2,000 new border agents aren't part of budget, Ridge says

[truthpusher]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=710&u=/usatoday/20050125/pl_usatoday/2000newborderagentsarentpartofbudgetridgesays&printer=1

2,000 new border agents aren't part of budget, Ridge says

Tue Jan 25, 7:25 AM ET

By Mimi Hall, USA TODAY

President Bush (news - web sites) will not ask Congress for enough money to add 2,000 agents to patrol the nation's borders in his 2006 budget, even though he signed a bill last month authorizing the increase.

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said Monday that Bush's new budget, to be released in early February, will propose a "good incremental increase" in the number of agents. But he made it clear the number would not approach 2,000. The new agents were to be the first hires toward doubling the size of the force over five years.

As part of a sweeping intelligence bill passed in December, Congress called for nearly doubling the size of the Border Patrol by adding 10,000 agents over five years. The agency has about 11,000 agents; 90% work along the southern border with Mexico.

But in an interview with USA TODAY, Ridge scoffed at the notion of adding so many agents and said it would be an inefficient use of precious homeland security dollars.


more:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=710&u=/usatoday/20050125/pl_usatoday/2000newborderagentsarentpartofbudgetridgesays&printer=1

[pinto]

1. and the obvious f/u? would be, where are the "precious" HS $'s going now?

[liberal N proud]

2. Classic bush style, pass legislation mandating something

then not providing funds.
Same as No Child Left Behind.

This time, they need the weak link in border security for many reasons.
One of them is the illegals crossing to do the cheap labor.
Another reason is terrorism, If the need arises to allow another terror attack within the US, they need to have a route the terrorist can cross the border undetected.
Drug trafficking is probably in there as well.