NEWS: Senate to Fence in Mexico

POLITICS: Senate to Fence in Mexico

Is it just me, or do our Congressional representatives seem to take a hell of a lot more vacation than the rest the country? In the mad dash to get something accomplished before yet another break in this year's session of Congress (and score a few political points with base voters before the midterm elections) the Senate overwhelmingly voted in favor of a bill that approves construction of a 700 mile long fence between the US and Mexico.

I'm sure this has absolutely nothing to do with the midterm elections coming up. Right. With scandals abounding, the government still expanding, federal spending on the rise, ties between the GOP leadership and Jack Abramoff still fresh on people's minds, the return of hurricane season stirring up not-so-pleasant memories of FEMA's performance during hurricane Katrina, the GOP needs to do something to convince conservatives they can get something done and are still, well conservative.



Not everyone in the Senate thinks it's the greatest idea, however.

Point well taken - that's a huge border. However, unlike some of my other progressive contemporaries, I actually don't fundamentally oppose the idea of a little more border control between the US and its neighbors. It would only seem prudent to try and at least monitor who is coming in and out of the country for security purposes, and also to try and get a better handle on just how many people pass the border each day. Plus, having the government in charge presents a better face to the rest of the world than just letting a bunch of vigilante psychos all juiced up after watching Red Dawn like the Minutemen try to pretend like they're the ones controlling the border.



However, the real problem isn't the construction of the fence, but the fact that the GOP and its candidates are virtually guaranteed to claim that having it there is a simple, band-aid solution to the very complex problem of illegal immigration. Even if the fence does limit the number of migrants crossing the border it doesn't help the farmers who depend on seasonal migrant labor who won't have enough pickers for their crops to harvest them. Nor will a fence change anything about the status of the millions of illegal immigrants currently resising in the US. Or the economic conditions abroad that offer laborers the stark choice of either not working or coming to the US illegally to find a decent, paying job.



Don't expect this Congress (or really any future ones) to realistically address any of these concerns. Projects like a giant fence are easy to point to and say they represent progress, but actual solutions take time, money and understanding that may be beyond the capacity of our nation's leaders to implement.

Don't they have better things to do? Like hit on 16 year old pages?

Parts of it should be fenced off, alot of people drop dead in the desert out there just trying to get here, at least if they cant get through those areas as easilly then hopefully they will try and will pick a safer route and we can stop them coming across.

Just another stupid legislated expenditure proving yet again that Republicans aren't really conservative. What the hell is this going to achieve? Just a side thought, but we could try to help Mexico instead of screwing them like we did with NAFTA. We could try to invest in their economy, and then maybe so many wouldn't feel the need to endanger their lives crossing the border. Whatever amount of money we're spending creating this 'picket fence' has got to have a least a doubly positive effect if it was invested in their economy or perhaps this is just by bleeding liberal heart being overly optimistic.

I agree. The difficulty is, that might take more than four years to pay off.

We're going to have to start eventually, what better time than now?

In other news, the Mexican government is royally pissed off by this bill. It's almost like they feel that their nationals have the right to enter our country without proper documentation...

You're right: NAFTA didn't go far enough. Maybe, from the outset, it was a sufficient exercise in trade liberalization, but it's twelve years old now, about to be Bar Mitzvah'd and made a man. Time to reform it.

&, yes, save for the snarky BM remark, I'm being serious. NAFTA could very much become something on par with the EU, with free-movement of workers between the countries involved, price supports installed (a la the Common Agrarian Policy), etc. & as for Mexico remaining a third world state while Canada (and, for now, the U.S.) remains first world, well, the EU just welcomed Romania & Bulgaria to the club, so there is room for accomodation.

Enlarge the precepts of NAFTA, make entrance into the country easier (assuming one has a legitimate (i.e. employment or scholastic) reason to be here), & invest in bringing Mexican infrastructure to a level commensurate with the continent of which it is part.

... Otherwise, there's always this: Transborder Volleyball.

Damn, I was just about to post that...

First, the DHS awards Boeing with a contract to design an 'electronic wall' along the borders of Mexico and Canada, and now a real fence. Wonderful.

Want to know the best part? It'll be more "good for nothing wetbacks" who'll build that fence with your taxes.

On the other hand, it's got nothing to do with thinking we should be allowed to enter your country without papers as illegal immigrants. Our government is pissed off because they've worked for a long time with yours on building a stable relationship between our two nations. Less than six months ago there was some intense lobbying and negotiation to promote a regulation that would suit both the immigrants' need for work, and the employers' need for cheap labor. It was announce and greeted as a big improvement in the situation, and now this.

Basically these senators expect that after dangers too numerous to mention, a wall is going to stop anybody from trying to get to the other side.

I like the way you think.

Of course, Boeing!

I'll be surprised if this makes a dent in the illegal immigration issue. But, since politicians need their precious votes, why not waste more taxpayer money on something that won't work?

When the Republicans get their asses handed to them in November, there will be more important matters on the agenda--like holding Republicans accountable for fucking up our country.

This always amused me. All the people in favor of a full wall the length of, seem to forget the Rio Grande. Nice big river, so the erosion pretty much guarantees you can't build a fence on the banks. Building it south of the river means annexing from Mexico. Building north of it effectively cedes land.

Logistically, this is a waste of money and time. I can't see why anybody even bothers trying to do it.

But the 'wetbacks'...

It turns out that most people are really dumb.

Of course we could always just annex Mexico. Then the McDonalds in Mexico City would have to pay the same min wage as the one in Denver. It would increase the size of our great nation and give the Republicans a chance to say..."Hey. We care."


But then again. Maybe the fence is there to keep us in, instead of keeping them out.

Well that may be, but what were all forgetting is anyone that doesn't want to build this fence is gay.

I guess I like sucking cock then...

Hell, if the fence is like metal public property around here, "entrepreneurs" will routinely be removing huge sections and hauling it to scrap metal dealers.

It also turns out that a double fence with electric heat/motion sensors/microphones and a road running down the middle that can be manned by very few border patrol personnel has been a proven to work system.

But don't let reality or being informed mess up your anti-"Mexico picket fence" views.

I'd rather see stiffer penalities for companies that knowingly hire illegal immigrants, the decriminalization of migrant workers, and a requirement for migrant workers to be documented and recieve a fair wage and compensation.

the fence just seems like a lot of expenditure for not much return.

I really don't mind a fence....I mean really.....we're pretty croweded here and I know that we're supposed to be the home of the "tired the poor" etc. but we're running out of real-estate and there're starting to chop into safe havens for forrest critters. I know Mexicans are coming in here just to get better money but really shouldn't Mexico do something for there citizens. Why dosen't someone bring that up in a UN Debate? Although I will say a 700 ft fence thats supposed to cover 2000ft is kinda half assed..but I guess thats what the extra border patrol is for...but what about shovels and tunnels....the cartel get though no problem how do we know illegals won't use those same tunnels for payment in the future. America should be open to all people but it should limits per year. and there should be harsh penalites for illegals..becuase they would screw the whole thing up.

I'm pretty sure that, when an open space is demolished to make way for more homes, it's more likely to be for well off American citizens rather than illegal immigrant workers. That's just an assumption, of course.

I was the first one to vote in favor of building this fence.