Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Breaking: Senate overwhelmingly approves House Border Wall (per KFI radio)
KFI radio broadcast ^ | 9/29/06 | self

Posted on 09/29/2006 7:40:28 PM PDT by The Spirit Of Allegiance

Edited on 09/29/2006 7:52:46 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

The House version of the bill approving and funding the building of a U.S./Mexico border wall has overwhelmingly passed the Senate, according to KFI News.

Link to station provided.

UPDATE: Senate backs fence along Mexico border
Reuters
By Donna Smith and Richard Cowan

The U.S. Senate on Friday overwhelmingly agreed to authorize construction of a fence along the U.S. border with Mexico, sending to President George W. Bush before the November 7 elections a bill that Republicans hope will showcase their efforts to stop illegal immigration.

The Republican-written bill authorizing construction of about 700 miles of fence was one of the last bills to clear Congress as lawmakers prepared to leave Washington to campaign for the congressional elections. On a vote of 80-19 the Senate approved the bill already passed by the House of Representatives and it now goes to Bush for his signature.

Bush had sought broad immigration legislation that would create a guest-worker program to help provide a steady workforce for jobs Americans are either unable or unwilling to do. But he was unable to marshal support for it in the face of opposition from a solid group of House Republicans who pushed for tougher enforcement and border measures instead.

A separate bill approved by the House on Friday provided an initial $1.2 billion in funding for the fence and other border-security measures for the fiscal year that begins Oct 1. The money is part of a $34.8 billion bill for domestic security programs for the fiscal year that begins October 1.

The broad spending bill also criminalizes the construction of tunnels that could be secret passageways from Mexico or Canada for drug smugglers, illegal aliens or terrorists.

The Senate was expected to pass the funding bill quickly and send it on to Bush along with the fence authorization.

Opponents of the fence said it would be expensive and was not an effective deterrent to illegal immigration.

"This is a political gimmick," said Sen. Ken Salazar, a Democrat from Colorado. "It is not in the long-term interest of of the United States of America and the Western Hemisphere."

The government of Mexico on Thursday issued a statement expressing "its profound concern" with the fence. The statement, translated from Spanish, said such measures "are contrary to the spirit of cooperation that should prevail to guarantee security in the common border."

IMMIGRATION OVERHAUL

Backers of the fence said it was an important tool to clamp down against illegal immigration. An estimated 1.2 million illegal immigrants were arrested in the last fiscal year trying to cross into the United States along the border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Sections of the fence would be built in each state.

"Fortifying our borders is the first prong of comprehensive immigration reform and it's an integral piece of national security," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican.

Lawmakers and analysts say Congress could tackle comprehensive immigration legislation in a post-election sessions, but they acknowledge difficulties.

"It will be tough but doable," said Rep. Adam Putnam (news, bio, voting record), a Florida Republican.

"There is a lot of pent up pressure and interest in doing something in the lame duck session," said Craig Regelbrugge of the Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform.

Democrats accused the Republican majority of playing politics with the fence bill after raising immigration as an election-year issue but having little to show in the way of legislation.

"This is about November. This is about incumbent protection, not about border protection," said Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

Earlier this year the Senate passed broad immigration legislation that combined border security and employer sanctions with a plan to create a guest-worker program and provide a path to citizenship for many of the 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States.

The Senate and House were unable to compromise and instead resorted to passing a series narrow border security measures.



TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS: aliens; hr4437; illegalimmigration; immigrantlist; immigration; mexico; s2611
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 461-463 next last
To: Paleo Conservative

To be accurate, Texans took that land from Mexico; and had their own Republic for a while before joining the rest of the US.


181 posted on 09/29/2006 8:53:29 PM PDT by Tammy8 (Please Support and pray for our Troops, as they serve us every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: ARealMothersSonForever

Do you or your family have land that may be effected by this legislation? Or is your concern for all?


182 posted on 09/29/2006 8:53:54 PM PDT by highpockets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt
How did we "take" Texas from Mexico? Did we just go in and occupy it? Did we invade and drive the Mexicans out?

Watch the History Channel in six minutes. Even better, record it. It's a two hour documentary about the Mexican-American War.

183 posted on 09/29/2006 8:53:58 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
"I'll cheer when construction starts and really celebrate when the construction is completed"

Can we have a volunteer FReeper brigade to pour cement and push steel...?

184 posted on 09/29/2006 8:54:06 PM PDT by spokeshave (The Democrat Party stands for open treason in a time of war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
They have no claim to any of that land now, it has been purchased in blood and treasure...and will ultiamtely have to be held using the same currency.
Spot On!
185 posted on 09/29/2006 8:54:34 PM PDT by ARealMothersSonForever (We shall never forget the atrocities of September 11, 2001.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

It was a great week. Bush really hit back,I.D. the Rats as cut and runners,he won all the security votes, the economy is roaring, we got 1/3 of the fence, with funding, and the Rats are losing ground every where.
Cheer up, Christmas is not very far away!


186 posted on 09/29/2006 8:56:33 PM PDT by bybybill (`IF TH E RATS WIN, WE LOSE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa
Notice Chafee. He is a flaming liberal, it is a huge stain of the Republicans that they associate with the likes of him.
187 posted on 09/29/2006 8:56:49 PM PDT by gafusa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Thanks. :-)

BTW, I'm been withholding my vote on McGavick uncertain whether I wanted to risk voting for a "Republican" in a blue state. Been burned by too many that end up following McCain off the yellow brick road.

I'm in better spirits now thanks to this vote. Not just the vote, but the number that cast in the affirmative. I'm still awaiting statements from Sessions and J.D....but conditionally based on this fence he just got my vote. It's still the state where theft of Governor's offices goes forward so the odds are still against him, but it's a vote he didn't have before tonight.


188 posted on 09/29/2006 8:57:06 PM PDT by Soul Seeker (Kobach: Amnesty is going from an illegal to a legal position, without imposing the original penalty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
so no one's private property will be in question in those areas.

There is a lot of federal, and state land along the border, there is also indian reservation. There is more private land than most realize, but everyone I personally know that owns private land on the border is more than ready for a fence.

189 posted on 09/29/2006 8:58:32 PM PDT by Tammy8 (Please Support and pray for our Troops, as they serve us every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: SandRat

Put not your trust, SandRat. We need to see the fine print first.

Respectfully,

SJB


190 posted on 09/29/2006 8:59:07 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Our troops will send all of the worlds terrorists to hell in a handbasket with no virgins!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Spirit Of Allegiance

Maybe they started listening.


191 posted on 09/29/2006 8:59:49 PM PDT by zeaal (SPREAD TRUTH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tammy8
everyone I personally know that owns private land on the border is more than ready for a fence.

Exactly...and welcoming it.

192 posted on 09/29/2006 9:00:35 PM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: ARealMothersSonForever; Dog Gone; Lurker; Brilliant; Buckhead; Congressman Billybob; ken5050
I posit that the taking of any lands (public or private) for the regulation of commerce between a foreign nation and any of the United States is not only unconstitutional: I predict that the Supreme Court will weigh in on this. Legislation done for popular appeal does not necessarily mean good legislation.

An activist SCOTUS or 9th District Appeals Court surely would wish to weigh in on this. Indeed, globalist anarchists and OBL types may try a 'trojan' anti-Kelo or other case which is intended to fight good borders. We need to be watching for this and seek to thwart any such scofflaw end-runs around a moral principle embodied by a wall/fence.
193 posted on 09/29/2006 9:02:02 PM PDT by The Spirit Of Allegiance (Public Employees: Honor Your Oaths! Defend the Constitution from Enemies--Foreign and Domestic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: JLS
I hope they understand if the Dims controlled either House of Congress this would not have passed.

Or that if your obsequious open borders mindset prevailed it would not have even been brought up for a vote. You have just gotten a lesson that doing the right thing is always better than blind party loyalty (the Democrat practice).

194 posted on 09/29/2006 9:02:40 PM PDT by oldbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Thanks!!

I'm amused by all the moles trying to say this is bad news.

Ah, the last laugh in November will be sweet.


195 posted on 09/29/2006 9:03:13 PM PDT by patriciaruth (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1562436/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: The Spirit Of Allegiance

This is a good start but I'm still voting based on which candidates DOES NOT support Amnesty. Any republican who wants amnesty will not get my vote. The fence is a good start.


196 posted on 09/29/2006 9:03:40 PM PDT by harveyrabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave

I'd imagine that they could get 2000 ready to work volunteers in 48 hours with just one request.


197 posted on 09/29/2006 9:04:01 PM PDT by B4Ranch (Illegal immigration Control and US Border Security - The jobs George W. Bush refuses to do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

"ARTICLE VIII.
The Mexican Government having on the 5th of February, 1853, authorized the early construction of a plank and railroad across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, and, to secure the stable benefits of said transit way to the persons and merchandise of the citizens of Mexico and the United States, it is stipulated that neither government will interpose any obstacle to the transit of persons and merchandise of both nations; and at no time shall higher charges be made on the transit of persons and property of citizens of the United States, than may be made on the persons and property of other foreign nations, nor shall any interest in said transit way, nor in the proceeds thereof, be transferred to any foreign government.

The United States, by its agents, shall have the right to transport across the isthmus, in closed bags, the mails of the United States not intended for distribution along the line of communication; also the effects of the United States government and its citizens, which may be intended for transit, and not for distribution on the isthmus, free of custom-house or other charges by the Mexican government. Neither passports nor letters of security will be required of persons crossing the isthmus and not remaining in the country.

When the construction of the railroad shall be completed, the Mexican government agrees to open a port of entry in addition to the port of Vera Cruz, at or near the terminus of said road on the Gulf of Mexico.

The two governments will enter into arrangements for the prompt transit of troops and munitions of the United States, which that government may have occasion to send from one part of its territory to another, lying on opposite sides of the continent.

The Mexican government having e agreed to protect with its whole power the prosecution, preservation, and security of the work, the United States may extend its protection as it shall judge wise to it when it may feel sanctioned and warranted by the public or international law."

Treaties over-ride popular opinion. Sorry.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomacy/mexico/mx1853.htm


198 posted on 09/29/2006 9:04:10 PM PDT by ARealMothersSonForever (We shall never forget the atrocities of September 11, 2001.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: deport

NAYs ---19
Chafee (R-RI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Lieberman (I-CT)


Not to worry, it's OKAY for them to vote with the socialist Dems 90% of the time, because they can WIN, you see...


199 posted on 09/29/2006 9:05:51 PM PDT by BillyBoy (ILLINOIS ELECTION "CHOICES:" Rod Bag-o-$hit or Judas Barf Too-Pinka)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Lunatic Fringe

Says who?....Woodward????


200 posted on 09/29/2006 9:07:07 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 461-463 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson