# Bush OKs 700-mile border fence



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Bush OKs 700-mile border fence


http://edition.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10 ... index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush signed a bill Thursday authorizing the construction of a fence along one-third of the 2,100-mile (3,360-kilometer) U.S. border with Mexico, but missing from the legislation is a means to pay for it.

"Unfortunately, the United States has not been in complete control of its borders for decades and therefore illegal immigration has been on the rise," Bush said before signing the measure in the White House's Roosevelt Room. "Ours is a nation of immigrants. We're also a nation of law.

"We have a responsibility to address these challenges. We have a responsibility to enforce our laws. We have a responsibility to secure our borders. We take this responsibility seriously," said Bush, flanked by Department of Homeland Security officials, GOP congressional leaders and Vice President Dick Cheney.

The Secure Fence Act of 2006 is one of the first steps of a tougher illegal immigration policy touted by Republicans. Its signing comes 12 days before potentially pivotal midterm elections.

It also comes the day after a CNN poll indicates that Americans prefer the idea of more Border Patrol agents to a 700-mile (1,125-kilometer) fence.

Though Congress overwhelmingly approved the bill last month, GOP leaders waited until Tuesday to take it to Bush's desk because they wanted a public signing closer to the election.

Bush boasted Thursday of other strides in immigration policy, including increasing border security funding from $4.6 billion in 2001 to $10.4 billion in 2006, and upping the number of Border Patrol agents from 9,000 to 12,000. By the end of his presidency, he said, there will be 18,000 Border Patrol agents.

Also, thousands of beds will be added at detention facilities for illegal immigrants, so Border Patrol agents can end "catch-and-release at our southern border," Bush said.

Since Bush took the Oval Office, the United States has caught and deported more than 6 million people entering the country illegally, he said.

"The Secure Fence Act builds on this progress," the president said, explaining that in addition to the fence, the bill provides for the use of advanced technology such as cameras, satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles.
Who picks up the tab?

But missing from the law are the funds to pay for it.

The act provides no funding mechanism for the fence, though a $1.2 billion appropriation was approved as part of a bill the president signed this month. There are no concrete numbers, but estimates suggest the fence would cost twice that amount. The earlier bill, however, stipulates that the $1.2 billion could be used for a fence, lighting, vehicle barriers and high-tech equipment.

A poll released Wednesday by Opinion Research Corp. finds that 74 percent of the 1,013 Americans surveyed are in favor of more U.S. agents along the border, while 45 percent said they want a 700-mile fence along the border.

The CNN poll also said that 67 percent of respondents would like to see fewer illegal immigrants in the country, but 34 percent said they should be removed.

The fence bill has earned the ire of U.S. southern neighbors, as Mexican President-elect Felipe Calderon this month called the proposal "deplorable" and Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez said Mexico was considering taking the issue to the United Nations, according to The Associated Press.

Calderon and President Vicente Fox later ruled out approaching the international body, and Fox said about three weeks ago he was "confident" the fencing would never come to fruition, the AP reported.

The Organization of American States released a statement Wednesday from Mexico and 27 regional countries expressing "deep concern" over the fence measure. The statement further called the proposal "a unilateral measure that goes against the spirit of understanding that should characterize how shared problems between neighboring countries are handled and that affects cooperation in the hemisphere."

The measure also had its critics at home, as Mike Cutler, a former special agent with the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, said before the bill's signing that he doubts the fence will be effective.

*"I'm very skeptical, and in fact doubtful, that that fence will ever really be built the way the American people are expecting it to be constructed," Cutler said. "Time will tell, but I'm not an optimist."
*
The president for the union representing Border Patrol agents also expressed skepticism, according to the AP.

"A fence will slow people down by a minute or two, but if you don't have the agents to stop them it does no good. *We're not talking about some impenetrable barrier,"* said T.J. Bonner, who heads the National Border Patrol Council, the AP reported.

During the signing ceremony, Bush said he was going to continue working to bolster the nation's immigration policy, including pushes to crack down on "widespread document fraud" and enacting a temporary worker plan. But he stated his opposition to granting workers quick citizenship.

"We must face the reality that million of illegal immigrants are already here. They should not be given an automatic path to citizenship. That is amnesty. I oppose amnesty," he said.

"There is a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant and a program of mass deportation, and I look forward to working with Congress to find that middle ground."

--------------------------------------------

So what I'm wondering is...

What happened to the entire fence? Why only 700 miles? I had heard that it originally was supposed to be much longer... however it was scaled back?

Not sure though...

Ryan


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

OUR NEW 700-MILE FENCE

The president is all set to sign today the bill authorizing the construction of a 700-mile border fence with Mexico. This would be an absolutely fabulous idea....if our border with Mexico were 700 miles long. The only problem: it isn't. It's almost 2,000 miles long. Oops! Looks like somebody fell a bit short in the arithmetic department. The $1.2 billion bill is seen as a "down payment" on the fence. Great...a fence that's too short still isn't fully paid for....this gets better all the time.

Republicans could have not only retained their majorities in the House and Senate, but expanded them this year. All they had to do was come out months ago in favor of getting tough on the illegal alien invasion. Some of them have, but the stumbling block isn't in Congress, it's at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. President Bush simply supports amnesty for illegal aliens...the so-called guest worker program....and does not support doing anything at all with the 12 million illegals already here.

So *this fence is just another do-nothing initiative that will not stop invasion from Mexico in the least.* It's not enough. As long as there are places where illegals can just walk right on in, they will. As long as they know nothing will happen to them once they get here, they will continue to take the risk.

How about a fence along the entire border? And a real fence...a manned one with gun turrets and stuff. You could even mine it. Illegal immigration problem solved. North Korea and South Korea have had a pretty good border fence for 50 years.

By the way .. have you heard that China is busy laying down a barbed wire fence along its entire border with North Korea? Let's send some observers over there to see how they're doing it.

NOT SERIOUS ABOUT THE MEXICAN INVASION

A story out of Atlanta today. Brian Feagans reports in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that every single day the police chief in Roswell, Georgia faxes a list to the Atlanta office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The fax is a list; a list of every inmate that the chief is holding in the Roswell city jail that he suspects is in this country illegally.

*Thus far about 10,000 names have been faxed to the immigration officials. And thus far immigration officials have picked up exactly three of them. Three, out of 10,000. :******:  *

That, my friends, is how serious our federal government is about fighting the Mexican invasion. At one point Feagans reports that an immigration official even called to tell the Roswell police that they are wasting their time. The faxes continue, though, and the so-called immigration enforcement types continue to do nothing. Here's your story.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/ ... etfax.html

The republicans will wonder why they lost the house and Senate, talk about stuck on stupid :eyeroll:


----------



## always_outdoors (Dec 17, 2002)

> but missing from the legislation is a means to pay for it.


Didn't we hear this same story with No Child Left Behind?

But never fear, we have over $500 billion in the Pentagon's budget plus all of our foreign aid we hand out.

:eyeroll:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

The defense budget is money well spent,

but the foreign aid isn't becuase the people getting it don't realize where it comes from,

it should always have strings attached and all the people that get it should realize that the aid came from the US.

Unicef and the Un do everthing they can to camoflage the US source, those bastards at the UN should be shot.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Exactly !!!!! I say starve the UN for money, cut all our support.

As far as the fence, I will get excited when it is built, full length, and twice as high. I would feel even better with a top wire with a few thousand volts/amp running through it. Even more excited if they build two fences 100 yards apart with a mine field in the middle.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> Didn't we hear this same story with No Child Left Behind?


Some people simply hear what they want to hear. North Dakota went from $21,644,587 government funding in 2001 to $30,068,320 in 2006. That's a 38.9% increase in funding since this administration took office and put no child left behind into law. The U.S. Department of Education distributes the funds to the various states, usually on a formula that is based on the level of poverty among school children. Nevada has received a 131% during that same time period. If your state is already meeting the goals and level of education set out in the program then you don't require as much assistance. It's not a welfare program, it's a program designed to assist the states. The funds are delivered to the state, the states, in turn, distribute the funds to schools and districts on both a formula and competitive basis, at least that is what they are suppose to do. Unfortunately some states saw a chance to cut back their own funding because of the extra cash from Washington and spend the state money elsewhere&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. this made for very little change in the state system. Is your state one of those?

On the subject of the fence............ one third of the estimated cost has been budgeted. To claim the remaining amount will never be funded at this point is nothing more than political posturing. BTW, you don't need a fence in areas a mountain goat couldn't cross so why build one there.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

:beer:


----------



## racer66 (Oct 6, 2003)

Been awhile since I posted and guess what, I still can't believe the crap whiny liberals spu.


----------



## always_outdoors (Dec 17, 2002)

True Gohon and immediately you would think 38.9% is golden, but education has been underfunded for years. That $30,068,320 was probably needed way back in 2001.

The HeadStart program isn't any different. Sure Bush put more in this year than lastyear , but he has underfunded the program for so long that the programs still have to make cuts because it didn't out-weigh the costs over the period of years to run the program.

IMHO I disagree on the defense spending. We don't need over $500 billion in that budget. We could cut that by $125 billion easy and still be over twice that of China's defense budget.

Add that to the foreign aid to the UN and other country's that shouldn't be getting it and we could fund that wall along Mexico and insure some "current" funding to needed programs.

Gohon: You have ties to the military so you want that funded. I have ties to education so I want that funded. Just differences in opinions.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> You have ties to the military so you want that funded. I have ties to education so I want that funded.


True, but the military is 100% federal funded. Education is suppose to be mostly funded by the state. What I don't understand is if federal funding for education is increased in your state to the tune of approximately 7.8% every year, then how is it under funded, assuming somewhere there are also ND funds added to that amount as required. How much did Clinton increase federal funding during his 8 years in office. And, how much did ND increase funding during the last 6 years and the 8 years prior to that. The numbers tell the real story........ ND had a increase of 39% in federal funding in the last 5 years where as Nevada had 131%. This tells me the kids in ND are better educated than the Nevada kids and ND doesn't need as much federal assistance as Nevada. Anything above the Federal mandate level is the responsibility of the state. Seems to me the finger is pointing in the wrong direction.

As to the boarder fence, I still don't think we need it along the entire 3000 miles. A lot of that terrain is simply not possible to cross. If I had the authority and the power I would use Federal imminent domain authority to buy a 20 mile wide section along the entire Mexican boarder, of course not to include cities, fence it in and move all military training bases into the strip and use it as a live training grounds which would include live fire and mining. When you have tens of thousands of military personal running around day and night along the entire boarder, it would be pretty difficult to cross if not impossible. That would certainly stop the crying about putting the military along the boarder just for security. Then they would be there in their own training grounds. But then again, I don't have that power........


----------



## always_outdoors (Dec 17, 2002)

> As to the boarder fence, I still don't think we need it along the entire 3000 miles. A lot of that terrain is simply not possible to cross. If I had the authority and the power I would use Federal imminent domain authority to buy a 20 mile wide section along the entire Mexican boarder, of course not to include cities, fence it in and move all military training bases into the strip and use it as a live training grounds which would include live fire and mining. When you have tens of thousands of military personal running around day and night along the entire boarder, it would be pretty difficult to cross if not impossible. That would certainly stop the crying about putting the military along the boarder just for security. Then they would be there in their own training grounds. But then again, I don't have that power........


Great idea. You got my vote.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

I thought of that a long time ago with all the base closings that would be the best place to put them although it would ruin a bunch of good quail habitat.

We spend more money per child than many countries that get better results its not money its the breakdown of school dicipline. Combined with politically correctness and with ridiculous multiculturalism.

All that nonsense is also driving the no Religion in school ect which is another nail in the coffin of discipline.

Private Catholic schools consistantly get better results because they can toss out the rotten apples and spend their time teaching instead of disciplining monsters.

Until discipline returns to the public school system tossing more money at it is throwing money down a rat hole.

Then of course there is the wonderful teachers union the most anti child organization in this country.


----------



## Alaskan Brown Bear Killer (Feb 22, 2005)

"Edit BOBM"

I hate censoring stuff and while I know you made this post in jest, its just not appropriate.

This site cannot allow something like that even as a joke.

No harm done just please don't go so far

Thanks


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

Don't need a fence.

Gov't is full of expert money trackers. Find the people and corporations with illegals on their payroll and fine the [email protected] out of 'em! Problem solved.

Won't happen because both sides of the isle are making millions (literally) on the cheap labor. Rest assured the Fed gov't will NOT solve the problem. I like live2hunt's plan, but then I like a lot of ideas most don't, like de-criminalizing most drugs so we have enough room in prisons for child molestors so we can stop letting them out with a promise to inform their new neighbors that the creeps think their new neighborhood is full of REALLY cute little boys!

No amnesty for the illegals OR the people who support them. Go through the proper channels to enter this country like everyone else or be dragged back to where you came from IMMEDIATELY! Afterall, this is a free country, so it's your choice!


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

Gohon, sorry for giving live2hunt credit for your idea. I don't know who or what pushed my button as I'm usually somewhat more reserved about expressing strong opinions, but I'm fired up tonight and read through things so fast I put the wrong name to the post.

But it sounds like you're both on the same page anyway!!!


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

Bobm said:


> Until discipline returns to the public school system tossing more money at it is throwing money down a rat hole.
> .


Oh yes and dont forget once the states get that fed money I am sure they allocate the lions share of it to "inner city schools" as they always need the most help and always will, now talk about a rat hole!!


----------

