Reading about President Obama and his administration’s plan to unilaterally enact immigration “reform”, one is reminded of other instances of poor management, bad leadership, potential illegal activity, et al, as well. Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the IRS scandal, the VA scandal, and on and on could be cited as examples of misbehavior at best, and unlawful actions at worst, by the White House.

There is one question that seems to be missing by Republicans, conservatives, and the media that has actually decided to report on these, and other, potential scandals: So what?

My question is not one of ignoring the situation or of condoning the actions. My question is rooted in the muddled results of inaction after these policies have been enacted. The informed observer will answer correctly that nothing substantial has happened. No consequences, no job terminations, no arrests, nothing of import. Looking at some of the scandals individually and the resulting action one can see a pattern of feckless inaction by Congress and those responsible for the checks and balances built into the Constitution.

So what if President Obama authorized Eric Holder and the Attorney General’s office to allow American guns to be illegally purchased and illegally moved across the border with Mexico? Does it matter that Border Agent Brian Terry was killed by one of these guns? The individual who fired the gun was eventually captured and convicted, but where is the accountability for those who allowed the guns to get into the killers hands illegally to begin with? If a gun was knowingly sold illegally in the United States, you can bet the AG, Justice Department, and ATF are going to throw the book at the seller. But a gun that those within the administration were responsible for making available? Nothing. 

It should be clear to anyone without a hyperpartisan worldview to protect Democrats that there is more than a “smidgen” of corruption contained in the IRS targeting of conservative and Tea Party groups. Those who push for Lois Lerner to actually defend herself, or at the very least for the legally required emails and communications to be presented, have been given the proverbial middle finger. Lerner was allowed to resign early, and some minor IRS officials were shuffled to new positions, but where are the pink slips for those who participated in the additional scrutiny of groups and individuals, which was clearly against the IRS’ own rules. Who has been tried in a court of law? Who has been charged?

“What difference does it make?” is the infamous quote by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding the death of multiple Americans in Benghazi including Ambassador Chris Stevens. While there is plenty of speculation about what was really going on there, (CIA operation? Arms buyback? Shoulder held anti-aircraft missile depot?) the fact that cannot be missed is the failure by the State Department to provide adequate protection of the outpost. Once again, the question that must be asked is, who has been held responsible?

In these scandals and others, Republicans have held hearings. They have posed questions while receiving few substantive answers, been stonewalled in many cases by those testifying, undercut by Democrats, and castigated by the press for running witch-hunts.  Many of the left have argued that these hearing have proven that there was nothing illegal about the IRS or Benghazi, for example. The only thing that has really been proven is that a pattern of delay, delay, delay, until American get bored of the scandal seems to work. When new, previously undisclosed, information is found the press goes after those who are running the hearings (read: Republicans) as if they were rabid pit bulls with nothing better to do than to chase after imaginary squirrels.

Now the president is stating he will enact unilateral changes to immigration law. In the past couple of years, he has stated on multiple occasions that he does not have the legal or Constitutional authority to enact such changes (See one example here) Now that Republicans have won the Senate and retained control of the house, the equation has changed and the president is either picking a fight or simply ignoring his own previous analysis of his authority. Either way, without a strong Republican response, the action will go uncontested, despite Constitutional responsibility of Congress. The question then continues, “So what?”

Republicans must make a stand. Impeachment is a non-starter. If President Obama were captured on camera strangling John Boehner there would still be Democratic Senators who would not impeach because “The president must have had a good reason to strangle Boehner.” Many would probably wish they had the gumption to do the same.

Instead, Congress must use any power they have to stop this action. Primarily, they must be bold and use the power of the purse to stop enactment of this unpopular action. If thousands of competent, quality officers in the military can be forced out of their jobs because of funding issues. Congress can render any Executive Order worthless by not providing funds to enact it. Lawsuits are a nice thought, but it takes months, if not years for the courts to take action. By then, any amnesty program would be long past enacted.

Congress has a responsibility to be a check and balance to the Executive Branch. If Republicans decide to be passive, if they decide to conservatively deal with immigration, then the administration will continue with whatever actions they collectively feel is in their best interest. When questioned regarding those same actions, they will shrug their shoulders, and smugly ask, “So what?”