[MaxMax]

America doubts Mexico will eat words after it's built.

[Cedar]

Start building it today!

[kstewskis]

"There is no money to build it, so it won't be built," Aguilar told reporters. "Even though the wall was approved, there is no funding."

Heck, with my next (sizable) quarterly tax check I send into the Feds, I will write on the memo, "my contribution to be used for the building of our fence!"

Screw you, Mexico.

[WoofDog123]

"But Fox's spokesman Ruben Aguilar said the U.S. Congress is unlikely to approve enough funding to finish the project."

based on past experience, I tend to agree. When the funding bill for this passes, I might look for the bidding process on the fence to start.

[Red Steel]

If $126 million will build a wall that has a length of 23 kilometers, then $1.2 billion will build a wall that's 219 km long, which converts to 135 miles of wall.

[TheLion]

Ping!

[starbase]

"There is no money to build it, so it won't be built," Aguilar told reporters. "Even though the wall was approved, there is no funding."

This is true, but the old "just don't fund it" trick doesn't work like it used to. NumbersUSA has more than 270,000 members now (of which I am one). We can forget about the fence funding for now, then as soon as it's being voted on, we can all turn our energy to storming congress with calls and faxes, and we will effortlessly be informed of when that time is by email.

Things just don't "get lost" in the Information Age, because we can expend no energy as time passes, but then be instantly active when the moment arrives.

Our elected officials are appearing a bit "dinosaur-ish" with their repeated attempts to return to these obsolete strategies.

[dcrider182]

HA!! we'll hire some of the illegals to built it cheap.. why? because they do jobs that Americans won't! (SRC)

[KTM rider]

"The wall will be useless and unworkable," Aguilar said, adding that it would adversely affect the environment, including the reproduction of some species.

while we are on the subject of the environment, what do you think is the environmental impact of a hoard of third world peoples who have no concept of environmental conservation, have not the means to implement such frugal environmental upgrades in their lifestyle due to poverty, who, notoriously as an ethnic group are known for licescious littering and dumping of toxic waste, who reproduce like rabbits, import a rainbow of diseases and traditionally operate old worn out motor vehicles with smog exept status as a way of life....need I go on ?

[Caipirabob]

I'm just worried about where we're going to get the illegals to build the darn thing. /s /no it's not

[TomGuy]

Cornyn: 700 miles of border fence won't happen Senator says doesn't have funds.

Posted by axes_of_weezles On News/Activism 10/04/2006 10:19:08 PM CDT · 72 replies · 822+ views The Austin American Statesman ^ | 4 October 2006 | eunice moscoso Cornyn: 700 miles of border fence won't happen Senator says plan isn't practical, doesn't have the necessary funds. By Eunice Moscoso WASHINGTON BUREAU Wednesday, October 04, 2006 WASHINGTON — Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican and key liaison to the White House on immigration, said Tuesday that 700 miles of fencing approved by Congress for the United States' southern border will probably not be built because of a lack of money and other practical considerations. "It's one thing to authorize. It's another thing to actually appropriate the money and do it," he said.Cornyn predicted that some fencing would be built...

[TomGuy]

Mexico warns U.S. of referral to UN over border fencing plan

Posted by TigerLikesRooster On 10/05/2006 4:22:13 AM CDT · 15 replies · 231+ views Xinhua ^ | 10/05/06 Mexico warns U.S. of referral to UN over border fencing plan www.chinaview.cn 2006-10-05 13:17:09 MEXICO CITY, Oct. 4 (Xinhua) -- The Mexican government on Wednesday warned that it may refer Washington's plan to build fences on the U.S.- Mexico border to the United Nations. US President George W. Bush (C) signs a bill to give 1.2 billion dollars to build a fence along the US-Mexico border to stanch the flow of illegal immigrants in Scottsdale, Arizona. Aournd Bush are Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano(L) and Arizona US Representatives. (Xinhua/AFP Photo) Photo Gallery >>> The U.S. plan to build about 1,125 km..

[djf]

Half a fence is mathematically equivalent to no fence at all.

So why build it?


Unless we start getting serious about this stuff, 9/11 is gonna look like a warm summer eve in comparison.

Doesn't matter of you voted Pubbie or Dim IF YOU'RE DEAD!!

[Eye of Unk]

Oh what a change things are going to be when it DOES get built!

[TomGuy]

Too true:






from Pookie's toons

[snowrip]

Wow, no money yet.

If the gov't had half a brain, they'd start hauling away those little illegal ba$tards en masse. That would save us roughly $68 bi;llion a year... more than enough to complete the entire border, with some extra money left over for claymores.

[longtermmemmory]

There is a reason he is saying this.

I had the same concern until it was pointed out that that the fence bill did include funding.

[azhenfud]

No one knows how much the 700-mile (1,125-kilometer) fence will cost, but Congress sent a bill to the White House making a $1.2 billion down payment.

---

It is estimated Mexico and Central/South America account for as much as 70% of the illegal drugs coming into these United States. To add insult to injury, the Mexican government has just recently thumbed its collective noses at America's fight against illegal drugs by its legalization of specific quantities of narcotics banned within the United States. If Mexican migrants ignore our drug laws with the frequency as have ignored our immigration code, America's judicial system is in trouble and with Mexico's threats to tie up American courts with challenges to National Guard assisted apprehensions of border crossers, this is sure to provide substantial future costs to all American taxpayers. Can anyone place an estimate on the burden of attorney fees in defense of migrants for those drug possession infractions taxpayers would then be expected to bear?

In 1999 alone, it was estimated Americans spent some $69 billion on illegal drugs. With certainty, that number has anything but decreased over the past six plus years. With 70% of that flowing in from our southern border, even should a barrier prove 50% effective in the war on drugs, it may be extrapolated that should the US invest as much in a barrier for the remainder of the 2000 mile stretch as we invest in a four-lane highway (approx $13 million/mile), our costs to taxpayers would still only amount to about half of our southern neighbor's contributions to the annual trade in illegal drugs - roughly $20 billion. The effectiveness of such a barrier may also be enhanced by alternating Border Patrol shifts and periodic relocation of personnel so contacts of corruption are difficult to maintain, resulting in an approximated 70% effectiveness to be realized.

A $20 billion expenditure is an investment with exponentially compounded savings to be recognized each year in the illegal drug fight as well from the aid to enforcement of our immigration code. To cut 70% of 70% of a $69 billion annual illegal drug trade (roughly $34 billion annually) is not something to quickly dismiss. What do we currently pay South/Central American administrations annually in illegal drug interdiction? and moreover, what do we have to show for it?

Even should we place $1.2 billion as payment on a barrier only 100 miles in length, strategically placed, the barrier - if made 70% effective - could pay for itself in illegal drug, environmental damage, and criminal border crossings abatement before the barrier is completed.

The question then becomes not how much a linear border barrier will cost taxpayers to erect, but how much will it cost Americans not to make that investment.

[Ditter]

Like my dad used to say "they can doubt in one hand a pffffft in the other and see which one gets full faster".