Executive Action On Immigration

I usually steer clear of political discussion in this blog (I'll leave that to someone else), but I feel I must speak.  Executive action or executive order (there is a slight distinction) has been around since the birth of our country.  Early presidents used this sparingly.  You could count on one hand the number of times most presidents used executive action in the first 150 years of our county.  But in the past 75 years, presidents in both parties have used it a lot.

President Obama has used executive action 193 times during his presidency.  By comparison, here is a list of other 20th and 21st century presidents and their use of executive action.  Franklin Roosevelt 3,522 times, Truman 907 times, Eisenhower 484 times, Reagan 381 times, George H.W. Bush 166 times, Clinton 364 times, and George W. Bush 291.  So what's all the fuss about Obama using executive action so much and acting like a dictator?   I don't get it.

Some of the most powerful and courageous actions by presidents have been taken in this way.  Are you aware of the fact that the Emancipation Proclamation by Lincoln was an executive action?  Also, Truman made a bold and courageous action by ordering the armed services to integrate.  Had he not taken this action, we might still be debating the subject.  Other important executive actions by recent presidents include the following:  Gerald Ford took executive action to abandon the use of certain chemical herbicides in war, Carter froze Iranian assets in the U.S. during the hostage crisis, both Regan and GHW Bush took action to defer the removal of certain immigrants, JFK established the Peace Corps.  He also recognized the right of federal workers to bargain collectively.  LBJ prohibited discrimination in employment decisions based on race, religion, sex or nation origin, and Nixon prohibited discrimination in competitive federal jobs.

  Some pretty important decisions have been made through executive action.  Obama's action on immigration is just another important action taken by a president who has tried to make immigration part of the conversation, but Congress has failed to even discuss.  Is it legal?  That's for the constitutional lawyers to decide, but based on precedent, you'd have to think it was.  We have elected this president to lead our country, and he has certain powers  that he does not need our approval to implement.  If people aren't happy with who is president or who is representing them in congress, they have a right to do something about it in the next election.  We just had an election where people showed how unhappy they were with congress, and threw out many long time members.  Let's hope that the people they replaced will legislate, which is what they were elected to do.  So far, I don't see that happening.  It's just new faces in congress doing the same old thing, NOTHING.  Pardon me if I'm skeptical.