ve asked this question before. Why is it that this would be at the top of their agenda? It was maybe plausible to be against the Affordable Care Act before it was implemented. But now it has been implemented and it is working.”

The House has voted more than 50 times in the past two years to repeal all or parts of the law.

The legislation would go next to the Republican-controlled Senate.

While some say the vote is a symbolic gesture, the push to repeal ObamaCare comes as the Supreme Court weighs the King v. Burwell case, which challenges the legality of some subsidies offered through the president’s signature health care law. If the Supreme Court upholds a lower court’s verdict, it could severely undermine the law and fuel GOP efforts to at least change it. 

Republicans, as their next major step, are planning to draft legislation offering an alternative to the ACA. The bill approved Tuesday also directs House committees to begin work on an alternative plan, in case the Supreme Court rules against the law. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

View the original article here

GOP-led House votes to repeal ObamaCare - Bill to undo Obama immigration actions, fund DHS fails in Senate test vote

House votes to overturn Obama immigration actions, bill heads to Senate - VIDEO: White House blasts move to block Obama"s immigration action

The Republican-led House voted Wednesday to overturn President Obama’s immigration actions from last November — and to unravel a directive from 2012 protecting immigrants who came to the U.S. illegally as children — sending the bill to the Senate where it faces an uncertain fate. 

The House voted 236-191 to approve the legislation, which funds the Homeland Security Department through the rest of the budget year to the tune of $40 billion. But as part of that bill, Republicans added provisions to gut the president’s immigration directives. 

Despite deep Democratic opposition, the House voted 237-190 on an amendment to undo the actions Obama announced in November that provide temporary deportation relief, and offer work permits, to some 4 million illegal immigrants. 

Another amendment would cancel Obama’s 2012 policy that’s granted work permits and stays of deportation to more than 600,000 immigrants who arrived in the U.S. illegally as kids. That measure passed more narrowly, 218-209, as more than two dozen Republicans joined Democrats in opposition. 

Republicans say Obama’s moves amounted to an unconstitutional overreach that must be stopped. 

“We do not take this action lightly, but simply there is no alternative,” House Speaker John Boehner said Wednesday. “It’s not a dispute between the parties or even between the branches of our government. This executive overreach is an affront to the rule of law and to the Constitution itself.” 

But as the White House threatened a veto, Democratic leaders claimed the GOP provisions would hurt immigrant families — and ultimately hurt Republicans politically. 

“The amendments … that the Republicans are tacking onto the bill, or at least trying to tack onto the bill, to keep the Department of Homeland Security open are inconsistent with our nation’s values and its history. They would tear families apart,” House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said. 

Even with Republicans in control of the Senate the bill faces tough chances there, especially because House GOP leaders decided to satisfy demands from conservative members by including a vote to undo the 2012 policy that deals with younger immigrants known as “Dreamers.” The amendment, which is opposed by some of the more moderate Republicans in the House, would ultimately expose those young people to deportation. 

Security-minded lawmakers on both sides of the aisle also are worried about using the DHS funding bill to wage the immigration fight, saying security funding should not be put at risk, particularly in the wake of the Paris terror attacks. Current DHS funding expires at the end of next month. 

In the Senate, Republicans would have to rally a 60-vote majority to advance the legislation, and they have only 54 members. 

With even some Republicans voicing reservations, the Senate may have to strip out the immigration provisions and send a straight DHS funding bill back to the House, as the Feb. 27 deadline looms. 

This, then, could set up another fight between GOP leadership and the conservative reaches of the party. 

One senior House GOP aide told Fox News, “I don’t know how this one ends.” 

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, in a written statement, said the bill would not pass the Senate. “Republicans have only been in control for a week and already they are picking an unnecessary political fight that risks shutting down the Department of Homeland Security and endangering our security,” he said, urging Republicans to pass a “clean” funding bill.

Some House Republicans acknowledged that the Senate is likely to reject their approach. 

“They’re not going to pass this bill,” Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pa., said in predicting the Senate outcome. 

Obama has threatened to veto the House bill, and Democrats roundly denounced it, even as immigrant advocates warned Republicans they risked alienating Latino voters who will be crucial to the 2016 presidential election. 

“Just two weeks into this new Congress, Republicans have turned a bipartisan issue, funding our Department of Homeland Security, into a cesspool of despicable amendments that cater to the most extremist anti-immigrant fringe,” Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Fla., said in a House debate. 

Fox News’ Chad Pergram and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

View the original article here

House votes to overturn Obama immigration actions, bill heads to Senate - VIDEO: White House blasts move to block Obama"s immigration action

"State of confusion?" DHS braces for surge in immigrant applicants - House moves toward vote on blocking immigration actions, White House threatens veto

Nearly two months after President Obama announced his immigration executive actions, questions remain over whether the Department of Homeland Security can be ready to process millions of additional immigrants through an already-burdened system.

DHS is on a hiring spree as it sets an ambitious schedule – outlined in a recent memo from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the DHS agency in charge of processing the requests — for accepting new applicants.

The agency plans to begin accepting applications in late February under an expanded program for those who came to the U.S. illegally as children (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA). And the agency is looking to May to implement the biggest, and most controversial, plank of Obama’s plan – effectively legalizing potentially millions of parents of U.S. citizens and legal residents.

But the colossal effort, on a tight timetable, perhaps inevitably has some questioning whether they can pull it off.

One source inside the Department of Homeland Security told Fox News that so far, not enough has been done to get that machine up and running on time. The source raised the specter of the HealthCare.gov launch.

“There is a state of confusion at DHS,” said the DHS source, who works in immigration enforcement, claiming that “just like ObamaCare, the administration is eager to make an announcement, but infrastructure is lacking to make it happen.”

The administration wants to hire 1,000 workers to help process applications out of a new facility in Crystal City, Va., just outside Washington.

Ken Palinkas, president of the National Citizenship and Immigration Services Council (NCISC), the union representing USCIS employees, said he recently toured the new operations center and it has little in it but leftover furniture from the last government tenant. With the agency aiming for Feb. 20 or so to launch the first phase, that leaves less than six weeks to hire, vet and train these new employees, he told FoxNews.com. 

“They want to do this in February – this is unheard of,” Palinkas said. “I’ve been working in government for 15 years, and I know things don’t get done on time.”

While the administration scrambles to get ready, Republican foes in Congress continue their quest to halt the effort. Republicans are debating legislation this week to block funding for the immigration actions.

But supporters of the program say that beyond leasing new office space and hiring employees, USCIS has been readying for the influx for some time and has learned from the rollout of DACA, which has been processing tens of thousands of young undocumented immigrants since 2012. Further, the administration already has launched a new policy, as a result of Obama’s November announcement, for immigration enforcement and deportations.

“The agency knew for a long time to anticipate something coming,” said Wendy Feliz, of the American Immigration Council. “They have been planning and thinking and modernizing for years. I think ramping it up to five million probably won’t be as hard as you think.”

Under what’s known as “deferred action,” those eligible would be able to work legally and avoid deportation for three years, as well as qualify for services offered by their state. Children and parents would have to demonstrate they have been living in the U.S. continuously since 2010.

DHS officials, meanwhile, describe an across-the-board effort to prepare, including multiple avenues for members of the public to get answers and training for employees.

A DHS spokeswoman stressed that Secretary Jeh Johnson has issued several sets of guidance, and training has begun for the new enforcement and removal program. She noted Johnson met with leaders from several agencies in Texas, and said there has been “extensive communication” with employees, in addition to DHS-sponsored town halls across the country.

As for the looming flood of applications, she said: “USCIS is building the additional capacity needed to begin accepting requests for upcoming immigration initiatives.”

She said additional workers and the new facility “will ensure that every case processed by USCIS receives a thorough review under our guidelines.” The spokeswoman said the USCIS website will be updated with new information “on a regular basis,” and hotlines are available for people to call if they have questions or need help.

Further, the departments of Homeland Security and State recently launched an outreach effort detailing eligibility requirements. The effort, which includes radio and TV ads, is aimed at the Mexican and Central American public, telling them whom the executive actions apply to and urging against more illegal immigration. Separate fliers remind would-be applicants that nobody can apply yet.

An estimated 3.7 million would be eligible for the program affecting parents of legal residents; and roughly 290,000 would be eligible for the expanded DACA.

The example of the 2012 DACA shows a significant number of those who qualify apply, and most who do are approved. According to the Migration Policy Institute, some 55 percent of the 1.2 million who qualified in 2012 have applied in the last two years.

According to their numbers, 682,189 had applied as of July 2014; approval was granted to 587,366. Those approved early in the program already are applying for renewals, which would add to the processing pressure on the agency.

According to the Brookings Institution, renewal applications should be in the 20,000-40,000 range per month until at least June. There have been numerous reports about DACA backlogs threatening a smooth roll-out of the expanded programs.

Meanwhile, a class-action suit filed against DHS and USCIS in July by asylum-seekers who say they have been in “limbo” cited a backlog of more than 45,000 in that program.

“The question is, how prepared is the agency going into this, and what things look like on their end,” said Audrey Singer, a senior fellow at Brookings. She is a supporter of the program who believes USCIS learned a lot in the last two years and will be depending on an “army” of municipal and community-based organizations to help streamline the effort.

According to a New York Times report in late December, the new operations center was leased for nearly $8 million a year, and salaries are expected to cost more than $40 million annually.

Palinkas, who opposes the president’s executive actions, said he’s been surprised at the “aggressive” nature of the roll-out. “My personal opinion is they are working more aggressively for illegal [immigrants] than for people who are legally taking the route [to citizenship],” he said.

Jessica Vaughan, policy director at the Center for Immigration Studies, which also opposes the actions, questioned where the money for the building comes from. “There is no doubt the agency has been planning this action for a quite some time,” she told FoxNews.com. “My idea is they squirreled away money from the fee revenues from other programs to get this off the ground … without authorization from Congress.”

This is the funding stream congressional Republicans are targeting.

Vaughan also predicted that with the influx of new applicants and the president’s ambitious timetable, USCIS agents will be pressured to “rubber stamp” requests. “It’s completely impossible for the agency to accommodate all these applications and process them with any integrity whatsoever,” she said. “This is five times their workload we’re talking about.”

Singer said aside from criminal background checks, applicants must meet specific criteria and provide documentation of their ages and residency.

“Rubber stamping” isn’t an option, she said. “People can speculate all they want. But this is a program the agency is taking very seriously, it’s very high profile and nothing is going to fly under the radar.”

Fox News’ Lucas Tomlinson contributed to this report.

View the original article here

"State of confusion?" DHS braces for surge in immigrant applicants - House moves toward vote on blocking immigration actions, White House threatens veto

Obama making record use of presidential memos - Fed judge: Obama immigration actions "unconstitutional"

President Obama reportedly is using a unique form of executive action known as the “presidential memorandum” at a historic pace – a tactic that allows him to, technically, claim he’s not over-using executive orders while still pursuing high-level policy changes without involvement from Congress.

A review by USA Today, published Wednesday, shows that, in fact, Obama has issued more memoranda than any U.S. president in history. He’s issued 198 – more than the 195 executive orders from his White House.

The executive action is strikingly similar to an executive order, with only slight differences. But by using the memos, this is how Obama and his advisers have claimed the president is not over-using executive orders.

According to USA Today, when the memos and executive orders are combined, Obama is on pace to issue more “high-level executive actions” than any president since Harry Truman.

As noted in the review, Obama’s most controversial executive action of late – an overhaul of the U.S. immigration system including de facto legal status for up to 5 million illegal immigrants – was done through memoranda.

Those actions already have led to legal challenges – and one judicial rebuke. On Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Arthur Schwab, in Pennsylvania, issued an opinion claiming some of Obama’s actions were unconstitutional.

The opinion, though, was delivered in a case not directly related to those actions, and the Justice Department downplayed Schwab’s opinion as “unfounded” and “flatly wrong.”

According to the USA Today review, Obama has used memoranda to take a number of other actions, including directing the Labor Department to collect salary data from federal contractors to see what they’re paying women and minorities, and directing federal law enforcement agencies to trace firearms that are part of federal probes.

The differences between an order and a memorandum are slight. According to the USA Today review, executive orders are numbered and memoranda are not. Executive orders have to cite the law they’re based on, and memoranda do not. Both actions can be used for similar purposes, though.

View the original article here

Obama making record use of presidential memos - Fed judge: Obama immigration actions "unconstitutional"