[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 7]
[House]
[Page 9235]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               THE WHITE HOUSE DECREE IS BAD FOR AMERICA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Brooks) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, last week, the White House decreed partial 
amnesty for an estimated 3 million illegal aliens and mandated 
acceptance of illegal alien work permit applications. The White House 
decree is bad for America.
  First, Mr. Speaker, it is unconscionable for the White House to pit 
unemployed Americans against illegal aliens in a competition for scarce 
jobs. In 2009, the Pew Hispanic Center found that 7.8 million 
struggling American families have already lost job opportunities to 
illegal aliens. America suffers an 8.2 percent unemployment rate. Even 
worse, Hispanic Americans suffer an 11 percent unemployment rate. Even 
worse, African Americans suffer a 14 percent unemployment rate. Even 
worse, American teenagers suffer a 25 percent unemployment rate. All 
are hammered by a White House decree that grants as many as 3 million 
illegal aliens work permits.
  I understand heartfelt compassion for illegal aliens, but where is 
the compassion for millions of Americans who are unemployed and 
suffering from jobs lost to illegal aliens? Where is the compassion for 
American taxpayers who must pay higher taxes to support millions of 
extra unemployed?
  Second, the White House decree grants amnesty to illegal aliens. 
Webster's defines ``amnesty'' as ``the act of an authority, as a 
government, by which pardon is granted to a large group of 
individuals.'' Further, ``pardon'' is defined as ``a release from the 
legal penalties of an offense.''
  A penalty for breaking America's immigration laws is not lawfully 
getting a job. The White House releases illegal aliens from this 
penalty; hence, the White House grants amnesty. While the amnesty is 
admittedly partial, it is amnesty nonetheless.
  Third, Mr. Speaker, the 1980s amnesty taught foreigners that America 
won't enforce its immigration laws. The result is over 10 million 
illegal aliens in America and an immigration mess that is destructive 
to America. A 2011 Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform study 
found that illegal aliens cost American taxpayers a net loss of $99 
billion a year. Illegal aliens overcrowd our schools and need costly 
English interpreters. In 2011, illegal aliens drove up America's K-12 
education costs by $49 billion per year. Illegal aliens overcrowd our 
emergency rooms, delay treatment for Americans, and drive up health 
care costs. Illegal aliens commit crimes, sometimes heinous, against 
American citizens and burden taxpayers with higher jail costs. In my 
home county, more Madison Countians have been killed by illegal aliens 
than have lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan combined.
  Mr. Speaker, amnesty did not solve America's illegal alien problem in 
the 1980s, nor will it today. Those who do not learn from history are 
doomed to repeat it. Mr. Speaker, America must never again give blanket 
amnesty to illegal aliens.
  Fourth, Mr. Speaker, the White House decree is of questionable 
constitutionality. The Constitution states, and I quote article I, 
section 1, ``all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a 
Congress of the United States,'' and ``the Congress shall have the 
power . . . to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.'' The 
Constitution does not empower a President to make law. Hence, the only 
change to immigration law is as our Constitution demands, through 
Congress, not by imperial decree.
  Mr. Speaker, in 2011, when it was not an election year, President 
Obama agreed. On March 28, 2011, the President stated:

       With respect to the notion that I can just suspend 
     deportations through executive order, that's just not the 
     case because there are laws on the books that Congress has 
     passed. The executive branch's job is to enforce and 
     implement those laws. For me to simply, through executive 
     order, ignore those congressional mandates would not conform 
     with my appropriate role as President.

  Last September the President again stated:

       I just have to continue to say this notion that somehow I 
     can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true. The 
     fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have 
     to enforce. And I think there's been a great disservice done 
     to the cause of the DREAM Act that somehow, by myself, I can 
     go and do these things. It's just not true.

  Mr. Speaker, the President's own words speak volumes about the 
constitutionality of a White House decree that undermines America and 
the rule of law.

                          ____________________