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."
We could fire every current border patrol agent and replace them with the minutemen and have billions left over to spend on all the wall.
How about these self important border patrol agents explain why 18 unarmed guys do more to stop illegal immigration in one month than the 1000s of agents we currently employ who seem utterly incapable of identifying ANY location where rampant illegal border crossings are occurring?
Frankly, I think these "employ me for a lifetime" border patrol incompetants are the real reason nothing is happening.
Where's the fence?
Wrong. They shouldn't be elected at all.
L
Link: Bush budget scraps 9,790 Border Patrol agents
Shameful and outrageous. No, border security cannot be done on the cheap.
Simcox's wallet?
Time to start voting the SOB's out of office.
"Tex"? Is that you?
Sorry, pard. Simcox is just a citizen activist, petitioning his government for redress.
It is the Congress and the President who raised their right hand and swore to protect the country and its people.
George W. Bush could solve this problem in a month.
Simply declare the situation a clear and present danger to the security of the USA, which it obviously is, and throw the available resources of our military into the fight. Oh, and start enforcing the laws on the books concerning employing illegals.
But unfortunately, they're more concerned with the Iraq/Iran border than they are with our own.
IF is a big word, I hope.
It's a mixed legacy as I support what he's done and is doing in other areas.
But this could sadly be the achilles heel.
All he needs is a good caging company, right?
BINGO BUMP! The Republicans in the senate with the exception of a few hard core Conservatives are nothing more than political pimps looking for votes. RINO to the core in each case. WORTHLESS!
There have been more murders done by criminals who overstay their visas and or those who just invade our country than occurred during 911.
Because they occur by ones or fives or so, they seem to have less impact than 911 but these Americans are just as dead and their families are just as torn up.
Anybody who aids or abets these criminals are guilty of these murders also.
No. All he needs is the will to do so.
I see the two senators from Nebraska... The dem votes for it & that puke Hagel votes against it. Why do you Huskers keep that loser in office?
There you go again. Don't you know the Founding Fathers were wrong when they made senators appointed by states so senators would protect state's rights?
How much fence has FedGov put up this year; parkie?
The FedGuv is trying to pass law regarding the border, do you support any version?
How many tools did Simcox defraud, weezley?
House bill as is. No pence, no senate bill or no bill at all.
Well, enjoy your no bill. ;)
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.