Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Common Sense

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Santa Clarita Ca
    Posts
    9,714

    Common Sense

    Article Posted: 05/23/2006 2:28:11 PM
    A Common Sense Approach to Border Security by Senator Ben Nelson

    My efforts to take strong measures to secure our borders got traction last week when the Senate approved an amendment I offered calling for construction of a border barrier at the most concerning trouble spots along a 700 mile stretch of the U.S.-Mexico border. The amendment passed on a vote of 83 to 16.

    I’m very pleased to see the Senate embrace a strong border security measure. Neglecting to enhance our border security is neglecting to address illegal immigration entirely. We must continue voting for border security first if we wish to create an effective plan that lasts when it goes to the House.

    Before it was amended the immigration bill only included repairs for a limited portion of already-existing barriers. My amendment, sponsored with Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to construct at least 370 miles of triple-layered fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers at strategic locations along the southwest border.

    I believe that most of my fellow Nebraskans would agree with how I referred to this amendment in a speech on the Senate floor when I called it “a common sense approach.”

    The measure amends the Hagel-Martinez Immigration Bill by providing $1.2 billion to construct 700 miles of triple layer security fencing at 5 trouble spots, East San Diego County, California, Douglas, Arizona, El Paso, Texas, Del Rio, Texas, and Brownsville, Texas.

    Effective barriers, including fencing, work in cutting down on illegal immigration and the statistics prove it. Consider the case in San Diego where there has been a security fence for many years. With the establishment of that fence crime rates in San Diego fell 56% between 1989 and 2000. The number of illegal immigrant apprehensions decreased from more than a half million in 1993 to just over a hundred thousand in 2003. The fence also helped stem the tide of drug smuggling with cocaine seizures dropping from 1200 pounds to about 150 pounds and a decline of 58,000 pounds of marijuana coming across the San Diego border in 1993 to just over 36 thousand pounds a decade later.

    Narcotics traffickers, human smugglers, and individuals seeking to enter the United States illegally are taking advantage of the government’s inability to adequately police our southern border. The 9/11 Commission recognized the need to secure our borders to protect against possible future attacks. While it’s certainly not the case with everyone coming across our border illegally, it is highly likely that some of those entering our country illegally have harmful intentions and could even be members of terrorist organizations. As a result, the issue of border security presents urgent national security implications.

    To stop the flow of illegal immigrants, as well as enhance enforcement against the smuggling of illegal drugs into the United States, we must first turn our eyes to the problem’s source—our porous border. Building a physical barrier in high traffic areas is a common sense and proven approach to securing our border.





    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Copyright © 2002 SWNEBR.NET (Southwest Nebraska News) All Rights Reserved.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,569
    Building a physical barrier in high traffic areas is a common sense and proven approach to securing our border
    I prefer a "physical barrier" (wall), 2000 miles of it.

    Okay follow the logic...put a "physicial" barrier in high traffic areas only. The next logical conclusion would be the high traffic areas will move to the areas that do not have a "physical" barrier.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,207
    On Monday, Senator Chuck Grassley was talking about common sense concerning this Amnesty, and he made a lot of great points.

    Not to mention, he had the decency to say he was wrong to vote Amnesty 20 years ago,and he feels it's wrong to do it again.

  4. #4
    breezy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    134

    Sen. Grassley

    Today he said something to the effect, that if anyone was hurt by a beuracratic establishment, that establishment shouuld be accountable. Perhaps it was, "to blame."


    Well ... what about us?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •