TOPICS
TOPICS
Senate sends Homeland Security spending bill to Obama
The Senate gave overwhelming approval Tuesday to a final $42.8 billion fiscal 2010 Homeland Security spending bill after an extended protest by Republicans over the removal of provisions during closed-door conference talks among House and Senate appropriators.
The 79-19 vote sent the bill to President Obama for signing. The House approved the bill last week by a 307-114 margin.
The bill includes language permitting detainees held at the U.S. military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to be brought to the United States for trial.
While that drew considerable attention when the House took up the bill, much of the debate preceding the Senate vote appeared to be orchestrated by several Republican senators who were upset over provisions left out of the conference agreement with the House.
"We're learning there's almost nothing politicians won't do to get out of promises they make in the daylight," said Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., complaining that conferees dropped a provision that would have required the Homeland Security Department to build 700 miles of double-layered reinforced fencing along the southern border.
DeMint reminded senators that a majority of the Senate voted to include the provision in the spending bill.
One of the dropped provisions to draw protests would have permanently reauthorized the E-Verify electronic system employers can use to verify the legal status of their workers. Another would have required employers to take action if the Social Security number provided by a worker did not match records with the Social Security Administration.
"People can have little confidence based on our votes here on the Senate floor," said Sen. David Vitter, R-La. "The conference committee work can be diametrically opposed to it on issue after issue."
But in the end, Vitter voted for the spending bill; DeMint voted against it.
Perhaps the only real surprise was the return of Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., to manage floor debate on the spending bill.
Appearing lucid and relaxed, Byrd defended the decision to remove language from the bill requiring 700 miles of double-layered fencing, calling it "too proscriptive and too costly." The bill includes funding to build a virtual fence along the border and to hire more Border Patrol officers, he said.
"The conference report strongly supports all aspects -- all aspects -- of border security and immigration enforcement," Byrd said.
COMMENTS
- Just one question to our leadership! Why do we need to create more bureaucracy when we have at least 20 organizations already that do this type work. If the FBI,CIA,DEA,INS,FDA,TSA National Guard,Reserve,ARMY,Navy,Air Force,Marines and who knows who else we dont know about Homeland Security will not make me feel safer but it sure the heck is making it tougher to put food on the table! When is enough enough when are we going to quit being so paranoid and rely on each other for help after all thats what we do as Americans. I believe if the guys on the planes during 9/11 where told how this was playing out earlier most of those terrorist would not have completed their missions. We dont need TSA we dont need to take more rights away from Americans. We just need to get back to helping your neighbor protecting not just your children but someone elses you dont even know. We have become a society of greedy people only caring about ourselves not looking to the future or how we can help. We are made up of everyone in this world we are tolerant of all however if a particular group is targeting our people they should be dealt with swiftly and not considered evil for profiling a particular group if I where in that group I would understand. No wonder the world views us as weak look at how we fix our problems throw money at it that cost us more and more money we dont have most Americans are bleeding now feeding our families is becoming priority and the American dream is taking a back seat. What has happen to us? Do we really need this bureauracracy to keep us safe wouldnt it be cheaper to have an air marshall on all flights or let the pilots arm themselves or maybe even the public. I will say this! that day will never happen again. I can promise the terrorist will not be successful a matter of fact you will need a coroner not the police when the plane lands if we dont push them out at 10 thousand feet. The American public showed you how we will react in the future to such a thing when the brave men on that plane realized how this was going down and did something about it that is the Americans I know. Stop asking the government to bail us out of everything that only cost you more of what little you make now handle things ourselves. After all we have been doing that since this countries conception so what has changed besides bureauracracy/Greed. LC Posted October 22, 2009 9:10 AM
- Robert Byrd is an imbecile and this proves it: "Byrd defended the decision to remove language from the bill requiring 700 miles of double-layered fencing, calling it "too proscriptive and too costly." The bill includes funding to build a virtual fence along the border and to hire more Border Patrol officers, he said." Yet, the Dems are prepared to spend TRILLIONS of our tax dollars to fund their economic train wrecks such as government-run health care and government takeovers of corporations and industry. (aka "bailouts") A "virtual border"? Is that like a "virtual politician with no brains"? SFC MAC Posted October 21, 2009 9:34 PM
- This administration does not want to secure our borders, from the Pres to the DHS sec to the Atty Gen they want the borders opened, they want illegals in our country, they want to facilitate the destruction of our way of life so that the Govt can take care of us, all hail MAO! gunnylav Posted October 21, 2009 6:54 PM
