Something that annoys me about politics in the United States is candidates for President claiming they will pass or repeal laws. A President can ask, cajol, badger, and otherwise influence Congress to pass or repeal a law. However, the President cannot go alone and create a law. He can only agree not to prevent a law from being created. This is easier when the political parties running both the House and the (60+ majority in the) Senate are the same as the President’s. Any one of these being different creates the impasse we have seen lately where even somewhat simple legislation becomes a nightmare.
An example is candidate Romney’s fix for immigration by removing Obama’s Executive Order and putting in place a law in the Washington Examiner.
“I will put in place my own long-term solution that will replace and supersede the president’s temporary measure,” Romney said.
(I do realize “long-term solution” is not explicitly a law passed by Congress, but what else could it be? Another Executive Order would be another temporary measure because any President coming along could remove it.)
Only if Romney becomes President AND the GOP keeps the House AND the GOP gets to 60 seats in the Senate is Romney likely ever to pass this kind of legislation. Maybe Romney banking on being at getting Democrats to support him than even Reagan? The Democrats’ DREAM Act fell victim to not having the votes required to pass it. Why would Romney’s version be any different unless the GOP get control of both houses of Congress?
I guess maybe stating one will ask Congress to pass one’s platform is too weak. Also, stating one will cram one’s platform through Congress is too dictatorial. So it is more convenient to pretend like one will have the ability to go it alone.