• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Our borders have to be controlled,

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Panhandle Congressman Fields
Questions On Border Back Home

By David Bowser

AMARILLO — A U.S. Congressman home over the weeklong Memorial Day holiday wanted to talk about Iraq, but at a press conference in his office here, many of the questions were about border security.

"The House passed a bill in December," Rep. Mac Thornberry said of immigration.

The Senate passed a much different bill as Congress adjourned for Memorial Day.

"Now, the question is can there be enough agreement in the two bills so that there really is something that a majority of both houses can agree on?" Thornberry said. "I think it's too early to say."

Thornberry said he thinks Congress will have to deal with border enforcement issues along with government's processes, before citizenship issues can be addressed.

"If we're going to set up a way for people to apply for something or to have some sort of identification, the government's going to have to have its act together, and it doesn't right now," Thornberry said.

People who try to follow the rules concerning citizenship or even entry into the U.S. now often wait months if not years for a background check, he noted.

Thornberry said those two things — border security and a workable governmental process to deal with aliens — have to be worked out before the rest of the discussion is relevant.

"Our borders have to be controlled, and the government processes have to work," Thornberry said. "Then we have to figure out a guest worker program, what we do with people who are already here, but if you don't have the first two done, the rest of it doesn't seem to matter."

The Immigration and Naturalization Service, Thornberry pointed out, still uses paper files, and they lose them.

"There's no central database," Thornberry said.

The Congressman said he was told by an irate employer a few weeks ago that the employer spent five hours on the telephone just trying to verify a social security number.

"That's not going to work," Thornberry said. "If we're going to have a guest worker program, it has to be a fast, efficient way for the government to interact with employers as well as with the people who are actually applying. Government does not have its act together at this point to be able to do that."

He said Congress can't enact a program and hope the government catches up when so much of it depends upon government interaction with people.

The Mexican border, Thornberry said, is not the only border he's concerned about.

"We tend to focus on the southern border, and it's a much bigger problem than that," Thornberry insisted.

About 40 percent of the people who are in the U.S. illegally are students or workers who came to the U.S. legally and overstayed their visas.

"They are people who were students or workers and did not leave at the time their visas expired or they did not renew their visas," Thornberry said. "We've got to figure out a way to keep track of them."

Thornberry is also concerned about the Canadian border.

"We don't focus on it as much," he said. "There are clearly not the numbers of people coming across there, but some people think that maybe our more dangerous vulnerability for Homeland Security is our northern border."

Thornberry said there is the danger of focusing on one part of a problem and missing the larger implications.

"If we're going to deal with this, we have to look at those bigger issues," Thornberry said, "and not just focus on our border with Mexico."

Thornberry said he's been disappointed with the lack of help from the Mexican government concerning the border situation.

"I don't think there has been as much cooperation as we would like between the Mexican government and the United States," Thornberry opined. "One of the things that has really escalated in the last or so has been the lawlessness on our southern border. Drug gangs have taken over whole towns."

Part of Thornberry's concern is that degree of lawlessness.

"To be fair," he said, "Mexico has its own problems. It has lots of folks coming from Central America across its southern border."

Thornberry said those people who say economic development in Mexico and Central America is the key long-term part of the solution are right.

"The problem is," he said, "I don't think we can wait for decades for living standards in those places to come up to the point where people no longer want to come here to work."

The House immigration bill and the Senate immigration bills will have to go to a conference committee to be worked out, but Thornberry questions whether a compromise can be reached.

"I don't know," Thornberry said. "It is a real question whether we can solve the whole immigration problem in one swoop with one bill. Some people think it's even dangerous to try."

He said Congress should focus on border security and interior enforcement and an efficient guest worker program.

"If you can start with that," Thornberry said, "these other issues related to what happens to the people who are already here we can deal with."

He questions the importance of moves allowing immigrants to become U.S. citizens.

"A lot of people who come here don't really want to be citizens," Thornberry pointed out. "They come here to feed their families. They come here to work and support themselves and their families. If there were an efficient way to facilitate that, it causes your illegal immigrant population to go down considerably."

A guest worker program, government processes and border security are the top tier of Thornberry's concerns about immigration.

He supports fences on the border as a part of border security.

"Absolutely," he said. "It's in both the House and Senate bills."

Thornberry said fences have made differences along the southern border of the U.S.

"I don't think anybody said there ought to be a fence all the way around this country," Thornberry said, "but there are some places where fences have already made a big difference."

He cites Southern California between San Diego and Tijuana.

"They had tremendous problems there," Thornberry said. "They completed a fence, a physical barrier, and it made a huge difference."

Thornberry said that in important, strategic locations, physical barriers along with unmanned flights and increased Border Patrol personnel, fences are effective.

"All of those things are needed and will certainly help," he declared.

As to what type of fence, the Congressman said there should be different types of fence in different areas. That, he said, should be left to the Border Patrol's discretion.

"The Border Patrol people think that physical barriers can reduce the illegal smuggling, which unfortunately has resulted in too many people dying," Thornberry said. "They're left out in the desert. There are people who prey on these folks who want to come here to work. To have more physical barriers, they believe, can diminish that somewhat."

He said money to pay for part of this has been included in the supplemental bill, the same supplemental bill that funds operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, hurricane relief and wildfire relief.

The problem, he notes, is that these programs are expensive.

"Money only comes from one place," Thornberry reminded, "the people who earn it. Government gets its money no other way."

Even if it's borrowing, it ultimately comes from the taxpayers, he said.

"It's the only place it comes from. My feeling is that being able to control who and what comes across our border is a high enough national priority that I'm willing to elevate that and do without some other things. That's part of what we go through in this endless budget cycle it seems like in Congress every year."

Corporate revenues coming into the federal government have nearly doubled what was projected for this fiscal year.

The economy is growing, Thornberry said.

"I would not favor new, higher taxes," he continued. "I would say the best thing for government finances is to not have higher taxes."

But he said there is support for spending more money on border security.

The trick for Congress is to sustain those funds to get the job done, Thornberry said.

"You're not going to solve this problem overnight," he said. "You're going to have to keep putting more resources into it. It's not a one-shot deal. Funding is going to have to continue."

Thornberry said there are parts of the House immigration bill that still need work.

"There are a couple of reimbursement issues in the House bill that I think need to be fleshed out," Thornberry said.

One concerns landowner losses due to illegal immigration. The other is reimbursing local law enforcement agencies.

"There's a program in there to try to reimburse local law enforcement agencies," Thornberry said.

If the federal government is not doing its job and the sheriff's got to, the sheriff, or the county, needs to be reimbursed, Thornberry avowed.

The other would compensate landowners up to $50,000 for damage to their property caused by illegal immigration.

"Exactly what they'll be reimbursed for and how it works," Thornberry said, "that needs to be worked on."

He said he doesn't know if smugglers driving through and taking out a quarter-mile of barbed wire fence or cutting fences would be reimbursable.

"I don't know," Thornberry said.

The local issue Thornberry faces is funding relief for ranchers who suffered losses from huge wildfires that burned off almost a million acres of pasture, thousands of miles of fence, destroyed homes and caused 12 deaths in March.

Thornberry tried to get emergency relief for his district while the fires were still burning, but he ran into procedural problems. The first problem was that no one knew the extent of damage. Estimates varied widely, and it took time to reach a final figure.

Now, those emergency funds are part of the supplemental appropriations bill that is expected to pass this month. The question is whether the wildfire emergency relief will remain in the bill.

"We are trying to see if we can work a way to have some livestock assistance for the people who lost animals," Thornberry said. "There are other kinds of assistance that are available for fences and things like that. We continue to work on that."

Federal financial aid for Texas Panhandle ranchers is tied up with the supplemental bill that funds the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and relief for victims of Hurricane Katrina.

"Within the next month or so," Thornberry said, "Congress should pass the Emergency Supplemental Bill, which is for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and Hurricane Katrina relief."

Area ranchers can see some aid in connection with their losses due to the wildfires that swept the Texas Panhandle, he said.

"My hope is that we can get some assistance from that bill," Thornberry said, "because if we don't catch this train, then the next one doesn't come until October."

"That's not to diminish the assistance that's already there," Thornberry said. "USDA has rearranged some funds. FEMA has come in with some housing assistance. A significant amount of help has already come. For this extra livestock assistance, I'm hoping we can do it before long."

Thornberry also addressed the next farm bill that's being developed on Capitol Hill.

"The farm bill does not expire until a year from September," Thornberry said. "The ag committee is going around the country and taking input, listening to everybody."

Thornberry has introduced a measure that would extend the existing farm bill until after there is a World Trade Agreement.

"What I don't want to see happen is going to all the trouble to write a new farm bill, have a new World Trade Agreement, and have to go back to the drawing board and do a different farm bill right after that. It seems to me that if we keep what we've got, and then see what the World Trade Agreement is, then we can work on a farm bill."

Not much has happened with Thornberry's bill, but he thinks that as time goes on and the deadline for a new farm bill draws near, his alternative will become more attractive.

"What we've got is working pretty well," Thornberry opined.

He said his bill is not tied to a date, but it is tied to an event, a world trade agreement.

A new farm bill, he said, would be drawn up a year after the U.S. ratifies a world trade agreement on agriculture.

"It's event-driven, not time-driven," Thornberry said. "That way we know what the rules are and then we can write a farm bill that meets those rules."

Other congressmen, he said, have written bills that are time-driven.
 

Steve

Well-known member
A new farm bill, he said, would be drawn up a year after the U.S. ratifies a world trade agreement on agriculture.

"It's event-driven, not time-driven," Thornberry said. "That way we know what the rules are and then we can write a farm bill that meets those rules."

like the Illigal Immigration issue,,where politicians listened to Non Citizens, they want to write a farm Bill dictated by a world trade agreement ...

what ever Happened to being our representative?

they do not represent Illigals, or a world trade organization.....they are elected to represent US.....
 

Silver

Well-known member
I agree with you guys on this one. I know I would sure be happy to see Canada beef up border security as well. The events of the last few days have really shown the true threats that are out there. Judging by the amount of active terrorist organizations that lie between our collective borders, now more than ever we need to be aware of what is going on.
On top of that, the amount of things being smuggled north and south of the 49th is truely troubling.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
Ofcourse the US wouldn't have to participate in a world trade agreement on ag, but if we do participate (we will and should) the farm bill should be compliant. So crafting the farm bill after the trade deal makes sense. What farmers are afraid of is leaving negotiators the lattitude to radically reduce payments. So some want a farm bill all porked to hell so that the trade agreement will be crafted to allow such.


As for border control, don't hold your breath. The GDP increase that illegals offer Mexico is astounding. And too many of the wrong people in the US benefit from wage depressing influx of unskilled labor.

I was up to Vancouver last month, and they tell me I'll have to have a passport after the first of 07 so it appears law abiding citizens will be nonterrorists.
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
The idea of World Trade Ag Bills are to give you export markets.
These terrorests they caught in Canada and in Great Britin where rich and or middle class second generation Muslim citizens.
I think America has the same problem?
Making Faster Horses Grandmother or my Wife get a passport is not going to help with security.
I think its time we forget about this political correct nonsense and start profiling.
America has how many Muslims citizens? 350 million?
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
Like Silver, I also have no problam with the border security being beefed-up.Once everyone knows this,accepts it and gets thier passports in order,it sure won't hurt and very well may help.Once the passports are in place crossing the border,should be no harder for normal citizens then it was before.


The only constant in our life is change,we have to learn to accept that and go along with it!
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
No way im going to buy a passport just to go across the line.
Even if only 1% of the Muslims already living in North America get sucked into the Jhad. Thats a lot of terrorest. How does a passport stop anything?
They recruit, train and conspire over the internet which has no borders.
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
RoperAB said:
No way im going to buy a passport just to go across the line.
Even if only 1% of the Muslims already living in North America get sucked into the Jhad. Thats a lot of terrorest. How does a passport stop anything?
They recruit, train and conspire over the internet which has no borders.
Do you remember after 911,Canada got blamed for allowing,terrorists to freely cross the border?? The passports will help this,then the only ones they can blame are themselves!

Roper your a rebel,you going to sneak across the border and get the wife to pick you up down the road :wink: :p
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Passports may slow down the occasional vacationer that might want to cross the border-- They may decide to spend that cost in the home country if it costs $300-350 to get passports for a family of 4 for just a vacation......Altho I heard they are trying to get Customs to develop a special US/Canada passport at a cheaper cost (about $35), but I heard Customs has fought that.....

Won't bother me any- nothing north of the border I haven't seen that I need to see- and without the huge money exchange there is no reason to even go north anymore....
 

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
While I think the Canadian border also needs to be tightened, Hay Maker's post was more concerned with our southern border. A friend of mine sent me this letter to the editor he copied from his newspaper. It explains border security better than all the stuff you hear on TV:

"Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration. Certain people are angry that the U.S. might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely. Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests.

Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors; I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house)."

According to the protesters, not only must you let me stay, you must add me to your family's insurance plan and provide other benefits to me and to my family (my husband will do your yard work because he too is hard-working and honest, (except for that breaking in part).
If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my right to be there - and accuse you of being a racist. It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm hard-working and honest ... um, except for .. well, you know.

And what a deal it is for me!! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness, prejudice and being anti-housebreaker.

Did I miss anything?

Does this sound reasonable to you?

If it does, grab a sign and go picket something.

If this sounds insane to you, call your senators and enlighten them because they are stumbling in the darkness right now and really need your help."
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
I agree completely that our borders need to be secured. I've been complaining about that since I started posting on this board: as Bush scares the American people with threats of attacks from terrorists, he refused to increase funding for the Border Patrol! Excerpts; my emphasis.

These facts from National Review Online (not a liberal site by any stretch).

"For instance, in the years 1995, 1996, and 1997, there were between 10,000 and 18,000 worksite arrests of illegals annually. In the same years about 1,000 employers were served notices of fines for employing them. Under the Bush administration, worksite arrests fell to 159 in 2004 when there was also the princely total of three notices of intent to fine served on employers."

"As my old National Review colleague Ed Rubenstein points out, these figures show that worksite arrests under Bush have fallen from Clintonian levels by something like 97 percent — even though September 11 occurred in the meantime."

"This dramatic relaxation of internal enforcement explains the rapidly rising estimate of immigrants living and working illegally in the U.S. In the last year it has risen by more than a million. For if people know that they are likely to be safe from enforcement once they escape the border area and reach L.A. or Chicago, then they will keep trying even if they were caught and returned to their country of origin any number of times."


When are you Bush supporters going to get tired of being jerked around by the Bush Administration and Republican Party?

Read the whole thing at:

http://www.nationalreview.com/jos/osullivan200604281356.asp
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
Mrs.Greg said:
RoperAB said:
No way im going to buy a passport just to go across the line.
Even if only 1% of the Muslims already living in North America get sucked into the Jhad. Thats a lot of terrorest. How does a passport stop anything?
They recruit, train and conspire over the internet which has no borders.
Do you remember after 911,Canada got blamed for allowing,terrorists to freely cross the border?? The passports will help this,then the only ones they can blame are themselves!

Roper your a rebel,you going to sneak across the border and get the wife to pick you up down the road :wink: :p

After 9/11 we got blamed for lax immigration, example losing track of refugees who entered Canada by sea and by air from Countries other than the United States. Example they would apply for refugee statis and then just disapear never to be heard from again. As far as im concerned we should do like other nations and contain them in detainment camps until they are either determined to be fit for citizenship or deported.
I agreed with the criticism and I still think lots should be done about who we allow into the country. But the people coming to Canada that im worried about are not coming from America.
Canada US Customs is intergrated anyway. When you cross that border if you look suspicous and if they want to do a criminal check on you they can punch your info into their computer and they have access to every bit of information on you anyways.
I only see passports useful for stopping cross border shopping<tourests>.
You know up until a few years ago we used to go down and compete in the Black Powder Cartridge Rifle shoots<buffalo guns> that were held all over MT. No hassles at the border. Actually one of the American border guards at Sweetgrass MT. was an active BPCR shooter. According to him on the southern border with Mexico they were even getting shot at by snipers on the Mexican side. I dont know how anybody could compare the Mexican border to the Canadian one?
Anyway my point is that its crazy that border guards have to spend as much time on me as they do with someone who is obviously Muslim just because if they dont, the Political Correct crowd would be screaching. Screw em and lets start using some common sense.
But if they want to do the passport thing with everybody then thats fine with me. But im not going to buy a passport just so I can go to Montana and buy stuff.
 

RoperAB

Well-known member
Disagreeable said:
I agree completely that our borders need to be secured. I've been complaining about that since I started posting on this board: as Bush scares the American people with threats of attacks from terrorists, he refused to increase funding for the Border Patrol! Excerpts; my emphasis.

These facts from National Review Online (not a liberal site by any stretch).

"For instance, in the years 1995, 1996, and 1997, there were between 10,000 and 18,000 worksite arrests of illegals annually. In the same years about 1,000 employers were served notices of fines for employing them. Under the Bush administration, worksite arrests fell to 159 in 2004 when there was also the princely total of three notices of intent to fine served on employers."

"As my old National Review colleague Ed Rubenstein points out, these figures show that worksite arrests under Bush have fallen from Clintonian levels by something like 97 percent — even though September 11 occurred in the meantime."

"This dramatic relaxation of internal enforcement explains the rapidly rising estimate of immigrants living and working illegally in the U.S. In the last year it has risen by more than a million. For if people know that they are likely to be safe from enforcement once they escape the border area and reach L.A. or Chicago, then they will keep trying even if they were caught and returned to their country of origin any number of times."


When are you Bush supporters going to get tired of being jerked around by the Bush Administration and Republican Party?

Read the whole thing at:

http://www.nationalreview.com/jos/osullivan200604281356.asp

Just to be clear
Things are not that bad in Canada that <real>Canadians are illegally crossing into the USA for work.
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
Right you are reader,Canada is too lax in letting just about anybody immigrate to our country.Our daughter works on a reclamation site,Altas. Safety laws require a hard hat on the site,the truck drivers are predominatly turban wearers that REFUSE to follow the hardhat rule,they call discrimination if asked to :evil: I see no problam with the passport rule,at least both borders can stop someone from entering if they deem them suspicious.......Roper I doute you'd count as being a suspious character,well maybe...post a pic and we'll deciede :p
 

Brad S

Well-known member
First, I think none of the 9/11 scum came through Canada. Canada and the US are both learning to impede terrorists, and this is a tough balance between freedom and law enforcement. But once a bad guy is in either country, the border is simply too vast and rugged to control passage from one country to the other. We need cooperation and help between the 2 countries, and I think this is going on.
 

nonothing

Well-known member
funny how it was ok to land EVERY single plane over american skys in canada the day of 911....who cares if they had bombs aboard .dont land them in usa,fly them to canada...then to tell us that the perputrators of 911 came from canada,which was wrong but never apologies for,was a nice thank you....tie down the borders if it saves lives,if thats the only solution,then its a no brainer....Passports do not stop terroists,Timothy McVeigh for instance could of had an updated passport,would it of stopped him?.....piont is,the only way to fight outside terrorism is through stealth like war fare....taking out top members of these groups,with percise unseen attacks.Infilltrating there dens.Assinating those who harbour such types...fear is only way you can deal with this.and i know some will die for their so called cause,but many wont..take out the ones who fear,but who also protect and you will see how easy it is to find the bad ones.who are unprotected and now in the open.






Broke cowboy,this is just my opinion and i may be way off.Go easy on me,but it is the only way i see to rid the world of this problem....
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Liberty Belle said:
While I think the Canadian border also needs to be tightened, Hay Maker's post was more concerned with our southern border. A friend of mine sent me this letter to the editor he copied from his newspaper. It explains border security better than all the stuff you hear on TV:

"Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration. Certain people are angry that the U.S. might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely. Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests.

Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors; I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house)."

According to the protesters, not only must you let me stay, you must add me to your family's insurance plan and provide other benefits to me and to my family (my husband will do your yard work because he too is hard-working and honest, (except for that breaking in part).
If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my right to be there - and accuse you of being a racist. It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm hard-working and honest ... um, except for .. well, you know.

And what a deal it is for me!! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness, prejudice and being anti-housebreaker.

Did I miss anything?

Does this sound reasonable to you?

If it does, grab a sign and go picket something.

If this sounds insane to you, call your senators and enlighten them because they are stumbling in the darkness right now and really need your help."

LibertyBelle,is correct,it's our southern border that is our #1 concern here in the south,govenor Perry just come up with an idea that is unique,the state of TX will start installing cameras "vandal proof" I suppose,... along the Mexican border,these cameras will not only be monitored by the border patrol they will also be monitored via a website that anyone can watch with their "PC" there will be a toll free number for people to call in suspicious activity ................good luck


PS now if I could just talk them into pointing those cameras at the few skinny ole cows we have left down there I would feel like my tax dollars are working for a change.
 

nonothing

Well-known member
HAY MAKER said:
Liberty Belle said:
While I think the Canadian border also needs to be tightened, Hay Maker's post was more concerned with our southern border. A friend of mine sent me this letter to the editor he copied from his newspaper. It explains border security better than all the stuff you hear on TV:

"Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration. Certain people are angry that the U.S. might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely. Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests.

Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors; I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house)."

According to the protesters, not only must you let me stay, you must add me to your family's insurance plan and provide other benefits to me and to my family (my husband will do your yard work because he too is hard-working and honest, (except for that breaking in part).
If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my right to be there - and accuse you of being a racist. It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm hard-working and honest ... um, except for .. well, you know.

And what a deal it is for me!! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness, prejudice and being anti-housebreaker.

Did I miss anything?

Does this sound reasonable to you?

If it does, grab a sign and go picket something.

If this sounds insane to you, call your senators and enlighten them because they are stumbling in the darkness right now and really need your help."

LibertyBelle,is correct,it's our southern border that is our #1 concern here in the south,govenor Perry just come up with an idea that is unique,the state of TX will start installing cameras "vandal proof" I suppose,... along the Mexican border,these cameras will not only be monitored by the border patrol they will also be monitored via a website that anyone can watch with their "PC" there will be a toll free number for people to call in suspicious activity ................good luck


PS now if I could just talk them into pointing those cameras at the few skinny ole cows we have left down there I would feel like my tax dollars are working for a change.


self policing only leads to huge mistakes,The only way people will stay home,is if staying home is equal or better....why not look at getting a solid goverment in there....if they can have ranches on the usa side of the border...why cant they do same on thier side.....Cropution needs to be defeated and pro active initiatives need to be developed......it has many things to over,probably one of the most attractive coastlines in the world....I know its more than a daunting task,but what is the annswer...using tax dollars to fight at the border is,in my opinion(broke cowboy,i said my opinion,so be nice),a losing battle.



and to LB,what if home is dirty,food is spioled,you work hard but watch the flies land on everything you own.What if police walk into your home and trash it just to get you to tow their line....to watch your 4 yearold son look pregant cause he cant get proper food.....say out your window is the view of grade five students picking through the dump to find their lunch...and the just over the fence are green gardens and shots to fight of desaeses that cripple your child.....the only thing you have to offer is the sweat off your back......
Just maybe LB you may hop the fence too....understand the differences to understand the problem.......feed the border towns.give them simple medical help and fix up their cummunities,make the water safe to drink....make dumps,dumps.not buffetts...and build the youth of the border towns through education....ask your neighbors like canada to help ..they will...It is better to build a boy then mend a man....maybe the money allocated should be looked at pro activly....and shame on you LB i know your a sitting rep,but at least if your gonna make decisions for others,you should find compassion in down trodding lifes not just sweeping them under rugs and calling them criminals.I wonder what jesus would think of your lack of vision and caring....staying is not an option for anyone...its time to build up north america.....and its not just the USA, but Canada needs to step up to.....
 
Top