• Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    133
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    The funds for 20 miles of border wall were approved in 2019 before Biden took office. He urged Congress to reassign these funds for more intelligent and efficient enforcement purposes, but Republicans did not comply. Now, Biden has to fulfill his lawful obligations.

    • underisk@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      He waived environmental protections with executive powers to expedite the process. He isnt just passively letting this happen because his hands are tied.

      • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Would those environmental protections have allowed the wall to simply not be built, or would they have just delayed it, costing even more money for environmental reviews, changed plans, etc., when a government shutdown is imminent?

        That’s a real question, to be clear, and not one the article answered one way or the other.

        • underisk@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Even if it were the case, as they said the budget is already allocated. Why not make them waste as much of it as possible paying for stuff that isn’t building the wall that everyone knows is useless? Making it look like even more of an expensive boondoggle seems like a better strategy than paving the way through federally protected lands.

          And that’s setting aside the costs of maintaining what gets built or what it would cost to remove the wall at some point.

          • crusa187@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            9 months ago

            Excellent points. This is completely braindead policy on Biden’s part. The reality is he wanted to give this money to the contractors building the wall, and it’s pathetic crony capitalism per usual.

        • los_chill@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Genuinely curious why he couldn’t go ahead and fund the wall, allow existing environmental law to block it, take that back to congress and say this project is illegal and now it is up to congress to repurpose funds.

        • underisk@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          He has to utilize executive fiat to circumvent normal environmental regulation procedures? What exactly do you think would happen if he didn’t?

    • naught@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yep, let’s not forget who controls the purse. You just know this is going to get spun 🙄

    • Heresy_generator@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      And the GOP House 100% would have voted to start an impeachment trial if he didn’t follow through on it. They would draw a false equivalence between the extortion scheme against Ukraine that lead to Trump’s first impeachment trial, where one aspect of it was Trump unlawfully withholding congressionally mandated funds, and claim that this is the same thing. Actually, they’ll say this is worse because they’re completely shameless and untethered to reality.

      • ArgentRaven@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s an excellent point. If he doesn’t comply in good faith, it would 100% be in conservative media that he’s sabotaging the borders, misappropriating funds, and haul him off to a real impeachment trial. It’d be the excuse for political theater that they want, and likely exactly why Congress wouldn’t reallocate the funds to something else.

      • guacupado@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        They’re so salty Trump got impeached (twice) that they’re pretty much calling for impeachment for any little thing they don’t like. It’s actually humiliating and I don’t understand how anyone can proudly say they vote for that party. It’s like middle school logic.

    • Belgdore@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I feel like a more creative person would have built an 10 foot long section of wall (or better yet a really fancy gate) valued at whatever amount of money congress had allocated.

      • thefartographer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        9 months ago

        That would be like USPS getting $30million to replace a fleet of delivery trucks and instead buying a handful of monster trucks that can’t enter residential areas. No one’s gonna look at that and go, “whoops! You got me! We said buy 120 USPS trucks with the approved budget but instead you bought 5 monster trucks and a sweet set of ramps and said you followed the ‘spirit of the ask’ because they’re all trucks. Well, I see no reason to investigate this for misusing funds! As you were!”

      • bluGill@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        It needs to pass an audit. The wall is stupid, but building a monument instead of a wall should fail audits and is a type of corruption worthy of impeachment.

          • bluGill@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I hope they stand for the rule of law. Mind you they should tell us when the law is wrong and fight to get that fixed. However they don’t get to ignore a bad law. There is often disagreement on what makes a good law, and sometimes you will lose that fight (or at least a battle in the fight).

                • Belgdore@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Corruption applies to actions taken for personal gain. Actions taken for perceived benefit of the constituents are noble even if they violate the law.

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    He tried to put it off as long as he could by getting Congress to reappropriate the funds. They refuses. He was ordered to build the wall.

    So he’s using the funds to ensure the most dangerous parts are blocked to funnel the people into the designated channels so they can be processed humanely and securely.

    What’s the problem.

  • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s security theater, just like the TSA you see at the airport do nothing. The real protection is hidden both at the airport and at the border.

    • darthskull
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Ain’t nothing hidden at the airport. It’s as secure as the bus

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        In general that’s not true.

        Reinforced cockpit doors.

        Isolation of runways/terminals (yes incursions happen)

        Habit tracing, and Id scanning upon entry. Gait analysis and license plate reading.

        Air Marshalls (yes not on every flight)

        Lots of shit that comes together to do a ton behind the scenes.

        • UFO64@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          All means shit if someone puts their mind to it. TSA misses the majority of treat items.

              • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Great response.

                If you had any critical thinking you’d see how I was largely agreeing with the above…the TSA is theatre

                • UFO64@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Go spend a few years working in that industry. To call airport security a joke is to insult the field of comedy.

  • Spendrill@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    9 months ago

    On the upside because these things get built by the lowest bidder the wall probably represents a significant transfer of monies to the Mexican-American community, which is no bad thing.

      • Gaim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        9 months ago

        As someone who lives in a border city, this is exactly what has happened and is still happening. Also, the wall wont work, the Republicans just wont admit it. just yesterday 300 migrants mass crossed through the canal in Tijuana 🫠

  • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    9 months ago

    He should had the money spent to redesign them as a welcome wall or something to help nesting birds and wild animals thrive. Instead of these shitty useless monstrosities.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      He is using the funds to make portable walls instead, which could be reused elsewhere I guess once their “purpose” has been fulfilled on the border. I’m not sure what the law requires of them, but they maybe will just be placed there and immediately moved.

  • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    Say what you will about whats legally required but if Biden didn’t want to catch criticism from his fellow democratic lawmakers, he shouldn’t have made a campaign promise saying he wouldn’t build ‘another foot’ of border wall. Its not like he’s unaware how these things work, he kind of brought this on his self.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      You can delve into the definition of “another” in that context. It could mean “no more than what is currently built” or it could mean " no more than what’s already been determined/legally required will be built".

      Though even with that, I will grant that using that wording could be considered deceptive. As much as people like to say “technically correct is the best correct”, I would disagree when it comes to politics. It’s Aes Sedai lying vs outright lying.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden on Thursday defended his administration’s decision to waive 26 federal laws in South Texas to allow for construction of roughly 20 miles of additional border wall, saying he had no choice but to use the Trump-era funding for the barrier to stop illegal migration from Mexico.

    Still, the waiving of federal laws for the construction — something also done when Republican Donald Trump was president — raised questions, particularly because Biden condemned border wall spending when he was running for the White House.

    Administration officials on Thursday announced they’d resume deporting migrants back to Venezuela, as part of their effort to to slow arrivals.

    The decision was met with immediate criticism from immigrant advocates and Mexico President Andres Manuel López Obrador, who called it a “setback.”

    The Department of Homeland Security posted the announcement of the latest wall action in the Federal Registry with few details about the construction in Starr County, Texas, part of a busy Border Patrol sector seeing “high illegal entry.” According to government data, about 245,000 illegal crossings have been recorded so far this budget year in the Rio Grande Valley Sector.

    Homeland Security has also worked on roughly 13 miles in the Rio Grande Valley, and another small-scale project to fill “small gaps that remain open from prior construction activities” in the border wall.


    The original article contains 809 words, the summary contains 225 words. Saved 72%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • Candelestine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      While I do not support wall construction, I actually don’t mind that he allowed the project to move forward. It shows respect for the office and for the voters of the previous administration. While he won’t get much credit for it, being the only adult in a room is just a pretty tough gig, I personally respect it.

      That said, I do not agree with waiving federal regulations to make it happen. It’s not like this is some magic fix that is sure to work or something, its not worth cutting through red tape.

      • Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Trump signed into law in 2019. Allowing the White House to waive the environmental rules. Do I wish he would have tied up in red tape yes. But this money and the waiver were from the previous Administration. Biden has been in office for three years. Seems to me that makes him look less than enthusiastic about the wall.

        • Candelestine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Then he could have un-waived them, assuming it was done via executive order. Simply allowing the regulations to protect the things they are supposed to protect, like the environment.

          • deur@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            9 months ago

            Have you considered the fact that your simple solution likely is based on a simple reality that only exists in your head?