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

Skip to comments.

Harry Reid eats crow on border security funding: “I was wrong and Senator Cornyn was right”
MichelleMalkin.com ^ | July 25, 2007 | Michelle Malkin

Posted on 07/26/2007 11:04:11 AM PDT by Stoat

Harry Reid eats crow on border security funding: “I was wrong and Senator Cornyn was right”

By Michelle Malkin  •  July 26, 2007 12:36 PM

 

First, watch this as Harry Reid eats crow (hat tip: Senate tipster):

 

After Reid and the Dems tangled with the GOP last night, the Senate just passed a good border security funding amendment today, 89-1.

The goat who voted against it? Babbling George Voinovich.

The Corner has some back story. Yeah, Lindsay Grahamnesty was involved, but the movers and shakers were solid enforcement-first senators like John Cornyn.

Oh, and if Grahamnesty think this rectifies all his smearing of grass-roots conservatives as bigots, he’s delusional.

Here’s the roll (check out the fence-sitters, too):

borderfundingroll.jpg

The amendment summary, via BP:

“There is hereby appropriated $3,000,000,000 to satisfy the requirements set out in section 1002(a) and, if any amount remains after satisfying such requirements, to achieve and maintain operational control over the international land and maritime borders of the United States, for employment eligibility verification improvements, for increased removal and detention of visa overstays, criminal aliens, aliens who have illegally reentered the United States, and for reimbursement of State and local section 287(g) expenses. These amounts are designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 204 of S. Con. Res. 21 (110th Congress).”

More:

The amendment would provide emergency funding of $3 billion for:

· Hiring 500 more Customs & Border Protection (CBP) officers per year (FY08-12), 1200 more Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents per year, 200 investigators to combat aliens smuggling, 50 Deputy U.S. Marshals;

· 23,000 Border Patrol agents hired, trained, and reporting for duty;

· 4 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles & 105 ground-based radar and camera towers;

· 300 miles of vehicle barriers & 700 miles of border fencing;

· A permanent end to the “catch-and-release” policy with 45,000 detention beds;

· Operational control over 100% of the U.S.-Mexico land border;

· To allow DHS to present a photo electronically to an employer so that the employer may confirm the identity of the individual when he presents ID;

· To require mandatory detention of aliens who overstay their visa by 60 days;

· To increase penalties for illegal entrants who are criminals of those who reentered after a deportation; and

· To reimburse local governments who choose to cooperation with ICE in enforcing the immigration laws (INA 287g).

287g is a focus of Deport Them Now.



TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: aliens; border; bordersecurity; cultureofcorruption; democratscandals; harryreid; harryreideatscrow; illegalimmigration; immigrantlist; nationalsecurity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-119 next last
To: NoBullZone
I should have been more specific. ...should be prosecuted if any such person or organization willfully refuses to enforce when having the means and ability to do so.

It seems that is the problem. There is always an excuse or reason not to enforce the laws. Legalese = chaos

81 posted on 07/26/2007 12:42:03 PM PDT by WesternPacific
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
“A permanent end to the “catch-and-release” policy with 45,000 detention beds;”

And I strongly suggest we get Sheriff Joe to manage the facility. See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1871896/posts

Personal to Michelle (the rest of you close your eyes): his name is not spelled Lindsay, it’s Lindsey, just the way girls spell it. Actually, he prefers to be called Pandsey Grahamnesty.

82 posted on 07/26/2007 2:44:38 PM PDT by upchuck (The Hildabeaste fears Fred.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan
"1 Nay - Voinovich of Ohio."

I'd be hard pressed to say what party he actually works for. He's either a liberal who pretends to be a republican or he's just a complete retard. He probably didn't know WHAT the hell he was voting on.

83 posted on 07/26/2007 3:05:41 PM PDT by boop (Trunk Monkey. Is there anything he can't do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CindyDawg

“Ok, what’s the catch?”

See #62.

I don’t trust the Democrats anywhere outside a high-voltage sealed cage, so for them all to vote for something this sensible must have a catch.

The catch may well be that Bush is threatening to veto the DHS bill because it spends too much and the Dems think its a ‘free vote’ to look tough on the border.


84 posted on 07/26/2007 3:50:23 PM PDT by WOSG ( Don't tell me what you are against, tell me what you are FOR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Czar; Borax Queen; WorkerbeeCitizen; processing please hold; potlatch; devolve; hedgetrimmer
The amendment would provide emergency funding of $3 billion for:

· Hiring 500 more Customs & Border Protection (CBP) officers per year (FY08-12), 1200 more Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents per year, 200 investigators to combat aliens smuggling, 50 Deputy U.S. Marshals....

Just one question.....what about the message this administration already sent to the Border Patrol who do their jobs and enforce the law against illegals? How does putting additional handcuffed Border Patrol help?

A great signal would be to speak up for Ramos and Campean who did their jobs, as well as all the other ramrodded Border Patrolmen. And what would also go a long way would be to FIRE JOHNNY SUTTON!

85 posted on 07/26/2007 3:55:15 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo

The biggest question I have is, Will they build a fence with the money or welcome stations for illegals coming in?


86 posted on 07/26/2007 3:59:07 PM PDT by WorkerbeeCitizen (An American Patriot and an anti-Islam kind of fellow. (POI))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: WorkerbeeCitizen

lol!

That’s a very good question.


87 posted on 07/26/2007 4:00:40 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

The Dems want this off of the radar screen in 2008. Just as the 2006 Fence Act was passed in October 2006, they want to pass this one so they can say that they are for secure borders,i.e., it is political cover. That said, this is a good step forward. The politicians are getting the message about illegal immigration.


88 posted on 07/26/2007 4:04:09 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: padre35

If Bush vetos this and it is overridden, it gives the Dems credit for border security. Bush is not only killing himself, he is destroying the GOP. Immigration is a winning issue for the Reps. It cuts across party lines.


89 posted on 07/26/2007 4:07:40 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: kabar

I know, the Dems will get credit because Jorge’ will be on the TV screen everynight talking about “why” he is going to veto the bill.

I.E. he is going to pee in his base’s faces again, and if the Veto is overriden, then the “D”’s are the “tough on the border” crowd.

The man is literally driving the Republican Party into extinction.


90 posted on 07/26/2007 4:23:26 PM PDT by padre35 (Conservative in Exile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: padre35

Agree. Bush is making this a winning issue for the Dems. In point of fact, the Rep House passed a tough enforcement first/only bill in 2006, but the WH helped kill it.


91 posted on 07/26/2007 4:38:15 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: devolve; Greg F; padre35; nicmarlo; PhilDragoo; dixiechick2000


92 posted on 07/26/2007 4:47:32 PM PDT by potlatch (MIZARU_ooo_‹(•¿•)›_ooo_MIKAZARU_ooo_‹(•¿•)›_ooo_MAZARU_ooo_‹(•¿•)›_ooo_))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: potlatch

bttt!


93 posted on 07/26/2007 4:51:58 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo

Lol, I came for your ping but saw the comment about the fence and couldn’t resist!!


94 posted on 07/26/2007 4:54:29 PM PDT by potlatch (MIZARU_ooo_‹(•¿•)›_ooo_MIKAZARU_ooo_‹(•¿•)›_ooo_MAZARU_ooo_‹(•¿•)›_ooo_))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: potlatch

Heh! I don’t think it will work. Put a couple guys in the pickup truck bed with handcuffs, weapons and binoculars and it might though.


95 posted on 07/26/2007 4:56:24 PM PDT by Greg F (<><)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

Abstaining:

Brownback
McCain
Coleman
Hussein Obama

Even Kennedy voted for aye. What’s Brownback’s issue in abstaining? Or Coleman’s?


96 posted on 07/26/2007 4:59:59 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: devolve; Greg F; ntnychik; PhilDragoo; dixiechick2000
A few thousand of those riding tandem 'might' help, lol. Better than THIS;
 


97 posted on 07/26/2007 5:01:40 PM PDT by potlatch (MIZARU_ooo_‹(•¿•)›_ooo_MIKAZARU_ooo_‹(•¿•)›_ooo_MAZARU_ooo_‹(•¿•)›_ooo_))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: padre35

ROFLMAO:

‘Kevorkakitty’

That’s classic.

“When the kitty cosies up, you better settle up your debts.”


98 posted on 07/26/2007 5:03:39 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
Harry Reid
Statesman

99 posted on 07/26/2007 5:11:58 PM PDT by ItsForTheChildren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: padre35
He may threaten to veto, but there are enough votes for a Super Majority that can easily over ride his veto.

Hmm, I wouldn't take that as a given. You are making the assumption that all who voted for it now will in turn vote for it in a veto override. I imagine that some of these voted yes as cover, figuring that when/if Bush vetoes it they can vote against overriding it on some pretext or technicality.

100 posted on 07/26/2007 5:24:46 PM PDT by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s........you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-119 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