A Con-Job on the American People

The United States Senate, including most of the Republican leadership, voted in May to build a border security fence, but now oppose funding it. "I voted for it before I voted against it." We've heard that before. It was as rediculous in 2004 as it is now. Democrats were joined by 28 Republicans (including Senators John McCain and his disciple Jon Kyl) in opposing the Sessions amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations Act which would have funded construction. Senators Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Thomas R. Carper of Delaware were the only two Democrats who voted for funding the fence.

"We do a lot of talking. We do a lot of legislating," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, the Alabama Republican whose amendment to fund the fence was killed on a 71-29 vote. "The things we do often sound very good, but we never quite get there," he told the Washington Times.

Sen. Session’s amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations bill would have authorized $1.8 billion to build the security fence as promised by the lawmakers and the Bush Administration. Two months ago members of the Senate voted 83-16 to build the fence along high-traffic areas of the border with Mexico. In that same vote on May 17, the Senate also directed that 500 miles of vehicle barriers to be built along the border. But the May vote only authorized the fencing and vehicle barriers. With the Senators now on record as voting for border fencing and barriers, without the appropriations, in reality they've voted not to build the fence they authorized. This is the second glaring instance of similar behavior by Senator Jon Kyl in recent months.

"If we never appropriate the money needed to construct these miles of fencing and vehicle barriers, those miles of fencing and vehicle barriers will never actually be constructed," Mr. Sessions said on the floor of the Senate just prior to the vote, which was aired on C-Span, but not by any of the broadcast or cable news shows.

The appropriations bill, which allocates over $30 billion to the Homeland Security Administration, which includes $2.2 billion for border security and control (but no fencing), passed on a 100-0 vote. The cost of the fence ($1.8B) would have been 6% of the Homeland Security budget appropriation. Funding for the fence could have been added to the bill by amendment instead of prorata reducing the Homeland Security budget. It could have been funded over several years. It would have been in the bill in the first place if there was any desire (or intention), either by the Administration or Congress, to build the border security fence. Any number of funding scenarios were available to the Senate and the Administration.

Why not put the cost of a border security fence in perspective? Over $100B in taxpayer funds has already been distributed to Gulf Coast states by Congress after Hurricane Katrina and Rita and more is on the way. And yet American citizens can't find jobs in these Gulf Coast states because they are inundated by literally hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens.

The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 called for at least 2,000 more Border Patrol agents per year along our border with Mexico to stop the unrelenting flow of people and illegal drugs into this country. But the Bush administration provided funding for only around 200 additional agents. President Bush then promised to deploy by August 6,000 National Guard troops to support the U.S. Border Patrol on the border with Mexico. Now, in mid-July, having already missed a June deadline, fewer than 900 have moved into place along the border.

As proposed, the Sessions amendment would have required some across-the-board cuts to the rest of the Homeland Security appropriations bill to fund the fence, which in itself is a breath of air in financial responsibility. It would have meant cutting roughly 6% of the very few newly authorized border-patrol agents put into this bill for political posturing and providing fewer detention beds for illegal aliens. Not only have roughly 90% of the border-patrol agents approved in previous legislation never materialized on the border, they are the most expensive and least effective of all available options. The few National Guard units sent to the border are serving no interdiction function. More detention beds will not begin to solve the problem. In the meanwhile, Congress and the Main Stream Media make denigrating remarks about the cost and effectiveness of the fence to sway public opinion.

It seems intuitively logical that the fence is needed now -- right now -- and should have taken priority, except apparently to those Senators who have no intention (refuse) to stem the flow of illegal aliens -- 71 of them.

What should not be lost on any American citizen is that a border security fence would be the least expensive long term solution by a wide margin. It would also be the least manpower intensive. It would be the most effective in detering illegal immigration, thwarting terrorist and drug cartel incursions, and reducing human smuggling. Arguably, detention beds are a laughable slight-of-hand by the Senate to give shelter, food, medical care and comfort to illegal aliens at taxpayer expense before they are returned to Mexico to try again.

It seems hard to imagine a single dollar in the Homeland Security Department budget appropriation that could be more important than border security fencing. "Americans should be outraged," said a Border Patrol agent, who wishes to remain anonymous. "Did anyone really believe these guys [senators] want to secure the border?" he said. Another Border Patrol agent was less diplomatic: "Our leaders are not serious about border security ... It's a con-job on the American people."

It is a safe bet to conclude that if the United States Senate (or the President) had any intention what-so-ever in stemming illegal aliens at the border, funding for the border security fence would have been included in the Homeland Security Administration budget appropriation.

Sessions Amdt. No. 4659, As Modified
Vote: 00200
Date: 13 July 2006
Issue: H.R. 5441
Question: S.Amdt. 4659
Result: Rejected by a vote of 71-29
Description: To appropriate an additional $1,829,400,000 to construct double-layered fencing and vehicle barriers along the southwest border and to offset such increase by reducing all other discretionary amounts on a prorata basis.

Red State Patriot

Posted July 15, 2006 11:32 AM
Read more on Articles - Red State Patriot ~ Immigration and Border Control