This
Thursday President Trump was signing a seven-part spending bill that would keep
the government open till the end of September, but his mind was on other
things. He announced that he would place the country in a state of national
emergency in order to “stop the national security and humanitarian crisis at the
border.”
The
bills’ border security compromise only placed $1.375 billion for 55 miles of
steel-post fencing, which is less than the $5.7 billion for 200 miles of steel
or concrete that he had previously asked for. By declaring a state of national
emergency, Trump’s main objective would be to gain funds that Congress had not
granted for building the wall. There was quite a lot of controversy and
opposition over this method from both parties, the article calling it
“presidential overreach.” Many Democrats have begun to create legislation in
the hopes of stopping the President from using money from other sources such as
the disaster relief fund. Some also
say that although the wall may be the President priority, perhaps declaring it
as a national emergency is too much. Supporters say that it will “give him that
flexibility that he wants and needs,” and since Mr. Trump could not get what he
wanted before the shutdown, then this is just a way to get done what “needs to
happen.” It was mentioned as well that this could lead to future presidents
taking this approach to other prominent issues.
Mr. Trump
sees this as the only way to get the border wall without another shutdown like
the last one where 800,000 employees did not have paychecks. The article
discussed two laws that would probably have a hand in justifying the President
actions. One allows the secretary of the Army to construct developments “that
are essential to the national defense,” while the second permits the secretary
of defense, in support of the armed forces and in an emergency, to allow
military construction projects. It will be an experience to see how Trump
justifies using other funds and the aftereffects of his decision to put the
country into a state of national emergency.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/14/us/politics/trump-national-emergency-border.html
2 comments:
It is interesting to see this development because it seemed that the president would not sign the spending bill unless he received funds for the wall. He decided to back down and sign the bill because there wasn't enough support from other parties. Now he has declared a state of emergency which means that this more or less has to happen and has set a precedent for presidents to follow. It does seem that he may be outside of his boundaries as a president but is dead set on getting this wall done. It will be interesting to see how other countries react as both political parties within the United States find each and every possible loophole to either stop or continue building the wall.
I wanted to take a moment to touch on the question of how other countries will react to the action of the President. I think the answer to this may vary from country to country. For example I do not believe that countries such as a western European one or Japan will really care that much. While it is possible they disagree with it politically, they would not be bothered by a new precedent nor would they be very affected by it socially or economically. Meanwhile a country like Mexico may care more. While they in fact will not be paying for the wall, they may pay in other forms. People emigrating from Latin or central america may not be able to make it through the American border and will simply stay in Mexico potentially. This would have serious implications on the economy of Mexico. Curious to hear other thoughts on how other nations would react to the declaration.
Post a Comment