Thread: Republicans Seek More Border Spending (Lindsey Graham)

Also see:

http://www.alipac.us./modules.php?name= ... ic&t=75060

which gives Chambliss and Isakson their share of the spin for this same amendment.


CQ TODAY MIDDAY UPDATE
July 25, 2007 – 2:10 p.m.

Republicans Seek More Border Security Spending in Face of Veto Threat

The White House issued a veto threat Wednesday against the Senate’s fiscal 2008 Homeland Security spending bill, citing excessive funding, as Senate Republicans attempted to add more spending to the bill for border security.

The statement of administration policy echoed those lodged against most of the 12 fiscal 2008 appropriations bills this year, as President Bush squares off against the Democratic-controlled Congress.

The $37.6 billion Senate version of the bill (S 1644) exceeds the president’s request by $2.3 billion, and the House-passed bill (HR 263 is $177 million more than Bush’s budget.

The White House statement also cited objections to a provision to bar the federal pre-emption of state chemical security laws, as well as a provision to delay the implementation of passport requirements for land and sea travel until June 2009.

[b]Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., unveiled an amendment to the bill to add to overall spending by allocating $3 billion for “emergency fundingâ€

GOP Senators Want More Border Barriers
$3 Billion Sought For Security

POSTED: 11:44 am PDT July 25, 2007
UPDATED: 11:51 am PDT July 25, 2007

WASHINGTON -- An effort to pass comprehensive immigration overhaul legislation is over for this session of Congress, but Republican senators want to revive a popular section of the bill.

The legislation, introduced as an amendment to the 2008 Homeland Security Appropriations, would provide $3 billion in emergency funding to beef up border security.

Republican Sen. Judd Gregg, one of the co-sponsors of the amendment, said it aims to establish operational control over the U.S.-Mexico border within two years.

The money would go to hiring and training 23,000 Border Patrol agents, and provide four remote-contyrolled drone aircraft, 105 ground-based radar and camera towers, 300 miles of vehicle barriers and 700 miles of border fencing, Gregg said.

What this amendment does is acknowledge the fact that what we have here is an emergency. It is as big and as important an emergency relative to national security as the war in Iraq," Gregg said.

"Nothing is more important to us from a standpoint of protecting our national security than making sure that we get operational control over the borders and as this amendment moves forward to do," he said.

The White house has already threatened a veto of the underlying homeland security bill for breaking Bush's budget and Gregg said the White House opposes the border security plan offered by Senate Republicans.

"The administration position ... is that they oppose it," Gregg said.

During the immigration debate last month, proponents of the broader approach such as Bush and Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina argued that splitting up the compromise immigration package and passing border enforcement first would doom the broader effort.

But Graham said Wednesday that the public won't accept more controversial elements -- such as a plan to give million of illegal immigrants a way to earn U.S. citizenship, dubbed "amnesty" by opponents -- until the porous border with Mexico is made more secure.

Distributed by Internet Broadcasting Systems, Inc. The Associated Press contributed to this report. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.ktvu.com/politics/13754259/detail.html

But Graham said Wednesday that the public won't accept more controversial elements -- such as a plan to give million of illegal immigrants a way to earn U.S. citizenship, dubbed "amnesty" by opponents -- until the porous border with Mexico is made more secure.

I would say, Graham is at least taking a step in the right direction by pushing for money to enforce border security but he still doesn't get it yet. He thinks if the government can show it's serious about border security, the American Public will then accept amnesty for the 20 plus illegal aliens that are here. Well, in response to that...NO!!!...85% of the American Public is against giving amnesty and citizenship to illegal alien lawbreakers!!! Give that part of your agenda up!

How about more enforcement and deporting!!!

You know the fastest way to get this done and the most cost effective would be for our government to go after the employers.

If the employment is dried up - they will leave on their own.

If they know they can't get jobs - they won't come.

It really is that simple.

Yes, border security is necessary - but it's kinda like spraying for ants - while leaving the lid off your sugar bowl.

GOP senators seek to revive border security initiative after failure of immigration bill
By Andrew Taylor, Associated Press Writer | July 25, 2007

WASHINGTON --With a comprehensive immigration reform bill in the dustbin, Senate Republicans sought Wednesday to win passage of its most popular piece, a $3 billion plan to beef up security along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The budget-busting GOP measure would be added -- over White House opposition -- to a pending bill to fund the budget for the Department of Homeland Security.

But Republican sponsors such as Judd Gregg of New Hampshire said securing U.S. borders is as important a priority as fighting terrorism and the war in Iraq.

The move comes in the wake of the collapse in the Senate of President Bush's immigration plan, a carefully negotiated compromise combining the popular border security initiative with a deeply controversial plan to legalize as many as 12 million unlawful immigrants.

The White House has already threatened a veto of the underlying homeland security bill for breaking Bush's budget and Gregg said the White House opposes the border security plan offered by Senate Republicans.

"The administration position ... is that they oppose it," Gregg said.

Sen. John Sununu, an original co-sponsor of the initiative, said the funding "will cover personnel, equipment, and border and interior provisions to stem illegal immigration, restrict benefits to lawbreakers, and further protect the homeland from terrorists and criminals. That's a critical investment in the security of our nation, and one that I strongly support."

During the immigration debate last month, proponents of the broader approach such as Bush and Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina argued that splitting up the compromise immigration package and passing border enforcement first would doom the broader effort.

But Graham said Wednesday that the public won't accept more controversial elements -- such as a plan to give million of illegal immigrants a way to earn U.S. citizenship, dubbed "amnesty" by opponents -- until the porous border with Mexico is made more secure.

"Border security is the gate that you must pass through to get to overall comprehensive reform," said Graham, who is up for re-election next year and facing political heat at home for backing Bush's unpopular immigration plan.

The emergency border security funding proposal is similar to one Republicans tacked onto an immigration measure to garner more GOP support for the bill, which died last month.

Democrats had supported that move -- an infusion of $4.4 billion in mandatory funding -- as a way of drawing broader backing for the compromise bill.

But it also includes several provisions that Democrats said went too far, such as allowing law enforcement officers to question people about their immigration status, cracking down harshly on people who overstay their visas, and imposing mandatory prison sentences on illegal border crossers.

For their part, Senate Democrats mulled their options on the GOP plan, which requires 60 votes to pass the 100-member Senate since it would be financed through additional debt. Democrats didn't immediately signal a willingness to kill the plan outright.

"On first glance, there's some stuff in this proposal we can support, but much of it also appears to be pretty objectionable," said Jim Manley, spokesman for Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

The GOP move is reminiscent of the successful plan last year to pass a bill to build vehicle barriers and a 700-mile fence on the southern border aimed at keeping out illegal immigrants from Mexico and other countries.

That effort was passed under GOP control of the House and Senate after the Senate passed a comprehensive immigration plan and House GOP leaders countered with the border fence initiative.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_ha ... tion_bill/