Which David Schweikert should we believe? Should we believe candidate David Schweikert, who said in 2010,"It's time for the federal government to finally do its job and secure Arizona's border with Mexico with a real fence and real enforcement. (davidschweikert.com)," or should we believe Congressman David Schweikert (R-District 5), who just voted to cut $600 million from border security and immigration enforcement in the Department of Homeland Security budget?

That vote represents nearly $1 billion less than President Obama's proposed $300 million increase. The GOP plan cuts funding for 250 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and threatens future funding for nearly 900 border patrol agents. What a hypocrite Schweikert is!

And this is just a month into office. I believe we can expect to see Schweikert continue his allegiance to the national GOP, while ignoring the wishes of his constituents in Arizona, both Republican and Democratic. I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

Frank Bing

(2) comments




-Democrat activists like Frank Bing are being directed to spin the border funding issue.

-House Republicans, including Schweikert, are increasing funding to protect our community.

1. More agents, to protect our community and enforce the law (and create jobs)
2. Fencing to keep out the bad guys
3. Technolgy so that we can detect and do even more
4. Assistance to local Sheriffs on the border per their individualized needs[whistling][beam]


Is this going to be starting another "hit job" on Congressman Schweikert and Republicans? C'mon, already, get your facts straight before taking your orders from the Arizona Democrat Party and the very misleading Washington Post story of 2/12/11! The Appropriations Committee in the House eliminated funding ($350M) for a program that does not work—maybe you heard about the problems with the Strategic Border Initiative technology that not only 1-did not work, but 2-was over budget and 3-behind schedule? Yeh, that makes a lot of sense—just throw money at the problem—just like with the hole democrats put us in by running up our debt by another $5+trillion passing all sorts of legislation like the failed nearly trillion dollar stimulus program, the bail outs and the rest of the misguided appropriations? But I digress.

The facts are this: $500 million have been appropriated to support border operations that work, maintenance of current infrastructure and fencing and proven technology that is already operational!

Republicans increased funding by $148 million over the Administration’s request while providing for more border security agents and more bed space to detain unlawful entrants who have been caught by more agents using technology that works!

This is apparently what Democrats do not understand and do not want you to understand—no one in this current administration has apparently not run a lemonade stand or had a paper route or taken an economics course and, when Republicans come along, assess the spending, determine costs and benefits, make a plan, stick to it and measure its effectiveness, democrats complain because we did not throw away enough money.

Maybe you’ve heard—we voted to change this wastefulness and abuse of our taxpayer dollars. And, unlike the misguided healthcare bill where Nancy Pelosi said we would “have to pass the bill to find out what is in it”, Republicans are actually being responsible with our hard-earned tax dollars, listening to us, reading the legislation, holding hearings, bringing in expert witnesses and trying to protect us as a nation from continuing down the path that got us here in the first place.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.