Gabrielle Giffords' Tunnel Enforcement Act

I received the following email from Gabrielle Giffords and thought it was worth posting for all to see. While I have stated many times she and I don't see eye to eye on many issues, there are several things I do appreciated from her. One of those efforts of hers is her on-going efforts to stay in touch with her constituents, even when they don't agree with her.

On this issue, what she's communicated to me sounds good--I will qualify this, though, as something I have to delve into deeper to make sure I'm understanding it correctly. On the surface, it appears she is indeed serious about not only enforcing our laws but tightening them up as well with stricter penalties. Here, then, is her email to me:

December 21, 2007


Dear [Redacted],


This week the House passed the Fiscal Year 2008 Appropriations package and it is now going to the President for his signature. I thought you might be interested in hearing about a provision that I included in that legislation to toughen our border security.


I first introduced this legislation as a stand-alone bill, called the Tunnel Enforcement Act (H.R. 4326). My legislation, as passed in the appropriations package, will ensure that the federal government can prosecute smugglers who tunnel into the United States .


This provision criminalizes the construction of tunnels under the U.S. border and adds this prohibition to the federal criminal code. It also creates criminal penalties for using tunnels to smuggle illegal aliens, goods, controlled substances, weapons, or terrorists.


Specifically, the Tunnel Enforcement Act established the following federal crimes and corresponding sentences.


--Any person who knowingly constructs or finances the construction of a tunnel or subterranean passage that crosses the international border between the United States and another country, other than a lawfully authorized tunnel or passage known to the Secretary of Homeland Security and subject to inspection by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for not more than 20 years.


--Any person who knowingly or recklessly disregards the construction or use of a tunnel or passage described in subsection (a) on land that the person owns or controls shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for not more than 10 years.


--Any person who uses a tunnel or passage described in subsection (a) to unlawfully smuggle an alien, goods, controlled substances, weapons of mass destruction, or a member of a terrorist organization shall be subject to a maximum term of imprisonment that is twice the maximum term of imprisonment that would have otherwise been applicable had the unlawful activity not made use of such a tunnel or passage.


Securing our border is my highest priority in Congress, and I have consistently been an advocate for strengthened border security by supporting these measures in Congress:


--Border Law Enforcement Enhancement Act (H.R. 2542) to fund enhanced law enforcement operations, as well as the detention and transfer of illegal aliens to federal authorities (cosponsor),


--To provide for the next generation of border and maritime security technologies (H.R. 3916) by deploying UAVs and Advanced Tunnel Detection on the U.S.-Mexico border and study additional border security needs (cosponsor),



--Motion to Recommit on the Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007 (H.R. 1851) to prevent illegal immigrants from receiving housing assistance,


--Alien Smuggling and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (H.R. 2399) to increase penalties for smuggling an illegal immigrant into the U.S. (H.R. 2399), and


--Department of Defense Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2008 (H.R. 3222) to support $247 million for the continuing National Guard operations along the U.S.-Mexico border.


Additionally, I launched a vigorous campaign in Congress to add $55 million in much needed funding to the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP). This program reimburses our county and state law enforcement agencies for the costs of incarcerating illegal immigrants. Other members of Congress and the President proposed cutting this essential federal program. As a result of my added funding, Congress included a total of $410 million in SCAAP funding in the Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations bill that passed the House as part of the FY 2008 Omnibus Appropriations package. The Omnibus funding package is going to the President for his signature which is expected promptly thereafter.


I always appreciate hearing from constituents, like you, who are informed and interested in issues of important to Arizona and the nation. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if you require assistance. My job as your representative is to assist you with federal agencies, access services and get your policy questions answered thoroughly. Feel free to sign-up for e-news updates on my website at www.giffords.house.gov.


Sincerely Yours,
Gabrielle Giffords
Member of Congress

Good job, Gabrielle. THIS is the kind of stuff your constituents want to see progress made on, not appeasement.

Sphere: Related Content

Cheers and Jeers--Giffords and Grijalva Update

In my last post regarding Gabrielle Giffords, freshman Congressman from Arizona's 8th District here, I asked a very pointed question regarding her stance on the MoveOn.org smear ad of General David Petraeus.

My computer has been down for a few days. I was just able to view the roll call.

I am pleased to see Congressman Giffords voted IN FAVOR of condemning MoveOn.org. Cheers to Congressman Giffords for her stance--it will certainly be remembered come election time.



However, the far leftist traitor also addressed in that post, Raul Grijalva, Arizona's 7th District Congressman, voted AGAINST condemning MoveOn.org.

What can you expect from a traitor who doesn't keep in contact with his WHITE constituency, only communicates with his Spanish speakers (running his entire campaign in Spanish and ONLY in the Mexican areas of town regardless of his district borders and constituency), whether legal or illegal, encourages the illegals and refuses to go to a memorial of an illegal soldier who gave his life for the country he loved (he didn't fit Grijalva's agenda as a downtrodden, leech off the system criminal)? A Pancho Villa wanna-be--and that's NOT a compliment--(just look at his mustache) who is as comfortable with La Raza and its agenda as he is with the snakes in Washington, slithering through the halls with the likes of Pelosi and ReidCo, while trying to stay in the background to keep his fat ass in a cushy government position?

It seems our freshman Congressman, Gabrielle Giffords, has more integrity in her little finger than Grijalva does in his whole bloated, fat, greasy body.

Congressman Giffords, you answered a very important question of mine and you did it with class. Thank you for your denouncement of MoveOn.org and their smear campaign against General David Petraeus.

Sphere: Related Content

Gabrielle Giffords In Tucson September 15, 2007; Questions for Her and Raul Grijalva

Those of you familiar with me know I seem to have an on-going, rather wary relationship with Arizona's 8th District Freshman Congressman, Gabrielle Giffords.

In our last go round, I published a letter she had sent me, and shredded it. I then emailed that blog entry to her office.

What I didn't get a chance to do was follow up with that blog entry until now. Allow me to do so.

I was contacted by Miss Giffords' chief of staff, who called me at work. I hadn't yet arrived; however, I was told she would be calling later that morning. From what I've seen of Miss Giffords, she is NOT one of the normal Dems who has an extensive, expensive staff. I have got to give her kudos for that. Further, her chief of staff appears to be her only staff member. No one can accuse Miss Giffords' of wasting taxpayer money on staffing and I will certainly give her that. I will also grant her this: her chief of staff was EXTREMELY cordial, pleasant, willing to answer questions (to a point) and certainly did not have to personally call me to discuss my concerns.

What we did disagree on, and I was very vocal about, was the lack of respect given to the office of Commander in Chief and the underlying disrespect in communications regarding the president and the war. I did get rather testy on that and stated it was NOT "Bush's war" it is AMERICA'S war and, she was perfectly entitled not to like the president but she was out of line in showing her disrespect for the office. That, however, was about the testiest it became; the vast majority of the conversation was extremely pleasant, cordial and polite.

I was actually invited to personally call anytime I had further concerns I wished to discuss--and it appeared to be a genuine invitation.

But, wait Miss Beth--you're being NICE to Miss Giffords! WHAT GIVES? HAVE YOU TURNED TRAITOR ON US?

NOT AT ALL. However, when one is treated nicely and with polite respect from a member of a party that appears to be on the verge of a total implosion and/or meltdown, it bears acknowledgment and appreciation to the person(s) who gave you that treatment. Just as I would be ripping her to shreds had it been otherwise, it is only right and proper to acknowledge when one has been treated with respect and politeness.

Imagine, then, my utter surprise when I found I was on Miss Giffords' email list (of course, I track her voting record through MegaVote and other vote tracking services) updating me on her activities on Capitol Hill. Imagine my further surprise when I received an invitation to her forum this weekend on Veteran's Affairs. You could have knocked me over with a feather!

Unfortunately (GROAN), I missed the rsvp date and won't be going as I had anticipated. So, I will ask my questions here and send her another email with the blog link. Keep in mind I have not yet checked her voting record regarding Veteran's Affairs. Nevermind, I just did. It apparently hasn't made it to Congress yet so she hasn't yet voted on it; I can be cautiously optimistic and hope she is having this forum to address Veteran's concerns in order to better formulate her vote.

Again, I will give her the benefit of the doubt based on the fact she hasn't yet voted and appears to want input prior to voting--I would expect that kind of responsiblity from any representative, Republican or Democrat, and I will try to think the best until I see otherwise.

One thing I must point out here is, while my and Miss Giffords' views are often in direct opposition to each other, I must commend her on her attention to her district. It is certainly NOT unusual to see her in Tucson, OFTEN, meeting with her constituents. Certainly far more than her counterpart, Mr. Grijalva (see below) who seems to think his deigning to visit his consitutency is the equivalent of a visit by crowned royalty. Again, DON'T GET ME WRONG, MISS GIFFORDS AND I ARE IN VERY DIFFERENT MINDSETS BUT SHE DOES KEEP IN CONSTANT TOUCH WITH HER CONSTITUENTS. That's a positive, a very definite positive.

Veteran's Affairs are something a lot of people don't think about; those blogging and doing our best to support the troops see horror stories of the mistreatment our Veterans receive upon their return home. It's not enough to support the troops while they're in battle--far too many need help upon their return home and subsequent discharge and far too many of THOSE Veterans just can't get the help they need.

One of my guest posters asked me to ask Miss Giffords something very specific. It was this:

Ask her why she isn't supporting legislation right now to protect our veterans monuments. Ask her why she isn't supporting legislation to make it a crime to desecrate our flag or insult our troops in a time of war. Ask her why she isn't supporting legislation right now that would make it a crime to spout out inflammatory, seditious and treasonable speech in public while this country is at war.

So, Miss Giffords? What is your answer to this Veteran's questions? Are you aware of the vandalism that occurred this past weekend to the Vietnam memorial? Are you aware of the pictures we have here on our blogs showing the criminal acts being perpetrated under the umbrella of "Free Speech"?

Here's a post from yesterday that was cross posted from another blog to mine--and many, many others. It's called "THIS Is What Anti-War Protestors Are Folks" and shows a late teen/early 20's male dropping his pants in an Oregon protest in March, 2007, in front of God and everybody (including children) to SHIT on OUR FLAG--a flag that had been burned earlier--along with a soldier in effigy--and he was shitting to put out the flames. This is NOT "Free Speech". This is "Hate Crime". How do you stand on Hate Crimes against this country, Miss Giffords?

And along that line of questioning, please tell me how you feel about the MoveOn.org's New York Times full page ad villifying and slandering General David Petraeus. And please tell me why I haven't heard you come out strongly and extremely vociferously against that slander. Why you haven't distanced yourself IMMEDIATELY from that ad? Would you please clarify that for me? I would certainly have more respect for you, regardless of party differences, if you were to immediately and loudly divorce yourself from any association with MoveOn.org--not just because of the ad, but also because of MoveOn.org's statement:

In a December 9th e-mail signed by “Eli Pariser, Justin Ruben, and the whole MoveOn PAC team,” the Soros front group stated: “In the last year, grassroots contributors like us gave more than $300 million to the Kerry campaign and the DNC, and proved that the Party doesn't need corporate cash to be competitive. Now it's our Party: we bought it, we own it, and we're going to take it back.” (quoted from FrontPageMagazine.com article MoveOn: 'We Bought' the Democratic Party; December 10, 2004)

I'm sure I'm not the only constituent that would be very interested in your response to these questions.

********************

THIS Congressman is Raul Grijalva, Arizona's Senior 7th District Congressman.

I've written him just as many letters as I have Miss Giffords. I've asked him just as many questions; in fact I've asked him identical questions.

I've received one form letter in response to my concerns. I signed up for his email notifications. It has been ignored. His email form on the contact reps page has cutesy little "tests" you have to answer correctly before you can leave him an email. Little things, like what is 2 + 2 (tonight's little challenge was 3 x 1--and you had three tries to correctly answer).

Now, considering he used to be a member of the Tucson Unified School District (and his daughter is now a member of said district), one would think he could have come up with something a little more challenging as a "screening" agent. Or not. The question is though--why should he be afraid to hear from his constituents to begin with?

Then again, once he got the NEA firmly ensconced into the school district with their agenda at dumbing down and indoctrinating the kids into mindless, non-questioning, goose-stepping obedience to the liberal, communistic, socialistic agenda, he went on to run for Congress. His work in Tucson was accomplished.

See, Mr. Grijalva only wants to hear from you if your skin is brown and you're mexican; legal or illegal doesn't matter. I happen to be white with a white surname, so I don't count. He even ran his campaign ads almost exclusively in spanish and did not campaign in the white areas of his district.

His voting record over his tenure shows him to be, in fact, one of the far left fringe. One particular issue that completely irritated me with this man was a particular young soldier Tucson lost. This was a young man who was an illegal, brought by his illegal parents across the border. However, this young man graduated high school and enlisted because of his love for this country. He fought AND DIED for this country. He was awarded his citizenship posthumously. I do not recall seeing Mr. Grijalva at this young man's grave site. I don't recall him being anywhere near the memorials.

I could be wrong and if I am, I will gladly apologize.

However, the message was clear--though this young man was illegal, he did the unthinkable in this far leftist's eyes--he enlisted to DEFEND THIS COUNTRY. He GAVE HIS LIFE to his adopted country. And that is unforgiveable in Mr. Grijalva's lexicon of the downtrodden illegal. This young man, had he not have died in a field of battle, would surely have made a success of himself. He had the drive and the ambition. He had the desire to become legal and do something FOR the country he loved rather than leech off the government his entire life. This ambition, this drive, this love of country is completely foreign to Mr. Grijalva. It doesn't fit in with his agenda; so, this young man was postuhumously punished because he didn't fit the party line agenda of entitlement and law breaking.

However, I'll give Mr. Grijalva one more chance. I presented several questions to Miss Giffords above.

I ask Mr. Grijalva to answer those same questions. In a public forum. Televised on mainstream stations, not just spanish speaking ones. And to answer those questions in the language of the land, English--AND ONLY ENGLISH, THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF AMERICA, so his American constituents can easily understand his answers without being forced to learn a language not the official language of this country.

Frankly, I have more faith in Miss Giffords. Even if there is some residual Democratic spin on the answers, I feel she will make a sincere effort to answer the questions in a somewhat thoughtful, measured manner.

I don't think Mr. Grijalva will even read this when I email it to him. After all, I'm white--I don't count. I'd wager it'll be ignored at best, and if by some chance it gets through his screeners (remember his cutesy little tests), it'll be deleted at worst. But we'll always have it here, won't we?

Who's with the traitors and seditionists at MoveOn.org and who isn't? Hopefully we shall soon see.

Who is going to at least make the effort to talk to Veterans before voting and who isn't?

Again, we have that answer.

It's not Mr. Grijalva. He could care less about Veterans. The Veteran's Administration complex is in his district. But, you see, they're VETERANS. THEY LOVE THIS COUNTRY. THEY TOOK AN OATH TO LAY DOWN THEIR LIVES FOR THIS COUNTRY. Completely foreign thought, totally anathemic idea to Mr. Grijalva. The only thing America is good for in his eyes is entitlement programs for the lazy and illegal, the drug thugs and the gangs (highly concentrated and growing in his district) while refusing the children quality education (most of the failing schools in the city are also in his district--his aversion to immersing the children in the language of the land so they can thrive here). In his eyes, America certainly isn't worth fighting and dying for. Just using.

Updates will follow.
********************
For those wondering why I have both these people as representatives, I own a house in Grijalva's district (my daughter lives in that house) and I live in Miss Giffords' district.

Sphere: Related Content

Gabrielle Gifford's Response re: Defeatism

Another patronizing, condescending letter received regarding her defeatist attitude. Do they think we can't see through them and their posturing?

April 3, 2007

Dear Certified (This was the third letter and she couldn't even get my name right!),

Thank you for contacting me about President Bush's escalation of troops in Iraq . I have grave doubts about whether this latest plan can succeed. Another Pelosi/Reid lapdog--she's a freshman and follows her leash training well!

Serving on the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees, I have been participating in many hours of hearings with Administration officials and policy experts. At briefings with top-level military leaders, I have been asking tough questions. These experiences have made me more confident than ever that the global war on terror and the situation in Iraq are more complicated than President Bush seems to recognize. Actually, they're a lot more complicated than YOU seem to realize and Gen. Petraeus told you exactly what was needed. I'd say he was pretty high ranking!

Common sense dictates that in order for any plan to succeed, it must require the Iraqi government to calm the sectarian violence and unify behind a workable political structure. Without the serious involvement and motivation of Iraqi political and religious leaders, the President's proposal to send more American troops into harm's way amounts to having 21,000 more soldiers stay the course. This I cannot support. I'd be willing to bet you support your "feminist rights" along with the gays and abortion mills--guess what, those won't exist anymore if you have your way!

The President should consider the views of the many active and retired military generals, and the recommendations of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group such as: He has--that's why he's the President and you're NOT!

-- Keeping rapid reaction and special operations forces in the region to strike Al Qaeda militias and train the Iraqi army to take over combat operations; And what do you think they're doing--sitting on their thumbs playing poker while "escorting" you and the other defeatists around when they could be accomplishing something more productive?
-- Setting performance benchmarks for the Iraqi government to create an oil revenue sharing program, reform of the de-Bathification laws and develop processes to amend its constitution and hold provincial elections; Real life doesn't follow utopian timetables
-- Starting a direct dialogue with Syria and Iran over Iraq and the Middle East ; WHAT??? ARE YOU NUTS??? and
-- Providing economic assistance to Iraq that will help create jobs, strengthen infrastructure and improve the Iraqis' capacity to be independent and stable. Again, we're already doing that--or was it not in your MoveOn.org talking points?

I strongly support our men and women in uniform who are risking their lives to protect and defend our nation. Our armed forces must have the tools, training and support they need to be successful in any mission. I have serious concerns that our Army, along with Guard and Reserve forces, is being stretched too thin. As the traitor you are, this is a lie, particularly since you supported the pork laden troop funding--funding that should have gone for the troops and veterans EXCLUSIVELY. You don't support anyone but the almighty dollar.

Instead of sending 21,000 more soldiers to Iraq as part of his same failed strategy, the President should focus on the global war on terrorism and deploy our troops in a more targeted fashion. And I believe that we need to work more effectively with other countries in order to face challenges and threats to our global economy and security. This dire situation in Iraq will remain a primary focus in my committees; I will continue to be actively engaged in trying to find solutions. The solution is the one that's working, the one the President and Gen. Petraeus presented to you and you refuse to acknowledge because it would mean we are winning--you can't accept that and prefer defeat.

Thank you for sharing your concerns with me. It is an honor to serve and represent you. Please visit my website at www.giffords.house.gov to sign up for e-mail updates and for more information about issues affecting Southern Arizona and our country. I didn't vote for you in '06 and I will never vote for you. I keep track of your voting record and will endeavor to keep that voting record in the public's view so they know that you, who ran as a Blue Dog Democrat, are truly nothing more than a Yellow Dog. This will be accomplished through blogs such as mine and the Victory Caucus (www.VictoryCaucus.com).


Sincerely,
Gabrielle Giffords
Member of Congress

Again, more of the Democratic Defeat our troops and our nation are struggling against. Don't it make you proud? NOT!!!

Sphere: Related Content