My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
19E - FED & STATE LOBBYIST SUMMARY
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2017
>
02/21/2017
>
19E - FED & STATE LOBBYIST SUMMARY
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/17/2017 8:59:14 AM
Creation date
2/16/2017 3:45:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
City Manager's Office
Item #
19E
Date
2/21/2017
Destruction Year
2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
On January 31, San Francisco (city and county) sued over the President's authority to withhold <br />funding from "sanctuary cities." Subsequently, Santa Clara County, and Chelsea and Lawrence, <br />Massachusetts, who filed a joint complain, have sued the administration over the EO. In their <br />complaint, San Francisco sought declaratory and injunctive relief against the United States of <br />America and certain federal officials for violating the 10a' Amendment (Anti -Commandeering <br />Principle) and further sought a declaration that the City and County of San Francisco comply <br />with 8 U.S.C. Section 1373. <br />DACA <br />The President recently indicated that he intends to issue his administration's policy on the <br />Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program in the next few weeks. Separately, the <br />sanctuary city EO may implicitly rescind the Obama Administration's November 14, 2014 <br />immigration executive action, which created the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and <br />Lawful Permanent Residents (DADA) program and expanded the 2012 DACA program. The <br />action was never codified into law. This EO comes soon after a federal judge overseeing a <br />challenge to President Obama's unilateral immigration reforms put the case on hold for two <br />months while President Trump decides what to do with the policies. The original lawsuit was <br />filed by 26 states, arguing that President Obama violated the U.S. Constitution's separation of <br />powers by acting without congressional approval. <br />If DAPA and DACA, are struck down, Congress would have to act to reverse this change in <br />policy and seek to codify President Obama's executive action to protect people brought to the <br />U.S. as children. Since Republicans hold a majority in both chambers, passing a bipartisan <br />DACA bill will be difficult, especially in the House. Some Republicans in the Senate, namely <br />those who cosponsored the Bridge Act—including Sens. Murkowski (R -AIC), Flake (R -AZ) and <br />Graham (R-SC)—which would provide temporary relief from deportation and employment <br />authorization to individuals who are eligible for DACA. <br />FY 2017 & FY 2018 Budgets/Appropriations <br />Budgets <br />To overcome the filibuster, Republicans will use procedural tools that only require a simple <br />majority (50 votes) to pass controversial legislation. One such tool is the budget reconciliation <br />process. This year, Republicans will use two budget reconciliations (resolutions) to accomplish <br />two major priorities: ACA repeal and replace (FY 2017) and tax reform (FY 2018). The first <br />budget resolution to repeal the ACA was passed by the Senate on January 12 and the House on <br />January 13, and does not require the president's signature. The President recently noted that a <br />GOP replacement plan could take a year. The FY 2017 resolution is currently being reconciled. <br />The FY 2017 budget resolution includes reconciliation instructions to four authorizing <br />committees—Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce in the House and Finance and Health, <br />Education, Labor, and Pensions in the Senate—to allow immediate action on repeal of the ACA <br />once reconciled. Once the committees finish drafting their changes, they will be sent to the <br />budget committees, which merge the language into a single bill. Then the House and Senate will <br />act on the bills produced by their budget committees. In the House, this is likely an up -or -down <br />vote on the product whereas in the Senate any amendments meeting the budget -related <br />requirement could be offered. Finally, the House and Senate would need to resolve differences in <br />5 <br />1 Msll5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.