Posted on 01/25/2005 9:56:49 AM PST by citizen
2,000 new border agents aren't part of budget, Ridge says
President Bush (news - web sites) will not ask Congress for enough money to add 2,000 agents to patrol the nation's borders in his 2006 budget, even though he signed a bill last month authorizing the increase.
Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said Monday that Bush's new budget, to be released in early February, will propose a "good incremental increase" in the number of agents. But he made it clear the number would not approach 2,000. The new agents were to be the first hires toward doubling the size of the force over five years.
As part of a sweeping intelligence bill passed in December, Congress called for nearly doubling the size of the Border Patrol by adding 10,000 agents over five years. The agency has about 11,000 agents; 90% work along the southern border with Mexico.
But in an interview with USA TODAY, Ridge scoffed at the notion of adding so many agents and said it would be an inefficient use of precious homeland security dollars.
"The notion that you're going to have 10,000 is sort of a fool's gold," Ridge said. "It's nice to say you're going to have 10,000 more Border Patrol agents in five years, but what other part of Homeland Security do you want to take the money from?"
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
"Another promise broken.
Pres. Bush, the Mexico-First President."
To be fair I don't really remember Bush saying that he was planning on hiring 2000 more border agents next year.
Congress passed legislation that included allowing for it, but didn't allocate funds for hiring them. Bush didn't veto it.
Bush's administration does have a lot of control over how the funds the Department of Homeland Security are spent as long as Congress didn't earmark the money for a certain purpose, but they don't control the amount they are given, and have to do the best with what they are given.
Bush does set suggest a budget to Congress, and he doesn't have the money for those agents in his budget. He does deserve the blame for that. However, Congress is who really creates the budget and passes it. Congress passed the bill that allows those agents to be hired, and Congress has the ability to earmark the funds for that purpose.
I do agree that Bush is too weak on the illegal immigration issue. It's something he's shared with his predecessors. He's actully doing better than Clinton on the issue, but that's not exactly a high standard.
The department of Homeland Security has limited funds, and a lot of places that need to be shored up after a long period of neglect. Our intelligence gathering and coordination really needs some serious attention.
The money for additional border patrol agents needs to come from somewhere. There are a lot of government funded wastes of taxpayer money I would love to see have their money taken away, and that should happen. However hiring, training, equipping, and paying the salaries and benefits of 2000 agents adds up to a huge amount of money.
That several hundred million dollars would have to come from somewhere.
I agree that hiring these agents should be a high priority. I also thing that new technology to aid the agents should also be a high priority. However, I don't really know what we'd be giving up to make it happen, so I'm hesitent to say the administration is completely out of line on this issue.
Jan 05. Dennis Miller needling Art Torrez
“Art, didn’t I hear a measure in the California State Legislature to not let naturalized citizens run for the presidency but in fact let illegal aliens run for the presidency??”
ping
The administration is set to request $80 billion for Iraq and Afganistan. I don't recall them worrying about taking that amount from the rest of the Defense Department. I would hope the security of our borders would be just as important.
You're absolutely right... we're seeing Hillary make her move to the center right now... next, she's going to take ownership of the Border Security issue and use it as her #1 issue to run on in '08.
If the Republicans and Conservatives in the Executive Branch and Legislative Branch of the USG don't do something now to address the Border Security issue, we'll be crying in our beers on January 20, 2009 when Hillary is taking the Oath of Office.
He breaks few promises.
However, his catering to the Hispanic vote is annoying. The boarder IS an issue in crime, terror threat and in economic terms. Bush needs to reevaluate his position. He’s acting like a Democrat on this issue.
Red6
You're absolutely right... we're seeing Hillary make her move to the center right now... next, she's going to take ownership of the Border Security issue and use it as her #1 issue to run on in '08.
And you believe her?????
Congress should appropriate the money anyhow.
Good point, NS.
Any legislation passed by Congress that doesn't allocate funds is basically political posturing.
I'm sure there are lots of liberals that voted for the legislation that have no intention of funding it, and will be overjoyed that they can criticize Bush's administration for not fully funding the plan in his suggested budget.
However, remember that it's congress, not Bush that creates and passes the budget. Bush's budget is merely a request. Congress has the authority to allocate the funds for that purpose.
We can rightly criticize Bush for his weak approach to securing our borders, but don't let Congress off the hook. They're the ones that have the power to make this happen, Bush can only really request it, or direct the department of homeland security on how they should use the funds they are given that aren't earmarked for a specific purpose.
Write your congressmen and tell them to fund the hiring of those agents in the budget. They passed the law allowing it, they need to follow through and see that it happens. That's their responsibility.
I remember having a debate about this with another FReeper some time ago and being told that 2,000 new agents was a strong commitment by the Administration. I said then, as I do know, that the budget is the real policy document, not legislation that only authorizes expenditures, if appropriated.
It's not whether I believe her (of course I don't), it's whether she can convince enough people who don't follow politics closely, who see illegal aliens on the street, who fear another terrorist attack, who read nothing but the MSM and get their news solely from the networks.
A treasonist socialist got over 59,000,000 votes in the last election - all Hillary needs to do is get a couple million people to change their vote next time (and Border Security is a hot enough topic with enough people, that it could be the issue that turns the election in her favor - unless the Republicans get serious about it now).
"I remember having a debate about this with another FReeper some time ago and being told that 2,000 new agents was a strong commitment by the Administration"
Yes, there were several of them who told us how dumb we are and that Bush had "fixed" everything with the new hires, even though we told them the intelligence bill did not fund them. Just like we were told if we'd just wait until after the election, this would all be handled.
For one thing we had a very active counterintelligence operation south of the border, extending all the way from Mexico down to Brazil and Argentina. I had a history professor who was the acknowledged expert on this little known aspect of WWII.
And if I recall correctly, the job of the last remaining horse cavalry units in the US Army was patrolling the Mexican border.
Until a guest worker program is implemented the cost of stopping all Mexican laborers would be next to impossible. All you would do is divert funds from anti-terrorist activities.
We already have 5 guards per mile on the southern border and still only catch 1/4th to 1/2 the Mexican laborers. How many would it take to catch all of them. And how would that stop terrorists?
State sponsored terrorists fly first class into the U.S. using visas acquired with official government issued documents. They don't take the unreasonable risk of being one of the 25% to 50% caught swimming the Rio Grande or trekking for three days across deserts.
If you want to stop Mexican laborers that's fine, but you only make a fool out of yourself when you claim you're trying to stop terrorists.
TJ better get back in line, or his new best buddy David Dreier is going to take Bonner's name off his new immigration legislation.
As expected, Bush has no desire to increase border security.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.