American Renaissance
Previous Story       Next Story       View Comments       Send This Page       Date Archives       Category Archives

Appropriators Deal Blow to Border Fence

More news stories on Immigration Law Enforcement

Walter Alarkon, The Hill, October 7, 2009

Appropriators dropped a requirement in the 2010 Homeland Security spending bill to rush the construction of a fence at the Mexican border, disappointing conservatives who pushed the project as a way to slow illegal immigration.

The conference report for the $42.8 billion appropriations bill left out language in the Senate’s version that required the installation of 700 miles of the border fence by the end of next year. The fence requirement was inserted in July as an amendment sponsored by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.). It was adopted with the support of most GOP senators and 21 Democrats.

{snip}

Rep. Jerry Lewis (Calif.), the top Republican on the House Appropriations Committee, and other GOP members of the panel assented to dropping the DeMint amendment partly because the conference report increased money for Customs and Border Protection, which includes the Border Patrol, a GOP aide said. The conference report calls for $10.1 billion for Customs and Border Protection, which is a 3 percent boost over funding for the agency in the 2009 Homeland Security spending bill.

Fence supporters faced several obstacles to funding the project.

The Obama administration had opposed a rapid expansion of the fence, requesting far less money for the project than President George W. Bush had asked for. The White House called for $779 million for the fence in 2010, less than the $1.9 billion spent by the Bush adminstration in 2008 and the $926 million appropriated to the fence in 2009. The Homeland Security conference report calls for $800 million for the fence.

Initial plans called for the fence to cover 670 miles of the nearly 2,000 mile U.S.-Mexico border. But a General Accountability Office (GAO) report in February found that less than three dozen miles of it had been built.

The project was dealt another blow last month when the GAO found that it would cost $6.5 billion over 20 years. The report also said that it couldn’t assess its effectiveness at stopping illegal immigration until its technological features were installed. Boeing, the firm building the fence, plans to install sensors to help Border Patrol agents deter people trying to cross it.

{snip}

“Virtual fencing won’t solve the problem and we need a real fence to deter the real problems of illegal immigration, terrorism, drug trafficking and human trafficking,” he said. “A strong bipartisan Senate majority voted to finish the fence by the end of 2010 and its very disappointing that Democrat leaders are thwarting the will of the American people behind closed doors.”

The Homeland Security conference report weakens another provision pushed by immigration hard-liners. The Senate had called for a permanent extension of the E-Verify program, an electronic system used by employees to check whether workers are in the country legally, but the conference report would extend it by three years, the same proposal in the House bill. The conference report does require federal contractors to use the system to check employees’ statuses, which is what the Senate had proposed.

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on October 8, 2009)

     Previous story       Next Story       Post a Comment     Send This Page      Search

Comments

1 — ranger wrote at 9:54 PM on October 8:

Here’s a good example of what those of us mean when we say it’s too late to turn this country around, because there are too many divisive elements in the nation today to overcome.

We can’t even build a defensive structure to protect the vital interests of the country, because of racist, radical groups who want to bring the country down. A country that refuses to do those thing to protect its national security isn’t a country at all, but simply a piece of real estate where people can come to sell dope and make money other ways.

There’s opposition right now, but it’s along lines of peaceful protests and amounts to a momentum building among patriot groups, but even they will not change the societal degeneration via street protests. No matter what is done it won’t be enough.

Then why am I a tea party advocate? Because it is a growing group of largely white protestors, united against the Obamanation, and his anti-white, pro-black policies. And, because of the growing racial tensions throughout the country….made worse by the Obamanation and militant black advocacy…… these white patriots are going to be forced into racial issues, and the next large white opposition will come from these people and millions of others that will rise up too.

In short, they might not be involved in any kind of racial issues at the present time, but they soon will be if they want to survive. I’d rather be aligned with a white group that is already formed and aware of the situatiuon, than start from scratch, when the time comes, to try to energize a sea of couch potatoes who haven’t even reached the stage where they will look up from their video games, the boob tube, or get up from the couch.

Up till now, Obama has been pre-occupied in passing healthcare and other radical measures to concentrate on his civil defense force that, in his own words, is going to be as powerful, as strong, and as well-funded as the US military. But, as soon as the health care debacle is even half-way settled he will turn to assembling his black masses. And, they will amount to no more than a mob of black criminals, with a contingent of white gullible fools, that will resemble Acorn almost to a tee.

I would suggest that every aware white out there adhere to a group of patriots in his area, then wait. Be prepared, but wait. The situation will continue to worsen all on its own, just as it has since 1965, when Kennedy set in motion the destructive immigration bill that had the same effect as spitting in the faces of the very people who founded this nation and are almost solely responsible for its prosperity.

2 — Sonya wrote at 9:56 PM on October 8:

I have NEVER felt good about the fence idea. Humans have their little territorial disputes all the time, but disrupting wildlife (which is already suffering so badly) is not okay.

Why a fence? The VAST majority come here to work for legal businesses, just make employing them a felony and lock up the offenders, and that would fix the problem. Also put good honest Americans to work defending our borders with firearms. Sure it wouldn’t stop the drug traffic, but the main issue is illegal workers, and that can be fixed internally.

3 — Anonymous wrote at 10:11 PM on October 8:

Why are people so concerned about a fence? It’s not like we are being invaded and our Country is being overrun, the Government would never let that happen!

Everything is under control people, nothing to see here, click on the link below to verify for yourself, there is no need for a Border Fence!

http://www.borderinvasionpics.com/0909CompVid1.html

4 — Anonymous wrote at 10:52 AM on October 9:

The original purpose of a “nation” was for people of SIMILAR culture, ethnicity, language, and religion to ban together for their common good. The leftists hate that, in part, because it is difficult to conquer a unified people, and difficult to take their resources. If they can destroy that unity, by diversifying the culture, racial composition, languages, and religions, then they can more easily achieve power. It’s called Divide and Conquer.

Also, a frontal attack (warfare) is too obvious and costly, and besides, most Third World peoples do not have the wherewithal to directly conquer a unified First World nation. However, a First World nation can be slowly conquered by slowly replacing its population with yours. The best way is if you can actually get the foolish citizens of the “host” nation to pay for their own displacement — i.e., tax the citizens and transfer that money to the invaders. This can involve “refuge” resettlement programs, massive legal immigration, welfare, food stamps, tax breaks, Section 8 housing, free medical care, free education, affirmative action hiring, and of course making sure that there is absolutely no border fence with Mexico. Our enemies are very wise. They are winning! Soon America will belong to them.

5 — Lex Concord wrote at 6:24 PM on October 9:

Sonya

If you want to see wildlife disruption, see the effect from thousands of people walking through an area, urinating and defecating with absolutely no regard, as unconcerned as a dog in a graveyard. See the clothing. food wrappers, plastic bags and water jugs littering the landscape, and the erosion caused by the thousands and thousands of illegal aliens traipsing through the delicate ecosystems. What effect do you think the constant intrusion of these invaders has on wildlife?
These people aren’t looking for legal work, they’re looking for money any way they can get it. Illegal is just as good as legal in their eyes. It would be great to “defend the borders with firearms” but Border agents get prosecuted just for defending themselves, let alone using firearms as a deterrent. The fences’ biggest function is to cut down on the casual crossers and funnel the smuggling loads into a more narrow area so they are easier to catch. Go spend a day or two on the border and watch what is happening. You’ll come away with a whole new outlook.

6 — Anonymous wrote at 5:57 PM on October 10:

Post # 4,

You are correct, but there is more to it than that. Greed is a universal human trait. It is also an almost universal human trait to blame others for your failures. European-derived nations are successful because they are created by intelligent and moral Europeans. Third-World Nations are unsuccessful because they are created by incapable, amoral people of low-intelligence. These people are incapable of building functional societies. Hence, they lust after the high standard of living of Europeans, while, at the same time, blaming Europeans for their own failures. They despise us, while desiring what we have created. They use our altruism against us to.

7 — Question Diversity wrote at 7:41 PM on October 10:

Anonymous:

I think that non-white-on-white racial jealousy, at least in the context of most Muslims, is what drives (1) Fundamentalist and extremists interpretations of the Koran, and therefore (2) Terrorism, aka anti-white hate crimes. If those same Muslims were Swedish whites, then they would still be Muslim, but interpret the Koran in a non-literal and non-violent way, e.g. “jihad,” or “djihad,” would mean for a Muslim what being “salt and light” does to a Christian.

8 — Sally Walters wrote at 9:57 PM on October 19:


Isn’t it telling when you mention to a Mexican you
know - that your husband’s
truck was stolen right off your driveway in an
upscale neighborhood - and the Mexican just shrugs
their shoulders? Like , so what ? No outrage,
no moral objections - even from the ‘good ones’
The attitude is ” You were stupid enough to put
your car where it could be stolen - that’s your problem.
Or, they are poor,so somehow it’s justified . The morals
just aren’t there, for the most part .
They come here unwelcomed, steal this, steal that ,
and then blame the ‘Anglo’
Wake up, Americans . Call, write and don’t let them
do this .


Home      Top      Previous story       Next Story      Send This Page      Search