Skip to comments.Grassley immigration amendment tabled (Border Enforcement)
Posted on 06/13/2013 10:46:11 AM PDT by Red Steel
(CNN) - An amendment to the Senate's immigration reform plan that would have required strict border controls be in place before undocumented immigrants are able to begin the process that could lead to citizenship was tabled Thursday.
Democrats and a few Republicans voted 57-43 to table the measure, proposed by Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa,
Democrats, who oppose the Grassley amendment because they think it sets security metrics that are not attainable
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
This is like Kabuki theater.
Yeah, why enforce the law...not like they care if the law actually WORKS!?
This monstrosity will pass and we are so doomed.
We built the Panama Canal. We put a man on the moon. Humans built the great wall of china with sticks, stones and wheel barrows. We extract petroleum from 50 miles below the surface of the earth.
WE CAN BUILT A WALL FROM THE GULF OF MEXICO TO THE PACIFIC OCEAN with the materials, equipment and technology that we have today. It would cost more than $22.4 billion to build a fence along the entire 1,969-mile border. That's chump change compared to the spending we are doing to support our illegal alien problem.
That's Mexico on the left, US on the right.
Clearly, the U.S. Gov't has no such intention.
We are kidding ourselves to think that either Party is concerned with border security.
Theyre not illegal aliens and dont call it amnesty !- SOB gang members
“Democrats, who oppose the Grassley amendment because they think it sets security metrics that are not attainable”
More like metrics that they have no intention of attaining.
The first feasible location on our side of the border.
A river....fence it a thousand yards back.
A mountain...fence it in reasonable locations.
This would be a true “eminent domain” issue to create a “no man’s land.” Or, for those willing to cooperate, it could be “no man except agriculture or other such use.”
it’s like gun control. don’t enforce/pass more!~
Are you La Raza?
A defacto handing back of territory to Mexico isn’t what most people think of when they think of border security.
Looks like a good place to have a Guard House with a Sentry and live ammo. Iam thinking between that and a rotting bloating corpse of the previous fool that attempted criminal invasion it would be a deterent.
What Republicans voted against Grassley’s amendment ?
I think it is exactly what people think of in order to secure the border. Nobody would insist that the fence come to the last inch of American territory.
Are you La Raza?
This was one big JO to the GOP voters. We will vote it out and then add amendments. The point is once the bill is on the floor, all amendments then have to pass to be added. Reid will simply ignor any he does not want or the dems have the firepower to vote down any gop amendment. Meanwhile, from here out the bill only requires a majority to pass and move over to the house. So, passage sans border security has been baked in by the very same people saying it was a principal part of it, namely Rubio. If they say they were scammed, don’t believe it, they knew what was going on all along. It was one big screw job to the public, the country and to their oath of office.
ENJOY READING THIS LIST OF ‘SO-CALLED’ “REPUBLICANS” who voted to KILL the Amendment....
We can’t very well put a fence on the Mexican side of the border, can we?
And a no-man’s land is not ceding territory to anyone. In fact, it’s doing the opposite. It’s saying it’s under your sovereign control.
Guard house with sentry is a good idea. In a military operation, you don’t put a perimeter in just any old place. You put it where it makes sense. Same with a fence. It should be across the entire border, but it should be where it makes sense and offers the best position from which to attack.
My point was that there are some areas where a fence is not needed, Santa Elena Canyon in Big Bend National Park being one of them.
I can’t imagine going to Big Bend and being stopped short of the Rio Grande by a fence. No one gets apprehended there, because few illegally cross there. There’s no where to go.
Those who put forth that bill never, ever planned to enforce that bill either!
Liars, cheats and traitors. Toss them out, establish recall elections where permissible and send them out to DC to live off their huge retirement plans, that Rubio won't get to take advantage of because he hasn't "worked" at his Senate job for 6 years!
I may seem absolutist, but it’s necessary with these politicians. Give them the freedom to make exceptions, and they will all over the place whether needed or not.
Fence the entire thing. In fact, double fence with no man’s land in between.
See that ledge on the top of the right cliff? It looks real flat there. I think that spot would do nicely. Give the river to Mexico. We got plenty of em.
Can I be La Raza too?
I don’t want a 6’ chain link fence with some rusty razor wire on top. I want a reinforced concrete wall on a foundation with a chain link fence and razor wire 15’ inside of the concrete barrier. Between the wall and the fence is where the mines are to be set.
Of course we should include the proper signage in both English and Spanish to protect our loving trespassers telling them of the dogs, electrified fence, land mines and killer bees.
....unless you have a boat and a phone. But the illegals aren't near that sophisticated are they.
I agree. The security fence in Israel has been very successful against Muslim terrorists. It is a “fence” fence in places and a concrete barrier in others depending on topography. We can use that as a model.
It is mindless chauvinism to argue against the barrier because it will not be on the last inch of US territory. That is the kind of argument a troll would make.
The only boats around there are people-powered. River-rafting is a HUGE industry there, and you’re trying to kill off the livlihood of hundreds of people. 10s of thousands of people, if you include the whole Rio Grande border.
Cell phones DO NOT work there. Maybe satellite phones, but that’s it.
You’re not from around here, are you?
Not since I rowed across the Rio Grande to live here in 1997. I got thirsty waiting for my ride.
Oh yes! An electric fence dead center!
<.....”Sooooooooo, those traitors never, ever had any intention of getting or enforcing border security! Of course, they already have the laws”...>
Shortened your comment a bit...but we already have the laws..and you are right..if they had wanted border security they would have long ago enforced the laws already in place.
Our borders will never be secured....they’ve made that quite clear.
I still say set an electric fence smack dab IN the river....on our side...fry them if they try to get across.
across terrain far more difficult and hostile than that between here and Mexico. Am I wrong to understand that a complete fencing system has already been passed not once, but twice, and has never been finished due to purposeful underfunding? By LAW those enactments mandate completion of the too-long unfinished border barrier. Excuses of "it can't be done", like this special interest amnesty, is utter BS.
...voted 57-43 to table the measure...
Did a Dem vote twice? ....Isn’t Kerry’s seat still empty?
Don’t get me wrong about securing the border - I want it secured. I like the lighting idea. I want it manned. I don’t want people having the ability to come across illegally.
I just happen to believe that this can be accomplished without ceding territory to Mexico. If a fence can’t be put right on the border, then do something else there.
We can secure the border without taking away people’s recreation, property and livelihood.