Sen. Ben Nelson
Posted on 03/04/2006 6:50:54 AM PST by Hat-Trick
Nelson wants to fence off Mexico
BY HENRY J. CORDES
WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER
There's a growing consensus in Washington that before Congress can address comprehensive immigration reform, it must first crack down at the nation's borders, U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson said Friday.
Sen. Ben Nelson
Nelson this week introduced a new border security bill, one that would go even further than the proposal he first outlined in September.
Among the provisions added since September is the construction of a $5 billion, two-layer reinforced fence that would stretch from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico along the 1,900-mile U.S.-Mexico border.
The latest bill also includes a requirement that all employers verify that their workers are in the country legally and adds 10,000 new detention beds to hold those found in violation of federal immigration laws.
"It's a border-security-first bill," Nelson, a Democrat, said at an Omaha press conference.
"If we don't do something about the border, the problem is going to get worse."
Nelson introduced his latest bill on the same day the Senate Judiciary Committee began work on an immigration reform proposal. Bill Frist, the Senate majority leader, has asked for a bill to be ready for debate by the full Senate later this month.
Nelson said the problem with most immigration proposals introduced to date is that they get bogged down over what to do with the estimated 10 million people already in the United States illegally.
There is much disagreement over that, from calls to deport them to various proposals to create amnesty or guest worker programs.
"A huge bill with guest workers or amnesty is going nowhere," he said.
Nelson said it will be possible to bring more people together if the issue of border security is addressed first.
A Nelson spokesman said the senator's bill is the only one in the Senate that includes provisions for a fence, though there have been other fence proposals in the House.
Nelson's bill is co-sponsored by two Republicans, Jeff Sessions of Alabama and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.
While the cost of the fence might be high, Nelson said, it's modest compared to the cost of dealing with illegal immigration.
He said he didn't think his proposal would hurt companies in Nebraska that have come to rely on labor from undocumented workers. Nelson said efforts to stop illegal immigration should be accompanied by steps to increase legal immigration.
Overall, he said, his proposal would "solve the border security problem where it starts - at the border."
Nelson's Nebraska colleague, Chuck Hagel, is among the senators who have introduced bills for comprehensive immigration reform.
Hagel has advocated legislation that would give legal status to undocumented immigrant workers under certain conditions, such as maintaining a work history in America for several years and passing security and criminal background checks.
Asked about Nelson's security-fence proposal, Hagel said he makes a distinction between immigration reform and border security.
"I'm generally not in favor of building walls," he said.
This story includes material from the Associated Press.
The trouble with the guest worker programs I see talked about is that many have a provision for permanent legal residency at the end of 'N' years. To me, a 'guest' is somebody who leaves eventually.
The flanking of the GOP by the Dems on the number one issue in most American's minds continues apace.
#26 - 10 Simple solutions...
BUMP!
It's amazing how firmly this particular Democrat has grasped the issues that are at stake, while our GOP leadership continues to refuse to do the same.
http://www.usbordersecurity.com
Whoops!
http://www.usbordersecurity.org
Mexico today reminds me of Italy before the First World War. Huge emigration to the United States, including the criminal class of Sicily. Big transfers of cash back to Italy, which was one of Italy's major sources of income. Also a corrupt government, liberal only in its illiberality.
glad to see everyone else is sharing our pain that we've lived with in California for a very long time.
Maybe we will get some results now.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Re #20 -
"...but slave labor and work camps?..."
Ain't happinin'.
The Labor Unions would have none of it.
Just remember Massachussetts' recent "Big Dig" project -
Only 1900 miles of it.
The Liberals know walls will work to secure our borders to a large degree, that's why they oppose their construction.
I say build them and enforce the anti-illegal immigration laws that are already on the books.
Me too.
"But the simple truth is that we've lost control of our own borders, and no nation can do that and survive." -- Pres. Ronald Reagan (News conference, June 14, 1984)
Ah - thanks, explains a lot. Any member of the McCain fan club has something seriously wrong in the character/brain department.
"And stalinist communism still failed. What's your point?"
I think you're still missing the point, here. Think of the flow of migrants in terms of pressure flowing across a permeable membrane. East Germany (communist) actually helped West Germany's economy by building the wall.
It restricted the flow of poorly educated cheap labor into West Germany, and cut down on their social costs.
By making emigration to the West difficult for East Germans, it led them to protest and demand reforms, thereby aiding in the collapse of the Soviet Bloc.
I think the general consensus on this thread is that a wall will not only help our economy by letting us make use of limited resources to take care of American citizens, and give dissatisfied Mexican citizens more motivation to push for change at home, as they will no longer be able to just come north to flee the problems.
Win-win for both countries in the long haul.
Doesn't sound all that bad, does it?
Gee Dane could it be because the Berlin wall was to keep people in (bad) and a U.S. wall would be to keep invaders out (good) is that simple enough for you?
Win-win for both countries in the long haul.
Uh then why Reagan's call for the wall to be torn down. If you all are going to invoke Reagan's name you should at least be consistent to his philosophy that walls don't work and Reagan was right, despite your micromanagement stalinist like theories.
Uh...for starters; I don't ever recall reading or hearing Reagan say walls don't work. The Berlin wall did work. Really well, in fact. Kept Germany split in half, just like it was supposed to.
The reason Reagan suggested they tear it down, was to re-unite a nation that had been artificially seperated by a wall demarcating differences of ideology; not differences of nationality and language.
We'd be throwing one up to enforce our legal border, and keep another country from dumping its socio-economic troubles on ours (also considerably beefing-up national security and cutting-down on contraband traffic).
Our federal government is actually charged with performing this duty in our nation's constitution. Two states have already declared a State-of-Emergency, and requested federal intervention. That right there should be reason enough.
Reagan, if you will do a little research, was a strong advocate of defending the border.
We're not talking about micromanagement at all. We're talking about macromanagement of a huge problem by builing a wall 1,700 miles long. Micromanagement is trying to arrest the illegals one-by-one after they're already here.
Stalin was a commie. I consider myself a Roosevelt (Teddy, that is) Republican, with a tip-of-the-cap to the 20th century's other great president, Ronald Reagan. You might pick up a book on either's term in office. Teddy was a real rump-kicker on both foreign AND domestic policies. We could use someone like that again.
Your personal stance on this issue seems to come from a mixture of Wilsonian idealism (good intentions, but historically flawed, IMHO), and Open-Trade peacemaking that caused the last 2 World Wars, and allowed Al Qaeda to proliferate in the Middle East.
Now, would you care to explain why you're so adamant that we keep criminals streaming across the border? Exactly what logic or reason do you have to defend your position, besides the fact that it costs the taxpayers billions, cuts down on the quality of public education for english-speaking students, bogs-down the healthcare system, and takes money out of the pockets of legal workers?
Uh jaybo there, then why would Ronald Reagan, go out publicly to declare that a wall be torn down, and also his speech of that wall to be torn down, become a cornerstone of his presidential legacy.
Whew you all in the pitchforker basement are spinning your heads so furiously, that would make the makeup artists of the movie "The Exorcist" saying, dang they(pitchforker basement) could have added to the effect.
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.