Thread: Leahy refuses to budge on 700-mile immigration fence

http://reformer.com/headlines/ci_4378558

Leahy refuses to budge on 700-mile immigration fence
By EVAN LEHMANN, Reformer Washington Bureau

Friday, September 22
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., wasn't straddling the fence when he assailed Republican plans to develop a massive barrier along the nation's southern border.

The 700-mile double-layer fence, which could reach 40 feet high, would be "a scar on a fragile desert ecosystem, and a scar on our legacy as a nation of immigrants," Leahy said Wednesday on the Senate floor.

"My grandparents were immigrants; my parents-in-law were immigrants," he added. "What does a 700-mile barrier wall say about us as a free country?"

But Leahy's comments, coming amid a contentious debate on GOP get-tough immigration policies scheduled six weeks before midterm elections, seem to mark a shift for Vermont's senior senator.

Four months ago, he was on the other side of the fence issue when he supported construction of a barrier along 370 miles of the southwest border, and the development of vehicle barriers spanning 500 miles. Leahy voted yes to the shorter fence, offered in an amendment to a sweeping proposal to overhaul immigration policy that would bolster border security, crack down on employers who hire illegal workers and legalize most of the 12 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States.

The amendment, offered by Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., was approved by the Senate 83-16 in May. Sen. James Jeffords, I-Vt., opposed the fence.

"The bill already contained sufficient border control measures," Jeffords spokeswoman Diane Derby said Thursday of the broader immigration legislation.

The divisive issue also split the senators from Massachusetts, both Democrats.

Sen. John Kerry supported the May amendment. Sen. Edward Kennedy, an author of the broader immigration bill, opposed it, citing measures already in the bill, such as limited fencing in strategic locations, a "virtual fence" using unmanned drones and sensors, and more border guards.

On Wednesday, Leahy addressed his earlier vote, saying his support of the "far more measured version" of the fence in May demonstrated his "commitment to border security."

He also drew distinctions between the two proposals, saying the shorter fence targeted "vulnerable high-traffic areas," was requested by the White House and included a provision requiring the U.S. to consult Mexico before building additional fences. The current bill, in contrast, is a "hasty, ill-considered, mean-spirited measure" that would give too much discretion to the Department of Homeland Security when enforcing immigration laws and stops just short of declaring a "war on immigrants," Leahy said.

Democrats are assailing Republicans for scheduling get-tough immigration bills before the election, saying the GOP is trying to force Democrats to support controversial measures to avoid pre-election attacks on their commitment to national security.

House Republicans blocked a vote on the broader immigration plan this summer, opposing its provisions granting legal residency to undocumented immigrants. Republicans say the borders need to be secured first.

The Senate is expected to vote on the fence early next week. Whether Vermont's senators support or oppose the fence will unlikely be determined by concerns about political repercussions at home, according to Garrison Nelson, a political science professor at the University of Vermont.

"They're not going to build a similar fence between us and Canada," Nelson said. "I think it's an abstraction here."

The fence bill being debated contains a provision to study whether a northern fence is needed, drawing further criticism from Leahy.

"I have heard some cockamamie ideas in my time in the Senate, but this rises to the top," Leahy said on the floor. "It is best to nip this foolishness in the bud before Congress wastes more tax dollars on another boneheaded stunt."

included a provision requiring the U.S. to consult Mexico before building additional fences.

Since when does the USA need to ask another country about what it does on USA soil?

NAU in the works, folks.

The 700-mile double-layer fence, which could reach 40 feet high, would be "a scar on a fragile desert ecosystem, and a scar on our legacy as a nation of immigrants,"

He must live under rock. Here is a sample of the illegals calling card in our desert ecosystem.

And what about the scars on the psyche of AMERICANS AND LEGAL IMMIGRANTS who have a right to feel safe in our own homes and on our own streets? What about the scars caused by criminal invaders????

"They're not going to build a similar fence between us and Canada," Nelson said. "I think it's an abstraction here."

Canada is not sending over 500,000 illegal immigrants into the United States annually!! Geez, this rhetoric is getting so boring!