June 20th, 2013
01:32 PM ET
10 months ago

Senate immigration deal includes tougher border security

Washington (CNN) - A bipartisan group of U.S. senators is proposing tougher border security measures - including doubling the current 21,000-agent border patrol - as part of a deal to get more Republican support for an immigration reform bill.

Sources revealed to CNN some of the details of negotiated changes to the sweeping bill being debated in the Senate. Along with the increased border patrol agents, it would call for 700 miles of fencing along the frontier with Mexico.

FULL STORY

Filed under: Immigration • Joe Biden • John Boehner • Marco Rubio • President Obama • Senate
soundoff (24 Responses)
  1. tom l.

    Are they going to rebuild the 700 mile fence that Congress had already approved?

    June 20, 2013 01:43 pm at 1:43 pm |
  2. tom l.

    It's nice to see that with this bill we will cut illegal immigration by a whopping 25% (please note sarcasm).

    June 20, 2013 01:44 pm at 1:44 pm |
  3. California

    Senate immigration deal includes tougher border security

    As it should.

    June 20, 2013 01:47 pm at 1:47 pm |
  4. Data Driven

    700 more miles of fencing? Expensive. Doubling Border Patrol staff? Super-expensive. Actual necessity justifying these expenditures? Super-duper-nonexistent.

    June 20, 2013 01:52 pm at 1:52 pm |
  5. Rick in OP

    Is it asking too much to have a secured border?

    Have you ever read accounts of how Mexico treats people who try to sneak in to southern Mexico from Guatemala or Belize?

    Since when did Mexico obtain the right to violate American border security at will? Just because they still operate their country like banana republic does not mean that we have to stoop down to their low standards.

    June 20, 2013 01:58 pm at 1:58 pm |
  6. California

    And

    And a GOP endorsed "open season" on Mexicans.
    -----
    Illegal immigrants are not just people from one country.

    June 20, 2013 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  7. Dutch/Bad Newz, VA -aka- Take Back The House -aka- No Redemption Votes

    You can put 100,000 troops on the border and republicans still won't support it. The funny thing about this immigration debate is that republicans think that just because they pass immigration reform it will get them more latino votes when in actuality it will do the complete opposite.

    June 20, 2013 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  8. OMG

    This may make people feel better but it's a very expensive way to address the problem. Enforcing I-9 requirements for employment will be a lot more effective and a lot cheaper. I suppose the 21,000 additional border patrol agents will be jobs but the GOP will soon be complaining about the number of federal employees again. Big Government indeed. Oh well. We get the Government we vote for.

    June 20, 2013 02:08 pm at 2:08 pm |
  9. Al-NY,NY

    Rick in OP

    Is it asking too much to have a secured border?
    --–

    please define "secured?" Does that mean zero movement? If not, what? It is of course a subjective term that anyone with a functioning brain knows the GOP will change with each passing day so that they can placate the herd with "we're not getting what we want so no immigration reform"

    June 20, 2013 02:17 pm at 2:17 pm |
  10. California

    And

    California – OK then. Call your favorite GOP/NRA congress person and tell them "open season on ALL illegals" or you won't get reelected!
    ----
    Open season? What are you implying? I sense hatred coming from you. Are you trying to inject something into this issue that doesn't exist?

    June 20, 2013 02:25 pm at 2:25 pm |
  11. Rudy NYC

    Rick in OP

    Is it asking too much to have a secured border?
    --------------------------–
    TRANSLATION: The bill does not provide enough additional security to call the border "secure".

    June 20, 2013 02:26 pm at 2:26 pm |
  12. Rudy NYC

    Dutch/Bad Newz, wrote:

    You can put 100,000 troops on the border and republicans still won't support it. The funny thing about this immigration debate is that republicans think that just because they pass immigration reform it will get them more latino votes when in actuality it will do the complete opposite.
    --------------------------
    You hit the nail on the head. Republicans have quite the conundrum to deal with, one that they created for themselves. A decade ago, George W. Bush commanded the Hispanic vote, mainly because he promised them jobs. Then Republicans took them for granted, played them for stupid, and here we are, today, with greatly diminished support.

    If they're against reforms, they lose voters. If they support the reforms, the feel Democrats will gain voters. All the while too arrogant to realize that the problem isn't the immigrants, or the liberals, or the economy, or anything else except for themselves. For it was Republican *policies* that turned almost all immigrants from almost any background against American conservatism.

    June 20, 2013 02:33 pm at 2:33 pm |
  13. Ann

    There is no meat to this bill. Border security needs to come first then citizenship can be addressed. I'm Hispanic and I won't buy into this political grandstanding.

    June 20, 2013 02:33 pm at 2:33 pm |
  14. tom l.

    Why are democrats so vehemently against a secured border? I don't get it.

    June 20, 2013 02:34 pm at 2:34 pm |
  15. Ron L

    I hate to be pessimistic but I think there will still be some of the hard core anti-path to citizenship Republicans who are going to attempt to sabotage the process one more time in a couple of weeks. Also I have to say doubling the current border patrol from 21,000 to 42,000 in addition to adding 700 MILES more of new fence and approving $2 billion dollars of new high tech equiptment is going to be pretty expensive but if it SEALS the deal...GO FOR IT!! We need to free up the Senate and Congress to move on to other important subjects, like the Budget, and a 10 year Rebuild America Infrastructure Project. You know they can only do ONE thing at a time..too bad isn't it...

    June 20, 2013 02:37 pm at 2:37 pm |
  16. tom l.

    Rudy, Dutch,
    Shine some light on this for me. Why are you against a secure border? What is the problem with a fence? Enlighten me, please. I just can't understand why you are against it.

    June 20, 2013 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  17. rla

    The liberals and democrats are the students of the scam!!! This bill is a lie– for every step that sounds good there are two pages of exceptions that make the trigger meaningless, guess who is getting millions to sign up people for Obama care and this immigration fiasco (SEIU, Teamsters, and all the democratic community organizations) do we really want to be subsidizing the democratic party???? CALL YOUR SENATORS TODAY!

    June 20, 2013 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  18. Rick in OP

    Al-NY,NY
    Rick in OP

    Is it asking too much to have a secured border?
    ––

    "please define "secured?" Does that mean zero movement? If not, what? It is of course a subjective term that anyone with a functioning brain knows the GOP will change with each passing day so that they can placate the herd with "we're not getting what we want so no immigration reform"
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    It is not a trick question. A secured border means you know who is coming and across your border. Just like in any other civilized country.

    June 20, 2013 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  19. Sniffit

    I see no problem with the patrol increase or even the silly fence as long as the standards for determining the triggers are clearly articulated and quantifiable, not wishy-washy nonsense that would allow southern states or a Republican administration to hem and haw, delay and thwart the issuance of green cards, pathway to citizenship, etc. I can live with that if it gets the freekin thing done...and I'll bet that most Dems and liberals can too and that most of these proposals will actually pass in the Senate. The House Teatrolls and ideological dogma like the Hastert Rule will then kill anything containing a pathway to citizenship and will demand some insane, impractical, unachievable level of reduction in illegal immigration, killing the whole reform effort and their political party all in one fell swoop.

    June 20, 2013 02:49 pm at 2:49 pm |
  20. Rudy NYC

    tom l.

    Why are democrats so vehemently against a secured border? I don't get it.
    --------------------
    Maybe it's because Republicans cannot tell us what "secured border" actually means, or means to measure its' security.

    June 20, 2013 02:52 pm at 2:52 pm |
  21. Rudy NYC

    Rick in OP wrote:

    It is not a trick question. A secured border means you know who is coming and across your border. Just like in any other civilized country.
    --------------------
    Could you be a little more specific. Because we already know who is coming across. The problem is how do you measure how many people are coming across that you don't know about.

    How do you measure it? How much will it cost to satisfy your vague definition of a "secure border"? Isn't 1300 miles of fencing and more than 40,000 border agents enough? How much will be enough? How long will it take to attain this state of a "secured border"? Did you know that the numbers show that Republican administrations have historically relaxed the border?

    These and other lingering questions are why we are where are today.

    June 20, 2013 02:57 pm at 2:57 pm |
  22. California

    Upholding laws is what any sane country must have. Anarchy is NOT an option anymore.

    June 20, 2013 02:59 pm at 2:59 pm |
  23. Al-NY,NY

    Rudy NYC

    Maybe it's because Republicans cannot tell us what "secured border" actually means, or means to measure its' security.
    ------------

    Rick in OP

    It is not a trick question. A secured border means you know who is coming and across your border.
    --------

    here's your answer Rudy..........huh? what? it STILL doesn't give a quantifiable answer. I could guess it means NO ONE gets across but since of course that is impossible...bingo...the GOP has their "out" for agreeing to reform

    June 20, 2013 03:05 pm at 3:05 pm |
  24. Rudy NYC

    California

    Upholding laws is what any sane country must have. Anarchy is NOT an option anymore.
    ---------------------
    Conservatives in Congress block bills calling for stiffer penalties for hiring illegals, claiming that it hurts small businesses and places undue burdens on them. They say it isn't fair to charge a business owner for hiring someone who the government should have stopped from coming here in the first place. And, blah, blah, blah.

    In other words, nothing gets done because Republicans don't want anything to get done. Their masters like cheap labor.

    June 20, 2013 03:08 pm at 3:08 pm |