Skip to comments.House rejects security fence at the border
Posted on 06/16/2007 5:18:55 AM PDT by radar101
The U.S. House of Representatives shot down a proposal Friday by U.S. Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz, that would have built an 854-mile, double layered security fences along the Mexican border.
Franks noted that only 13 miles of a Mexican border fence approved last year have been built and that the fencing is needed to improve border security.
"With over 4,000 people crossing our southern border illegally every day, our border remains one of our country's most critical national security vulnerabilities. In order to carry out an act of terrorism, a militant Islamist simply needs a porous border and a dangerous weapon," said Franks in a statement.
Franks represents Glendale, Peoria, Sun City and Kingman.
The fence plan failed by 272 to 149 votes. Most Democrats (including Arizona congressional members Harry Mitchell, Gabrielle Giffords , Ed Pastor and Raul Grijalva) voted against the border fence plan.
Most Republicans (including Franks and fellow Arizona Reps. Rick Renzi and John Shadegg) voted for the comprehensive fence plan.
Mesa GOP Congressman Jeff Flake crossed party lines and vote against the border fence bill.
The House did approve an overall homeland and border security appropriations bill Friday. Mitchell said he backed that bill because it allocates federal money to hire more Border Patrol Agents and resources to deport violent illegal immigrant criminals.
"Deporting those illegal immigrants who have committed violent crimes is absolutely imperative to keeping our communities safe," Mitchell said in a statement. Mitchell represents Tempe and Scottsdale.
The state's four Democratic representatives and Renzi voted for the final bill. Flake, Franks and Shadegg opposed.
The votes could be a precursor to a big political fight over immigration reforms, a guest worker program and how to deal with the 12 million illegal immigrants already in the U.S.
Claire wants our laws to be enforced, our borders protected, and employers held accountable for hiring illegal immigrants. The Bush Administration has failed to secure our borders and to take seriously the problem of illegal immigration. Claire does not support amnesty. As a former prosecutor, Claire believes people who break the law should be held accountable, both illegal immigrants and the employers who exploit them for cheap labor.
Eleven to twelve million illegal immigrants currently reside in the United States thanks to this Administration’s failure to secure our borders. The Bush Administration has refused to enforce the laws we have on the books and clearly did not make border security or immigration reform a priority until an election year. Last year, President Bush chose to only fund 210 extra Border Patrol agents after Congress authorized an additional 10,000 agents over five years. In addition, audits of employers who use illegals has declined from 8,000 under the Clinton Administration to 2,200 in 2003. In 2004, only THREE employers were fined for hiring illegal labor. This was down from 1999, when 417 businesses were fined. This failure is inexcusable.
Until the President and Congress can move forward on this agenda, Claire does not believe we need any new guest worker programs undermining American workers. While building a fence along the border in some of our most porous areas is an appropriate first step, rampant illegal immigration will not be resolved until this Administration stops taking care of special interests who care more about access to cheap-labor than they do about securing our borders.
While the Bush Administration has neglected its duties, states and local government have borne the costs of cracking down on illegal immigration. This year, the President even proposed eliminating the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) which helps overburdened local municipalities deal with the costs of incarcerating illegals who commit crimes. Missouri received over $400,000 in 2005 for this vital program. The states have had to unfairly shoulder the costs of enforcing immigration laws because Washington has been shirking its duty. Claire will fight to make sure our states have the resources they need and she intends to hold Washington accountable for its failures to secure our borders.
No doubt there is some propaganda here, but the shameful, one could easily say traitorous, conduct of the administration is clear.
Arizona has a provision for recall in which federal officials can "pledge" that they will abide by the results of recalls conducted in that state. In such states, a recall effort against Senators and Representatives IS possible, and should be pursued as promptly as possible.
There is a two-rail shot available in some of the other states. In those which have the initiative for constitutional change, the effort should be to 1) establish an Arizona-type recall for Congress, and 2) having established that, use it against Members who are voting wrong on illegal immigration.
Normally, a citizen effort to establish something procedural, like recall for Congress, would be too esoteric to get the attention of talk radio, citizens organizations, and talk radio, for instance. But when you couple the process with the subject of the ultimate target -- illegal immigration -- it could work.
Hope these comments on the nexus between process and policy are useful to you.
“It’s way past time for the pitchforks.”
I have access to the tar. If someone would be good enough to supply the feathers well have a plan.
Too bad no one has learned, instead forcing the Sheeple to die again.
Az Dem Rep. Raul Grijalva - is an unapologetic Mechista. He has deep ties to the racist MEChA brotherhood. A simple Google search will turn up a ton on stuff on this anti-American. The only numbers that carry him at the polls in Az is because of the rich enclave of pro-illegal immigrant sympathizers in the Tucson region.
Does anyone have the names of the Republican who voted against this so that we can all make sure that they are not back in the next Congress.
Thanks for your valuable input. While I was hunting around, I saw the exclusion clause, so your comments are most germaine. Yes, it's the recall PROCESS that must be addressed. Can the states' electorates be motivated enough to initiate an Arizona-type process?
BTW, while searching the Internet I found a "Mother's Against Illegal Aliens" recall petition that has already been started against Kyl and McCain. I plan to put that online in a later post for further discussion.
It may be that Arizona is the perfect target state, since they already have a procedure in place and, indeed, a petition started. Any Arizona people who can weigh in?
More to follow on this. Again, thank you CB.
I wonder how this got to the floor. The dems can't want their votes on record on this issue.
Today, to oppose unrestricted immigration in polite society is the equivalent of attending a cocktail party with your fly open.
Either America will finally resist this cynical shopping of racial politics by the rats or, ultimately, we will balkanize ourselves.
In that event, all politics will not be racial, they will be bloody.
They are playing to the latino vote both present and future....and to corporate lobbyists.
They no longer represent the “People”...their number one priority is reelection.
Okay, looks like funds were never appropriated for the fence bill that was passed. I’ve heard there were funds....not now!
Cong. Franks website:
Congressman Franks Offers Amendment to Build Border Fence
Urges Members to Appropriate Funds for the Double-layered Fence
June 15, 2007 Congressman Trent Franks (AZ-02) offered an amendment today to H.R. 2638, the Homeland Security Appropriations Act for FY2008, which would require the necessary funds be used to build the 854 mile, double-layer fence on the southern border of the United States that was authorized in the 109th Congress but was never funded.
Franks stated, Border security is inextricably tied to national security. With over 4,000 people crossing our southern border illegally every day, our border remains one of our countrys must critical national security vulnerabilities. In order to carry out an act of terrorism, a militant Islamist simply needs a porous border and a dangerous weapon. To underestimate this danger would be a cataclysmic failure on the part of the U.S. Government.
He continued, Despite passing the Secure Fence Act, we continue to talk about the problem but refuse to act. My amendment would have required that Congress keep its promise to our constituents and the American people, and designate the funds necessary for building the 800 mile border fence. I am incredibly disappointed that once again, this Congress failed to take meaningful action to gain control of our porous border.
The Secure Fence Act of 2006 amended the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to direct the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to provide at least two layers of reinforced fencing, installation of additional physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors. To date, only 13 miles of the border fence have actually been constructed. The amendment dedicated $1 billion to provide the resources and manpower for the construction of 854 miles of border fencing and roads, as prescribed by the Secure Fence Act. In addition, it struck provisions in the Act intended to delay, and in some cases halt, construction of tactical fencing along the border.
Congressman Franks is serving his third term in the U.S. House of Representatives, and is a member of the Committee on Armed Services, Strategic Forces Subcommittee, Readiness Subcommittee, Committee on the Judiciary, and is Ranking Member on the Constitution Subcommittee.
Mesa GOP Congressman Jeff Flake crossed party lines and vote against the border fence bill
Burn in Hell Jeff!
anybody know what it takes to call a Constitutional Convention?
That explains to me why, after the "Secure Fence Bill" was passed last year, POTUS weaseled and waffeled all over the place when asked (in a couple of interviews I saw) if this was absolutely, positively, unequivocally a done deal, with no backing out. He was sweating bullets when asked that, and for good reason. The knife was already in our backs.
Yep, many were snookered on the fence. It was a nice little fantasy, wasn't it?