House panel approves $10 billion for border wall; Democrats show how little American lives matter...

AsianTrumpSupporter

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2017
Messages
4,264
Reaction score
1,117
Points
390
Location
Democratic People's Republique de Californie
...by opposing it already:

House panel approves $10B for border wall

The House Homeland Security Committee approved Wednesday a border security bill that includes $10 billion for a border wall.

The Border Security for America Act, proposed by committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas), was passed on a party-line 18-12 vote.

The bill includes the $10 billion in border wall funding, $5 billion to improve ports of entry and adds 5,000 agents to both the Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection.

The legislation would also authorize the federal government to reimburse states up to $35 million for use of National Guard assets to reinforce border security.

The legislation will head to the House floor amid debate over whether border security provisions should be attached to potential legislation to protect recipients of the rescinded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

Democrats criticized the bill as a political stunt to appease President Trump, who proposed the border wall as a central point of his campaign.

"There was a time in the not too far distant past when this committee cared for facts, data and results," said ranking member Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.).

Thompson called the Republican proposal an attempt to "fulfill a misguided campaign promise."

McCaul praised Trump's focus on border security and urged the committee to seize the opportunity to legislate on the issue.

"We finally have a partner in the White House who has prioritized this issue, and it's time for Congress to do its job," he said.

While the bill is expected to pass the House, it's unlikely to clear the Senate, where it needs a 60-vote majority.

But Democrats are wary that the bill's provisions could be the first shot at a Republican proposal for border security measures on a bill to protect so-called Dreamers — undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children — in the wake of Trump's rescission of DACA.

"There's no doubt that this is a setup for that conversation," said Rep. Nannette Barragán (D-Calif.), a committee member.

To show their disdain for the idea of building a border wall, the bill's central tenet, Democratic committee members proposed tongue-in-cheek amendments.

Thompson proposed changing the bill's name to "Taking Americans' Land to Build Trump's Wall Act of 2017," and Rep. Filemon Vela (D-Texas) proposed a definition of "border wall" that would include the terms "big and beautiful," "real," "inclusive of a door" and "paid for by the Mexican Government."

Vela also made a proposal to withhold wall construction funds until Mexico agreed to reimburse them, alluding to Trump's campaign pledge to get Mexico to pay for a border wall.

"I appreciate the gentleman's creativity in this amendment and sense of humor, but I will oppose this amendment," said McCaul.

But debate centered on the impact of the border wall on border communities and the environment on the border.

Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas) made two proposals to protect the environment; Democrats said they were good in spirit but opposed them because they require no oversight of the secretary of Homeland Security.

None of the Democratic proposals were accepted, but an amendment put forth by Rep. Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) was unanimously accepted.

Her proposal would force a substantial part of investments in border security, such as control centers, to be installed in the border, rather than remotely.

"It's a good amendment and we support it," said Thompson, ending debate on the matter.

Still, Democrats were incensed that a $15 billion proposal that includes measures they deem unnecessary would see a House vote...

For all the crocodile tears shed by the likes of Jimmy Kimmel, liberals sure are quick to oppose anything that would protect America from being invaded by the likes of MS-13 and other terrorists.
 

shockedcanadian

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
13,137
Reaction score
9,491
Points
2,255
"There was a time in the not too far distant past when this committee cared for facts, data and results," said ranking member Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.).

He makes that comment but doesn't include the discussion of the passing of Obamacare and it's massive failings? It seems the "facts" can be manipulated by agencies driven by politics.

The proven fact is that America spends over $125B a year on the illegal immigration issue, the $10B is a fraction of these costs and it's not an annual massive cost as the illegal issue is.
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
214,459
Reaction score
40,322
Points
2,190
Why didn't the House pass legislation to impose tariffs on Mexico to make them pay for it?
 

shockedcanadian

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
13,137
Reaction score
9,491
Points
2,255
Why didn't the House pass legislation to impose tariffs on Mexico to make them pay for it?
They will pay for it, this you can be sure. Keep your eye on the NAFTA negotiations, both Canada and Mexico are going to be repaying their debt, with interest in some cases.
 
Last edited:

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
148,210
Reaction score
16,514
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
Why didn't the House pass legislation to impose tariffs on Mexico to make them pay for it?
They will pay for it, this you can be sure. Keep your eye on the NAFTA negotiations, both Canada and Mexico are going to be repaying their debt, some interest in some cases.
Should we hold our breathe in anticipation?
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
214,459
Reaction score
40,322
Points
2,190
Why didn't the House pass legislation to impose tariffs on Mexico to make them pay for it?
They will pay for it, this you can be sure. Keep your eye on the NAFTA negotiations, both Canada and Mexico are going to be repaying their debt, some interest in some cases.
Then where is the legislation?

If you want Mexico to pay for it you need laws imposing the fees

Why are they making the taxpayer pay for it without offering a single piece of legislation making Mexico pay?
 

TomParks

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
2,994
Reaction score
731
Points
390
Why didn't the House pass legislation to impose tariffs on Mexico to make them pay for it?
They will pay for it, this you can be sure. Keep your eye on the NAFTA negotiations, both Canada and Mexico are going to be repaying their debt, some interest in some cases.
Yeah they have already hinted on this....China is going to get hit hard as well
 

Timmy

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Messages
22,424
Reaction score
2,814
Points
290
Meanwhile the GOP is busy protecting ms13's access to guns .
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
18,162
Reaction score
3,052
Points
290
...by opposing it already:

House panel approves $10B for border wall

The House Homeland Security Committee approved Wednesday a border security bill that includes $10 billion for a border wall.

The Border Security for America Act, proposed by committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas), was passed on a party-line 18-12 vote.

The bill includes the $10 billion in border wall funding, $5 billion to improve ports of entry and adds 5,000 agents to both the Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection.

The legislation would also authorize the federal government to reimburse states up to $35 million for use of National Guard assets to reinforce border security.

The legislation will head to the House floor amid debate over whether border security provisions should be attached to potential legislation to protect recipients of the rescinded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

Democrats criticized the bill as a political stunt to appease President Trump, who proposed the border wall as a central point of his campaign.

"There was a time in the not too far distant past when this committee cared for facts, data and results," said ranking member Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.).

Thompson called the Republican proposal an attempt to "fulfill a misguided campaign promise."

McCaul praised Trump's focus on border security and urged the committee to seize the opportunity to legislate on the issue.

"We finally have a partner in the White House who has prioritized this issue, and it's time for Congress to do its job," he said.

While the bill is expected to pass the House, it's unlikely to clear the Senate, where it needs a 60-vote majority.

But Democrats are wary that the bill's provisions could be the first shot at a Republican proposal for border security measures on a bill to protect so-called Dreamers — undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children — in the wake of Trump's rescission of DACA.

"There's no doubt that this is a setup for that conversation," said Rep. Nannette Barragán (D-Calif.), a committee member.

To show their disdain for the idea of building a border wall, the bill's central tenet, Democratic committee members proposed tongue-in-cheek amendments.

Thompson proposed changing the bill's name to "Taking Americans' Land to Build Trump's Wall Act of 2017," and Rep. Filemon Vela (D-Texas) proposed a definition of "border wall" that would include the terms "big and beautiful," "real," "inclusive of a door" and "paid for by the Mexican Government."

Vela also made a proposal to withhold wall construction funds until Mexico agreed to reimburse them, alluding to Trump's campaign pledge to get Mexico to pay for a border wall.

"I appreciate the gentleman's creativity in this amendment and sense of humor, but I will oppose this amendment," said McCaul.

But debate centered on the impact of the border wall on border communities and the environment on the border.

Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas) made two proposals to protect the environment; Democrats said they were good in spirit but opposed them because they require no oversight of the secretary of Homeland Security.

None of the Democratic proposals were accepted, but an amendment put forth by Rep. Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) was unanimously accepted.

Her proposal would force a substantial part of investments in border security, such as control centers, to be installed in the border, rather than remotely.

"It's a good amendment and we support it," said Thompson, ending debate on the matter.

Still, Democrats were incensed that a $15 billion proposal that includes measures they deem unnecessary would see a House vote...

For all the crocodile tears shed by the likes of Jimmy Kimmel, liberals sure are quick to oppose anything that would protect America from being invaded by the likes of MS-13 and other terrorists.
That is so much bull. We do not need a border wall. It is a waste of money. We also do not need 5,000 border agents either. We do not need to turn this into a police state. A strong majority of Americans do not support building a wall. It has nothing to do with MS-13 and terrorists. That is a straw man and nothing more.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
18,162
Reaction score
3,052
Points
290
Why didn't the House pass legislation to impose tariffs on Mexico to make them pay for it?
They will pay for it, this you can be sure. Keep your eye on the NAFTA negotiations, both Canada and Mexico are going to be repaying their debt, with interest in some cases.
Go ahead and start a trade war. Americans will lose big time.
 

WheelieAddict

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2012
Messages
7,849
Reaction score
1,139
Points
265
Title should be: "Republicans show how little they care about the national debt despite whining about it constantly".
 

shockedcanadian

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
13,137
Reaction score
9,491
Points
2,255
Why didn't the House pass legislation to impose tariffs on Mexico to make them pay for it?
They will pay for it, this you can be sure. Keep your eye on the NAFTA negotiations, both Canada and Mexico are going to be repaying their debt, with interest in some cases.
Go ahead and start a trade war. Americans will lose big time.
Why, because you feel you will lose out on some cheap stuff and cheap labor?

America holds all the cards because they are capitalist, Mexico and Canada know this and they wish to maintain a heavy state presence in the economy meant to undermine and steal from the U.S.

I can't speak in detail about Mexican internal tactics, but I know first hand how the Canadian police apparatus works in corporations as I've experienced it first hand. In short, they are exploiting American businesses and American workers (stealing your jobs through bribes and underhanded methods).

If you don't believe me, as an example of the kind of hardball America is playing against Canada, they placed heavy tariffs on lumber, and now 220% duty increases on Bombardier, AND now today announced another 80% duty on another Bombardier product. What this does is render Bombardier government assistance irrelevant and ensures the RCMP, CSIS and Quebec authorities, have no ability to guide the company with impunity while harming foreign businesses.

There is no alternative for America but to drastically alter the agreement or walk away. I'm guessing it's even money or better at this point that Trump walks away from NAFTA. It would be extremely popular with the voting public and as much as I am a free market economist, here is something you can take to the bank: China, Mexico and Canada, in that order, are exploiting and even abusing your country, businesses and workers.

I'm doing my part in what I call "Operation Justice" to explain to this to the U.S and European government (and large businesses). It's beyond payback to me, it's really about justice. It will be served.
 
Last edited:

francoHFW

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
63,573
Reaction score
4,106
Points
1,815
Location
NY 26th FINALLY DEM!
...by opposing it already:

House panel approves $10B for border wall

The House Homeland Security Committee approved Wednesday a border security bill that includes $10 billion for a border wall.

The Border Security for America Act, proposed by committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas), was passed on a party-line 18-12 vote.

The bill includes the $10 billion in border wall funding, $5 billion to improve ports of entry and adds 5,000 agents to both the Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection.

The legislation would also authorize the federal government to reimburse states up to $35 million for use of National Guard assets to reinforce border security.

The legislation will head to the House floor amid debate over whether border security provisions should be attached to potential legislation to protect recipients of the rescinded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

Democrats criticized the bill as a political stunt to appease President Trump, who proposed the border wall as a central point of his campaign.

"There was a time in the not too far distant past when this committee cared for facts, data and results," said ranking member Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.).

Thompson called the Republican proposal an attempt to "fulfill a misguided campaign promise."

McCaul praised Trump's focus on border security and urged the committee to seize the opportunity to legislate on the issue.

"We finally have a partner in the White House who has prioritized this issue, and it's time for Congress to do its job," he said.

While the bill is expected to pass the House, it's unlikely to clear the Senate, where it needs a 60-vote majority.

But Democrats are wary that the bill's provisions could be the first shot at a Republican proposal for border security measures on a bill to protect so-called Dreamers — undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children — in the wake of Trump's rescission of DACA.

"There's no doubt that this is a setup for that conversation," said Rep. Nannette Barragán (D-Calif.), a committee member.

To show their disdain for the idea of building a border wall, the bill's central tenet, Democratic committee members proposed tongue-in-cheek amendments.

Thompson proposed changing the bill's name to "Taking Americans' Land to Build Trump's Wall Act of 2017," and Rep. Filemon Vela (D-Texas) proposed a definition of "border wall" that would include the terms "big and beautiful," "real," "inclusive of a door" and "paid for by the Mexican Government."

Vela also made a proposal to withhold wall construction funds until Mexico agreed to reimburse them, alluding to Trump's campaign pledge to get Mexico to pay for a border wall.

"I appreciate the gentleman's creativity in this amendment and sense of humor, but I will oppose this amendment," said McCaul.

But debate centered on the impact of the border wall on border communities and the environment on the border.

Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas) made two proposals to protect the environment; Democrats said they were good in spirit but opposed them because they require no oversight of the secretary of Homeland Security.

None of the Democratic proposals were accepted, but an amendment put forth by Rep. Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) was unanimously accepted.

Her proposal would force a substantial part of investments in border security, such as control centers, to be installed in the border, rather than remotely.

"It's a good amendment and we support it," said Thompson, ending debate on the matter.

Still, Democrats were incensed that a $15 billion proposal that includes measures they deem unnecessary would see a House vote...

For all the crocodile tears shed by the likes of Jimmy Kimmel, liberals sure are quick to oppose anything that would protect America from being invaded by the likes of MS-13 and other terrorists.
The
New b******* GOP continues to be trapped by its ridiculous rhetoric. The wall won't work and it's unAmerican. Pass the comprehensive Democratic bill of 2010 with a social security ID card that can't be faked, and end this ridiculous GOP b******* and the problem forever...
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top