2006-10-05 06:01:06 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
go for both
2006-10-05 06:09:10 · answer #1 · answered by traveller 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Read this.Eunice Moscoso WASHINGTON BUREAU Wednesday, October 04, 2006
WASHINGTON — Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican and key liaison to the White House on immigration, said Tuesday that 700 miles of fencing approved by Congress for the United States' southern border will probably not be built because of a lack of money and other practical considerations. "It's one thing to authorize. It's another thing to actually appropriate the money and do it," he said.
Cornyn predicted that some fencing would be built as part of a comprehensive strategy that includes more Border Patrol agents, more technology, more detention facilities and various physical barriers.
"There's different kinds of fencing. . . . There's the old fence post and barbed wire, and then there's the virtual fence, which is a combination of physical barriers, people and technology, and I think, in the end, that will probably be how this is addressed," he said.
Cornyn added that 700 miles of fencing would not solve the problem of illegal immigration because it would still leave about 1,300 miles of unfenced border.
"I'm not sure that's the most practical use of that money," he said.
In many border areas, the federal government would have to figure out how to compensate land owners for the property used for the fence, which raises a lot of practical questions, he said.
In addition, residents in the Rio Grande Valley, El Paso and South Texas are concerned that a fence could harm legal trade and commerce back and forth across the border, which is key to jobs and the economy in those areas, he said.
Cornyn defended the Senate vote for the fencing, saying it was a symbolic gesture to show that Congress is serious about protecting the border.
The Senate cleared the bill late Friday, and President Bush has said he would sign it. But Congress approved only $1.2 billion for fencing, barriers and other infrastructure in a separate homeland security measure. Estimates for the 700 miles range from $2 billion to $7 billion.
2006-10-05 07:17:13 · answer #2 · answered by Zoe 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Automatic draft into the military for men and women over the age of 18 that cross illegally into the country. Hey - if you want the liberty and freedom and rights of a citizen, but don't have access to do it the legal way, you cannot say you would be unwilling to serve the country in some other way then.
Better pay then picking fruit and cleaning hotel rooms, with benefits and long-term career options. Not to mention rights as people, not as slave labor. And since so many supporters of illegal immigration say they just want a better life - well, here is the perfect chance.
Anyone under 18, how about becoming a congressional page?
2006-10-05 06:13:13 · answer #3 · answered by zombie_togo 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not exactly sure how the blindfold would work, but it still seems like a better idea than the wall. We already have a fence around the border, that didn't do anything but make people go out of their way and buy wire cutters before crossing over. Ladders are going to be in high demand when the new fence is built.
2006-10-05 06:52:28 · answer #4 · answered by maryjane green 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You can try the fence, but take into consideration that it will only stop a certain percentage of illegal immigrants while leaving those who cross through the northern border free to keep crossing. What about the shores? Biggest concern is Terrorism is it not, yet the northern border security is not tight at all. We have screwed up priorities and it may take 5 to 10 years before we try to stop illegal entry through the north and shores.
2006-10-05 06:06:43 · answer #5 · answered by Sleazy P. Martini 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think they rank about the same. What we really need is a wall that goes from the Pacific to the Gulf because 700 miles doesn't cut it when they can easily take a detour and go around. I mean thats like trying to build a dam in the river and only putting a single stone in the middle. the water is still gonna get around. it's still getting through. that 7 inch rock isn't doing that much good to a 7 foot river.
2006-10-05 06:05:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
None of those.
The only thing which will work to stop illegal immigration is that CO STOP HIRING THEM. They are there because those companies like cheap workers, people who accept a bad payment.
A wall won't stop someone who tries to get a better life.
2006-10-05 06:15:52 · answer #7 · answered by C6 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
ilegal immigration will always be a problem. This has always been a country for equal oppurtunity for everybody, We just need to open the borders and let everyone come through as long as they speak english, pay their taxes and abide by our rules and have not commited a crime from their original country. President Bush loves the Mexican president and that is one reason why we do not enforce the immagration laws..
2006-10-05 06:12:42 · answer #8 · answered by sissybombay 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Annex Mexico! Make it a STATE!
Seriously, we should be fining and punishing the employers who hire illegals AND set up a good program for those employers to get guest workers who can be taxed and must be paid minimum wage. That will stop a lot of it.
2006-10-05 06:11:29 · answer #9 · answered by loryntoo 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Come on. This 700 mile fence thing is just election year rhetoric
2006-10-05 06:09:16 · answer #10 · answered by super.sweep 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
A 2000 mile wall and interior enforcement, which includes the arrest of every illegal alien in the U.S.A. and immediate deportation of them and their anchor babies.
Apparenty YOU are the one wearing the blindfold.
2006-10-05 06:06:18 · answer #11 · answered by shoshone 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋