WASHINGTON, D.C. – It has been interesting to see the mixed reactions of North Carolina’s Republican congressional delegation to President Donald Trump’s national emergency declaration regarding border security. After all, it is congress that has failed, time and again, to sufficiently fund border security.
Two members, Reps. Richard Hudson (NC-08) and Tedd Budd (NC-13) of that delegation are on opposite sides, with one joining the likes of Sen. Thom Tillis, and the other pointing out that Trump is merely pursuing a solution to a problem congress has failed to fix.
From the Salisbury Post:
“While members of Congress such as Rep. Ted Budd, R-13, say the declaration is within Trump’s powers as president, others such as Rep. Richard Hudson, R-8, and Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., say they’re worried about the precedent it sets.
Budd, who was in town Tuesday to speak to the Salisbury Rotary Club about term limits for elected officials, told the Post the optimal way to provide border wall funding would be through Congress and that he supports the president’s declaration.
“Unfortunately, Congress did not deliver that in the 115th Congress, so I think it’s within his presidential powers,” Budd said. […]
Budd doesn’t support securing the border with only technology solutions such as drones or thermal cameras. A physical wall would be best, he said.
“The main concern is that it be effective,” Budd said. “I don’t care about the material as long as it’s durable and effective.” […]”
Hudson on the other hand is pushing back against the president’s emergency move in Tillis-like fashion.
“I worry it sets a precedent future Democrat presidents would abuse to achieve a radical agenda like the Green New Deal or to confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens,” Hudson said in an emailed statement. “While this process now plays out in the courts, I continue to ask the administration not to tap into already appropriated military construction funds that our troops and their families need at Fort Bragg.” […]
Tillis and Hudson seemingly share the same view about how Trump’s decision might set a bad precedent.
“It wouldn’t provide enough funding to adequately secure our borders, it would likely get tied up in litigation, and most concerning is that it would create a new precedent that a left-wing president would undoubtedly utilize to implement their radical policy agenda while bypassing the authority of Congress,” Tillis said in a statement Friday.[…]”
We’ve highlighted previously that the argument of precedent setting by employing a constitutionally sanctioned executive power to enforce federal law and national security is misleading. ‘Precedent’ has already been set dozens of times by past presidents. The insane policies of the Left that those like Tillis and Hudson mention are in no way comparable to using emergency powers to enforce a national border.
Budd seems to understand this.
“That has been set as the argument to prevent him from doing it, but there have been 40 uses of it since the act was established by Congress,” Budd said. “It’s a power Congress gave to the president to call a national emergency. It’s not for something whimsical.”
As long as those politicians that subscribe to the thought process of Hudson and Tillis outnumber the more intellectually honest approach of Budd, we will continue to be plagued by a congress that does too little of it’s real job, and too much business-as-usual.