Pres. Bush signs HR5441: Provides $1.2 billion for border fence

Little-Acorn

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
10,025
Reaction score
2,404
Points
290
Location
San Diego, CA
One major obstacle overcome. There is now money to pay for approx. 300 miles of fence. Not a complete solution, but a good start IMHO.

However, has the President signed HR6061 that authorizes 700 miles of fence? That's the other obstacle. And I haven't heard about any such signing of that bill. Anybody know? I thought BOTH bills had to get signed into law, for us to get a fence.

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

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15131303/

Bush signs bill paying for new U.S. border fence

$1.2 billion for border part of $33.8 billion domestic security package

Updated: 12:20 a.m. PT Oct 4, 2006

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. - President Bush on Wednesday signed a law that will pay for hundreds of miles of new fences along the U.S.-Mexico border, a move against illegal immigration that Republicans had sought before next month’s congressional elections.

Under the legislation, about $1.2 billion would be spent during the fiscal year that began Oct. 1 for southwest border fencing and other barriers. The money is part of a $33.8 billion package for domestic security programs that are being bolstered following the Sept. 11 attacks.

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

Text of the bill Bush signed today:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:7:./temp/~c109oxqucq:e14047:

H.R.5441
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)

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

BORDER SECURITY FENCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TECHNOLOGY

For expenses for customs and border protection fencing, infrastructure, and technology, $1,187,565,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That of the amount provided under this heading, $1,159,200,000 is designated as described in section 520 of this Act: Provided further, That of the amount provided under this heading, $950,000,000 shall not be obligated until the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives receive and approve a plan for expenditure, prepared by the Secretary of Homeland Security and submitted within 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to establish a security barrier along the border of the United States of fencing and vehicle barriers, where practicable, and other forms of tactical infrastructure and technology, that--

(1) defines activities, milestones, and costs for implementing the program;

(2) demonstrates how activities will further the goals and objectives of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), as defined in the SBI multi-year strategic plan;

(3) identifies funding and the organization staffing (including full-time equivalents, contractors, and detailees) requirements by activity;

(4) reports on costs incurred, the activities completed, and the progress made by the program in terms of obtaining operational control of the entire border of the United States;

(5) includes a certification by the Chief Procurement Officer of the Department of Homeland Security that procedures to prevent conflicts of interest between the prime integrator and major subcontractors are established and a certification by the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Homeland Security that an independent verification and validation agent is currently under contract for the project;

(6) complies with all applicable acquisition rules, requirements, guidelines, and best systems acquisition management practices of the Federal Government;

(7) complies with the capital planning and investment control review requirements established by the Office of Management and Budget, including Circular A-11, part 7;

(8) is reviewed and approved by the Department of Homeland Security Investment Review Board, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Office of Management and Budget; and

(9) is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.


[snip]
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
One major obstacle overcome. There is now money to pay for approx. 300 miles of fence. Not a complete solution, but a good start IMHO.

However, has the President signed HR6061 that authorizes 700 miles of fence? That's the other obstacle. And I haven't heard about any such signing of that bill. Anybody know? I thought BOTH bills had to get signed into law, for us to get a fence.

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

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15131303/

Bush signs bill paying for new U.S. border fence

$1.2 billion for border part of $33.8 billion domestic security package

Updated: 12:20 a.m. PT Oct 4, 2006

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. - President Bush on Wednesday signed a law that will pay for hundreds of miles of new fences along the U.S.-Mexico border, a move against illegal immigration that Republicans had sought before next month’s congressional elections.

Under the legislation, about $1.2 billion would be spent during the fiscal year that began Oct. 1 for southwest border fencing and other barriers. The money is part of a $33.8 billion package for domestic security programs that are being bolstered following the Sept. 11 attacks.

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

Text of the bill Bush signed today:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:7:./temp/~c109oxqucq:e14047:

H.R.5441
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)

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

BORDER SECURITY FENCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TECHNOLOGY

For expenses for customs and border protection fencing, infrastructure, and technology, $1,187,565,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That of the amount provided under this heading, $1,159,200,000 is designated as described in section 520 of this Act: Provided further, That of the amount provided under this heading, $950,000,000 shall not be obligated until the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives receive and approve a plan for expenditure, prepared by the Secretary of Homeland Security and submitted within 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to establish a security barrier along the border of the United States of fencing and vehicle barriers, where practicable, and other forms of tactical infrastructure and technology, that--

(1) defines activities, milestones, and costs for implementing the program;

(2) demonstrates how activities will further the goals and objectives of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), as defined in the SBI multi-year strategic plan;

(3) identifies funding and the organization staffing (including full-time equivalents, contractors, and detailees) requirements by activity;

(4) reports on costs incurred, the activities completed, and the progress made by the program in terms of obtaining operational control of the entire border of the United States;

(5) includes a certification by the Chief Procurement Officer of the Department of Homeland Security that procedures to prevent conflicts of interest between the prime integrator and major subcontractors are established and a certification by the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Homeland Security that an independent verification and validation agent is currently under contract for the project;

(6) complies with all applicable acquisition rules, requirements, guidelines, and best systems acquisition management practices of the Federal Government;

(7) complies with the capital planning and investment control review requirements established by the Office of Management and Budget, including Circular A-11, part 7;

(8) is reviewed and approved by the Department of Homeland Security Investment Review Board, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Office of Management and Budget; and

(9) is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.


[snip]
Ever the cynic, I see it as a bone being tossed to calm down the pound until the voting's over.
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
Ever the cynic, I see it as a bone being tossed to calm down the pound until the voting's over.
Yep, I wouldn't be surprised to see is rescinded, after the election. In any case, there are well over 2k miles of border, not to mention Canada, which is at least as serious of a problem.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
Yep, I wouldn't be surprised to see is rescinded, after the election. In any case, there are well over 2k miles of border, not to mention Canada, which is at least as serious of a problem.
I doubt rescinded, but watered down even worse than the bandaid on an artery that it is I can easily see.
 

UnAmericanYOU

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
389
Reaction score
103
Points
78
I doubt rescinded, but watered down even worse than the bandaid on an artery that it is I can easily see.
Needs a frickin' tourniquet, just say no to Democrats and other RINO's. Speaking of which, this fence thing has stirred up the eco-terrorists:

Border Fence Could Spell Environmental Disaster
by Haider Rizvi

Environmental groups are concerned about a new plan to build a 700-mile long fence along the border with Mexico.

The official plan, as envisaged in a legislative bill on immigration reforms, is meant to stop the flow of undocumented workers from Mexico, but scientists say it will bring nothing but disaster for the biological diversity of the region.

"The only living things the walls won't stop are people," said Michael Finkelstein, executive director at the Tucson, Arizona-based Center for Biological Diversity, in a statement.

Finkelstein and other independent experts fear that the proposed fence will restrict the movement of wildlife and disturb the unique and fragile ecology of the region.

The border area is home to many endangered species of plants, birds and animals, such as owls, parrots, jaguars, wolves, bears, and lions, that often need to move around as an essential element of their survival.

According to experts on biological diversity, some jaguars found in Arizona come from Mexico.

Similarly, "Mexican Gray Wolves, Peninsular Bighorn Sheep, and other endangered species need to cross their borderland habitat often," said Finkelstein, "and this wall will crush their ability to survive."

The 2,000-mile long U.S.-Mexican border region is considered an extraordinary source of biological diversity because its is shaped by a variety of ecological forms, including deserts, mangrove forests, plains, mountains, river valleys, and wetlands.

The Senate approved the legislation on Friday and now it awaits only a signature from President George W. Bush.

The proposal seeks to construct a series of barriers separated by an access road for patrol vehicles on long stretches of the border in California, Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico.

The immigration bill passed by the House does not provide funding for the fence, but Republicans have suggested it would cost around $2 billion. Democrats estimate that it would cost no less than $7 billion.

Supporters of the fence plan say it would enhance border protection from illegal immigrants crossing from Mexico and provide security against its possible use by terrorists.

"We have to come to grips with the facts that our border petrol agents need a fence on our southern border where we are now facing infiltration by members of terrorist organizations like Hezbollah," said Rep. Ed Royce, a California Republican, in a recent statement.

For their part, Democrats have charged the Republicans with trying to use the immigration issue to attract votes in the upcoming Congressional elections.

They are trying to confuse Americans into thinking "Osama bin Laden is heading north in sombrero," said Texas Democrat Lloyd Doggett.

The proposed legislation allows the Department of Homeland Security to take charge of the border in 18 months and gives additional powers to the border security force agents, besides calling for a study on the need for a fence along the U.S.-Canada border.

About 1 million undocumented workers from Mexico are believed to have crossed the border last year.

Even before the bill has been signed into law, the Department of Homeland Security has awarded a contract to the Boeing Corporation to develop sensors, cameras, and other equipment to control the U.S.-Mexican border.

Those who failed to win the contract include giant corporations such as Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and Ericsson.

The three-year contract Boeing won is estimated to be worth over $2 billion.

"This strategic partnership allows the Department to exploit private sector ingenuity and expertise to quickly secure our nation's border," said Michael Chertoff, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in a recent statement.

As federal border enforcement intensifies, environmentalists say such measures will not stem the tide of illegal immigration, and authorities should take measures that do not harm wildlife.

"They need to focus on vehicle barriers in strategic and at-risk places on the border," said Finkelstein, who notes that wildlife-friendly vehicle barriers in Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in southern Arizona have already proven effective at stopping smugglers from entering the United States.
From commonnightmares,uh, dreams: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1003-08.htm

They're obviously enviromentalists AND immigration experts, those progressives sure seem to be real smart!
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
One major obstacle overcome. There is now money to pay for approx. 300 miles of fence. Not a complete solution, but a good start IMHO.

However, has the President signed HR6061 that authorizes 700 miles of fence? That's the other obstacle. And I haven't heard about any such signing of that bill. Anybody know? I thought BOTH bills had to get signed into law, for us to get a fence.

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

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15131303/

Bush signs bill paying for new U.S. border fence

$1.2 billion for border part of $33.8 billion domestic security package

Updated: 12:20 a.m. PT Oct 4, 2006

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. - President Bush on Wednesday signed a law that will pay for hundreds of miles of new fences along the U.S.-Mexico border, a move against illegal immigration that Republicans had sought before next month’s congressional elections.

Under the legislation, about $1.2 billion would be spent during the fiscal year that began Oct. 1 for southwest border fencing and other barriers. The money is part of a $33.8 billion package for domestic security programs that are being bolstered following the Sept. 11 attacks.

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

Text of the bill Bush signed today:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:7:./temp/~c109oxqucq:e14047:

H.R.5441
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)

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

BORDER SECURITY FENCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TECHNOLOGY

For expenses for customs and border protection fencing, infrastructure, and technology, $1,187,565,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That of the amount provided under this heading, $1,159,200,000 is designated as described in section 520 of this Act: Provided further, That of the amount provided under this heading, $950,000,000 shall not be obligated until the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives receive and approve a plan for expenditure, prepared by the Secretary of Homeland Security and submitted within 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to establish a security barrier along the border of the United States of fencing and vehicle barriers, where practicable, and other forms of tactical infrastructure and technology, that--

(1) defines activities, milestones, and costs for implementing the program;

(2) demonstrates how activities will further the goals and objectives of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), as defined in the SBI multi-year strategic plan;

(3) identifies funding and the organization staffing (including full-time equivalents, contractors, and detailees) requirements by activity;

(4) reports on costs incurred, the activities completed, and the progress made by the program in terms of obtaining operational control of the entire border of the United States;

(5) includes a certification by the Chief Procurement Officer of the Department of Homeland Security that procedures to prevent conflicts of interest between the prime integrator and major subcontractors are established and a certification by the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Homeland Security that an independent verification and validation agent is currently under contract for the project;

(6) complies with all applicable acquisition rules, requirements, guidelines, and best systems acquisition management practices of the Federal Government;

(7) complies with the capital planning and investment control review requirements established by the Office of Management and Budget, including Circular A-11, part 7;

(8) is reviewed and approved by the Department of Homeland Security Investment Review Board, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Office of Management and Budget; and

(9) is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.


[snip]


Seems that may be happening, pocket veto, yeah, links:

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/008239.php

October 08, 2006
A Pocket Veto On Border Fence?

Mickey Kaus has checked the calendar and wondered if George Bush might issue a passive-aggressive veto on the Secure Fence Act passed last week by Congress. Normally, bills passed by Congress become law if the President signs them or does nothing for ten days, but the Constitution also provides an exception for this in Article I, Section 7:

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.
This is known as the pocket veto, and it has plenty of precedent. However, it is not as easy as it sounds. The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that an adjournment would have to be for a significant time to enable a pocket veto. Both houses of Congress adjourned on September 30th and are not scheduled to resume the session until Thursday, November 9th, two days after the midterm elections.

The Secure Fence Act passed Congress the day before its latest adjournment. Excepting Sundays as the Constitution requires, that would mean that Bush would have to sign the Act on October 11th at the latest. If he fails to do so, would that comprise a pocket veto? And as such, could Congress even take a vote to override it?

It certainly would be bad politics, and it might be a flawed tactic. No one disputes the ability to issue the pocket veto at the end of a session, but intrasession pocket vetoes are very controversial, although used by Reagan, Bush 41, and Clinton. Following a pocket veto by Nixon and a legal challenge to it by Congress, the DC appellate circuit held that intrasession failures to sign legislation does not prevent the President from returning the bill to Congress upon their return. Since then, Presidents have usually returned the bills to Congress in the interests of collegiality and to avoid having the Supreme Court issue a precedent-setting ruling that would wipe out intrasession pocket vetoes.

Robert Bork argued against the intrasession pocket veto during the Ford administration in his position as Solicitor General:

On January 26,1976, Solicitor General Robert Bork wrote a memorandum to Attorney General Edward Levi, concluding that President Ford should not exercise the pocket veto during intrasessions and intersessions, but only at sine die adjournment at the end of the second session, provided that Congress has authorized an officer or other agent to receive return vetoes.26 Bork reached that conclusion by taking into account both historical and practical considerations. He wrote: “We do not believe that the length of the intra-session adjournment can be constitutionally significant under modern conditions, so long as an agent remains behind who is authorized and available to receive a return veto. Nor do we regard the difference between intra-session and inter-session adjournments to require a difference in constitutional practice.”27 The use of a pocket veto, he wrote, “is improper whenever a return veto is possible.
Clinton's attempts at intrasession pocket vetoes all came in the last year of his presidency, and probably was meant to tweak the Congress that had impeached him. In all instances, however, he handled them as "protective return", and in two of the three cases, Congress took up override votes, treating his refusal to sign the bills as normal vetoes rather than as passage into law. In the third case, they replaced the bill with another that Clinton supported.

Will this history of tension between the executive and legislative branches get another spin in modern times? It seems odd that Bush has not yet signed the Secure Fence act, and his opposition to all but a comprehensive approach to immigration may be tempting him to spike the bill. If he thinks that will happen quietly, though, he is sorely mistaken, and that tactic will rebound horribly against a Republican Party that has enough trouble on its hands in these midterm elections. It would provide a fascinating showdown between the White House and Congress over the meaning of Article I, Section 7, and it may wind up giving the Supreme Court the final word on intrasession pocket vetoes that has been lacking for 200 years.
Posted by Captain Ed at October 8, 2006 11:20 AM
 

UnAmericanYOU

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
389
Reaction score
103
Points
78
Ever the cynic, I see it as a bone being tossed to calm down the pound until the voting's over.
Then, ever the cynic, you'd be correct:

BORDER FENCE WEAKENED

No sooner did Congress authorize construction of a 700-mile fence on the U.S.-Mexican 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 Homeland Security Department'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 American Indian 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.''

Source: Washington Post
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/15693546.htm

The House had to practically fold, the GOP Senate and Bush insisted on the heavy dilution of the bill you mentioned in another post.

Pork no equal fence. A virtual fence, maybe you can see it with your third eye.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top