welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

oh yeah - about that fence...

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17267
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 6:47 pm    Post subject: oh yeah - about that fence... Reply with quote

got this from
here
Quote:
In border fenceís path, legislative roadblocks
Loopholes mean fence may never be built, at least not as advertised
By Spencer S. Hsu
The Washington Post

Updated: 2:25 a.m. MT Oct 6, 2006

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.

"It's one thing to authorize. It's another thing to actually appropriate the money and do it," said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.). The fine-print distinction between what Congress says it will do and what it actually pays for is a time-honored result of the checks and balances between lawmakers who oversee agencies and those who hold their purse strings.

Political calculations
In this case, it also reflects political calculations by GOP strategists that voters do not mind the details, and that key players -- including the administration, local leaders and the Mexican government -- oppose a fence-only approach, analysts said.

President Bush signed the $34.8 billion homeland security budget bill Wednesday in Scottsdale, Ariz., without referring to the 700-mile barrier. Instead, he highlighted the $1.2 billion that Congress provided for an unspecified blend of fencing, vehicle barriers, lighting and technology such as ground-based radar, cameras and sensors.

"That's what the people of this country want," the president said. "They want to know that we're modernizing the border so we can better secure the border."

Bush and Chertoff have said repeatedly that enforcement alone will not work and that they want limited dollars spent elsewhere, such as on a temporary-worker program to ease pressure on the border. At an estimated $3 million to $10 million per mile, the double-layered barrier will cost considerably more than $1.2 billion.

Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who chairs the Senate subcommittee that funds the Department of Homeland Security, said that before the legislation was approved, the department had planned to build 320 miles of fencing, secure 500 miles of hard-to-traverse areas by blocking roads and monitor electronically the rest of the 2,000-mile-long southern frontier.

"I think there'll be fencing where the department feels that it makes sense," Gregg said, estimating that "at least 300 to 400 miles" will be built.

Congress withheld $950 million of the $1.2 billion, pending a breakdown by Chertoff of how he plans to spend the money. It is due in early December, after the midterm elections.

'Virtual fence'
Asked whether Homeland Security would build 700 miles of fence, department spokesman Russ Knocke would not say. Instead, he noted that department leaders announced last month that they will spend $67 million to test a remote-sensing "virtual fence" concept on a 28-mile, high-traffic stretch of border south of Tucson over eight months, and then adjust their plans.

"We plan to build a little and test a little. . . . Stay tuned," Knocke said. "We're optimistic that Congress is going to provide the department with flexibility."

The split between GOP leaders hungry for a sound-bite-friendly accomplishment targeting immigration and others who support a more comprehensive approach also means that the fence bill will be watered down when lawmakers return for a lame-duck session in November, according to congressional aides and lobbyists.

The office of Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.) yesterday released a letter from House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) promising to ensure that Chertoff has discretion over whether to build a fence or choose other options. Homeland Security officials must also consult with U.S., state and local representatives on where structures are placed.

The letter was inserted in the Congressional Record on Friday night because Congress ran out of time to reach a final deal, aides said.

"State and local officials in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas should not be excluded from decisions about how to best protect our borders with their varying topography, population and geography," Hutchison said in a statement added to the record.

Congress also hedged on when a fence would be completed. The law mandating it said Homeland Security officials should gain "operational control" of the border in 18 months. But the law funding it envisions five years. Chertoff has set a goal of two to three years, but only after completion of an immigration overhaul.

Staff writer Peter Baker contributed to this report.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15149231/


now here in my parts, this whole border protection thing is a really big deal - my current congressidiot, brian bilbray, focused his whole campaign on tthat. now, the wall is a stupid idea, for many reasons - but this has been pushed as the "big thing" congress has done to deal with illegal immigration. i had heard that they failed to fully fund it - but it is interesting to see how many other holes there are in the legislations.

....makes it easier to get through than the border.
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Xavyor



Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 202
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why can't congress just vote on the actual topics. None of this cancelling the entire intent of the bill with another action or adding ammendments to get it passed that have nothing to do with the original bill.
_________________
Morality: That instinctive sense of right and wrong that tells some people how everyone else should live their lives.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17267
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

are you suggesting that congress draft clear and comprehensible legislation, unencumbered by dodges, earmarks, irrelevant activities and earmarks?

you rebel, you!
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AfyonBlade



Joined: 16 Sep 2006
Posts: 681
Location: The Middle of Everywhere

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is why we need to get DoD to put the Star Wars satellites up and have them vaporize anything that crosses the border. Then they could have their 'virtual fence.' Plus, it would cost a ton of money and be ultimately ineffective. It would have to be approved!
_________________
Knowledge is Power.
Power Corrupts.
Study.
Be Evil.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
WheelsOfConfusion



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 12244
Location: Unknown Kaddath

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AfyonBlade wrote:
This is why we need to get DoD to put the Star Wars satellites up and have them vaporize anything that crosses the border. Then they could have their 'virtual fence.' Plus, it would cost a ton of money and be ultimately ineffective. It would have to be approved!

Maybe they should work on an anti-ballistic immigrants defense system wherebody you try to hit rocket-powered Mexicans who are travelling faster than a speeding bullet with another speeding bullet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dr. Awkward



Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the only practical way of changing the way legistlature is made is to start over with a clean slate. Our current system and anyone involved is so arbitrary and convoluted that it is impossible to have a clear picture of what is actually happening, let alone have any foresight to create a decision plan to clear up any of the current BS. I mean, these people are so used to sidestepping that moving forward is a foreign concept to them, and foreign is bad.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10789
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

WheelsOfConfusion wrote:
AfyonBlade wrote:
This is why we need to get DoD to put the Star Wars satellites up and have them vaporize anything that crosses the border. Then they could have their 'virtual fence.' Plus, it would cost a ton of money and be ultimately ineffective. It would have to be approved!

Maybe they should work on an anti-ballistic immigrants defense system wherebody you try to hit rocket-powered Mexicans who are travelling faster than a speeding bullet with another speeding bullet.

And we could fund an anti-Mexican-government group to develop the rocket-propelled Mexicans as a means to fight corruption in the government, and have the CIA train them.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AfyonBlade



Joined: 16 Sep 2006
Posts: 681
Location: The Middle of Everywhere

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dogen wrote:
WheelsOfConfusion wrote:
AfyonBlade wrote:
This is why we need to get DoD to put the Star Wars satellites up and have them vaporize anything that crosses the border. Then they could have their 'virtual fence.' Plus, it would cost a ton of money and be ultimately ineffective. It would have to be approved!

Maybe they should work on an anti-ballistic immigrants defense system wherebody you try to hit rocket-powered Mexicans who are travelling faster than a speeding bullet with another speeding bullet.

And we could fund an anti-Mexican-government group to develop the rocket-propelled Mexicans as a means to fight corruption in the government, and have the CIA train them.


This has possibilities...
_________________
Knowledge is Power.
Power Corrupts.
Study.
Be Evil.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group