San Antonio Express

Border lawmakers from Southwest states were instrumental in pressing the House to pass a $701 million bill Wednesday for security measures on the U.S.-Mexico border after the money was stripped out of a previous war funding bill in the Senate.

Rep. Ciro Rodriguez, D-San Antonio, said the vote “gives us the chance to right that wrong and provide for security needs along our borders.”

The bill passed the House on a voice vote.

Lawmakers from Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California convinced House leaders to take action on the funding, which they argued is critical for strengthened security for border communities.

Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, noting the congressional recess coming in August, argued that “we are at a critical juncture in our nation’s border and homeland security.”

“We cannot wait another six weeks for this critical funding,” Cuellar said.

The bill must now pass the Senate, where lawmakers stripped $20 billion in domestic spending measures out of the bill for programs including border security, Pell grants and funds to prevent the layoffs of school teachers.

Border lawmakers were hopeful the Senate — considering the border security funding separate from other requests — would approve the bill next week.

The $59 billion war spending bill, passed by the House and Senate, will provide an infusion of 30,000 troops that President Barack Obama has ordered to Afghanistan.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., criticized the Senate for stripping the border spending from the original bill.

“I am appalled that senators would turn their back on Americans who live and work on or near the border,” Giffords said.

She said the Senate must “agree to restore this essential funding.”

Several lawmakers said sending the border measure separately would help its passage in the Senate, where Republicans repeatedly have called on the Obama administration to ramp up security measures.

The bill includes $356 million to hire 1,200 Customs and Border Protection agents, $200 million for Justice Department programs to curtail smuggling, $30 million for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and $50 million to support local law enforcement programs through the Department of Homeland Security.

It also includes the purchase of two additional Predator B unmanned aerial vehicles for surveillance of the border.

House leaders agreed to allow a vote on a separate bill after border lawmakers sent a letter urging immediate action.

The letter was initiated by Giffords, Rodriguez and Rep. Harry Teague, D-N.M.

Texas lawmakers who signed the letter included Rodriguez, Cuellar, Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi, Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-El Paso, and Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston.

Sierra Vista Herald

Although $701 million for border security was cut by the U.S. Senate last week from the war supplemental bill, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the same amount Wednesday in an emergency border security funding bill.

The funds’ revival was introduced by Democratic U.S. Rep. David Price of North Carolina, chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee.

U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Tucson, had fought for the funds since they were removed by the Senate. Arizona’s two GOP U.S. senators voted to remove the money and other funds totaling nearly $20 billion that had been added to the supplemental bill by House members.

“I promised members of the Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association when I spoke to them last week that I would fight for this funding,” said Giffords, who represents Arizona 8th Congressional District.

The first responsibility of the government is to protect its citizens from harm, and “the Senate failed in meeting this responsibility when it voted against border security last week,” said the congresswoman, whose district includes all of Cochise County.

Now the ball has been passed back to the Senate, where she said she hopes the upper chamber will quickly approve the funding.

While both of Arizona’s senators — John McCain and Jon Kyl — voted to remove the $20 billion in add-ons to the war supplemental bill, McCain said he would like to have a clean bill for border security presented so he could add amendments to strengthen border security. House Bill 5875 includes funds for 1,200 additional Border Patrol agents, 500 more Customs and Border Protection officers at ports of entry, improved tactical communication along the border, three permanent Border Patrol operating bases, two additional unmanned aerial vehicles, $201 million for the Department of Justice to hire additional agents for the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the Drug Enforcement Administration and the FBI for border duties and to hire additional prosecutors, $50 million for Operation Stonegarden grants to support local law enforcement activities and $30 million for Immigration and Customs Enforcement activities.

After the Senate’s action, Giffords worked with Price to introduce the emergency border appropriations bill.

At a news conference in Washington, Giffords said not having additional money for the border sent a message, especially from the Senate, to those who live along the international boundary: “Your lives, your safety are not important.”

Dr. Gary Thrasher, a Cochise County veterinarian and border resident, said he is pleased: “She’s been carrying the water a long time on this and I’m proud of her,” he said.

Tucson Sentinel

The U.S. House of Representatives voted Wednesday to boost spending on border security by $701 million.

The Senate stripped the border enforcement money from a war spending bill last Thursday. After a weeks’ pushing by Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Border Security Act was passed on a voice vote Wednesday evening.

A separate military appropriations bill, which passed the House 411-6, includes $70.4 million in funds for new military facilities in Southern Arizona, including hangers at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base and Fort Huachuca.

The border bill includes funding for:

* 1,200 additional Border Patrol agents.

* 500 more Customs and Border Protection officers at ports.

* Improved tactical communications along the Southwestern border.

* Three permanent Border Patrol forward operating bases.

* $50 million for Operation Stonegarden grants to support local law enforcement on the border.

* Two additional unmanned aircraft systems.

* $30 million for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

* $201 million for the Department of Justice to hire more agents for the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the Drug Enforcement Administration and the FBI and to hire additional prosecutors.

The House had originally passed the border funding earlier this month, 239-182.

Giffords worked with Rep. David Price of North Carolina, chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, to introduce emergency appropriation legislation solely for border security.

Giffords thanked Price for “standing up against the narco-terrorists and showing Americans that this Congress is serious about border security,” in a speech to the House on Wednesday.

“Residents in my district are fed-up. They are tired of the break-ins, thefts, threats of violence and trash caused by the smuggling of drugs and people across their land every day,” Giffords said.

After the House approved the border funding, Giffords noted that some senators said they voted against the money last week because it was attached to an emergency appropriations bill that provided $32.8 billion for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“Those senators said unrelated domestic programs should not be attached to funding for these two critical military operations,” Giffords said. “I disagreed with that reasoning. To me national security means border security.”

The bill will return to the Senate for consideration.

Military projects

The 2011 military construction appropriation passed Wednesday includes $70.4 millin for seven Southern Arizona projects.

The largest single local item in the bill is $25 million for a hanger facility at the “Boneyard” at Davis-Monthan. The facility will allow the 309th Aircraft Maintenance and Regeneration Group to perform its work on larger aircraft year-round without impacts from high temperatures, lightening or wind.

The hanger will support maintenance and repair of Air Force regeneration and reclamation of C-130, KC-135 and P-3 aircraft. The planes will be sold to foreign countries, returned to Department of Defense service or used by other federal and state agencies. The hanger will have a clearance height of 52 feet and be large enough to house two KC-135 planes.

The other projects:

* Fort Huachuca Reaper Launch and Recovery hanger: $11 million – Will provide a hanger and maintenance shops for the Arizona Air National Guard’s 214th Recon Group. The facility will support a Predator unit mission of four unmanned aerial systems scheduled to arrive in 2010. Will include hangar space configured to adapt to multiple aircraft types and maintenance shops as well as communications equipment and video-link capabilities.

* Davis-Monthan HC-130 aerial cargo facility: $10.7 million – Will provide space to process, maintain and store HC-130J aerial cargo for combat search and rescue assets.

* Davis-Monthan HC-130J parts store: $8.2 million – Will provide space to maintain and store parts and assemblies necessary to maintain the HC-130J aircraft.

* Marana Parachute Training Facility: $6.25 million – To build a 19,000-square-foot Special Operations Command parachute training and operations facility. The building will support ongoing operations and international commitments for jump training.

* Davis-Monthan HC-130 aircraft ground equipment maintenance facility: $4.6 million – Will provide space to perform equipment maintenance in support of combat search and rescue missions.

* Air National Guard, Davis-Monthan Predator facility: $4.65 million – Will expand existing facilities for an Active Duty Associate wing to be based alongside the Arizona Air National Guard’s 214th Recon Group in Tucson at D-M. This effort is designed to fully integrate the Air Guard with the Active Duty Air Force.

Tucson Weekly

Representative Gabrielle Giffords says today’s ruling imposing a partial injunction against SB 1070 by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton is “an affirmation of the fact that the enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws is the responsibility of federal government.”

She also took the opportunity to push for her $701 million in emergency border security funds.

The statement reads:

The latest chapter in what promises to be a lengthy legal fight over Arizona’s immigration law has been written. But this court battle must not be allowed to distract us from the real issue: Arizonans want our nation to control its borders and bring a halt to the violence, smugglers and drugs that threaten our communities.

State lawyers arguing with federal lawyers will not help us secure our border, fix our broken immigration system or improve safety for the ranchers of Cochise County, the seniors of Green Valley or the families of Tucson.

Judge Bolton’s ruling is an affirmation of the fact that the enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws is the responsibility of federal government. It is time — in fact, it is way past time — for the federal government to start taking that responsibility seriously.

Congress must act to protect and defend the American people. This is why I am fighting for $701 million in emergency border security funding to train and hire additional Border Patrol agents and bring more surveillance technology to the border.

Shamefully, the Senate stripped these funds from appropriations legislation they approved last week. Later this evening, when the House is expected to approve my bill to restore these critical funds, the ball will be back in the Senate’s court. I urge Senators not to let the people of Arizona down.

Arizona’s immigration law was passed because we were fed up with years of federal inaction and neglect. We are angry and we are frustrated. But we must seize this opportunity and get the job done.

The Hill Congress Blog

It was Ronald Reagan who famously said, “I am not worried about the deficit. It is big enough to take care of itself.”

That may have been the case in 1981 when Reagan took office. But today, the deficit is so bloated – more than five times what it was at the beginning of Reagan’s presidency – that it is far too corpulent to care for itself.

So it now is time – in fact, it is way past time – for us to take care of the deficit. The Truth in Spending Act, which we are introducing, is one solid way to begin reining in this rapidly expanding threat.

The national debt recently hit a record-breaking $13 trillion – and it is growing by a staggering $1 million every 30 seconds.

Clearly, the reasons for the deficit are many – and so are the solutions. But we in Congress must accept our share of the blame – even though many increases in the deficit came not because of bad intentions but because of bad information.

The Congressional Budget Office employs talented economists whose job it is to study every aspect of every bill and predict how much each will cost – or how much each will save – years into the future.

They are good, but they are not infallible soothsayers. Economic predictions that are off just a little in a year can become wildly inaccurate over the course of decades.

Examples of that abound:

·        In 1965, as Congress considered legislation to establish the Medicare program, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated the hospital insurance part of the program would cost $9 billion annually in 1990. Actual cost in 1990: $67 billion.

·        In 1989, Congress considered adding a catastrophic coverage benefit to Medicare to take effect in 1990. The CBO cost estimate was $5.7 billion. One year later, the estimate was raised to $11.8 billion and Congress responded by repealing the program before it took effect.

·        In 2008, CBO estimated the 2002 and 2008 farm bills combined would generate federal budget deficits of $49.8 billion. The actual cost later was reported at $87.9 billion.

There also are errors that are wrong in the other direction.

·        CBO projected Medicare’s hospital payment system would save $10 billion over 10 years. Actual savings: $21 billion.

·        In 2003, CBO projected that a new Medicare drug benefit would cost $518 billion. The price tag, three years later: $382 billion.

Our Truth in Spending Act won’t make predictions more accurate. But it will force Congress to take action when predictions are inaccurate.

The legislation would require the Office of Management and Budget to check cost estimates for legislation five and 10 years after laws take effect to determine the accuracy of the predictions.

When costs are higher than or savings lower than predicted, the Truth in Spending Act creates a fast-track process to reduce excess costs through legislation.

This legislation also would cover laws already passed. Laws passed from 2005 to the present also would be included.

We can get a handle on the federal deficit by putting teeth into the cost estimates that legislation is built upon.

Good information leads to good legislation. Our Truth in Spending Act is a contract with the American people that will force Congress to live within budgetary estimates for legislation.

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords had some strong words for the U.S. Senate last week, after they knocked down her bill, the Emergency Border Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, which would allot an extra $701 million to fortify the border.

“Southern Arizonans should be appalled that the United States Senate said ‘no’ to supporting the troops on the border, said ‘no’ to protecting the ranchers in my district who are threatened daily and said ‘no’ to increasing border patrol agents who would help stop the flow of drugs and illegal immigrants into our country,” Giffords said in a statement last Friday.

But now she says the bill is back on track.

Giffords’ spokesperson, CJ Karamargin, says the bill is scheduled for a vote on the House floor this afternoon.

“We think it’s going to pass, but Congress is sometimes an amazing institution,” he says.

The bill would put about $350 million into Border Patrol salaries and expenses, and another $30 million into ICE salaries and expenses. The Department of Justice would get roughly $200 million for “necessary expenses for increased law enforcement activities related to Southwest border enforcement.” State and local programs would get $50 million, while another $34 would go to acquisition and deployment of unmanned aircraft along the border. Roughly $14 million would go to “Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology.”

Giffords is one of 10 co-sponsors on the bill that was introduced by Rep. David Price of North Carolina.

Fox 11 News

Congresswoman Giffords sends news on Congress canceling cash for border security.

U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and two colleagues from southwest border states are urging House leaders to restore $701 million in border security funds that were stripped from an appropriations bill last week by the Senate.

“This funding is essential to maintain safe communities on the border and crack down on drug smuggling and other border crime,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. “We strongly urge you to work with the Senate to reinstate this funding.”

Signing the letter with Giffords are U.S. Reps. Ciro D. Rodriguez of Texas and Harry Teague of New Mexico.

Giffords will speak about border security funding tomorrow morning on the floor of the House. Her remarks are expected to take place between 10 and 10:30 a.m., Arizona time.

Giffords first raised this issue on Friday, when she strongly criticized the Senate for stripping the border security funds from the Fiscal Year 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Bill. She called the Senate’s refusal to provide the emergency border security funds “the kind of Washington gridlock that Americans are sick of.”

Giffords repeated that criticism this morning in an interview on Fox News.

The money stripped from the bill by the Senate would have paid for additional Border Patrol agents, surveillance technology and assistance to local law enforcement agencies. A similar bill was approved by the House on July 2.

The failure of the Senate to act was covered locally by KMSB, KGUN, KVOA, the Sierra Vista Herald and Arizona Daily Star.

“I am appalled that Senators would turn their back on Americans who live and work on or near the border,” Giffords said. “These citizens have called on their federal government to send troops, Border Patrol agents and surveillance equipment to stop the drug cartels that are threatening them on their land and in their homes. The first responsibility of government is to protect its citizens from harm and the Senate must agree to restore this essential funding.”

Sierra Vista Herald

Add-ons to war funding bill blamed for defeat in Senate

The demise in the U.S. Senate of more than $700 million for border security brought reaction Friday from both sides of the political aisle.

Arizona Democratic U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords said she was appalled by Senate action on a House bill that includes the extra money for border security.

“Southern Arizonans should be appalled that the United States Senate said no to supporting our troops on the border, said no to protecting the ranches in my district who are threatened daily and said no to increasing Border Patrol agents who would help stop the flow of drugs and illegal immigrants into our country. Arizonans repeatedly have said they want stronger border security, and senators yesterday turned their backs on them,” she said Friday.

Arizona Republican U.S. Sen. John McCain said the $80 billion supplemental bill has more than $20 billion of add-ons by House members to the detriment of fiscal responsibility.

“I will concede that  some of this funding may be necessary. But it should not be added to a must-pass bill to fund our troops, and it should be fully offset. … The supplemental also contains the president’s request for increased personnel and technology to improve border security; however, the House made several changes that are detrimental to Arizona’s border security and our nation’s homeland security,” he said.

Giffords and McCain are running for re-election, and both have made border security a key issue in their campaigns. The congresswoman has a TV ad involving Cochise County residents and their safety concerns. Along Interstate 10 are billboards touting McCain’s involvement in finding solutions to the border problem.

While Giffords and McCain will not face each other since they serve in different congressional chambers, the two-term congresswoman said the $701 million for border security in the supplemental appropriations bill was passed July 2 by the House on a 239-182 vote.

In the Senate, the bill  was defeated, with 51 senators voting no and 46 voting yes. The four Democratic senators in California and New Mexico voted for it.  The four Republicans representing Arizona and Texas were opposed.

Giffords said the long-awaited deployment of National Guard forces to the border — with Arizona getting 524 of 1,200 troops — was supposed to be helped by additional nonmilitary individuals and equipment that were to be  part of the $701 million.

Calling the success of the Guard deployment now “in doubt,” Giffords said the troops “were intended as a bridge until additional agents from the Border Patrol are hired, trained and in place. The Senate action removes funding for those additional agents, raising questions about the effectiveness of the Guard deployment.”

The increase in violence south of the U.S. border with Mexico and the ”brazen actions” of those involved in drug cartels has led to incidents spilling across the international boundary to include the death of a Douglas-area rancher, Giffords said.

“And it is commonplace to see heavily armed drug runners coming across ranch land and into the communities of Southern Arizona,” said Giffords, whose Arizona 8th Congressional District includes Cochise County.

She said she sought additional funding after violence increased in Mexico and because agents in the Tucson Sector of the Border Patrol deal with 47 percent of the illegal immigrants in the entire country along with large amounts of drugs.

In a speech before the Senate ahead of the vote, McCain mentioned many of the add-ons to the bill, the main purpose of which is to provide additional funds to support U.S. forces in combat. He said the add-ons would increase the budget deficit.

When it comes to the supplement for increased personnel and technology along the border, he said, “The president’s announcement of additional personnel and resources to the Southwest border is a step in the right direction. However, a lot more needs to be done, including making the deployment of federal agents permanent.”

It was wrong to add to the bill important needs to secure the border, he said.

“Such funding for border security should not be included in a war supplemental bill but instead be considered in the regular order where amendments are able to be considered,” McCain said.

Saying he supports  President Barack Obama in rescinding $100 million for the “failed virtual fence,” he said he does not support the House’s actions to cut an additional $100 million which would go to completing a real border fence.

Now, with the defeat of the bill and the stripping out of all items not involving supplemental funds to support forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, the measure will be sent to the House for a vote without amendments being allowed.

AT A GLANCE

In defeating the war supplemental bill in the Senate on Thursday night, 45 Democrats and one independent voted for it and 39 Republicans, 11 Democrats and one independent voted against the proposal. Two Republicans and one Democrat did not vote.

The $60 billion war supplemental bill saw the price go up by nearly $23 billion added by members of the House of Representatives, including:

• $10 billion for education jobs programs.

• $4.95 billion for Pell grants.

• $701 million for border security.

• $180 million for emergency loans.

• $163 million for schools on military installations.

• $142 million for the Gulf oil spill.

• $50 million for Emergency Food Assistance.

• $16.5 million for a new soldier processing center at Fort Hood, Texas.

• Other programs.

The $701 million for beefing up border security along the international boundary with Mexico included more than $208 million for 1,200 additional Border Patrol agents, $201 million for Justice Department programs and temporary deployment of special investigative teams and attorneys, prosecutors and immigration judges, $136 million for 500 additional officers at ports of entry, $50 million for grants to support local law enforcement agencies, more than $35 million for improved tactical combinations and three BP forward operating bases, $32 million for an additional two unmanned surveillance aircraft and $30 million to add customs agents.

Arizona Daily Star Pueblo Politics Blog

Democratic U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords says she is outraged at her Senate colleagues for killing $700 million in emergency border security funds from a war funding appropriations bill.

On Thursday night, the Senate voted against some $20 billion in domestic spending that was tacked onto a $59 billion war funding request. The additional projects included stepped-up border security efforts, as well as money for teachers, summer jobs and student loans.

In large part, Republicans said the funding was an end-run around the pay-as-you-go law that requires new discretionary spending to be offset with either cuts or revenue increases.

Giffords, who has an ad running touting her efforts on border security, and who is poised to receive a service award Saturday morning from the Arizona Cattlemen’s Association for her work on border issues, said stripping out the funding calls into question how effective the National Guard can be when it takes its place on the border next month.

President Obama decided in May to put 1,200 soldiers — 524 of them in Arizona — along the southern border.

“Southern Arizonans should be appalled that the United States Senate said ‘no’ to supporting the troops on the border, said ‘no’ to protecting the ranchers in my district who are threatened daily and said ‘no’ to increasing border patrol agents who would help stop the flow of drugs and illegal immigrants into our country,” Giffords said in a written statement.

Chalking the vote up to Washington gridlock, Giffords said the troops were only intended to serve as a bridge until more border staff arrived. “This long-overdue deployment was not to take place in a vacuum, and the success of their mission now is in doubt,” she said.

The money stripped from the bill included $208 million for 1,200 additional Border Patrol agents, $136 million for additional officers and canine teams at ports of entry, as well as money for additional courts and detention costs.

The House version of the supplemental appropriations bill passed earlier this month with 239 votes in support. Fifteen Democrats and 167 of 177 Republicans voted against the measure.

Giffords said she sought the funding because of the increased violence in Mexico and because the Border Patrol’s Tucson sector apprehends nearly half of the illegal immigrants detained in the entire nation.

“The drug cartels have become more brazen than ever,” Giffords continued, “and it is commonplace to see heavily armed drug runners coming across ranch land and into the communities of Southern Arizona.”

Lt. Valentine Castillo, a spokesman for the Arizona National Guard, said he could not comment on Giffords’ concerns.

Sen. Jon Kyl said on the Greta VanSusteren show Thursday night that there are several keys to securing the border, including the Guard troops, additional surveillance equipment and an adequate supply of Border Patrol staff. “I mean, there is no substitute for the law enforcement officials,” he said.

His staff did not return calls seeking comment about the vote.

In a floor statement, Sen. John McCain said he could not support it because it was not paid for and the price tag was too high.

He said that could have been remedied with a host of cuts, including a one-year moratorium on raises and bonuses for federal employees, reducing printing costs of government documents, eliminating non-essential government travel and cutting the budgets of members of Congress. “We’ve saddled future generations with literally trillions of dollars of debt,” he said.

“When is it going to end? If we are going to dig ourselves out of this fiscal mess then we must begin to make some very tough and often politically unpopular decisions,” McCain said.

Conceding some of the funding requests could very well be necessary — and singling out border security as one area in need — McCain said it should not have been added to a bill meant to provide support for ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

He said, too, that the House border package didn’t provide as much as the President requested for construction and maintenance of the border fence.

Asked to respond to McCain’s concerns that the spending was a way around the PAYGO provisions, Giffords’ spokesman C.J. Karamargin said, “The congresswoman has said all along that border security has to be a top priority. Period.”

U.S. Rep. Raúl Grijalva, meanwhile, was dismayed at losing the additional education resources, saying it would have helped stem cuts to school districts and address a continuing shortfall in Pell Grants.

“I am dismayed at the Senate for not understanding what our communities are going through on a daily basis,” the Tucson Democrat said. “This will add to burden that our teachers already face.”

U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords on Saturday will speak about border security to ranchers from across Arizona who are gathered in Tucson this week for their 106th annual convention.

During the convention, Giffords also will receive the organization’s Public Service Award for her work to secure the border.

The congresswoman is expected to start speaking at 8 a.m. at the convention at Loews Ventana Canyon. She will then take questions.

More than 300 ranching families are scheduled to attend the annual three-day convention. During her Saturday morning speech, Giffords will discuss her recent efforts to strengthen security along the border, especially on the isolated ranches of Southeastern Arizona.

It was in that part of the state that Rob Krentz, a rancher, was killed March 27. Immediately after Krentz was killed, Giffords said a swift, strong response was needed and she called for the deployment of the National Guard.

President Obama agreed in late May to send 1,200 troops to the nation’s Southern border. The first troops are expected to begin arriving Aug. 1.

The Hill.com

Arizona Democrat Gabrielle Giffords used Twitter Friday to express her anger that a border security appropriation in the $59 billion war funding bill was rejected by the Senate Thursday night.

While the July 1 House version of the measure included more than $20 billion for domestic spending, the version upheld by the Senate is limited to war appropriations, foreign aid, veterans’ benefits and a FEMA disaster relief provision.

“While I would have preferred that the Senate take up and pass H.R. 4899 as further amended by the House, an amendment that addressed several additional critical needs, I understand that we were not going to get 60 votes for that to happen,” said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii).

In addition to the border security provision endorsed by Giffords, the House version had included more than $15 billion for education.

Giffords, who represents the Tucson area, tweeted:

More Washington gridlock: Senate stripped border security funding from the supplemental last night. I’m outraged.”

As a businessman, I put a high priority on honesty, transparency and fair play. I support Gabrielle Giffords because she fights for these values every day.

Only 18 months ago, the recklessness and greed of some on Wall Street devastated the life savings of Southern Arizona families and seniors, caused record job losses and forced many Southern Arizona businesses to close their doors.

Yesterday, our country took a big step towards restoring economic fair play when the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act became law. Gabrielle voted twice for these reforms that hold Wall Street accountable for its abuses, protect consumers and level the playing field in the market.

We are lucky to have Gabrielle on our side, taking on Wall Street greed and fighting for hardworking families and the honest businesses in our community.

Thank you, Gabrielle, for standing up for Southern Arizona families and fair play!

Sincerely,

Dr. Jeff Britt

President and CEO of Tucson-based Global Solar

By Rep. Gabrielle Giffords

The Hill’s Congress Blog

At the Major League Baseball All-Star Game on July 13, Commissioner Bud Selig was heavily pressured to move next year’s game from Phoenix because of Arizona’s immigration law.

To his credit, Selig refused to accede to the demands, correctly pointing out that neither keeping the game in Phoenix nor moving it would affect Arizona lawmakers.

“We’ll do things when baseball can influence decisions,” Selig wisely told The New York Times. “I’ll say that very clearly. And this situation will be solved in the political process at the appropriate time.”

Good for Bud Selig.

The commissioner understands that this ill-conceived push to “punish” Arizona for enacting a new state immigration law is harming innocent individuals and businesses that were just beginning to see better times after a devastating recession.

That not only makes this boycott unfair but ineffective. As Selig understands, the people behind the immigration legislation aren’t impacted by boycotts. Instead, those who had nothing to do with the law or may even have actively fought its passage now are being hit in the pocketbook.

There are other examples of the unintended and unfair impacts of these boycotts.

A Tucson company that manufactures equipment for the solar industry recently was prohibited from submitting a bid for a project with the Los Angeles Unified School District.

That prohibition came because the city of Los Angeles has banned local governments from conducting business or signing new contracts with Arizona businesses until the immigration law is repealed.

Because of that prohibition, this Tucson business — which is not involved in the immigration debate — could not even compete for a contract that could have been worth up to $4 million. That is not only lost revenue for a local company, but lost tax money for cash-strapped Arizona governments.

I am among many Arizonans who have concerns about this new immigration law. I view it as a divisive distraction from the real issue for my constituents: securing Arizona’s border with Mexico.

But concerns about the law will not be addressed by unfairly targeting innocent businesses and their employees. The harm done to working people in Arizona will not change the law.

According to an economic analysis by the University of Arizona, the “Great Recession” hit Arizona especially hard. From the third quarter of 2007 through year-end 2009, Arizona lost one in every nine jobs. Unemployment topped 9 percent, up from 3.5 percent only two years earlier.

Just within the past few months, Arizona has seen sure signs of recovery. But in many areas of the state’s still-fragile economy, those small gains are being wiped out by calls for boycotts over the state’s immigration law.

State tourism officials recently said spending by overnight visitors to Arizona dropped by 10.2 percent in 2009 from the year before. With calls for a boycott of Arizona, this already dire situation will only get worse.

The Arizona Hotel & Lodging Association said the boycotts are hurting the hourly wage-earners “who work at these hotels and rely on visitors in order for them to have jobs.” A boycott, the association noted, will punish the 200,000 workers in the tourism industry in Arizona who rely on visitors to feed their families.

My fervent hope is that Arizona’s immigration law will serve as a wake-up call to Congress and the administration who for too long have not taken seriously their responsibility to address the crisis on our border.

In the meantime, boycotts are counterproductive and will seriously harm many innocent people. I’ve made this very point in letters to every city and organization that has announced or is considering a boycott.

Bud Selig has set a good example. Arizonans will benefit if more people live up to it.

In “Gets It,” the Republican Glenn, whose family has ranched along the U.S.-Mexico border for 100 years, explains what Giffords is doing to keep southern Arizona safe from smugglers and border violence.

“Gets It” will begin airing today in the Tucson market. Click here to view the ad.

Since taking office in 2007, Gabrielle has been one of the strongest advocates in Congress for securing the border and fixing our broken immigration system. Along with border representatives from both parties, she has fought to:

• Secure the border through measures such as doubling the number of Border Patrol officers and deploying National Guard troops to the Arizona sectors of the border.
• Break down the power of Mexican drug cartels by blocking the flow of money they receive and increasing prison sentences for those who smuggle drugs across the border.
• Punish employers who hire illegal workers in Arizona and throughout the US.

Click here to watch "Gets It."

Since taking office in 2007, Gabrielle has been one of the strongest advocates in Congress for securing the border and fixing our broken immigration system. Along with border representatives from both parties, she has fought to:

• Secure the border through measures such as doubling the number of Border Patrol officers and deploying National Guard troops to the Arizona sectors of the border.
• Break down the power of Mexican drug cartels by blocking the flow of money they receive and increasing prison sentences for those who smuggle drugs across the border.
• Punish employers who hire illegal workers in Arizona and throughout the US.

Click here to read more about Gabrielle’s work to secure the border.

Transcript of “Gets It”

Fifth-generation Cochise County Rancher Warner Glenn:

For generations, we’ve worked this land.

Today, it’s ground zero for coyotes, drugs and violence.

But Gabrielle Giffords is doing something about it.

She battled non-stop to get the National Guard down here,

Helped secure more border agents,

And wrote a bill to toughen penalties for drug smugglers.

Gabrielle Giffords gets it.

Gabrielle Giffords:

I’m Gabrielle Giffords and I approve this message.

Gabrielle Giffords voted twice to protect Southern Arizona consumers and hold Wall Street accountable for its reckless abuses that brought our economy to a screeching halt in 2008. Now these new protections are poised to become law when the President signs the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act on Wednesday, July 21.

Any candidate for office owes it to Southern Arizona to say where they stand on these critical reforms that protect consumers and re-establish the level playing field a strong economy depends on.

At least we know where Jesse Kelly stands. At a Douglas Tea Party rally on Saturday, he promised to repeal the Wall Street reforms if elected.

Former corporate lobbyist Paton has not taken a stand. The only indication of his position is his unwavering defense of the payday lenders who paid him thousands of dollars in protection money, despite Southern Arizona’s two-to-one opposition to this predatory industry.

Giffords is the only candidate to hold Wall Street accountable.
“I fight every day to make life better for Southern Arizonans,” Giffords said. “That’s why I voted twice to fight the greed and recklessness that led to record job loss and economic destruction. The people of Southern Arizona deserve to know where their candidates for public service stand on protecting hard working families from Wall Street greed.”

Once the candidates make their choices, Southern Arizona voters will make their own.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords has gained statewide recognition as Arizona’s biggest champion for tourism for her work to stop the misplaced and harmful economic boycott against Arizona.

Brian Johnson, managing director of Loews Ventana Canyon Resort located in Giffords’ district in Tucson, and other tourism industry officials at last week’s Governor’s Conference on Tourism lauded Giffords for her fight against the boycott.

As reported by The Arizona Republic’s Dawn Gilbertson on Sunday, July 18, Johnson “singled out U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., as the industry’s biggest supporter during the backlash. She has gone on national television to tout the industry’s economic impact in Arizona and to argue against boycotts. She also has called, at individual hoteliers’ requests, groups that are thinking of canceling meetings because they don’t want to face the controversy. ‘She has really stepped up to the plate as our tourism champion,’ Brian Johnson said. He and others suggested that attendees write her a thank-you note and/or make a campaign contribution.” (“Tourism industry: Elect candidates who back us,” The Arizona Republic, Jul. 18, 2010.) Read the full article here.

Gabrielle strongly opposes any boycott of Arizona. These boycotts are ill-conceived and counterproductive.  They harm innocent workers and businesses just as our state’s economy is beginning to recover from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Boycotts will drain needed tourism and tax dollars from our already struggling state and hurt Arizona hospitality workers more than any other segment of our economy. In recent weeks, Gabrielle has written to 43 cities and organizations and two federal agencies urging them to support Arizona’s workers and reverse plans to boycott in protest of Arizona’s new immigration law.

The tourism fallout from the state’s new immigration law is sparking calls for more political activism by industry members.

At the annual Governor’s Conference on Tourism in Tucson last week, industry leaders encouraged attendees to support politicians who have come to their support in the wake of meeting cancellations and calls for travel boycotts of the state and to vote out anyone they feel has caused some of the damage.

“Now is our opportunity as an industry to take our elected leaders who are not supporting our industry and get them out of office,” said Debbie Johnson, CEO of the Arizona Hotel & Lodging Association.

Brian Johnson, managing director of Loews Ventana Canyon Resort in Tucson, singled out U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., as the industry’s biggest supporter during the backlash. She has gone on national television to tout the industry’s economic impact in Arizona and to argue against boycotts.

She also has called, at individual hoteliers’ requests, groups that are thinking of canceling meetings because they don’t want to face the controversy.

“She has really stepped up to the plate as our tourism champion,” Brian Johnson said.

He and others suggested that attendees write her a thank-you note and/or make a campaign contribution.

Debbie Johnson said U.S. Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz., has been “fantastic” in helping to get correct information out about the new law.

Not getting the industry’s love: Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz. Tourism officials believe he made Senate Bill 1070 a tourism issue when he called for a travel boycott of the state just before the bill was signed in April.

Brian Johnson said the industry has twice sent him letters about his calls for a boycott, asking him in one case for an apology. There has been no response. “To me it appears that he’s turned his back on our industry,” Brian Johnson said. “That has been very, very disappointing.”

Ruth McClung, a physicist and rocket scientist in Tucson, is running in the Republican primary in August in hopes of facing Grijalva in November. She attended the opening reception of the tourism conference. Her campaign slogan: “Boycott Grijalva, not Arizona.”