The Border Bill

The “bipartisan conference” has laboured mightily and brought forth the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019” [PDF], “Making further continuing appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for fiscal year 2019, and for other purposes”.  It is—wait for it—one thousand, one hundred and fifty-nine pages long.  As Byron York notes,  congressreptiles will have only 40 hours to try to figure out what’s in it before voting on it.

“The wall”, such as it is, is on page 33 (Sec. 230), with a total of US$ $2,370,222,000, or which US$ “1,375,000,000 is for the construction of primary pedestrian fencing, including levee pedestrian fencing, in the Rio Grande Valley Sector”.  Sec. 231, immediately following, lists specific places in which no fencing will be built.

What’s in the other 1157 pages?  Who knows?  I just scrolled to a page (110) at random and came across “to study how mangroves, kelp forests, tidal marshes, and seagrass meadows could help deacidify the oceans”.  Then on page 112,

Sec. 771. Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall submit to Congress a report describing the ways in which conservation programs administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service may be better used for the conservation of ocelots (Leopardus pardalis) and any action taken by the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service relating to the conservation of ocelots.

Dealing with the pressing problems of the nation!

Post any gems you find in the comments.

6+

Users who have liked this post:

  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar

Author: John Walker

Founder of Ratburger.org, Autodesk, Inc., and Marinchip Systems. Author of The Hacker's Diet. Creator of www.fourmilab.ch.

6 thoughts on “The Border Bill”

  1. A sure consequence of a 20% reduction in detainment beds is increased release of criminals into our country.  Trump won’t sign that.  I’m betting he’s got a gimlet eye on the cluttered “wall” language as well.  One bazillion percent surety now that the Uniparty remains ascendant.

     

    Too late now, but Trump should have slapped Ryan the Traitor around mercilessly.  I’m having difficulty prioritizing my hate now, there are so many choices!  GOP, Congress, the media, Chelsea, and on and on and on and on.  Much more of this tripe that passes for governance and I’ll be cozying back up with Coulter.

    5+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  2. In the border part, it has “Contains language allowing only fencing designs in use as of 2017″ (From Conservative treehouse, which also has the full pdf)

    In other words, ignore what the Border agents have been asking for.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  3. There’s an amnesty Trojan horse on page 24.

    Sec. 224. (a) None of the funds provided by this Act or any other Act, or provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the United States derived by the collection of fees available to the components funded by this Act, may be used by the Secretary of Homeland Security to place in detention, remove, refer for a decision whether to initiate removal proceedings, or initiate removal proceedings against a sponsor, potential sponsor, or member of a household of a sponsor or potential sponsor of an unaccompanied alien child (as defined in section 462 (g) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g))) based on information shared by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

    Got that?  Suppose you’re in the U.S. illegally. All you have to do to prevent detention or deportation for you and all members of your household is to “sponsor” or become a “potential sponsor” of an unaccompanied alien minor who shows up at the border.  Now the child gets in and the whole “sponsor” family gets amnesty.  What do you think this is going to do to the flow of unaccompanied minors across the border?

    4+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  4. John Walker:
    There’s an amnesty Trojan horse on page 24.

    Sec. 224. (a) None of the funds provided by this Act or any other Act, or provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the United States derived by the collection of fees available to the components funded by this Act, may be used by the Secretary of Homeland Security to place in detention, remove, refer for a decision whether to initiate removal proceedings, or initiate removal proceedings against a sponsor, potential sponsor, or member of a household of a sponsor or potential sponsor of an unaccompanied alien child (as defined in section 462 (g) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g))) based on information shared by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

    Got that?  Suppose you’re in the U.S. illegally. All you have to do to prevent detention or deportation for you and all members of your household is to “sponsor” or become a “potential sponsor” of an unaccompanied alien minor who shows up at the border.  Now the child gets in and the whole “sponsor” family gets amnesty.  What do you think this is going to do to the flow of unaccompanied minors across the border?

    After the useless Republicans pass this piece of junk, Trump needs to veto it.

    4+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  5. John Walker:
    There’s an amnesty Trojan horse on page 24.

    Sec. 224. (a) None of the funds provided by this Act or any other Act, or provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the United States derived by the collection of fees available to the components funded by this Act, may be used by the Secretary of Homeland Security to place in detention, remove, refer for a decision whether to initiate removal proceedings, or initiate removal proceedings against a sponsor, potential sponsor, or member of a household of a sponsor or potential sponsor of an unaccompanied alien child (as defined in section 462 (g) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g))) based on information shared by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

    Got that?  Suppose you’re in the U.S. illegally. All you have to do to prevent detention or deportation for you and all members of your household is to “sponsor” or become a “potential sponsor” of an unaccompanied alien minor who shows up at the border.  Now the child gets in and the whole “sponsor” family gets amnesty.  What do you think this is going to do to the flow of unaccompanied minors across the border?

    This is a poison pill.   Even if the wall were built, this would open the gates and prevent any meaningful enforcement, and it is a recipe to create an even larger market for the trafficking of children to be used as shills.

    President Trump needs to veto this bill.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar

Leave a Reply