Tom Reed’s statement on H.R. 5759

justabill2-300x230H.R. 5759 — “To establish a rule of construction clarifying the limitations on executive authority to provide certain forms of immigration relief.”

I was pleased to support the House effort to remind the President of his duties as given by the Constitution. Rather than taking unilateral, clearly unconstitutional action that places politics over fairness to those who follow the rules and come to this country legally, I hope that the President will work with us. While I do not support amnesty, a path exists to providing legal work status to those here illegally while at the same time ensure our national security remains intact. I know from listening to constituents a pathway to such status, as opposed to unconstitutional amnesty, is a compromise that can work.–Rep. Tom Reed

  • I was pleased to support the House effort to remind the President of his duties… — The purpose of H.R. 5759 is to mollify dissident Republicans rather than to remind the President of anything.
  • Rather than taking unilateral, clearly unconstitutional action… — Tom often suggests without justification that something he doesn’t like is unconstitutional–a meaningless claim.
  • that places politics over fairness… — H.R. 5759, doomed to fail in the Senate, is purely political posturing.
  •  I hope that the President will work with us. — This turns the facts upside down; does anyone think the House is only waiting for President Obama’s cooperation to stop stalling?
  • While I do not support amnesty, — That President Obama’s Executive Order constitutes amnesty is a meaningless charge. Tom uses amnesty and unconstitutional as smears, to vaguely suggest something is wrong without saying why.
  • a path exists to providing legal work status to those here illegally while at the same time ensure our national security remains intact. —Tom seems to favor a guest worker law. The reference to national security replaces reason with an appeal to fear.
  • I know from listening to constituents… — Tom’s constituents are authorities on immigration law? Who knew?
  • a pathway to such status, as opposed to unconstitutional amnesty, is a compromise that can work. — Perhaps, but even if Congress would follow up on this idea, it is a pale shadow of needed immigration law reform.

One sided statements, which often deny the obvious, are typical of Tom Reed.

© William Hungerford – December 2014

Advertisements

About whungerford

* Contributor at NewNY23rd.com where we discuss the politics, economics, and events of the New New York 23rd Congressional District (Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung, (Eastern) Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben,Tioga, Tompkins, and Yates Counties) Please visit and comment on whatever strikes your fancy.
This entry was posted in Congress, Immigration, Political, Reed's Views and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Tom Reed’s statement on H.R. 5759

  1. Deb Meeker says:

    “You can’t defend the indefensible – anything you say sounds self-serving and hypocritical.”
    ~ Diane Abbott, British politician

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.