[ARealMothersSonForever]

Thanks, I found it one second before your reply ;).
Upon reading the details, and the specifics I hereby retract my previous stance. I fully support this bill, and encourage the President to sign the Act into law.
This does NOT include provision for the taking of private land. It does include necessary surveillence. This is a good act IMHO.

[deport]

This does NOT include provision for the taking of private land.

---

Doesn't have to as the Public Law it is using already includes that provision[s]. How do you think they will install fences and other devices unless they make arrangements to secure property along the border. Unless they own a buffer zone along the border to which I don't know one way or the other. See USC, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter 1, Sec. 1103 (b)........

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001103----000-.html

[Kimberly GG]

Fox New's explanation, which I'm not sure makes sense, was this....There are actually two bills.

One is for 700 miles of fencing and is NOT funded.

And the other is for funding of only 300 miles (of the 700) of fence.