This is all that has been requested by the officials on the boarder
Seem a lot of folks thing we are attempting to build the next great wall of China.
Provides $1.375 billion, or $4.325 billion less than the $5.7 billion the Trump administration requested, for a very limited 55 miles of physical barrier that can only be placed along the southern border in *only* the Rio Grande Valley of Texas.
Contains language allowing only fencing designs in use as of 2017.
No funding for new border patrol agents above the current on board levels.
Does not fund the Administration’s request for joint detention facilities.
No funding for additional enforcement and removal field personnel.
Border wall bill is out, here are some highlights:
Here are the areas Trump cannot build any wall (map at link)
The bill gives $1.375 billion for constructing a “wall”/pedestrian fencing
$725 million for technology
They can only be used to make steel bollard design… no concrete wall, no prototypes. Same thing as what Bush and Obama built… just a little bit taller
The bill secures more than $3.1 billion in foreign health services, more than twice for the wall.
Sec. of DHS cannot increase border crossing fees
Border “Wall” construction is only allowed in the Rio Grande Valley Sector
Other highlights:
$415 million for humanitarian aide
$77 million for opioid equipment
1,200 new Customs and Border Patrol Agents (retain current levels)
The bill expands Catch and Release by reducing the number of border beds from 49,060 to 40,520.
No funding for additional enforcement and removal field personnel. – that means no more ICE agents to deport people already in the country.
Expands the Alternatives to Detention program from 82,000 to 100,000… so instead of housing family units at the border- they get moved into the interior where they almost always stay in the country permanently.
Provides $40 million for additional ICE staffing dedicated to overall ATD (Alternatives to Detention) case management, particularly for asylum seekers… so no new ICE agents, but money to ICE to help illegal aliens settle in a non-detention center in the country.
The bill gives over $1 billion for the Smithsonian.
$3.4 billion in refugee assistance – $74 million more than last year.
$4.4 billion in international disaster assistance – $100 million more than last year.
Does not eliminate any foundations that Trump wanted to get rid of including: The Asia Foundation, the U.S. African Development Foundation, the Inter-American Foundation, and the U.S. Trade and Development Agency.
Israel, Ukraine, and Jordan receive $5.3 billion for border security fencing.
Suggestions for President Trump:
1. Establish a tent camp to hold all illegal immigrants while their cases are being handled in remote northern Alaska. Knowing where they will be held and no roads to escape would be a great deterrent to coming.
2. Any illegals who actually are released are to be released into sanctuary cities with NO federal funding. Let those sanctuary's taxpayers fund their politics.
3. Reduce foreign aid funds on a per capita basis for each illegal that crosses the border based upon (a) country of origin and (b) countries that abetted and allowed continued passage to the US border.
4. No social or welfare benefits to anyone here illegally. Those caught using stolen SSNs to be deported immediately and forfeit any wealth or property acquired under a stolen identity.
Senate Republicans have to be begging him not to do this. But they will get what they deserve.
Senate Republicans have to be begging him not to do this. But they will get what they deserve. "
This lets me know declaring an emergency is a great idea.
• You shutdown the government • Cost the economy $11 Billion Dollars
All so you could get less money for the wall than was initially offered.
Schumer offered you $1.6B in Dec 2018 for 65 Miles
Now you’re getting $1.375B for 55 Miles
Great. Dealmaker huh?
Trump lost $225 million of funding for his wall. As that happened, he cost the U.S. economy $11 billion due to the shutdown.
The guy couldn't negotiate his way out of a paper bag.
Interesting to look back on all of this in 15-20 years and see what's up. Things swing. be it 2020 or 24 or beyond, things will swing the other way... then they will swing the other way... then they will swing the other way... then, well, you see where I'm going. So check it off, build that wall.
itshot's Link
hesheit deleted the pic (as always) of receipt that hesheit modified to hide date and address
feel free to save a snapshot for posterity
A simple little mind bereft of independent thought will have to go back to that same well of plagiarism again and again. He knows it. And we know it. But his silly little game of lie and deny continues.
Same for when he was trying to poke JTV about running the Marine Crucible course, when Putz never actually ran it himself. Remember how many times I had to ask him that specific question to finally get to the truth? He apparently took a pretty picture of it though!
Whaleshit indeed!!!
Bentstick had the right idea. He wasted 2+ years of his life answering every post. Now, I am sure that his family appreciates getting him back.
Gillibrand Also Signals Willingness To Tear Down Existing Border Walls
"It was one thing, the promise he made every single day at every single speech. Forget the fact that he's digging his own grave," Coulter added. "The only national emergency is that our president is an idiot."
Throughout the 2016 election, Donald Trump campaigned for president on the promise that he would build a wall along the southern border. Six weeks after his election in November 2016, Congress overwhelmingly passed a statute—codified as 10 U.S.C § 284—that authorized the secretary of defense to support the “construction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States.” On Dec. 23, 2016, a month before leaving office, President Obama signed the 973-page bill into law without any objection to this provision.
On Feb. 15, the Trump administration invoked this express statutory delegation of authority to do what the statute says: “construct ... fences ... across international boundaries of the United States.” Specifically, the president identified up to $2.5 billion under the Department of Defense funds that were designated for counterdrug activities. This provision does not turn on the declaration of a national emergency pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2808, which the president also invoked in a proclamation issued the same day. Critically, the White House stated that “these funding sources will be used sequentially and as needed.” The “emergency” funds may not be tapped until the other, less controversial funds are depleted. Plaintiffs may not have standing to challenge the diversion of “emergency” funds until those funds are in fact allocated. Through § 284, both Houses of Congress willingly gave President Trump a path to build at least part of the wall.
This episode illustrates how Congress long ago relinquished its lawmaking powers. The legislature enacts omnibus bills that few members actually read. Often, these super-duper-statutes contain nearly-limitless delegations of authority to the executive branch, with only the flimsiest guidelines on how and when that authority should be executed. Other times, Congress gives the president the exact authority he needs, with few strings attached. Such is the case with § 284: Obama signed a bill into law that gave his successor the very precise power to “construct ... fences ... across international boundaries of the United States.” Moreover, a predecessor of this statute, known commonly as Section 1004, has been in effect since 1990. Critically, other long-standing provisions allow the president to shift appropriations around to fund that construction.
Trump’s decision to rely on § 284 reflects, once again, an instance where he relies on express delegations of power to accomplish awful policies. Congress cannot claim that the president is subverting the rule of law when it gives him the precise authority he needs to accomplish his goal. In January 2017, Democratic Senator Jack Reed said that Congress could block the president from relying on this statute to fund the fence—and certainly that could work prospectively. But Congress is responsible for enacting this statute in the first place.
This executive order isn’t the first instance in which Trump has relied on express statutory authority to implement a terrible policy. For example, in Trump v. Hawaii, the Supreme Court found that 8 U.S.C. §?1182(f) authorized the president to implement the travel ban. This statute provided, in part, that the president could deny entry to “aliens or ... any class of aliens into the United States” that he deems would be “detrimental to the interests of the United States.” Some lower court judges found that this broad statute violated the nondelegation doctrine. At the time, I argued that precedent foreclosed this argument: Five decades ago, the Supreme Court recognized that the president has inherent authority to exclude aliens. This delegation placed Trump in Justice Robert Jackson’s first Youngstown tier. Trump v. Hawaii did not need to reach this issue. Justice Clarence Thomas did, though I have doubts about whether his opinion is correct as an original matter. If Congress is not pleased with President Trump’s use of Section 1182(f), it should modify the statute. (I hope it does so in the future.)
Like Obama, Trump turned to executive action after Congress refused to legislate his preferred agenda—but beyond that, Trump’s policies contrast with several of Obama’s most prominent executive actions. For example, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) programs did not stand on express delegations of authority. Rather, the Department of Homeland Security relied on an executive practice known as “deferred action,” and two general statutes. 6 U.S.C. § 202(5) states, “the Secretary shall be responsible for ... establishing national immigration enforcement policies and priorities.” 8 U.S.C. § 1103(a) states, in part, “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall be charged with the administration and enforcement of this chapter and all other laws relating to the immigration and naturalization of aliens.” Were the president to rely solely on these statutes, as I’ve argued, DAPA would violate the nondelegation doctrine.
The same cannot be said for 10 U.S.C § 284. Congress wittingly enacted a statute that allowed Trump to do what he had promised to do. Not even a robust application of the nondelegation doctrine—which I favor—would provide a basis to challenge this exercise of authority. Under modern doctrine, the new executive policy is well within the bounds of Congress’s power to delegate authority.
Ultimately, I fault Trump for pursuing this unfortunate policy. But I place greater blame on Congress, which long ago stopped enforcing its legislative powers. Peter Schuck accurately summarized the situation: “By failing to define crucial terms, legal standards and accountability rules, Congress has handed presidents an all-too-handy tool of tyranny commonly used by autocrats.” Until Congress does its job, the courts will be unable to restore the separation of powers.
Amoebus's Link
Time will tell.
Oh wait, we are not pulling out of Syria. I guess the money we are saving not having a SoD can be used to help.
USMCA, the new NAFTA, has not been passed yet.
A sample of one is what you are asking we develop policy on?
Matt brought up before how much of this land is in private hands with no ROW, and that domain laws would be needed. He was also right according to my research that there are numerous pending legal cases from the last time.
Did FOX talk about that at all?
elkmtngear's Link
It's the "Problem areas" down there along the Rio Grande, that need shoring up immediately.
Or is the logic if you can't do ALL of it tomorrow, it's some kind of reason you can't get going on what you CAN get started building tomorrow?
But hey..... if ya can ding Trump a bit..... who cares what's good or bad for the country....
The last time the Feds seized land for border fencing was thru the Secure Fence Act of 2006. They built 350 miles of pedestrian fence and 299 miles of vehicle barriers. The land seizures resulted in 320 federal court cases. A decade later 60-70 of those cases are still in litigation.
Yes, some Texas landowners will welcome a wall on their property. But, history tells us many landowners won't. I've read that some are already lawyering up to fight against the land seizures. It could take decades to settle all of those cases.
There's also the issue that eminent domain powers rest in the legislative branch. Congress has to authorize the taking of land. By bypassing Congress and declaring a national emergency, Trump may have effectively buried the project, since he has no authority to seize private property. Some claim that previous legislation already authorizes the land grab, but those claims seem shaky to me, based on my research.
Matt
This is an invasion, of a million illegal aliens a year. I think Trump can make the same argument on a national emergency and border defense. Curious what happens next. Build That Wall!
Thanks for presenting the facts.
If the legislative branch would end rights for illegal immigrants including birth rights, we probably would not need a wall, or at least we would probably have time to go through the proper process.
Habitat for Wildlife's Link
Commonly referred to as a funnel/ambush. Take out a few of the invaders, and the word will quickly spread. Time for political correctness to be over. Illegal is illegal. Secure our damn border, protect our citizens and spend our money on Americans.
It's apples to apples.... it's enforcement of the law. In the case of a wall..... the attempt to actually prevent a crime, not catch more criminals. FAR more efficient use of resources overall. Big difference I'm sure you would agree.
What would be the crime rate be if the criminals knew no security present?.... and even if they were caught, they would be released and taken to a sanctuary where they would not ever have to come back for trial....
oh. wait...
never mind......
Grey Ghost's Link
With all due respect, BB, you may want to do a little research on the border issue. This link is a good place to start.
Our current southern border consists of a patchwork of various pedestrian fencing and vehicle barriers. There is approx. 654 miles of the border with some form of barrier. 1279 miles of the border remain unfenced.
That said, you've hit on the one of my biggest problems with this whole issue. Nobody seems to know exactly what "The Wall" is suppose to mean. The design, height, location, length, etc....is constantly changing. Trump campaigned on a "big beautiful wall" made of reinforced concrete, suggesting it would span the entire border. Now, it's morphed into a 722 mile mix of wall and fencing, mostly updating the barriers that are already in place.
There doesn't seem to be a clear plan for "The Wall" and the vague details we get keep changing. Bottom line is, I believe "The Wall" has become more about political capital than about actually securing our border.
Matt
Do you have definitive information on where this 200-300 mile of wall is suppose to be built? What's the design? What makes this 200-300 mile stretch of wall more necessary than other sections of the border? What is the plan for the 1000+ miles of border that will remain with no barrier?
I get the concept of funneling the illegal traffic to areas that can be more easily monitored and patrolled, but only 200-300 miles seems like plugging a fire hose with a tooth pick.
I'd appreciate specific information if you have it, instead of your usual cheerleading and personal attacks.
Matt
Matt
Who is "they", and what do they know?
"You don't need to know.".
I believe we have a right to know, since our tax dollars will ultimately fund it.
"There are unfortunately some variables still at play..."
Exactly what are those variables?
Matt
BowSniper's Link
The real question is how many miles of wall are needed to replace crappy ineffective fencing already in place and how many more miles of new wall needed for an effective border barrier in total.
And when will Trump complete the task we elected him to do.....?
As with ANYTHING, first set goals. If the goal is to eliminate illegal crossing as much as possible, then set that goal. You then go the professionals as to how to best achieve that goal. Enforcement. Security. Engineers. Those who have literally studied the situation and those like it for YEARS. Not Joe Blow off the street. There are no enforcement people I'm aware of who do NOT recommend a wall. If the word triggers some TDS.... ok, call it a barrier. I don't care. But get the goal done, finalized and then work to achieve it.
IMO the goal is not to "catch" people crossing. Some even use that as cover, knowing full well the results. That's far too late and with the liberal system in place..... almost a placement/adoption agency for illegals. The goal is to prevent the crossing.... the crime.... as much as possible. Prevention in nearly every aspect of life is far more effective in both time and eventual costs than repair or remediation (if even possible) after the fact.
I'm afraid a good many people however are not forthcoming about their true goals.
Edit...Thank you for clearing that up.
Annony Mouse's Link
