Wall Act
Today, GOP senators introduced the Wall Act.
Who’s Paying for the Wall?
“The WALL Act would fully fund the border wall by closing existing loopholes that provide illegal immigrants with federal benefits and tax credits, without affecting the benefits and tax credits used by Americans,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said in a statement on Thursday.
“If you want to receive food stamps and other benefits, then you should prove your citizenship. If you cross the border illegally or overstay your visit to this country, then you should pay a stiff penalty,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) added.
Wall Will Pay For Itself
Wait a second. Wasn’t Mexico Supposed to pay for it? https://t.co/oQE65FqsSg
— Mike “Mish” Shedlock (@MishGEA) December 6, 2018
Damn. I thought Mexico was supposed to pay for the wall. Well having a wall pay for itself, is the best of all world. Unless…
Nancy Pelosi Says Wall is Immoral
Nancy Pelosi says funding for Trump’s ‘immoral, ineffective, expensive’ border wall is off the tablehttps://t.co/l7MaB4UXL7
— Nancy Pelosi (@TeamPelosi) December 6, 2018
Republicans had a chance to pass the Wall. Now perhaps they don’t. Democrats will be back in control of the House.
Congress Passes Temporary Spending Bill
Meanwhile, as the debate over the wall continues, Congress Passes Temporary Spending Bill.
Congress passed a two-week spending patch on Thursday, all but ensuring the government will avoid a partial shutdown this weekend. Shortly after the House vote, the Senate passed the measure on a voice vote extending the government’s funding through Dec. 21. President Trump has said he would sign the short-term extension.
Seven spending bills are currently set to expire at 12:01 a.m. Saturday, as lawmakers face an impasse over whether to increase funding for border security. Mr. Trump has demanded $5 billion to build a wall along the border with Mexico, but Democrats have balked.
Both Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) have said they would be willing to pass the six less-controversial spending bills and extend current funding for the Homeland Security Department, which oversees the border wall, for one year.
Senate Majority Whip JohnCornyn (R., Texas) said a one-year extension of Homeland Security funding wouldn’t be acceptable to the White House. “I don’t think that’s acceptable and I can’t imagine the president will accept that,” Mr. Cornyn told reporters on Thursday. “I know Sen. Schumer is having a little difficulty with his conference.”
The last sweeping spending bill, which passed in March, included funding for new fencing and levee walls, as well as technology, but prohibited the administration from building a solid concrete border wall.
Not Acceptable?
Really? Trump won’t sign it? Or will he sign it and complain? What’s the current definition of acceptable?
I have a question for Pelosi as well:
How is it that a concrete wall is immoral but new razor wire fencing and levees are not.
It seems to me we have new definitions of “not acceptable” as well as what constitutes “immoral”.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
If Pelosi says the wall will be ineffective, the opposite is true.
Pelosi , I’ve got a question : how you call partial abortion if the wall is immoral ?
The funding amount for the wall is roughly equal to 3 days of interest on US gov’t debt. No one is opposed to the interest cost when we borrow money, but when the money is actually spent on something constructive, politicians are up in arms.
You can argue a wall is expensive and/or ineffective. However, as long as we have borders how can putting a wall on them be immoral? A wall is not a morality issue.
Unless 2Banana is correct I guess.
Ironically, if 2 is correct he should hope illegals keep pouring in because it keeps the red/blue game alive, something he’s always been strongly invested in.
In reality both fake parties have been complicit in this problem, every step of the way. The number of illegals in the US has reached 8 figures, something that couldn’t happen without massive collusion over an extended period of time.
No argument here.
Trump can always stop illegal immigration by carrying out extensive raids. Without jobs, even California will want to get rid of illegals because they will seriously drain the state’s welfare budget.
Sounds great. An armed police force raiding our homes and businesses and stopping us and we walk or drive down the street and demanding papers. Utopia!
“Raiding our homes” and “demanding papers”? TDS much? How about publicized weekly raids on businesses? That will give pause to employers hiring illegals. Without jobs, there will never be 22 million illegals in this country.
This is correct thinking, that going after employers would be by far the most effective way to curb illegal immigration, a means of striking at the root of the issue. Of course, we also know this will never happen. If anyone actually wanted to stop illegal immigration, this method would have been attempted decades ago. Instead the endless stream of muttered excuses, finger pointing, and foot dragging will continue unabated.
Trump can start by raiding his own homes and businesses… NYTimes has a story that Trump knowingly keeps illegal immigrants on staff.
Another one with TDS.
The last time we had a Republican president and Democrat house, you got the financial crisis. This time will be worse I predict.
nice observation
And then there was Hoover as well as Nixon but the Fed is usually to blame and not the President who happens to get the short stick.
What’s worse than a politician claiming protecting our border is immoral? The people that vote for them.
“I thought Mexico was supposed to pay for the wall.”
Being pedantic (sorry!), there are more ways to ‘pay’ for something than sending a check. You can, for instance, cease receiving foreign aid — or stop offloading your undesirables on to your neighbors.
Stopping them from entering is better than letting them come in so the wall is good. So say they do get in legally or illegality the older ones jump on SSI and drain the system of our resources. The free stuff needs to stop.
Good, stop the free stuff, for everyone! Many problems solved.
By now, everybody should be realizing that “The Wall” is just rhetoric. They have done this before, they will keep doing it, and if they ever fund it, the funding will be diverted or taken away by a subsequent bill. It is a great cover story to keep the Israeli plundering of our Treasury out of the news though.
It is “immoral” because it may delay a few illegal immigrant democrat votes in the 2020 election or slow the growth of the free sh*t army – which vote 100% for democrats.
“This looks like a good thing. It’s shocking that the loopholes existed in the first place.” There are all kinds of idiocies like this. Some including illegal “earned income” refunds that go straight to Mexico.
The only loophole that I’m aware of is that an illegal who is a parent or guardian of a citizen minor who is eligible for benefits can manage the benefits on behalf of the minor. In no way can they get their own benefits. So I guess they would just need to find a legal immigrant or citizen to accept and manage the child’s benefits.