Congress approves border fence, then pass bill allowing "virtual" barrier

Friday, October 6, 2006; A01

In Border Fence's Path, Congressional Roadblocks

By Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post

No sooner did Congress authorize construction of a 700-mile fence on the U.S.-Mexico border last week than lawmakers rushed to approve separate legislation that ensures it will never be built, at least not as advertised, according to Republican lawmakers and immigration experts.

GOP leaders have singled out the fence as one of the primary accomplishments of the recently completed session. Many lawmakers plan to highlight their $1.2 billion down payment on its construction as they campaign in the weeks before the midterm elections.

But shortly before recessing late Friday, the House and Senate gave the Bush administration leeway to distribute the money to a combination of projects -- not just the physical barrier along the southern border. The funds may also be spent on roads, technology and "tactical infrastructure" to support the Department of Homeland Security's preferred option of a "virtual fence."

What's more, in a late-night concession to win over wavering Republicans, GOP congressional leaders pledged in writing that Native American tribes, members of Congress, governors and local leaders would get a say in "the exact placement" of any structure, and that Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff would have the flexibility to use alternatives "when fencing is ineffective or impractical."

The loopholes leave the Bush administration with authority to decide where, when and how long a fence will be built, except for small stretches east of San Diego and in western Arizona. Homeland Security officials have proposed a fence half as long, lawmakers said.


story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/05/AR2006100501935_pf.html


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

and stick Dems with the bill, in case we win

one month or less and we'll have the stories about how the money was stolen away for pet and patronage projects completely unrelated to the purpose stated for the fence, and nothing resembling the campaign rhetoric.

but I think the goal is, by then, to blame this "wasteful spending" on Dems who voted for it.

our money thrown at these districts, or promised, for nothing to show for any of what Bush promised. So typical

:rofl:

Not be all panicky and stuff, but if people who are coming to this country poor and looking for opportunity can come easily, what about people like al-Qaeda operatives who have substantial financial backing? I think most people know it would be easy.

This whole border matter shows that Bush is really not interested in "Homeland Security," he has had five years to do something about this and not a damn word about it until the racists in his own party started bitching about it loudly earlier this year. If we actually helped Mexico, fewer people would be coming across the border and then when people did cross we could monitor it and react to it better. Building a fence is just a temporary fix to the root cause of the problem, the fact that a lot of people in Mexico and elsewhere in this world are far poorer and have a lack of hope and opportunity.

Even though I think it is a patch, a band-aid of sort to this problem, I find it interesting that they don't even keep to their own flawed plans.

of cheap labor they would simply enforce the laws already on the books.

If they really wanted to help the people of Mexico, they would encourage things that actually HELP people, not screw the poor immigrants and on top of that regular middle class Americans as well.