Submitted by: Suzanne
Iowa Representative King Intends to "Repeal Everything" Obama has Signed
Written by Kelly Holt
An Iowa congressman said on Tuesday that he will sue President Barack Obama over the executive’s decision to stop the deportation of certain young illegal immigrants. According to The Messenger, August 8, U.S. Representative Steve King told a audience at a Humboldt (Iowa) picnic, “I am bringing him to court and we're going to defend the Constitution of the United States and the separation of powers.'' The event was sponsored by the Humboldt County Republican Party.
King was referring to Obama’s signing of an executive order earlier this year halting the deportation of law-abiding illegal immigrants who arrived in the United States before age 17, but who are not yet 30. Qualifying immigrants must have completed high school or served in the military. A long-time opponent of amnesty, King said he’d made the decision to sue the president the day of the announcement. He believes Obama violated the Constitution in issuing the executive order, since such a program should be created only through the congressional process, but a lawsuit must be filed before Labor Day, according to King. The Hill stated that under the policy change, immigrants will enjoy two a two-year deferral.
Of Obama’s executive order, King said, ''He has prosecutorial discretion, but he does not have the ability to grant blanket amnesty to entire classes of people.''
But King didn’t stop there, adding that he’s considering introducing a bill that would repeal everything the President has signed into law. He places top priority on stopping ObamaCare.
Iowa’s Republican Party chairman, A.J. Spiker chimed in, saying that Obama has been tearing the country apart ''from Day 1 with his socialist agenda of Obamacare.” He added that the Republican Party would, according to The Messenger, “continue to stand for low taxes, less regulation, and the sanctity of life, beginning at conception.”
But King parts ways with many constitutionalist conservatives on a few issues. He reiterated to Humboldt Republicans his commitment to a balanced budget amendment, “If you don't tighten the belt on Congress by insisting upon a balanced budget amendment to our Constitution, I'm afraid we don't have five years before we go off the cliff into the abyss of an economic collapse for our country.” His idea of a balanced budget amendment would cap federal spending at 18 percent and require a congressional supermajority to raise taxes.
Constitutionalists argue that a balanced budget is inherent in any enterprise, therefore shouldn’t require an amendment, which Congress would likely observe just about as much as it does other existing amendments, which is "not much." The balanced budget amendment idea is often proposed by liberal leftists to divert attention from the real problem — the need to cut spending. And, more often than is revealed, the balanced budget amendment proposal is used to promote the companion idea of a constitutional convention, a highlydangerous idea that stubbornly refuses to go away.
King has earned a faltering 79 percent on The New American's Freedom Index, a "scoreboard" for congressional votes based on the Constitution. King did not vote on a piece of legislation that would have repealed the high-profile "death panel provision" in ObamaCare, because of his opposition to the program.
Nevertheless, his proposal to "repeal everything" is likely to resonate with constitutional conservatives. And the only way to enforce the Constitution is to, well, enforce the Constitution.