Secure the border

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    July 2, 2013 4:26 p.m.

    VickieB said: The border patrol agents say that they are not allowed to turn back people, since the amnesty may affect them.
    How about a reference?

    @ vicky
    The Rio Grande Valley a stretch of border from Brownsville to Laredo on the southernmost tip of Texas; has become the agency's hottest area along the border. The Border Patrol's arrests of people trying to cross the border illegally jumped 65 percent in that area last year. At the end of May, sector Chief Patrol Agent Rosendo Hinojosa said agents had already made more than 90,000 apprehensions in the first eight months of the fiscal year, a 50 percent increase over the same period last year. (Published June 15, 2013 - Associated Press)

  • VickieB SLC, UT
    July 1, 2013 10:15 p.m.

    The border patrol agents say that they are not allowed to turn back people, since the amnesty may affect them. The administration mentioned a waiver yesterday for those arriving after December 31 2011. This amnesty is getting bigger and bigger.

    That's a huge waste of manpower. Instead of 20,000 new border patrol agents we need 20,000 new ICE agents and more judges along the southern border. Interior enforcement is just as important as a border fence. (Mexico liked our fence so much, they built their own on their southern border).

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    July 1, 2013 4:43 p.m.

    The FBI has 13,766 special agents. The Border Patrol will have more than two and a half times as many agents on the southwestern border alone as the FBI does to investigate crimes anywhere in the world. (And the Border Patrol is even bigger than that. It assigned an additional 2,430 agents in 2012 to the northern border and coastal regions, and its parent agency, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, has nearly 39,000 additional employees in the U.S. and around the world.)

    According to the International Water and Boundary Commission -- a bi-national body that oversees governance issues on the U.S.-Mexico border -- the border between the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico is is 1,954 miles long. That works out to 10.32 million feet.

    Doing the math, you could space out 37,716 agents one every 274 feet (or, using the widely published 40,000 figure, you could put them every 258 feet).

  • VickieB SLC, UT
    July 1, 2013 4:36 p.m.

    Eric Samuelsen;

    "We call things racism just to get attention. We reduce complicated problems to racism, not because it is racism, but because it works."

    --- Alfredo Gutierrez, political consultant

  • Eric Samuelsen Provo, UT
    July 1, 2013 3:57 p.m.

    Again, this mania for 'border security.' South, not north, obviously, because of the non-threatening skin color of most of our neighbors to the north.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    July 1, 2013 12:26 p.m.

    Go to U-tube and see a video that features Chuck Shummer giving a "we have to bring them out of the shadows" speech. Notice that he has a lot more hair. Care to guess why? It was from 1986 and he just gave the same speech again this year. So why do we not trust these fellows in Wash DC who keep repeating the same old same old? They don't have a good track record on the subject of illegal migration or amnesties (7). Immigration (legal) is doing just fine, maybe to tweak the numbers a bit. Immigration (legal) is what made this country great. I despise those (media) that keep lumping illegal migration and Immigration (legal) together as if it is the same thing. It Is Not!!

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 1, 2013 11:29 a.m.

    A fence isn't the only deterrent non-Democrat Americans want. But it's a visible symbol of our government's commitment to enforcing our borders, and a message to those who would cross illegally that we intend to enforce our borders.

    It won't fix everything (nobody said it would) but it isn't intended to be the only thing we do. But it's an important message that we intend to enforce our borders.

    Anybody who says non-Democrats think a fence will fix the problem... is full of partisan coolaid and doesn't care about the truth. We understand a fence won't "Fix" the problem. But it is a symbol or our government's commitment to enforcing our borders, and is something we'd like to see commitment to BEFORE we liberalize the "Path to Citizenship".

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    July 1, 2013 9:54 a.m.

    We don't have an illegal immigration problem, we have an illegal employer problem. Until you stop wrist slapping then go home and get back to me when you are serious. You regressives won't spend money on teaching our children, healing our neighbors, or feeding the elderly but you have no problem throwing money down a rabbit hole they call fencing the southern border. Go figure.
    wrz of Phoenix, just by quoting the vile you have nullified any credibility you thought you had.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    July 1, 2013 6:53 a.m.

    TS - Fence source= Sen. Lee's Rep in my city, and Sen Sessions. Past Amnesties = past actions on amnesty. The Bill lacks penalties for not enforceing (ho hum) provisions stated and ZERO additional ICE agents. Big question, why was Border Agents and Border Sherriffs not allowed into meet with those writing the bill (to give input since they do have some skin in the game)? Why was LaRaza invited to give their input, as well as certain unions who have an agenda not favorable to the unemployed citizen? What is the $5,000 fine for hiring citizens over legalized illegals? Why bring the bill out on a Friday night and call for a vote on Monday (try to get through to the phone lines of the Senators on a week end)? Just wondering.

    July 1, 2013 1:46 a.m.

    Here is the opt out.
    (5) LIMITATION ON REQUIREMENTS- Notwithstanding paragraph (1), nothing in this subsection shall require the Secretary to install fencing, or infrastructure that directly results from the installation of such fencing, in a particular location along the Southern border, if the Secretary determines that the use or placement of such resources is not the most appropriate means to achieve and maintain effective control over the Southern border at such location.

    It's the same type of opt out used in the 1986 amnesty.

    Obama did silent raids for a while, they audited business, gave them a small fine compared to their net income, and turned the people working there (illegally) loose.

    Swifts meat plant went out of business, a company from Brazil took it over, hired citizens, and has made record profits. Perhaps we are letting in the wrong group. We don't need illegal workers, we need illegal business owners.

  • wrz Pheonix, AZ
    July 1, 2013 12:33 a.m.

    "Liberals want the rest of the world's poor to come here not only to raise their children, clean their houses, manicure their lawns and cook their meals, but to give birth to the Democratic children that liberals aren't having [to expand their voting base]." - Ann Coulter

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 30, 2013 10:47 p.m.

    Roland Kayser,
    We've been prosecuting businesses caught hiring illegal aliens all along (both administrations). When the Obama administration OR the Bush Administration has conducted raids on companies they have evidence is hiring illegals (SLC Airport, Meat Packing plant in Logan, etc)... the radical-left comes to their defense, there's illegal sympathizers crying and gnashing their teeth on the TV every night at the prospect of the government harshly enforcing the law, the Democrat lawyers come out of the woodwork, and many of them end up staying.

    A recent DMN article stated that most of the people deported for working at the meat packing plant have since returned (again illegally). They are nervous about getting deported again, but they are back taking their chances that if they are here when the law passes they can stay forever.

    Don't blame Republicans for not raiding businesses, they've done it. But they get resistance from the left. Same has happened when Democrat administrations have done raids. The radical left just doesn't want immigration law enforced, plain and simple.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 30, 2013 6:18 p.m.

    To Fitness Freak: President Obama has prosecuted more businesses for violating immigration laws than any previous president.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    June 30, 2013 2:08 p.m.

    "Real Mav" is right this time. Its MUCH CHEAPER to arrest/prosecute (and highly publicize)a few employers who break labor and immigration laws, than use the excuse that we'll build a fence and maintain border security .......sometime.....IF we can afford it.

    However, the fact that Mr. Obama has NOT done that, tells me he has ABSOLUTELY NO intention of ever doing it. He has no excuse for not using the tools of enforcement at his disposal. Neither did George Bush for that matter.

    Real border security and immigration control is multi-faceted. It should be everything from border control measures to ICE agents doing stakeouts of the hardware store parking lots and arresting ANYONE who breaks the law.

    The problem is the government doesn't care, or (seemingly)doesn't want to know who's here illegally.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    June 30, 2013 12:05 p.m.

    Here's a crazy idea: employ an illegal worker? Lose your business and freedom. If businesses were ever punished you'd see an incredible drop in illegal immigration.

    Why not hire Americans? Why does big business fear this? Oh yeah, because then they'd have to pay them fair wages. And we all know how big business despises that. Your CEO will have to settle for a 599 foot yacht instead of the 600.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    June 30, 2013 10:47 a.m.



    What you wrote is flat out false.

    From Politifact:
    "R-Jeff Sessions said the immigration bill "has a specific provision that says that Secretary Napolitano does not have to build any fence if she chooses not to." His press secretary pointed to an "opt-out" provision in the bill.

    But it would take a dramatic leap of legal interpretation to argue that provision allows Napolitano to skip fence-building altogether. Legal experts we spoke to said, instead, it gives her discretion about WHERE to build border fencing."

    We rate Sessions’ claim False.

  • Star Bright Salt Lake City, Ut
    June 30, 2013 9:52 a.m.

    Kayser: And the border agents have been told to stand down and not arrest anyone. The border control agents are against this amnesty bill.
    Maybe sen hatch should read the bill before he supports it. Even one of the designers of the bill has said he doesn't understand parts of it. GREAT. Just as nancy pelousi said, "we have to pass it to see what's in it!"
    I'm sick of our legislators not doing their jobs and refusing to sit long enough to read it through.
    I challenge sen hatch to state that he has read all of it and understand what's in it.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    June 30, 2013 8:54 a.m.

    FACT: The amendment contains tangible, concrete triggers which ensure that Registered Provisional Immigrants (RPIs) cannot receive green cards until at least 10 years after the enactment of the bill, AND the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Defense, the Inspector General, and GAO, certifies that:

    An unprecedented surge of an additional 20,000 Border Patrol agents are deployed, maintained and stationed along the southern border.
    The Comprehensive Southern Border Security Strategy is deployed and operational, which includes, at a minimum, full implementation and activation of the $4.5 billion in specific technology and equipment requested by the Border Patrol to achieve full surveillance of the border.
    The Southern Border Fencing Strategy has been implemented, and at least 700 miles of fencing has been completed along the southern border.
    The mandated electronic visa entry/exit system has been fully implemented at all air and sea ports of entry where U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers are currently deployed, which will improve the identification of those who overstay their visas.
    E-Verify is being used by all employers in the country, making it virtually impossible to work in the United States illegally.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    June 30, 2013 8:52 a.m.

    Conservative leaders like Ralph Reed suppoted Republican Senators Haeven and Corker's amendment on border security.

    "Sessions said the immigration bill "has a specific provision that says that Secretary Napolitano does not have to build any fence if she chooses not to." His press secretary pointed to an "opt-out" provision in the bill.

    But it would take a dramatic leap of legal interpretation to argue that provision allows Napolitano to skip fence-building altogether. Legal experts we spoke to said, instead, it gives her discretion about where to build border fencing.

    We rate Sessions’ claim False."

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    June 30, 2013 7:54 a.m.

    So Gary just how high should the fence be, and just how much money should we spend to build a fence in a thousand foot ravine, and at what point is the border secure? This mania for border security is not conservative. There is nothing conservative about it except it's the old Republican trick of supply side economics. They are simply trying to solve a demand problem by cutting off the supply. Worked well in the drug war didn't it..well guess what it won't work here either. Pass reasonable laws and then spend your border security money to create workable systems of enforcement here.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    June 30, 2013 7:39 a.m.

    I agree. Hidden deep in the bowells of the 1200 page bill, that no one who voted for it has read, is the provision that if Janet "deems" the border is secure there will be no further fence or border security measures taken. Key word is deem and we all know how Harry will pass a bill that is deemed passed. Year 1986 "amnesty to end all amnesties" invited 1.8 million illegals to get amnesty. 3.2 million showed up and got amnesty. Year 2013 11.0 million are invited to the amnesty party and around 33.0 million will get it if Washington can't say no to illegal migration. Year 2040, past history shows that 65.0 million will be offered amnesty. Will the cycle ever end? With the likes of Orrin and Lindsay voting I doubt it. Too bad the citizens can't vote on such a measure.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 30, 2013 12:21 a.m.

    20 years ago we had 4000 border control agents. 10 years ago we had 10,000. Today we have 20,000. This bill is said to double the number, so we will have 40,000. We already spend more on border control than we do on any other law enforcement activity. Net migration from Mexico is currently right around zero, meaning there are as many people leaving as coming.

    All this brought to you by the people who say they want smaller government and less spending.