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

Skip to comments.

Senate OKs Border Fence, Mulls Citizenship
AP ^ | 20 minutes ago | DAVID ESPO,

Posted on 05/17/2006 12:32:49 PM PDT by BenLurkin

WASHINGTON - The Senate voted to build 370 miles of triple-layered fencing along the Mexican border Wednesday and clashed over citizenship for millions of men and women who live in the United States illegally.

Amid increasingly emotional debate over election-year immigration legislation, senators voted 83-16 to add fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers along the southern border. It marked the first significant victory in two days for conservatives seeking to place their stamp on the contentious measure.

The prospects were less favorable for their attempt to strip out portions of the legislation that could allow citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants and create new guest worker programs.

The Senate acted in a volatile political environment, as the White House struggled for a second day to ease the concerns of House Republicans who contend that President Bush favors amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Thousands of demonstrators massed a few blocks from the Capitol demanding immigrant rights.

Construction of the barrier would send "a signal that open-border days are over. ... Good fences make good neighbors, fences don't make bad neighbors," said Sen. Jeff Sessions (news, bio, voting record), R-Ala. He said border areas where barriers already exist have experienced economic improvement and reduced crime.

"What we have here has become a symbol for the right wing in American politics," countered Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. He said if the proposal passed, "our relationship with Mexico would come down to a barrier between our two countries."

The Senate labored to complete work by next week on immigration legislation that generally follows an outline Bush set out in a nationally televised speech this week.

The measure includes provisions to strengthen border security, create a new guest worker program and crack down on the hiring of illegal immigrants.

Most controversially, it offers an eventual chance at citizenship for many of the estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants already in the country. Senate Republicans staged an impromptu, occasionally emotional debate over whether that amounted to amnesty.

Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana said it did. "Surely this is a pardon from what present law says must happen," he said of provisions in the bill that require immigrants to undergo background checks, pay back taxes and take other steps before they can become citizens.

Sens. John McCain and Chuck Hagel replied heatedly it was not amnesty.

"Let's stop the nonsense," said Hagel, addressing fellow Republicans. "You all know it's not amnesty." Said McCain, addressing Vitter, "Call it a banana if you want to ... to call the process that we require under this legislation amnesty frankly distorts the debate and it's an unfair interpretation of it."

Vitter sought the last word. "Methinks thou dost protest too much."

The clash erupted after Vitter sought a change in the legislation to strip out provisions of the bill that would allow for guest worker programs and give some illegal immigrants a chance at citizenship.

Supporters of the Senate measure credited Bush's prime-time Monday night speech with giving fresh momentum to the effort to pass long-stalled legislation.

Across the Capitol in the House, the story was different. Republicans pushed through a border security bill last year, and several members of the rank-and-file have criticized Bush for his proposals. To calm their concerns, the White House dispatched Karl Rove to their weekly closed-door meeting.

Rep. Steve King (news, bio, voting record), R-Iowa, an outspoken opponent of the Senate bill, derided the effort. "I didn't see it was a persuasive event. If it was about Karl Rove seeking to convince members of Congress after debate that he's right and we're wrong it would have been better not to have the meeting," he said.

King said Rove told lawmakers Bush is sincere about enforcement. But, he added, "The president doesn't want to enforce immigration law because he's afraid he'll inconvenience someone who wants to come into the country for a better life."

Rep. Peter King (news, bio, voting record), R-N.Y., agreed that Rove did not seem to have been persuasive. "It's not the kind of issue you can compromise on; either you're giving amnesty to people who are here illegally or you aren't."

At the White House, press secretary Tony Snow defended Bush against criticism. "The president is actually taking a more aggressive role on border security than the House itself took," he said. "That is the sort of thing that is going to answer a lot of the complaints that we have heard."

The National Capital Immigration Coalition organized the afternoon demonstration on the National Mall a few blocks from where lawmakers debated the issue they cared about.

"This is a critical moment. We oppose the militarization of the U.S-Mexican border," said Juan Jose Gutierrez, one of the event's organizers.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; Mexico
KEYWORDS: 109th; aliens; borderfence; mexico; southernborder
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-156 next last
To: OKIEDOC
Can you believe this? Kennedy is making no sense at all...What the hell is he going on about?

sw

61 posted on 05/17/2006 1:14:05 PM PDT by spectre (Spectre's wife) ("The Devils in the Details")..Sen David Vitter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
King said Rove told lawmakers Bush is sincere about enforcement. But, he added, "The president doesn't want to enforce immigration law because he's afraid he'll inconvenience someone who wants to come into the country for a better life."

Could be a mis-quote. The media is notorious for those.

But which is the misquote? I don't think even MSNBC would misstate what Representative King said. It's possible that Mr. King is liberally paraphrasing Rove, but the comment is entirely consistent with the President's (and Rove's) previous statements about the hard-working, deprived mojados who come here looking for an honest day's trabajo. This kind of "compassionate conservatism" reminds me of when Ronald Reagan made the second worst mistake of his Presidency by dealing arms to the Iranians 'cause he couldn't stand to hear (CIA agent) Bill Buckley's recorded screams under torture. Sometimes you've got to be a tad bit hard-nosed and remember that you were elected President of the United States, not Presidente at large to the World.

62 posted on 05/17/2006 1:14:35 PM PDT by pawdoggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ruschpa
Yeah I've reread it - and reread it. Rep. King is repeating what Rove told them how Dubya 'feels' on immigration. And unless there was a talking mouse in the room, Rove told them directly, or in words to the effect of, that Dubya doesn't want to really enforce the law.

In either case it is reprehensible. And that quote will create a bigger brouhaha than those 16 words about yellow cake.

63 posted on 05/17/2006 1:15:10 PM PDT by Condor51 (Better to fight for something than live for nothing - Gen. George S. Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: sheana

“The president doesn’t want to enforce immigration law because he’s afraid he’ll inconvenience someone who wants to come into the country for a better life.”

Well, if he's REALLY worried about that, why not send buses to give them all a nice air conditioned ride here. Free cerveza!

What about "inconvenience" to your constituents Mr. President!!!!????

What a joke. Sickening.


64 posted on 05/17/2006 1:16:07 PM PDT by EEDUDE (A penny saved is......a penny Congress overlooked.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

they are tossing out goodies to try and peel off enough House members to push it through. we know from yesterday's vote, that its essentially a done deal in the senate, without major modifications.

its going to be close in the House.


65 posted on 05/17/2006 1:16:28 PM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: EEDUDE

He would send air conditioned buses after them if he thought he could get away with it. That is the really sad part.


66 posted on 05/17/2006 1:17:15 PM PDT by sheana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Tony Snow defended Bush against criticism. "The president is actually taking a more aggressive role on border security than the House itself took," he said. "That is the sort of thing that is going to answer a lot of the complaints that we have heard."

We love ya Tony, but border security is an essential function of the Federal Government, and should be performed by every President who takes the Oath of Office. It is not something the people need bargain for, that will only be performed if the Government can provide Amnesty to 12 million lawbreakers.

As Ben Franklin might have put it:

Those who would let Congress provide just one last amnesty, to purchase a little border security, will get no border security and more amnesty.

67 posted on 05/17/2006 1:18:31 PM PDT by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spectre
Michael Reagan said that it is easy to hate a liberal.

Murdering Ted is so soaked in alcohol that he doesn't think straight.

He is on a tangent and wants illegals to have more rights than Americans citizens.

Kennedy is a fool.
68 posted on 05/17/2006 1:22:16 PM PDT by OKIEDOC (There's nothing like hearing someone say thank you for your help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: ruschpa

Agreed- I just re-read the statement several times- whoever wrote that sentence needs to return to 6th grade grammar.

Normally I would say it was a deliberate attempt by some reporter to make Rove and the president look badly. This time though, I believe the writer is simply ignorant about how to structure sentences containing direct quotes.


69 posted on 05/17/2006 1:23:12 PM PDT by SE Mom (God Bless those who serve..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
Well then, you are in agreement with the great majority of Democrats. Congratulations! Meanwhile, I'm in agreement with the majority of Republicans.

That is a straw-man's argument - The reality is that most DEM's are not in favor of much of what GWB is proposing (nor do I care if they are or aren't...my politics aren't based on if DEMs like it or not). First off Democrats are not in favor of GWB reforms on temporary worker permits (requiring IDs on only non-U.S. citizens). They are not in favor of the assimilation requirements GWB would like to see placed on those looking to become citizens.

Dem's are not in favor of the NG being sent to our borders. Dem's are not in favor of the vast majority of the stances GWB has taken on national security issues (including those on our borders), etc, etc, etc.

The reality (and we'll see this continue) that more and more people are coming toward what GWB is suggesting. A comprehensive reform package that addresses both legal and illegal immigration. That deals with border security, reform of the flawed temporary workers permits along with dealing with those here who are currently illegal (from background checks, English, etc) -

70 posted on 05/17/2006 1:24:49 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: ruschpa

Reread it... The Representative said that, not Rove. That was his interpretation.




Exactly. That was Kings interpretation NOT what Rove said.


71 posted on 05/17/2006 1:25:06 PM PDT by AmeriBrit (ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION, IT INCLUDES TERRORIST SLEEPER CELLS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
"The problem isn't that Bush has proposed "comprehensive" immigration reform, but that he's proposed the wrong "comprehensive" immigration reform."

I have to give Rove, if it was Rove, credit on this one. Bush kicked the can on border security and enforcement for six years. Here is a description of the stunt they pulled off last year:

Bush budget scraps 9,790 border patrol agents - President uses law's escape clause to drop funding for new homeland security force

A bill to bring in 10's of millions of more green carders and immigrant, and I'm talking about new laws way beyond an amnesty of illegals already here, would not have a chance in hell standing alone. How does one get it passed? You need nice words like "welcoming society" but one can point out we already take in 1 million per year.

They had to couple it with security. Bush kicked the can down the road for six years heightening the sense of crisis, and aiming to provoke a sense of inevitability and resignation among Republicans.

It worked on some, you can see it here. Their faith in Bush is in crisis, they are accepting his "comprehensive" memes. Comprehensive doesn't mean comprehensive in the normal sense, but you acceptance of Bush's definition of it. People feel they need to trade their economic well-being with Bush giving them in return border security. Bush played these cards well.

The surprise, for me, is how the Democrats and left have stated no dissent. The blogs are silent, but then the Left blogs are part of the same class as rules the Democrats - globalist, anti-worker, anti-middle class, anti-American. - this time -though it may have been Norquist or others who calculated this "comprehensive" idea. Insourcing 50 million+ new migrants wouldn't have a chance in hell of passing alone. It has to be coupled with

72 posted on 05/17/2006 1:25:24 PM PDT by Shermy (Read my lips. No new amnesty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Condor51

WTH indeed!

I am waiting for the Rove Kool Aid drinkers to come on here and defend this.


73 posted on 05/17/2006 1:25:37 PM PDT by The South Texan (The Democrat Party and the leftist (ABCCBSNBCCNN NYLATIMES)media are a criminal enterprise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DevSix

"Background checks"

What? Are we linked into some mythical centralized Mexican computer base?

Don't fall for that.


74 posted on 05/17/2006 1:27:16 PM PDT by Shermy (Read my lips. No new amnesty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: kidd
Building 370 miles of fence is worse than building no fence at all. It will simply encourage illegals to travel through the desert to locations where there isn't a fence. It will simply result in the deaths of more illegals, but it won't stop them from coming.

This is the Senate playing games with the House. They do not want to give them the full 700 miles the House voted for unless they get something in return...like amnesty.
75 posted on 05/17/2006 1:27:40 PM PDT by GarySpFc (Jesus on Immigration, John 10:1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: spectre
And I think you are looking at this from a very narrow political driven window - Where as GWB is looking at the bigger picture on how to seriously address a 40 year in the making problem.

He is looking to address this in a comprehensive and systematic process. Which does not push off needed segments of reform for years down the road. If we are going to deal with this situation...then lets deal with it on the whole.

But that's just my opinion.

76 posted on 05/17/2006 1:27:56 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: lemura

Yes, I agree.


77 posted on 05/17/2006 1:28:40 PM PDT by Tammy8 (Build a Real Border Fence, and secure the border!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
What? Are we linked into some mythical centralized Mexican computer base? Don't fall for that.

That is background checks for those already "here" in the States (illegally). Do they have any records? If so, they will not be able to go through the process of becoming citizens.

78 posted on 05/17/2006 1:29:01 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Shermy

Why would the Democrats object? They will get at least 20 million new voters out of this and a parade of stupidly short-sighted Republicans is handing them electoral dominance for a generation.


79 posted on 05/17/2006 1:30:21 PM PDT by AntiGuv (How is Mexico our friend?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Condor51

No joke. Bush really believes anyone who comes here looking for work and finds a job should be allowed to stay, so long as they are not a threat to this country. Bush is an "open borders" globalist.


80 posted on 05/17/2006 1:37:34 PM PDT by Robertsll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-156 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