Republican amnesty game plan missing in action

With President Obama determined to declare an executive amnesty program for 5 to 10 million illegal aliens soon after next week's midterm elections, citizens across the nation are wondering what the Republican Party plans to do to stop it.

One thing is certain. We need a better plan than promising to file a lawsuit.

Remember all the fanfare last summer when House Speaker Boehner announced he will sue the president over unconstitutional changes in Obamacare? He even got a bill passed to authorize it. Guess what! That lawsuit still has not been filed in federal court!

So, the answer is probably going to be – speeches and vague threats but nothing concrete.

Obama's plans have been much discussed in the press for months, and no one in the White House has denied that such plans are in the works. No one in the Republican congressional leadership can claim to be surprised when it happens. Yet, there is no plan to block it.

Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus has said he opposes the Obama amnesty "with every fiber of my soul" – BUT he has no plan to halt it. Speaker Boehner says he opposes it, but he has no plan. Every Republican U.S. Senate candidate running against an incumbent Democrat opposes Obama's amnesty plan, but none of them has offered a plan to block it.

What's going on? Does the Republican Party have a death wish? It begins to sound like the Republican establishment is planning to let Obama's plan be implemented with only token opposition as a way to "get immigration issue off the table for 2016."

But wait. That would be plausible only if there were a way to halt Obama's amnesty that had been considered but dismissed. After all, if there is indeed no way to stop it, then everyone is off the hook.

Of course, the truth is just the opposite. There is a way to block it and everyone knows what it is – yet Republican leadership will not undertake those steps.

The well-understood way to block the president from implementing his giant amnesty plan, an unconstitutional action that he has arrogantly advertised in advance, is to impeach the president.

There could be intermediary steps attempted, such as blocking funding needed to implement the amnesty and filing lawsuits challenging the legality of the plan. Those steps should be undertaken, but they might be circumvented. The only certain way to halt the massive amnesty is to immediately file articles of impeachment against the president.

Concerned about the impact of illegal aliens on the United States? Don't miss Tom Tancredo's book, "In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America's Border and Security" -- and with your purchase get a free copy of "Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America's Borders"!

There have always been two main arguments against impeachment even among those who support it in principle – first, that it is not practical because it would never succeed in the Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate, and secondly that, well, you just can't impeach the first black president no matter what he has done. But given the likely new political circumstances post-Nov. 4, both of those arguments have lost their power.

In the first place, impeachment is no longer "impractical." In fact, it is the only practical means of stopping the president from undertaking unconstitutional actions. Lawsuits won't work because even if you win in court after a two-year long appeal process, the Supreme Court's decision would be moot: The amnesty could not be undone. Everyone understands this.

Every poll shows that public opinion overwhelmingly opposes the unilateral amnesty of millions of illegal aliens using an authority Obama is not granted under the Constitution. The public also understands that Obama has postponed the action until after Nov. 4 precisely because it will be condemned as unconstitutional across a wide spectrum of public opinion.

Even normally liberal newspapers and commentators have agreed that Obama lacks the authority to do it. Thus, a move toward impeachment based on that unconstitutional action would have immediate sympathy and support if Republicans had the courage to do it. That has always been the missing ingredient in Republican plans: the courage to do the right thing.

A political blockbuster and guide for Congress to draw up articles of impeachment -- Aaron Klein's "Impeachable Offenses: The Case for Removing Barack Obama from Office"

If Republicans capture the majority in the U.S. Senate as now appears almost certain, the 2015 Congress is a new ballgame. If the House were to bring impeachment charges based on not only the amnesty but several other unconstitutional actions, do Democratic senators want to run for re-election in 2016 on a platform that starts with apologizing for Obama's unconstitutional behavior?

Here's the key question: Is Obama so popular now that Democrats in 2015 and 2016 will fall on their swords to defend him? Do Senate Democrats want a vote against impeachment to be the defining issue in their 2016 campaigns, while also defending the influx of millions of additional illegal aliens across our unguarded borders?

The Obama presidency is self-destructing. All that is needed to neutralize his planned amnesty and other unconstitutional actions is Republican courage to follow the Constitution and impeach the man. Anything less will simply pave the way for more of the same – not only on immigration, but on energy, welfare, voting rights and other issues.

Media wishing to interview Tom Tancredo, please contact [email protected].