Thread: In Border Fence's Path, Congressional Roadblocks

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01935.html

In Border Fence's Path, Congressional Roadblocks

By Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 6, 2006; Page A01

No sooner did Congress authorize construction of a 700-mile fence on the U.S.-Mexico border last week than lawmakers rushed to approve separate legislation that ensures it will never be built, at least not as advertised, according to Republican lawmakers and immigration experts.

GOP leaders have singled out the fence as one of the primary accomplishments of the recently completed session. Many lawmakers plan to highlight their $1.2 billion down payment on its construction as they campaign in the weeks before the midterm elections.

But shortly before recessing late Friday, the House and Senate gave the Bush administration leeway to distribute the money to a combination of projects -- not just the physical barrier along the southern border. The funds may also be spent on roads, technology and "tactical infrastructure" to support the Department of Homeland Security's preferred option of a "virtual fence."

What's more, in a late-night concession to win over wavering Republicans, GOP congressional leaders pledged in writing that Native American tribes, members of Congress, governors and local leaders would get a say in "the exact placement" of any structure, and that Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff would have the flexibility to use alternatives "when fencing is ineffective or impractical."

The loopholes leave the Bush administration with authority to decide where, when and how long a fence will be built, except for small stretches east of San Diego and in western Arizona. Homeland Security officials have proposed a fence half as long, lawmakers said.

"It's one thing to authorize. It's another thing to actually appropriate the money and do it," said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.). The fine-print distinction between what Congress says it will do and what it actually pays for is a time-honored result of the checks and balances between lawmakers who oversee agencies and those who hold their purse strings.

In this case, it also reflects political calculations by GOP strategists that voters do not mind the details, and that key players -- including the administration, local leaders and the Mexican government -- oppose a fence-only approach, analysts said.

President Bush signed the $34.8 billion homeland security budget bill Wednesday in Scottsdale, Ariz., without referring to the 700-mile barrier. Instead, he highlighted the $1.2 billion that Congress provided for an unspecified blend of fencing, vehicle barriers, lighting and technology such as ground-based radar, cameras and sensors.

"That's what the people of this country want," the president said. "They want to know that we're modernizing the border so we can better secure the border."

Bush and Chertoff have said repeatedly that enforcement alone will not work and that they want limited dollars spent elsewhere, such as on a temporary-worker program to ease pressure on the border. At an estimated $3 million to $10 million per mile, the double-layered barrier will cost considerably more than $1.2 billion.

Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who chairs the Senate subcommittee that funds the Department of Homeland Security, said that before the legislation was approved, the department had planned to build 320 miles of fencing, secure 500 miles of hard-to-traverse areas by blocking roads and monitor electronically the rest of the 2,000-mile-long southern frontier.

"I think there'll be fencing where the department feels that it makes sense," Gregg said, estimating that "at least 300 to 400 miles" will be built.

Congress withheld $950 million of the $1.2 billion, pending a breakdown by Chertoff of how he plans to spend the money. It is due in early December, after the midterm elections.

Asked whether Homeland Security would build 700 miles of fence, department spokesman Russ Knocke would not say. Instead, he noted that department leaders announced last month that they will spend $67 million to test a remote-sensing "virtual fence" concept on a 28-mile, high-traffic stretch of border south of Tucson over eight months, and then adjust their plans.

"We plan to build a little and test a little. . . . Stay tuned," Knocke said. "We're optimistic that Congress is going to provide the department with flexibility."

The split between GOP leaders hungry for a sound-bite-friendly accomplishment targeting immigration and others who support a more comprehensive approach also means that the fence bill will be watered down when lawmakers return for a lame-duck session in November, according to congressional aides and lobbyists.

The office of Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.) yesterday released a letter from House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) promising to ensure that Chertoff has discretion over whether to build a fence or choose other options. Homeland Security officials must also consult with U.S., state and local representatives on where structures are placed.

The letter was inserted in the Congressional Record on Friday night because Congress ran out of time to reach a final deal, aides said.

"State and local officials in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas should not be excluded from decisions about how to best protect our borders with their varying topography, population and geography," Hutchison said in a statement added to the record.

Congress also hedged on when a fence would be completed. The law mandating it said Homeland Security officials should gain "operational control" of the border in 18 months. But the law funding it envisions five years. Chertoff has set a goal of two to three years, but only after completion of an immigration overhaul.

Bush and Chertoff have said repeatedly that enforcement alone will not work and that they want limited dollars spent elsewhere, such as on a temporary-worker program to ease pressure on the border. At an estimated $3 million to $10 million per mile, the double-layered barrier will cost considerably more than $1.2 billion.

Bush and Chertoff sound like mealy mouthed liberals. You don't appease an invader by giving up some of your valuables. They want it all. How about easing the pressure on the border by seeing to it that there is no reward for crossing our border? If you employ an illegal you go to prison and forfeit your assets to the US taxpayers.

It sounds like we have been had!

Who’s surprised by this? Appease the people with lip service and quietly stack the deck in the opposite direction. It’s no different than saying it’s against the law to be in the country illegally, but, passing laws making it against the law to ask a person about their immigration status. You know the governments not going to upset their corporate masters.

One of the questions on our candidate survey seeks to find candidates that will follow through. If we get the right persons in office we won't be had.

As a member of Congress I will use the full force of my office to ensure the Executive Branch starts to enforce our existing immigration laws? (1-10)

Found here:

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... ic&t=43068

Copy and paste into an email to send to your preferred candidates campaign site.

SUCKERS!!!!!

I guess we need to spread the word about this and vote accordingly.

Originally Posted by jp_48504

I guess we need to spread the word about this and vote accordingly.

This makes me absolutely furious! If it wasn't for the fact that the Democrats would be doing just the same, or worse, I would be for teaching the national GOP a lesson. I'm so sick of voting for the lesser of the two evils. I'm ready for a third party, that are "true" Conservatives, that aren't in the pocket of Global big business, as both party's seem to be, and will fight for the sovereignty of this country. As I've always said, there are "Republicans", and then there are "true Conservatives". As this article shows, one is not necessarily the other.

And people wonder why folks are "sick" of party politics. I will "never" put a party over the best interests of this country. And putting party over the sovereignty, and cultural integrity of this nation seems to be what's going on.

It's so frustrating to get our elected officials to do the right thing. But I will be working on the grass roots level to try and get good, "Conservatives" elected that see the situation, and position on issues the same as I do. The problem on the national level is, no one holds these people to account for how they vote. We need to contact our representatives, and GOP leadership and tell them how disgusted we are with what's going on. And contact potential presidential candidates, and tell them the same thing.

I will stay a Republican to support those on the local, and state level, for as they say, "all politics is local", and maybe some of this good work on the local level will work it's way up. At least I hope so. What is the alternative we have in the short term? On the local, and state level, we have some excellent candidates running this time, that dispise what's going on in Congress, concerning the immigration issue. They "are" going to stand up on the state level to, as they've said, "make it unpleasant" for illegal immigrants in NC to scam the system. Such as no social services, non emergency medical care, and no drivers licenses. Our only hope is to make change on the grass roots level.

I heard one caller on the radio say the other day, that he was not voting anymore, and was going to wait for the revolution to start. Well, my answer to that is, the revolution starts with each one of us. Waiting around for someone else to do the job, is what's put us where we are. Those of us with like minds need to hang together, and take a stand. Even against our own party, if need be. If a third party is what it takes, then so be it.

I know it's not possible to find a party, or person that anyone can totally be in agreement with all the time. But we need to work together toward the ideals were looking for. And hang tight!

Originally Posted by CountFloyd

SUCKERS!!!!!

What was the alternative??