About Me

My photo
Beverly Hills, California, United States
Eli Kantor is a labor, employment and immigration law attorney. He has been practicing labor, employment and immigration law for more than 36 years. He has been featured in articles about labor, employment and immigration law in the L.A. Times, Business Week.com and Daily Variety. He is a regular columnist for the Daily Journal. Telephone (310)274-8216; eli@elikantorlaw.com. For more information, visit beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com and and beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com

Translate

Thursday, March 22, 2018

Spending Bill Would Add Border Barrier Funding, But Short of Trump’s Demands

Wall Street Journal
By Laura Meckler and Kristina Peterson
March 21, 2018

A $1.3 trillion spending bill unveiled Wednesday includes funding for new barriers along the southwest border—but only about half of what President Donald Trump requested for this year.

Mr. Trump can claim a victory in seeing some new border construction, a step toward fulfilling his “Build the Wall” campaign slogan. In return for Democratic support, Republicans agreed to drop some demands for stepped-up interior enforcement, and agreed to limits on the type and location of border barriers.

More than a year ago, Mr. Trump asked for $1.6 billion to build 60 new miles of a border wall and to add secondary fencing alongside 14 miles of existing fencing this fiscal year. As debate over immigration unfolded in recent months, he raised his request significantly, asking Congress for $18 billion for hundreds of miles of fencing to be built over 10 years.

Democrats were willing to fund the larger sum but only as part of an agreement protecting young, undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children. Those talks fell apart, and the spending bill doesn’t offer any help for participants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. A federal court has ordered that the administration continue the program for now. Without a deal on DACA, the question remained how much border money Mr. Trump would get for 2018.

The final agreement is a compromise, and provides $1.571 billion for border fencing and related costs. Specifically, it provides:

• $641 million for 33 miles of new fencing and levee wall in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas. Levee walls, which are already in use in Texas, are vertical spans of concrete with bollard fencing on top. This is about half of the 60 miles requested.

• $251 million for the 14 miles of secondary fencing in the San Diego sector asked for by Mr. Trump.

• $445 million to replace existing fencing, a pot of money that the administration hadn’t initially requested. Replacing existing fences is far less controversial than building new ones. Congressional aides said this would pay for about 45 miles of replacement fencing.

• Additional funding for border security technology, planning, road construction and additional Border Patrol agents. That includes about $50 million for new towers, $87 million for remote video surveillance and $20 million for ground sensors. One congressional aide said the total increase in new spending on these items totaled $1.196 billion.

The bill also includes new limits on the administration including:

• An explicit prohibition against building on the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge had been identified as a spot for early construction because the federal government already owns the land, but environmentalists and others were outraged by the prospect.

• Prohibition against building a solid concrete border wall. The bill directs that the money only pay for designs that exist on the border today.

On other controversial immigration matters, the bill provides several victories for Democrats including:

• No funding for additional interior enforcement officers in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. ICE was given money to hire 65 more people in the Homeland Security Investigations division and 60 new attorneys and other personnel.

• No large increase in the number of detention beds to hold people during deportation proceedings. Republicans said there was a small increase; Democrats said the level was flat. Mr. Trump had asked for an increase of about 10,000 beds.

• No new federal punishments or restrictions on so-called sanctuary cities, which decline to fully cooperate with the federal government on immigration enforcement.

For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com

No comments: