Thread: Prelates Urge Bush to Veto Secure Fence Act

Code: ZE06101223

Date: 2006-10-12

Prelates Urge Bush to Veto Secure Fence Act

Fear That More Migrants Would Die

WASHINGTON, D.C., OCT. 12, 2006 (Zenit.org).- A U.S. bishops' conference official asked President George Bush to veto a bill that would authorize construction of up to 700 miles of fencing and barriers along the Mexican border.

Bishop William Skylstad, president of the U.S. conference, made his request in a letter sent to Bush regarding the Secure Fence Act of 2006.

"To be clear," Bishop Skylstad wrote, "the U.S. Catholic bishops are supportive of efforts to enforce immigration law and secure our borders, so long as the mechanism and strategies applied toward this end protect human dignity and protect human life."

"However," the bishop of Spokane added, "we are opposed to this legislation because we believe it could lead to the deaths of migrants attempting to enter the United States and increased smuggling-related violence along our border. We also believe it would send the wrong signal to our peaceful neighbor to the south, Mexico, as well as the international community."

Bishop Skylstad, 72, also noted that a recent study from the Government Accountability Office found migrant deaths have doubled since 1995, about the time the government began a series of border enforcement initiatives designed to stem illegal entries at ports-of-entry and other traditional crossing routes.

Since this time, close to 3,000 immigrants have died in remote portions of the U.S. Southwest.

The bishop continued: "In our estimation, the erection of a border fence would force migrants, desperate to find employment to support their families, to seek alternative and more dangerous ways to enter the country, contributing to an increase in deaths, including women and children. …

"We strongly feel that the development of just global economic and trade policies designed to help create living wage jobs in countries of origin would permit persons to remain home and support themselves and their families."


http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=96431

The Catholic Church needs to butt out of our politics and Catholic Charities needs to stop renting the HUD housing that they manage to illegals.

However," the bishop of Spokane added, "we are opposed to this legislation because we believe it could lead to the deaths of migrants attempting to enter the United States and increased smuggling-related violence along our border. We also believe it would send the wrong signal to our peaceful neighbor to the south, Mexico, as well as the international community."

God help us ! There is never any talk of punishing the people who are breaking the laws !! Just a constant barage of insanity coming out of all of these people's mouths.

In the meantime our jails are about to burst, there are security concerns at some, and we are still forced to listen to this nonsense ?!

Oh please. Will there ever again be a president in our White House with an ounce of intelligence and true concern for the citizens of America ??
A president who truly loves our country and understands that there comes a time when a good president must have the ability to stand up to people and say, "Stop ignoring the laws of this country !"

Well now wait a minute... Has Bush signed this thing or not? I have read a couple of news articles that say that Bush signed the fence bill, and I heard a local talk show host say that he had signed it, but I keep seeing these stories about groups urging a veto. Can someone help me out here?

There are TWO bills that were on the table.

The one he signed, the last one that everyone was hanging their hopes on is not funded in full and has many loopholes.

The other bill.....has some meat {forgot the name} is the bill that they're discussing.

JP.....do you have that bill's info? I think it's a homeland insecurity bill or something like that. Definitely a separate bill. He's not even made a move to sign it because that was the more important of the 2 bills.

Originally Posted by 2ndamendsis

There are TWO bills that were on the table.

The one he signed, the last one that everyone was hanging their hopes on is not funded in full and has many loopholes.

The other bill.....has some meat {forgot the name} is the bill that they're discussing.

JP.....do you have that bill's info? I think it's a homeland insecurity bill or something like that. Definitely a separate bill. He's not even made a move to sign it because that was the more important of the 2 bills.

I believe that the funded fence bill is HR 6061. Is that the one that has not been signed?

CrocketsGhost wrote:

Well now wait a minute... Has Bush signed this thing or not? I have read a couple of news articles that say that Bush signed the fence bill, and I heard a local talk show host say that he had signed it, but I keep seeing these stories about groups urging a veto. Can someone help me out here?

I was wondering the same thing. I heard he signed the 700-mile fence bill (HR 6061) while he was in Arizona.

Found this post on a thread on the Free Republic forum:

More on Fence Rumors (Secure Fence Act will get signed into law.)
NRO ^

Posted on 10/10/2006 4:31:07 AM PDT by Republican Red

More on Fence Rumors [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Captain Ed thinks Kaus is paranoid:

I checked with a source on the Hill yesterday, who says that we have nothing to worry about on the Secure Fence Act:

Yesterday I analyzed the possibility that the lack of a presidential signature on the Secure Fence Act (HR 6061) might be an attempt at a pocket veto. President Bush has never given very enthusiastic support to any border solution that didn't include a plan for normalization for illegal immigrants already inside the US. Mickey Kaus started counting the days since Congress passed the bill and wondered whether the White House had decided to simply ignore the bill to death.

I took a few minutes at my lunch break to contact a senior staffer on the Hill who has worked the immigration issue. He told me that, as some CQ commenters had speculated, Congress has not formally sent the bill to the President. That means the clock has not started for his signature. The 10-day period starts only after Congress formally prints and delivers the bill for the President to sign into law.

Why has Congress waited? The Secure Fence Act, which requires that the border barrier be constructed, is a very high priority for Republican leadership in both chambers. They and the White House want to schedule the signing for what they see as the maximum impact to the midterm elections. This means waiting for other stories to fall off the front pages. My source told me that the terrorist detention and interrogation bill will be signed on October 17th, and they want this to come after that.

Expect to see this get signed somewhere between October 24th and November 1st. The White House considers this bill a front-and-center accomplishment and wants the boost to last all the way through Election Day. Bush and the Republican leadership in Congress (especially Bill Frist, I'm told) want this to get as much coverage as possible. After the signing ceremony, expect to see this bill get trumpeted in the final advertising push for all Republican incumbents running for re-election.

No one on the Hill or in the White House has missed the message from the base. Everyone understands the importance of signing this legislation for the midterms. My impression is that they didn't realize that people expected the bill to get signed at the same time as the Homeland Security appropriation, and now they understand the confusion. Bottom line: the Secure Fence Act will get signed into law.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1716740/posts

Hmmm......guess it hasn't been signed yet.

CROCKET
I don't know the name or number of the other bill.
The 700 mile ditty is the weak bill & was signed in Az.

The other has to do with BORDER SECURITY and not just a certain number of miles of fence. It had stronger funding included. If memory serves, without that bill this 'fence bill' is close to worthless, as I've mentioned before.

Lately, I've depended on JP {bless him!} to keep me informed of the bills & their numbers.

By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer
Wed Oct 4, 4:47 PM ET

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. - President Bush on Wednesday signed a homeland security bill that includes an overhaul of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and $1.2 billion for fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border to stem illegal immigration.

ADVERTISEMENT

Standing before a mountainous backdrop in Arizona, a state that has been the center of much debate over secure borders, Bush signed into law a $35 billion homeland security spending bill that could bring hundreds of miles of fencing to the busiest illegal entry point on the U.S.-Mexican border.

Bush said enforcement alone will not stop illegal immigration, and urged Congress to pass his guest worker program to legally bring in new foreign workers and give some of the country's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants a shot at U.S. citizenship.

"The funds that Congress has appropriated are critical for our efforts to secure this border and enforce our laws, yet we must also recognize that enforcement alone is not going to work," Bush said at the bill-signing ceremony tucked into his three-day campaign fundraising trip to the West. "We need comprehensive reform that provides a legal way for people to work here on a temporary basis."

Among other things, Bush said the homeland security funding bill deploys nuclear detection equipment to points of entry, raises safety security standards at chemical plants, provides better tools to enforce immigration laws and provides vehicle barriers, lighting and infrared cameras to help catch illegals trying to cross the border.

"It's what the people in this country want," Bush said. "They want to know that we are modernizing the border so we can better secure the border."

Outgoing Mexican President Vicente Fox, who has spent his six-year term lobbying for a new guest worker program and an amnesty for the millions of Mexicans working illegally in the United States, has called the barrier "shameful." He compares it to the Berlin Wall.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061004/ap_ ... urity_bill