In DC we have the annual game of chicken over funding bills and a threatened gov't "shutdown." Will Congressional Republicans be blamed if Obama vetoes the bill?
i) It's harder for Obama to defend a veto that's predicated on his legally dubious and deeply unpopular refusal to enforce immigration laws.
ii) Even if Congressional Republicans are blamed, the 2016 election will be dominated by presidential politics. How many voters will remember a temporary DHS shutdown?
iii) A shutdown of DHS is very different from a general shutdown of the Federal gov't.
Keep in mind, too, that voters who panic over Federal gov't shutdowns rarely vote Republican anyway.
iv) When I mouse over to the DHS website, what do I find? It includes "Immigration Services" and "Border Protection," as well as ICE (fair amount of duplication right there).
That would be significant if, in fact, these agencies were actually enforcing the law rather than breaking the law. Under Obama, they are funneling illegal immigrants into the country. Indeed, these Federal agencies have become major official traffickers of illegal aliens.
Then there's TSA. Again, that would be significant if in fact TSA was protecting passengers from hijackers. But due to political correctness, TSA harasses passengers least likely to hijack a plane while ignoring passengers most likely to hijack a plane. Also, it repeatedly fails random security tests.
Then there's the Secret Service. Somehow I doubt the President will lose his security detail in a temporary shutdown.
Mind you, under Obama, the Secret Service was falling down on the job, anyway.
There's also a thing called Office of Intelligence and Analysis. However, between the NSA, CIA, FBI, and military intelligence, we already have tremendous duplication vis-a-vis domestic and foreign intelligence collection and analysis.
Then there's FEMA. However, that's been criticized as a bungling bureaucracy.
So what do we have to lose in a temporary shutdown of DHS? Heck, why not make it permanent?