Posted on 11/28/2005 2:39:24 PM PST by Brian_Baldwin
Bush Outlines Border Security Plan
Monday, November 28, 2005
CRAWFORD, Texas — Trying to unify a fractious Republican Party headed to midterm elections with wide differences over how to best deal with illegal immigration, President Bush was in Tucson, Ariz., on Monday to say America shouldn't have to choose between a welcoming society and a lawful one.
"Securing our border is essential to securing our homeland. And I want to thank all of those who are working around the clock to defend our border, to enforce our laws and to uphold the values of the United States of America. America is grateful to those on the front lines enforcing the border," Bush said at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in the first of two speeches on border control.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,176879,00.html
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
"Why do you think that the "guest workers" should be given the option of citizenship after 3 years?"
Because they paid a coyote $1000 or more just to get here for our public services and jobs!!
/sarc
first Mexican customs facility in the United States
http://www.insidebayarea.com/businessnews/ci_3254225 ^ | 11/27/2005 | Garance Burke
Posted on 11/27/2005 4:42:00 PM PST by cope85
New Kansas City customs port may expedite trade with Mexico Region hopes to capitalize on growing cross-border trade By Garance Burke, Associated Press
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Shipping American cars and electronics to Mexico may become much cheaper and faster early next year when the first Mexican customs facility in the United States is expected to open in the heart of the Midwest. It may be nearly 1,000 miles to the border from Kansas City, but this industrial hub will soon start building an inland port that would whisk thousands of trucks through export inspections and shoot them back out onto the North American Free Trade Agreement corridor, where they can roll through the border without further delays.
The $3 million facility, which would be the first foreign customs office inside the United States, will likely be approved by the U.S. and Mexican governments by year's end and is scheduled to open next May, said Chris Gutierrez, president of Kansas City SmartPort Inc., a nonprofit organization promoting the project.
Planners say manufacturing industries in the upper Midwest and Canada would be the first to benefit from the new customs operation, which they believe could expand to handle cargo from across the country.
Mexican government officials confirmed the two countries had agreed on the overall proposal, though both nations said finer points of the agreement were still being negotiated by customs officials — including security concerns and the legal standing of Mexican customs officials working in the United States.
After a visit to Kansas City in May, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Robert C. Bonner said the pilot proposal was "bold and imaginative" and could transform Kansas City into a "major new trade link" that would fit well with new border security initiatives to pre-approve cargo.
"We've always had the railroad and the river and the airlines and the roads, but this will open up tremendous new business opportunities for Kansas City," said Kansas City councilwoman Bonnie Sue Cooper, who said she proposed the idea to the Mexican Finance Minister Francisco Gil Diaz last year.
In the 1940s, Kansas City — at the intersection of two major interstate highways along the Missouri River — was one of the country's largest rail distribution centers.
Now plans are to fill a gravel lot that once held cattle with a big-box building that will process long lines of big rigs packed with goods for export to Mexico.
Providing the containers stay electronically sealed once they're inspected, the trucks will be free to cross the border and avoid further inspections, resulting in efficiencies and cost savings.
"Kansas City is the geographical
heart of the United States and of the entire NAFTA region," said Everardo Suarez, Mexican consul general in Kansas City. Once the agreement is completed, Kansas City would essentially function like a Mexican port.
The transition to the global economy comes just in time: since the city's stockyards and airline industry declined, it has been struggling to rebuild itself as a leader in global logistics.
"I think this project would go a long way to transform trucking," said Chaz Jones, a research analyst with Morgan Keegan, a Memphis investment bank. "Truckers typically get paid per mile. The more time cargo spends moving on the road, the more revenue it generates for a carrier."
In recent months, delays at the hurricane-damaged port of New Orleans and bottlenecks at Long Beach and Los Angeles have caused companies to look for alternative trade routes. Industry analysts said Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is one of several companies moving freight through Mexico as an alternative to using West Coast ports; Wal-Mart spokespeople would not confirm the move.
Because so much trade between NAFTA partners is carried by truck, Midwestern cities with good transportation infrastructure stand to capture some of that trade flow.
In August 2005, trucks carried 64 percent of imports from Canada and Mexico and 80 percent of U.S. exports to those countries, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics.
San Antonio has also invested significant efforts to develop a competing inland port. But Kansas City officials hope the customs facility will give the city a leg up, especially once the project's second phase, which will allow rail cars to clear Mexican customs as well, is completed.
Kansas City Southern owns two Mexican train lines which means they can send freight from the Midwest directly to the Mexican port of Lazaro Cardenas, where car manufacturer Mazda Motor Corp. has begun shipping vehicles from Japan to Kansas City.
"There might not be enough volume to open a rail facility today, but we certainly expect that will increase in the next few years," said Warren Erdman, a vice president at Kansas City Southern. "We have great interest in the proposal."
"Once the agreement is completed, Kansas City would essentially function like a Mexican port."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..........
Chilling to read this. The sellout is not even being hidden from us.
sellout of America, it is
Yes!
>>>I don't like the Presidents border policy either but Kerry would have had you screwed from day one. Do you honestly think Kerry would be closing the border right now if he was in office? Go back to DU with your BS.<<<
I'm a conservative, sonny. Why would I want to hang around your buddies at DU?
Both President Bush and Minority Leader Pelosi use the word "comprehensive" which is apparently the code word for "guest worker" and/or "amnesty."
Nada about sending employers to jail.
List the countries, Please!
Well when the first S--- you throw at the wall doesn't stick, grab another handful and throw again.
Now, if you are through beating your breast like a little girl and being "sick" for having voted for Bush, run back to your friends on DU and try to stay there this time. Oh, yeah, grow up a little will you?
I'm well aware that muslims lie to advance their religion/totalitarian movement. However, you could ban immigration from muslims countries, with the exception of those persecuted because they're not muslim, you could deny entry to those named "Mohamed," you could make it clear that muslims are not wanted, and you would make a big dent in their numbers. Pretending they are the same as other immigrants is suicidal.
"Where you are wrong is that the federal government can abridge them or deprive any person of life, liberty, or proerty without due process of law, nor deny the equal protection of the laws (see, e.g. Amendments 1 - 10"
That is covered under the Fifth Amenedment isn't it, not the 14th?
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:jwWDDIu2HeYJ:caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment05/+fifth+amendment&hl=en
I wish that were the case. Alas, too many Republicans believe in this limpwristed border strategy. They'd reach a compromise that isn't acceptable to you and me. Tancredo and similarly principled folks wouldn't stand for it, but there aren't enough of them.
What a foolish and ignorant thing to say. I voted for Bush in both 2000 and 2004 and I have supported him on just about every issue. But on the issue of illegal immigration, I disagree with Bush. Disagreeing with Bush on illegal immigration doesn't mean that I hate Bush, just as disagreeing with my wife on an important issue doesn't mean that I hate my wife.
Not so fast: according to this article, for example, no European nation does.
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.