Last week the Obama administration
had said it was looking to accept 5,000 Syrian refugees in the coming fiscal
year. But that number didn’t please many members of Congress. House Democratic
Leader, Nancy Pelosi, criticized the number for being to low. Just one day
later, the Obama administration announced that it would be accepting 10,000
refugees. Although, Syrian refugees remain in the hands of the President and
the State Department it has become a central issue for many members of
Congress. On one hand, Democrats like Pelosi feel that President Obama needs to
increase the quota for refugees so more Syrian refugees can be accepted. But on
the other hand, Republican members of Congress are also putting pressure on the
President to use caution with the number of refugees America accepts in the
next year.
The Syrian refugee crisis was
particularly interesting to me because its not something that necessarily falls
within Congress’s jurisdiction, yet members of Congress have already had so
much influence on the matter. Nancy Pelosi was able to have a huge influence on
the number of refugees just by making a statement that she wanted President
Obama to accept more. A multitude of other Democratic lawmakers have also
called on Obama to accept more refugees in the coming year. This prompted me to
think more about the relationship between Congress and the President. We have
discussed the two major roles that are often conflicting. On one hand, Congress
is a lawmaking body, yet members of Congress are also responsible to their
constituencies.
So why would a lawmaking body be
interested in the number of Syrian refugees American accepted? In my opinion,
the commitment of members of Congress on this issue is a result of the
responsibility members have to their constituencies. Pelosi has a very liberal
constituency and it therefore, makes sense that she would fight strongly for
this issue. I also think that members have become committed to the Syrian
refugee crisis because Obama will likely struggle to make progress or change on
the matter without the support of Congress and the American people. Therefore,
those that do support accepting more refugees are being more vocal in order to
bring it to the forefront of lawmakers and American’s attention. This perfectly
exemplifies the constant struggle members of Congress face between their two
roles. In cases like this, where the opinions of Americans and of lawmakers
could make or break what happens to the Syrian refugees, members that both
strongly support or strongly oppose have had to put pressure on the President
and the State Department in order to fulfill their duel roles as members of Congress.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politics/u-s-take-10000-syrian-refugees/index.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/09/11/the-politics-of-the-syrian-refugee-crisis-explained/
1 comment:
The issue of admitting Syrian refugees (though it reaches far beyond the US and into international law) is an interesting one to think of through the guise of the Congress. As we previously discussed in class, Congress usually tries to keep out of foreign policy and let the President do what he thinks is best. But, the Syrian refugee problem has become so widespread recently that I can understand why Congressmen feel the need to get involved and speak up, especially with campaign season starting in the next few months.
Post a Comment