Thread: Napolitano signs order to send Guard to border

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/ ... 07-ON.html

Senate approves National Guard proposal

Associated Press
Mar. 7, 2006 06:00 PM


The state Senate approved a proposal Tuesday to require Gov. Janet Napolitano to follow through on her idea to put National Guard troops at the Arizona-Mexico border to crack down on illegal immigration.

The bill, approved in an 18-11 vote, also would provide $10 million in state money for that effort. It could receive a final vote by the state House as early as Wednesday.

Napolitano wants to expand the National Guard's border presence from its current role in helping in anti-drug efforts to performing other duties to give federal agents more time to catch illegal border-crossers.

The governor has asked the military to pay for sending unspecified number of additional troops to work at crossing points, assist with cargo inspection and operate cameras and mobile observation points so they can report suspicious activity.

Last week, though, Napolitano said she was prepared to spend state money for the project. She also has said the proposal would intrude on her authority to command the Arizona National Guard.

Proponents say the National Guard's assistance in federal immigration efforts could help reduce border-related crime and make it more difficult for the tens of thousands of people who try to cross into Arizona illegally each year.

Critics say the National Guard's lack of training in immigration law could lead to racial profiling and that stationing troops at the border could hurt the morale of those who may have already served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Arizona already has about 170 National Guard troops at the border assisting federal and state officers with communications, fence construction and anti-drug efforts.

---

Critics say the National Guard's lack of training in immigration law could lead to racial profiling and that stationing troops at the border could hurt the morale of those who may have already served in Iraq and Afghanistan

Who gives a shyt what they got to say about it? La raza and associated goons only know one defense - the race card. And the trouble is, it isnt working anymore!!

Hurt the morale? To get to defend their OWN country instead of Halliburtin's oil interests? IS THAT THE BEST argument THEY CAN COME UP WITH? Are these our opponent's great legal minds that are supposedly taking over our country? Excuse me while I scream with laughter.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/ ... s0308.html

GOP bill calls for Guard on border
Napolitano says it takes away her command role

Chip Scutari and Robbie Sherwood
The Arizona Republic
Mar. 8, 2006 12:00 AM


Attempting to force Gov. Janet Napolitano's hand on border security, the state Senate passed a bill Tuesday requiring her to station more National Guard troops along the Mexican border to fight illegal immigration.

Napolitano says the measure violates the state Constitution by usurping her authority to command the National Guard. Republican leaders say if she vetoes the measure, she will violate her promise to beef up border security.

Senators gave their final approval to House Bill 2701, which allocates $10 million to station Guard troops at the border to deal with the smuggling of humans and other problems connected with illegal immigration. The House previously approved the bill but with an expenditure of $5 million. The measure will go to Napolitano as soon as the House approves the increased amount.

Napolitano is likely to veto HB 2701 unless it undergoes other last-minute changes, which appears unlikely.

Arizona already has about 170 National Guard troops at the border helping federal and state officers with anti-drug operations, manning traffic checkpoints and repairing and fixing border fences. They have been stationed there since the mid-1980s, but their key duty has been to fight drug trafficking.

The bill does not specify how many troops would be stationed at the border. There are roughly 6,500 Guard troops in Arizona who are available for border duty. But National Guard officials have questioned what role they would have and said that the militarization of the border could spur immigrants to take up arms.

Napolitano believes the Republican sponsors of HB 2701 are trying to put her in a political pickle over immigration. Her concern comes down to two words: the difference between "shall" and "may."

Rep. John Allen's bill says Napolitano "shall" put troops on the border when she declares an emergency. Because she declared an ongoing state of emergency last October, the troops would have to be sent after the bill becomes law.

She wants the wording in the bill changed to let her make the final decision. In a rare move, Napolitano met with Allen on Tuesday and told him she would sign the bill and order the troops to the border if he would agree to change the wording.

She told him that under the state Constitution, the governor is commander in chief of the Guard.

"She looked him right in the eye and said do the right thing, fix the problem, and we'll go forward," said Napolitano spokeswoman Jeanine L'Ecuyer.

Allen said that he would likely refuse to make any changes and that the House would take its final vote today, but he indicated he has not made up his mind. While acknowledging that there "might be a constitutional argument," Allen said his bill gives Napolitano what she asked for in her State of the State address. Allen also said he is unsure he can trust Napolitano after her previous vetoes of budget bills last year.

"We should just hope she does what she says?" Allen asked. "That's the problem. I tried to be very candid with the governor today. The trust, that's a real problem."

During the State of the State address in January, Napolitano asserted her willingness to station more Guard troops on the border if the federal government would pick up the tab. In late December, Napolitano wrote a three-page letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld citing a federal provision that allows governors to use the Guard "to conduct homeland defense activities." Two weeks ago, Napolitano had a private meeting with Rumsfeld to follow up on her request for federal funds, but she did not get any answers or assurances.

An Arizona Republic Poll of 602 registered voters in December showed that illegal immigration is considered the most important issue in Arizona this year. The statewide poll found that more than nine in 10 respondents said a candidate's approach to illegal immigration would be at least somewhat important when it comes to deciding their vote for governor.

The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

An estimated half-million immigrants enter the United States illegally each year, joining the roughly 11 million already here, about 300,000 to 500,000 of whom are in Arizona.

Some live anonymously, providing cheap labor to the state's agricultural and service industries. Others live on the margins, engaging in criminal activity and fueling fears of gangs and terrorism.

Allen's bill passed the Senate on a party-line vote Tuesday, as it had earlier in the House. Republican lawmakers like Sen. Dean Martin were dismissive of Napolitano's claim that the bill infringes on the Constitution's separation of powers.

"She can't have it both ways," said Martin, R-Phoenix. "You can't pretend to want it one day and veto it the next. This is just a way to back out of something she said she wanted in the beginning of the year."

But Sen. Ken Cheuvront said the bill is "all about political theater."

"They just want to force her to veto it," said Cheuvront, D-Phoenix. "It's ridiculous."

Rep. Jonathan Paton, who represents the border counties of Cochise and Santa Cruz, said people in his area are seething with frustration over the problems wrought by illegal immigration.

"In Green Valley, folks have people walking through their back yards," the Tucson Republican said. "The smugglers (of humans) can be violent. People are mad and scared at the same time."

Republican lawmakers have lobbied for more troops at the border since the governor declared a state of emergency there last August in response to increased illegal immigration. Martin amended the bill Tuesday so that it would allocate $10 million, saying he worried the governor would oppose the measure if it did not provide sufficient funds.

Republican lobbyist and former lawmaker Stan Barnes said everyone will be watching to see how Napolitano handles this touchy issue.

"When voters see this bill on her desk, they will expect a signature," Barnes said. "The average Arizonan will not want to hear about legal wriggling about a separation-of-powers issue."

She sure is a flip flopper.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/ ... 0N.html

Napolitano signs order to send Guard to border

Associated Press
Mar. 8, 2006 10:30 AM


Gov. Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she signed an executive order to expand the Arizona National Guard's presence at the state's porous border with Mexico to support federal efforts to combat undocumented immigration and other border problems.

The governor also said she would veto a bill in the Legislature requiring her to send troops to the border, but wants lawmakers to pass a proposal to pay for the expanded National Guard role.

She said the Legislature's pending bill requiring additional deployment as a result of her declaration last summer of an immigration emergency in four border counties appeared to be an attempt by critics to score political points at her expense.

She referred questions about the number of troops and costs to the National Guard and declined to elaborate on the mission the troops would perform.

She said that was spelled out in the order, which wasn't immediately available.

Napolitano stressed that the National Guard's role would be limited to supporting the federal efforts.

"They are not there to militarize the border," she said. "We are not at war at Mexico," she said.

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/119161.php

Published: 03.08.2006

Governor set to veto bill to increase Guard border presence
Seeks new legislation without 'unconstitutional directive'
By Howard Fischer
CAPITOL MEDIA SERVICES
PHOENIX - Gov. Janet Napolitano is deploying more National Guard troops along the border today even as she vetoes a bill to force her to do it.

Her order, announced this morning, comes less thasn 24 hours after the Senate voted to direct the governor to expand the presence of the Guard in Southern Arizona and gave her $10 million to do it. Napolitano said she intends to veto that bill when it gets to her desk later today, calling the mandate an unconstitutional infringement on her power as commander-in-chief of the Guard.

But the governor's order is contingent on lawmakers recrafting that legislation to give her the money - but without what she said is the unconstitutional directive. That move puts the political hot potato back in the hands of the Republican-controlled Legislature: If they don't approve the bill the way she wants it, there's no money - and she can blame them for failure to deploy the troops.

But Rep. John Allen, R-Scottsdale, who crafted the measure, said he does not believe it is unconstitutional.

Napolitano insisted this morning she was not pressured into action by the Legislature and that she had always intended to expand the presence of the Guard in Southern Arizona.

"I've been saying since State of the State (speech) we're sending the Guard down there,'' she said.

But that isn't exactly true: In her January speech, the governor said only that she was asking Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to use a provision of federal law "which allows the federal government to pay for us to station the National Guard at our border.'' She said those federal funds "would allow the Guard to expand its presence and become even more involved in enforcing the rule of law at the border.''

"I'm not playing semantics with you,'' she shot back Wednesday when pressed about the differences.

So why did she wait until now - with the Legislature sending her a mandate to put the Guard on the border - to issue her order, as opposed to doing it months ago?

"I was waiting to see if Secretary Rumsfeld would fund the Guard,'' she responded. Napolitano said she had not had a chance to meet with him until she was in Washington last week.

There are fewer than 200 Guard troops along the border now, doing what Napolitano has described as "support'' functions.

She said while troop levels will change, the mission will not.
"They are not there to militarize the border,'' she said. "We are not at war with Mexico.''

Napolitano said she wants troops doing things like helping to staff border checkpoints and conducting cargo, vehicle and electronic identification checks, assisting local law enforcement and working with the Department of Public Safety in their campaign to keep stolen vehicles from entering Mexico. The governor's decision comes in what promises to be a tough reelection year for her, with Republican foes saying she has been slow to protect the state from illegal immigration.

In approving the mandate Tuesday, Sen. Dean Martin, R-Phoenix, chided Napolitano for saying in her January speech she would expand the role of the Guard on the border -- with federal dollars.

"If she's going to ask for troops on the border and she wants the money to pay for it, the Legislature is the right body to appropriate those monies and give her the authority,'' Martin said.

"But you can't play it both ways,'' he continued. "You can't pretend to want it one day and then say you don't the next.''

Napolitano, in turn, accused Allen of being the one who is playing games. She said Allen was shown a copy of the draft executive order Tuesday night but still refused to back off the wording that would require her to use Guard troops.

"I told her to her face I didn't trust her,'' said Allen. He said the governor has had credibility issues since she went back on a budget deal at the end of the 2005 legislative session.

added to the homepage

here

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-18591.html

and here

http://www.alipac.us/article1091.html

Excuse me, Brian, I must have been pasting at Drudge while you were posting. Feel free to delete mine UNLESS you think it's call for celebration and we should have two ! It's up to you.

"We are not at war with Mexico.''

AWWW C'MON! I'd join back up in a heartbeat for that. It would be like Mike Tyson versus both of the Olsen twins.

Of course, if we win what do we get? About 100 million new "citizens" looking for "better opportunities", along with the 23 million that we already have here.

Meanwhile while the Gov plays power games... the boarders are still open, illegals still coming in with their dope. and crimals driving stolen cars still going back to Mexico.

Enough already ready... do like Bush, send the troops then worry how your gonna pay for it.
Its going be the taxpayers anyway. Either in higher federal or state tax.