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

Skip to comments.

Last-minute bill changes funding for border fence
Washington Post ^ | Oct 6, 2006 | Spencer S. Hsu

Posted on 10/06/2006 6:49:47 AM PDT by engrpat

WASHINGTON - No sooner did Congress authorize construction of a 700-mile fence on the U.S.-Mexico border last week than lawmakers rushed to approve separate legislation that ensures it will never be built, at least not as advertised, according to Republican lawmakers and immigration experts.

GOP leaders have singled out the fence as one of the primary accomplishments of the recently completed session. Many lawmakers plan to highlight their $1.2 billion down payment on its construction as they campaign in the weeks before the midterm elections.

But shortly before recessing late Friday, the House and Senate gave the Bush administration leeway to distribute the money to a combination of projects -- not just the physical barrier along the southern border. The funds may also be spent on roads, technology and "tactical infrastructure" to support the Homeland Security Department's preferred option of a "virtual fence."

What's more, in a late-night concession to win over wavering Republicans, GOP congressional leaders pledged in writing that American Indian tribes, members of Congress, governors and local leaders would get a say in "the exact placement" of any structure, and that Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff would have the flexibility to use alternatives "when fencing is ineffective or impractical."

The loopholes leave the Bush administration with authority to decide where, when and how long a fence will be built, except for small stretches east of San Diego and in western Arizona. Homeland Security officials have proposed a fence half as long, lawmakers said.

This case reflects political calculations by GOP strategists that voters do not mind the details, and that key players -- including the administration, local leaders and the Mexican government -- oppose a fence-only approach, analysts said.

(Excerpt) Read more at dfw.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aliens; betrayal; border; bush; bushamnesty; congress; fence; illegalaliens; illegalimmigration; immigrantlist; immigration; invasion; invasionusa; mexico; quislings; sellout; virtualfence
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last
To: NewRomeTacitus; CharlesWayneCT
"What, exactly, do we retain by entrusting power to provenly compromised scoundrels who demonstratively hold us in contempt?"

We didn't have anywhere near as much illegal immigration with Clinton in the White House as we do with Bush. When we had a Democrat president, we at least had a Republican congress that appeared to be fighting for us.

Now the congress is just a rubber stamp for this craven, open borders, one-worlder.

61 posted on 10/07/2006 4:32:30 AM PDT by 4Freedom (America is no longer the 'Land of Opportunity'. It's the 'Land of Illegal Alien Opportunists'!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: AppleButter

In a word, no.


62 posted on 10/07/2006 5:15:40 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 43 | View Replies]

To: gubamyster

.


63 posted on 10/07/2006 9:26:05 PM PDT by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

ets face it, folks
this fence/wall is not gonna be built until we have a leader who WILL DEMAND IT! "

Which I don't think is going to happen.


64 posted on 10/08/2006 12:05:03 PM PDT by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Would you demand a fence on this stretch of the Texas/Mexican border?

In a word, yes. That particular location is in a National park which means the Federal government owns all the land. I'm sure they could find a suitable location for the fence.

65 posted on 10/08/2006 5:06:46 PM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
Either you didn't click the link or you think a 20 foot fence is much harder to scale than a 150 foot vertical cliff.
66 posted on 10/08/2006 5:36:21 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Either you didn't click the link or you think a 20 foot fence is much harder to scale than a 150 foot vertical cliff.

I went to the link. I don't believe the fence would have to be at that exact spot. Because they own all the land they could use the path of least resistance. Mexicans are risking their lives to cross inhospitable desert every day and many of them are dying. If the fence is built only on the easiest places to cross the border they will risk their lives to cross at the more difficult spots. The "toothpaste effect" has already been shown in areas, like San Diego, where fence has been built and in areas with increased spot enforcement. The point is that the entire border needs to be secured, not just the easier areas.

67 posted on 10/08/2006 7:02:55 PM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

And that's the only point I was trying to make. We don't need a fence at Santa Elena Canyon because the natural barrier is better than any we fence we could build anywhere along the border.

I agree that we have to deter crossing at all points along our border, but we might as well do it intelligently. The border is not uniform and the fence doesn't have to be uniform in order to be effective.


68 posted on 10/08/2006 7:20:34 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: engrpat

BTTT...


69 posted on 10/09/2006 1:42:11 PM PDT by LowOiL ("I am neither . I am a Christocrat" - Benjamin Rush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Ill withhold judgment for now but this article suggests the money will be spent on a so called "virtual" fence. Otherwise known as "not a fence". If true its a case of deception plain and simple.
70 posted on 10/09/2006 3:46:38 PM PDT by mthom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: engrpat

hmmm, person who wrote this works for The Washington Post. This is the same tactics that are used to divide and conquer, and right before an election too !


71 posted on 10/09/2006 3:53:23 PM PDT by BradtotheBone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

People have said this is not true... but have yet to produce any source that it was untrue... Washington Post is pretty credible to me, so until I see proof otherwise, I believe this story.


72 posted on 10/16/2006 4:54:22 PM PDT by LowOiL ("I am neither . I am a Christocrat" - Benjamin Rush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: engrpat
The loopholes leave the Bush administration with authority to decide where, when and how long a fence will be built...

Great, they will build a pretty white picket fence 2-1/2 feet tall and stretching all of 50 miles. When it doesn't work they will say, "See...fences don't work, not without comprehensive reform".


73 posted on 10/16/2006 5:13:06 PM PDT by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 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