Posted on 07/18/2006 1:09:27 PM PDT by Founding Father
Getting tough on immigration apparently means refusing to provide funds for programs that have already been approved.
When the immigration issue was at the boiling point in the spring, the US Senate voted to erect a mere 370 miles of security fencing along the US-Mexican border. However, last week many of the same senators voted against providing funds to build it.
"We do a lot of talking. We do a lot of legislating," said Senator Jeff Sessions, the Alabama Republican whose amendment to fund the fence was killed on a 71-29 vote. "The things we do often sound very good, but we never quite get there," he told the Washington Times.
Sessions submitted his amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations bill that would have authorized $1.8 billion to build the security fence as promised by the lawmakers and the Bush Administration. Two months ago members of the Senate voted 83-16 to build the fence along high-traffic areas of the border with Mexico. In the same vote on May 17, the Senate also directed 500 miles of vehicle barriers to be built along the border, as well.
But the May vote only authorized the fencing and vehicle barriers, and while the senators are on record as voting for border fencing and barriers, without the appropriations they've voted not to build the fence they've authorized.
"If we never appropriate the money needed to construct these miles of fencing and vehicle barriers, those miles of fencing and vehicle barriers will never actually be constructed," Mr. Sessions said on the floor of the Senate just prior to the vote, which was aired on C-SPAN, but not by any of the broadcast or cable news shows.
Democrats were joined by 28 Republicans in opposing the Sessions amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations Act. Senators Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Thomas R. Carper of Delaware were the only two Democrats who voted for funding the fence.
The senators — including most of the Republican leadership — voted in May to build the fence but last week opposed funding it.
The appropriations bill, which allocates over $30 billion to the Homeland Security Department — which includes $2.2 billion for border security and control but no fencing –passed on a 100-0 vote.
Republican Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, who in the past has fought to increase border security and enforcement of federal immigration laws, opposed Senator Session's amendment.
"We should build these walls; there's no question about it. But the real issue here is the offset that's being used, and the offset creates a Hobson's choice for almost everyone here," Greg told the Washington Post.
Mr. Session's amendment would have required across-the-board cuts to the rest of the Homeland Security appropriations bill, Mr. Gregg said, which would mean cutting 750 new border-patrol agents and 1,200 new detention beds for illegal aliens that he included in the bill.
"Once again we see our government officials trying to provide security-on-the-cheap. Americans should be outraged," said a Border Patrol agent, who wishes to remain anonymous.
"Did anyone really believe these guys [senators] want to secure the border?" he said.
Another Border Patrol agent was less diplomatic: "Our leaders are not serious about border security. A few hundred more agents is a far cry from what they promised. It's a con-job on the American people."
Seriously, for frist to allow this vote, knowing the outcome (the outcome is known 99% before any vote is taken) demonstrates that the gop leadership has made its commitment.
The individual senators are certainly responsible, but make no mistake - the gop has chosen its position.
ping
A good house cleaning is appropriate and way past due!
$50,000,000 for the Paleo-stinians, but nothing for our borders.
Another Border Patrol agent was less diplomatic: "Our leaders are not serious about border security. A few hundred more agents is a far cry from what they promised. It's a con-job on the American people."
Seriously, for frist to allow this vote, knowing the outcome (the outcome is known 99% before any vote is taken)
I can't wait for November just to get rid of him!!! Every vote he has put up has been turned down. I think he is trying to make the GOP look bad because he knows he is done. I firmly believe he is the worst Senate Majority Leader I have known in my life time. For the last two years he has done nothing and then this year he is putting up failing bills. He stinks!!!! I hope he is better at performing operations.
How many Billions to defend the borders of Iraq every year? World war 3 ! What a joke.
1.8 billion is a helluva lotta money for a damn fence!
They could grant money to ranchers, landowners and college kids to build it with the nat'l guard keeping watch.
Heck, I'll build it for 900 million easy!
I'm glad they didn't approve of it! Sounds like they were watching out for the money on this one finally!
He is not my senator, therefore I cannot take any action to remove him.
I can, however, "not" vote for my own senator, the equally pathetic mike dewine.
Better yet, make it an annual election for these bozos.
No secret about that!
It's the Hitlerian Big Lie Theory -- Keep telling your constituents you voted to build a Border fence loud enough and often enough, and it will never occur to them to ask if you voted to pay for it.
Now thats the best thing I've heard; nov. is coming let them know theres goona be a lot of changes
BTTT
These Border Patrol agents should resign, which will serve as a wake-up call to the Senate. This is absolutely unbelievable. They can find billions to fund Housing and Education but not a measly billion to fund a fence.
Once again we see our government officials trying to provide security-on-the-cheap. Americans should be outraged," said a Border Patrol agent, who wishes to remain anonymous.
"Did anyone really believe these guys [senators] want to secure the border?" he said.
Another Border Patrol agent was less diplomatic: "Our leaders are not serious about border security. A few hundred more agents is a far cry from what they promised. It's a con-job on the American people."
Sums up my feelings!
Hahaha, that would be so effective it would never be done.
When it's a matter of dickering over "legislation" they can make excuses; that is the preferred way of not addressing the crisis.
EN-FORCE-EXISTING-LAWS!!
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.