Senate Votes to FUND the Mexican Border Fence

From Article:

The Senate did an abrupt about-face yesterday, voting overwhelmingly to begin paying for 370 miles of fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers on the U.S.-Mexico border, just three weeks after voting against the same spending.
The amendment's sponsor said senators were so embarrassed by that July 13 vote that most felt they had to reverse course and vote for it this time -- especially after so many were on record in May voting to build the fence in the first place. The amendment, which provides nearly $2 billion for the project, passed 94-3, with 66 senators switching from "no" to "yes" votes since last month.

66 senators switching? That's pretty phenomenal... I wonder what caused the turnaround?

But in any case, I for one am very glad to see them putting the priorities right: secure the border first, and worry about amnesty programs for illegals later. If there's one thing I don't mind my tax dollars going for, it is this. But I'd still prefer they pursue the solution of a complete fence along with tunnel monitoring services I proposed in this ATSNN thread.

edit: spelling

[edit on 3-8-2006 by TrueAmerican]

This about face goes to show you that some of them must have received a lot of flak from voters in their area. I also think it is a very good step in the right direction and long overdue.

I think you nailed it, shots. There is a lot of support for that fence. And the November elections are only 90 days away...

Yep, it could be the upcoming elections is the reason for the turnaround, because it probably sure as hell wasn't because of embarrassment as the article states. There's enough of that going around already, numbing any sense of embarassment they may have left...

But I do have a question for all those that answered in the other thread that the fence is a waste of time and money, and that said it would be inneffectual:

With the access to information that our Congress has- all the studies, estimates and figures that led them to the decision to fund the fence- does that affect your decision any now? Especially seeing as the Senate voted OVERWHELMINGLY to do so? And I'm curious as to the conservatives here, why would you still stand so opposed to the fence when we have the entire leadership so in favor- and by sheer representation statistics, the general public likely to be in favor as well?

While there will probably be those that'll claim this is a political ploy, I'm getting the feeling that the fence idea is hitting home at a grass-roots level in America. It is real, physical and makes a serious statement that America is over the illegal invasion. Enough already, said America. And I say it's about damn time. YAY Congress on this one!

posted by TrueAmerican

I have a question for all those that answered in the other thread that the fence is a waste of time and money, and that said it would be ineffectual: does that affect your decision now? [Edited by Don W]

No.

As to the conservatives here, why would you still stand so opposed to the fence when we have the entire leadership so in favor

I thought the conservatives supported the fence?

I'm getting the feeling that the fence idea is hitting home at a grass-roots level in America. It is real, physical and makes a serious statement that America is over the illegal invasion.

The “fence” is an admission of failure. It is a placebo to those who like glitz instead of wits. While the fence people are at it, why not hire retired East German Vopos to man the fence, and set up a 300 yards free fire zone? Hmm?

What keeps one man out will keep another man in.

Originally posted by donwhite
The “fence” is an admission of failure. It is a placebo to those who like glitz instead of wits.

Failure to what? Keep 13 million illegals from entering the country? Which they did? Yeah, no kidding its an admission of failure. Failure to secure the border. And really, why should America have to do ANYTHING about this problem, in principle? We have a legal system for it, that takes into account the numbers, economic impact and strain on the health care system. But when that is usurped by invasive illegals, something has to be done. These people talking about having to change this and that to OUR system to accomodate ILLEGALS... In a sense that's like negotiating with terrorists. And you KNOW how the administration feels about THAT.

Israel's security fence is extremely effective. Suicide bombings significantly dropped off after the fence was erected. The fence on the US-Mexico border is going to be designed in a very similar manner. Why should it be any less effective? Why is it just a placebo when we've seen the same design be so effective in the Middle East?

Pure political pandering. The fence may work for awhile, but until $ are appropriated to the border patrol to patrol it, it will be full of holes, tunnels, ladders etc. A more effective way to secure the borders would be to hire manpower.

I got green money that says Halliburton builds the fence. Let's hope they do a better job with it than they have with their projects in Iraq!

Schools out! They don't care about protecting the border. All they want is the corp. campaign contributions and kickbacks.

I'll also bet they hire illegals to help build it.

[edit on 4-8-2006 by whaaa]

posted by whaaa
Pure political pandering. A more effective way to secure the borders would be to hire manpower. I got money that says Halliburton builds the fence. All they want is the corp. campaign contributions and kickbacks. I'll also bet they hire illegals to help build it. [Edited by Don W]

Good Going, Mr W!

I’m ashamed, embarrassed and frightened to think I live in a country that even thinks about building a China Wall around itself. Good God A’mighty! Do we have chicken blood in our veins? I’m equally scared that so many of my fellow citizens are willing to enclose themselves behind a wall and shut out the world? What keeps one man out keeps another man in. Hmm?

Say Hello Alberto Gonzales, Hello Bush43! Hmm? Do these two hold our future in their hands?

Say Hello, Berlin, here we come!



[edit on 8/4/2006 by donwhite]

Originally posted by donwhite
Say Hello, Berlin, here we come!

The Berlin wall was designed to keep East Germans from fleeing to West Germany. A very different concept from a fence designed to help control the flow of illegal aliens entering the country.

The fence is not a remedy in itself, but a means by which law enforcement can better conduct their mission.

You forget, Grady, that the US is apparently a human right. Other nations are allowed to control their borders, but the US is not. It's kinda ironic if you think about it; the same people that hate the US seem to think that it is a human right that all people should be allowed to partake in while other nations can protect their borders because they're not as necessary for human life.

Well, either that or those that hate America are spinning the issue so as to make the country easy to penetrate in order to make it weaker/more susceptible to attack.

posted by GradyPhilpott

The Berlin wall kept East Germans from fleeing to West Germany. A different concept from a fence designed to help control the flow of illegal aliens entering the country. [Edited by Don W]

Q1. Who hires undocumented workers? A. Poor people do not hire them.

Q2. Who runs the country? A. Poor people don’t run the country.

If the R&Fs hire the workers, and if the R&Fs run the country, what are the rest of us worrying about it anyway?

Is the Fence a sop for us, or are we saps for the Fence?

JJ Offers: Grady, the US is apparently a human right. It's kinda ironic if you think about it; the same people that hate the US seem to think that it is a human right that all people should be allowed to partake . . those that hate America are spinning the issue so as to make the country easy to penetrate in order to make it weaker more susceptible to attack.“

Out of 11 or 12 or 13 million undocumented persons in the US, not one, say again, not one, has been arrested for an act of terrorism.

Do you think that “security” thing is a sham? Or is it just a scam? Is there a pill to take for paranoia? Say Hello, Dr. Gonzales!



[edit on 8/4/2006 by donwhite]

Originally posted by junglejake.

Well, either that or those that hate America are spinning the issue so as to make the country easy to penetrate in order to make it weaker/more susceptible to attack.

Why is it that people with different opinions are labeled as those people that "hate America"

I almost never agree with anything you say JJ, but I don't hate America. Ive been in business and paid my taxes just like you. I love America, I'm disappointed in the current culture of fear and hate that seems to be so prevalent in today's society. But this is MY country too and I find it presumptuous and arrogant for you to label those you disagree with as America Haters.



[edit on 4-8-2006 by whaaa]

No one has ever broken into my apartment. Should I stop locking my doors and windows? What it all boils down to is that this is America and if Americans want a fence on the border, then who's to say we can't have one? We can install an alligator-filled moat, if we want one.

I have read plenty of arguments here on this board that seem to say that Mexicans and other foreign nationals have more of a right to occupy American territory than US citizens, e.g., members of the Minutemen Project are castigated as vigilantes, while some place "comfort stations" in the desert to facilitate illegal entry into the country.

[edit on 2006/8/4 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by junglejake.

Well, either that or those that hate America are spinning the issue so as to make the country easy to penetrate in order to make it weaker/more susceptible to attack.

Why is it that people with different opinions are labeled as those people that "hate America"
[edit on 4-8-2006 by whaaa]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying those who believe America should have an open door policy allowing anyone who wants to to come here without letting anyone know hates America. What I do suspect, though, is that those who do hate America love this plan. To use a metaphor, a metaphor is not necessarily a simile, but a simile is always a metaphor.

posted by junglejake
To use a metaphor, a metaphor is not necessarily a simile, but a simile is always a metaphor. [Edied by Don W]

Is that so?

Originally posted by whaaa
Pure political pandering. The fence may work for awhile, but until $ are appropriated to the border patrol to patrol it, it will be full of holes, tunnels, ladders etc. A more effective way to secure the borders would be to hire manpower.

So in other words, you are against a wall? Or are you in favor of a wall? Or are you in favor of a combination of a wall and more border patrols?

How do you feel about using the National Guard?

No one method fixes everything. The best solution is the wall and the National Guard. The Guard is a better solution than hiring massive amounts of border patrols, because the Guard can also be used to assist in emergencies such as Katrina, etc.

Originally posted by bombers8

Originally posted by whaaa
Pure political pandering. The fence may work for awhile, but until $ are appropriated to the border patrol to patrol it, it will be full of holes, tunnels, ladders etc. A more effective way to secure the borders would be to hire manpower.

So in other words, you are against a wall? Or are you in favor of a wall? Or are you in favor of a combination of a wall and more border patrols?

How do you feel about using the National Guard?

No one method fixes everything. The best solution is the wall and the National Guard. The Guard is a better solution than hiring massive amounts of border patrols, because the Guard can also be used to assist in emergencies such as Katrina, etc.

I'm not really sure what would be the best method to secure the borders.
I do know however; I don't want my tax dollars wasted on some boondoggle that Washington is fond of cooking up; with cost overruns, and contractor kickbacks, with the accompanying campaign contributions. I'm really sick of Washington corruption. But that's for another thread.

posted by bombers8

So in other words, you are against a wall? Or are you in favor of a wall? Or are you in favor of a combination of a wall and more border patrols? How do you feel about using the National Guard? The best solution is the wall and the National Guard. The Guard is a better solution than hiring massive amounts of border patrols, because the Guard can also be used to assist in emergencies such as Katrina, etc.[Edited by Don W]

1) Border Patrol. This is the legal agency charged with the operation of our borders. It has never been adequately staffed and it has never had the public exposure and support it deserves. We have sent 10 men to do the job 100 could not do, then we bad mouth the 10 and wring our hands! We go off half cocked to look for New Solutions! Geez.

2) The National Guard is the modern form of the Revolutionary War’s militias. Citizen soldiers. One weekend a month, two weeks in the summer. Under a RIF - reduction in force - plan adopted in the 1990s, the AFUS - Armed Forces of the United States - manpower levels were greatly reduced. We did not want a draft and we did not want to pay the wages needed to keep a large volunteer army.

If we want to use the National Guard we will need some new laws, for example, requiring employers to keep the man’s slot open and to keep him eligible for raises and promotions even when he is on extended duty. We must supplement the income of the guardsman when called to duty, in a meaningful way or amount. Using the Guard will not be cheap.

3) I am opposed to any more militarization of the United States.

America is in its permanent war making mode. We have been looking for an enemy since 1991 but so far we have not found one worthy of either our massive nuclear deterrent or our so huge to silly excess fleet of super carriers and the support vessels each requires. Geez.


[edit on 8/5/2006 by donwhite]

There is no question that illegal immigration is a problem across the whole spectrum of nationals that are here illegally. But for all intents and purposes, Mexicans at this point have taken the cake. And they're eating it too, with lots of ice cream and cookies.

I don't think it is anyone's direct intent to single them out on a basis of race, unless someone is just an outright racist. But according to statistics obtained at the DHS Immigration Office, 92% of border apprehensions are Mexican nationals attempting to cross:

Nationality of Apprehended Aliens.
Nationals of 182 countries were apprehended in 2004—aliens from Mexico pre-dominated, accounting for 92 percent of the total 1,241,089 apprehended. The next largest source countries were Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, Canada, Cuba, the People’s Republic of China, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Jamaica and Pakistan.

Also note from the same report that:

DHS removed 88,897 criminal aliens from the United States. The majority of criminal aliens (68,771 or
77 percent) were from Mexico.

With these kinds of figures, and considering the Mexican criminal element there, I just don't understand people not wanting to support this fence. I hear you don on your points, but they fail to sway me in the face of these figures. If these figures were pointing at Canada instead, you can bet I'd be in support of building it there first.