Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

  1. #1
    Senior Member Brian503a's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California or ground zero of the invasion
    Posts
    16,029

    Congressman criticizes border security hearing

    http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_4003757

    Congressman criticizes border security hearing
    Panel has no immigration jurisdiction, Sherman says

    BY LISA FRIEDMAN, Washington Bureau
    LA Daily News

    The leading Southland Democrat on a House panel convening next week in San Diego on illegal immigration issues blasted the field hearing as a sham and said the Republicans who run his committee have no business holding border security inquiries.

    Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Sherman Oaks, said he intends to attend the House International Relations Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation hearing despite his contention that the panel "has no jurisdiction or mandate" on immigration.

    "I know that the title says `terrorism,' but the role of the subcommittee is to look at the treaties that we have with other countries in controlling terrorism, to look at whether the State Department is getting the cooperation we need in combating terrorism," Sherman said.

    Sherman's procedural objections reflect wide opposition among Democrats to the immigration panels slated to convene this summer, which they largely view as being conducted by and for Republicans.

    While many Democrats have opted not to attend the hearings, Sherman said he plans to go to San Diego because "as long as there's going to be a Republican dog and pony show, we've decided that we want to be involved because they've got really ugly dogs and really mangy ponies."

    Sara Carmack, a spokeswoman for Rep. Ed Royce, who chairs the Terrorism and Nonproliferation subcommittee, vigorously defended the panel's right to hold the summer's debut examination of the impact of illegal immigration on national security.

    She noted that the committee is charged with overseeing U.S. efforts to combat terrorism and maintained Wednesday's hearing - titled "Border Vulnerabilities and International Terrorism" - does just that.

    "It's not an illegal immigration hearing; it's about border security and potential terrorists that have been coming across the border," Carmack said.

    According to the committee's Web site, it is charged with overseeing "the United States' efforts to manage and coordinate international programs to combat terrorism as coordinated by the Department of State and other agencies, including diplomatic, economic and military assistance programs in areas designed to prevent terrorism."

    It grants specific congressional oversight of the Foreign Assistance Act, the Arms Export Control Act, the Export Administration Act and legislation pertaining to arms transfers as well as all matters involving nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.

    Los Angeles Sheriff Lee Baca is among those scheduled to testify. According to a set of 12 points his office released Friday, Baca intends to testify to the importance of border security as well as the need to determine the number of guest worker jobs necessary to sustain the U.S. economy.

    He also intends to bring up the need for the federal government to reimburse states for the costs of incarcerating illegal immigrants charged with crimes.

    None of Baca's points directly address the potential threats of terrorism. Others testifying include: Darryl Griffen, chief of the San Diego Border Patrol sector; T.J. Bonner, head of a union representing Border Patrol agents; and Andy Ramirez, chairman of Friends of the Border Patrol, a Covina-based volunteer civilian patrol group.

    Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar with the conservative American Enterprise Institute think tank in Washington, said the panel could make the argument that since it deals with terrorism, border security is an issue of its concern.

    But, he noted, during the major House debates on immigration last year, GOP leaders never opted to send the legislation to the foreign affairs panel for a major debate.

    "The immigration bill didn't go to the International Relations Committee. The immigration bill went to the Judiciary Committee," he said.

    Republicans, Ornstein said, "are doing field hearings because they can't get a bill out and they see their hope in November as being greatest if they can inflame their base."

    Staff writer Troy Anderson contributed to this report.

    lisa.friedman@langnews.com

    (202) 662-8731
    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  2. #2
    Senior Member dman1200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    3,631
    The leading Southland Democrat on a House panel convening next week in San Diego on illegal immigration issues blasted the field hearing as a sham and said the Republicans who run his committee have no business holding border security inquiries.
    The only sham going on is the one perpetrated by open borders clowns such as yourself and the fact that you shysters don't even have the guts to tell the American people to their faces what your plans for this country really entail is a sham and a disgrace unto itself. Another sham is that a criminal fraud like you actually get voted into office by the mindless sheep in this country in the first place.
    Please support our fight against illegal immigration by joining ALIPAC's email alerts here https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    206
    I think it's obvious the intent is more about Illegal immigration than terrorism regardless of the supposed premise. It's nothing new when it's politicians going at it. I do think Illegal immigration makes a very nice doorway for terrorism. Anyway .....

    Sherman said he plans to go to San Diego because "as long as there's going to be a Republican dog and pony show, we've decided that we want to be involved because they've got really ugly dogs and really mangy ponies."
    I'm not surprised that he insulted someone, but it never ceases to amaze me how far they will go regardless of which side they are on.

Posting Permissions

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