September 17th, 2009
05:00 PM ET

DHS secretly approves $15 million border checkpoint that 3 people cross a day?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Homeland Security ought to be embarrassed by the way its spending stimulus money... with the administration even coming under fire from fellow Democrats on this one.

Turns out they're not following their own internal priority lists when deciding which border checkpoints get money for renovations. Instead - they're using a secretive process potentially influenced by politics. Just like President Obama promised during the campaign, right?

This translates to spending millions of dollars at tiny checkpoints... and skipping over busier, high-priority areas. One example is a $15-million dollar project in Whitetail, Montana where only 3 people cross a day.

This is insane. President Obama continues to promise transparency when it comes to the spending of economic stimulus dollars, but this is far from the openness the American people were promised.

Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota says the department is treating the stimulus plan like a "bottomless pit" of taxpayer money, and that with the country deep in debt "this is not a smart investment."

Now, of course, since this all came out, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is promising not to start any new border construction projects, and review how the projects were chosen. She says once the review is done, she'll make "all information, not involving national security concerns, public."

But it's kind of late for that. Even if she releases some information, it probably won't change much, since the department has already signed many construction contracts - like the $15-million dollar one in Montana. She should be fired.

Here’s my question to you: What does it say about transparency when Homeland Security has secretly approved $15 million for a border checkpoint where only three people cross a day?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

Filed under: Immigration
soundoff (166 Responses)
  1. Peg from NY

    Government at it's finest~more lies and ridiculous monies spent. This should be stopped, regardless of contracts, etc. The monies need to go to something constructive, like helping the middle class.

    September 17, 2009 at 2:38 pm |
  2. Ed from California

    Isn't Max Baucus from The Big Sky State? And for an additional $15m, all we get is a Health bill that was written by the Insurance lobby! Seriously, I guess that's where those sneaky Canucks are coming in to get our Medical care. Good, now we can stop em.

    September 17, 2009 at 2:44 pm |
  3. Pete - Augusta Ga

    Jack –

    Give me the $15MM & I'll move to northern Montana & build a nice home at the border crossing – I will personally guarantee those 3 Canadians trying to cross our border (in my front yard) will not pose any threat to our country. If I can arrange for 24/7 hockey on a big screen TV they'll probably simply stay at my house & return to Canada when I run out of beer. EH!!

    September 17, 2009 at 2:45 pm |
  4. Rus in St. Paul, MN

    Well, you never can be too careful to defend the nation against those Canadians coming down through Montana and stealing our jobs 3 per day. By the year 2178 they'll completely take over the US. I for one am glad we are putting an end to this now and I consider it money well spent! (and I apologize sarcasm doesn't carry over in written word).

    September 17, 2009 at 2:46 pm |
  5. Allan Hanson Placerville,Ca

    Government at its most efficient. We have too many of these idiocies.

    September 17, 2009 at 2:48 pm |
  6. James in North Carolina

    President Obama is like all other previous presidents. It's easier to campaign for President and make promises than it is to govern with the Congress doing it's own thing irregardless of the President's agenda.

    September 17, 2009 at 2:53 pm |
  7. Diane Dagenais Turbide

    Democrats should start moving more to Montana!

    I mean what else can I say Jack!

    September 17, 2009 at 2:57 pm |
  8. Al from SoCal

    Where is the surprise? Its not like the Obama administration doen't lie about things. Maybe CNN and othe Obama supporting networks should start doing their job, do some investigating into Obama undertakings, -before it too late... to late for America..

    September 17, 2009 at 3:05 pm |
  9. Bonnie Lough

    Usually I have much to comment on with your questions Jack, but I have to say, this one has just rendered me speechless!

    September 17, 2009 at 3:09 pm |
  10. Robert, New Orleans

    Jack: I find it hard to believe these construction contracts within the federal system were planned and signed under Obama. Knowing the federal procurement system, I'm sure these were planned during the Bush administration, and probably benefit some friends of the family.

    September 17, 2009 at 3:10 pm |
  11. Gary H. Boyd

    Jack - Your commentary concludes with the suggestion Janet Napolitano should be fired. I couldn't agree more. Before President Obama, in his infinite wisdom, selected her as his Secretary of Homeland Security, she was the Governor of my state - Arizona and she was lousy at that job too.
    Obama got her out of here and promoted her to the level of her incompetence. Now she's gone from being Arizona's problem to one of being America's problem. Boy oh boy, Obama sure can pick 'em.

    Gary Boyd in Scottsdale, Arizona

    September 17, 2009 at 3:18 pm |
  12. jerry

    Jack, I finally agree with you on something! This was such a stupid idea that whomever made it should be fired twice...Want to bet nothing happens.

    September 17, 2009 at 3:35 pm |
  13. Craig

    is it safe to say anything about dhs!

    September 17, 2009 at 3:35 pm |
  14. SLM

    Another example of government waste and they wonder why there are TEA parties!!

    September 17, 2009 at 3:35 pm |
  15. Agnes from Scottsdale, AZ

    Jack: I'd say we need to get all the facts. Homeland Securitiy is led by a very able person in Janet Napalitano. Remember when everyone was out to get Geitner fired back in February? Let's all take a deep breath and get to the botton of this. And remember, when you sign a contract with the government, there is always an "escape" clause that permits deeming the contract null and void. Let's stop getting hysterical Jack!!

    September 17, 2009 at 3:38 pm |
  16. Mark... Voorhees, New Jersey

    When was this done? Under the Bush administration? Now that would not surprise me. It is going to take years to root out all the corruption of the last eight years, if ever.We should start by nationalizing the "health"insurance companies.

    September 17, 2009 at 3:40 pm |
  17. Meg from Troy, Ohio

    It says that the President obviously can't be everywhere at once to insure transparency, so it is really important that his cabinet members are on the same page with him. Obviously, this situation is ridiculous and needs to be corrected at once. He needs a transparent meeting with his cabinet members spellling out his transparency policy.

    September 17, 2009 at 3:43 pm |
  18. Jerry Jacksonville, Fl.

    Some idiot or idiots should be fired, where in the world did these simple minded jerks come from. They have to be part of a group that doesn't have anything to do but try and see how much taxpayers money they can waste.

    September 17, 2009 at 3:46 pm |
  19. fred doofenshmirtz

    Maxine Waters extorted 50 million from TARP. Let's talk about that. Got RICO?

    September 17, 2009 at 3:47 pm |
  20. Terry, Chandler AZ

    I don't what it says about transparency, but it confirms what many of us in Arizaoona know about our former governor. She has a bit of a flaw when it involves being a good civil servant. Janet likes to be somewhat opaque in her management style. Hmmmmm, I guess that does saysomething about tlack of ransparency Jack.

    September 17, 2009 at 3:48 pm |
  21. David in San Diego

    What does this have to do with "transparency"? You learned about it. Does government contracting have to be conducted in public, before the fact? It may be a foolish decision and a relative waste of $$, but it doesn't lack "transparency."

    September 17, 2009 at 3:48 pm |
  22. tim

    Hell, President Obama is not responsible for every cent that is being spent from the stimulas plan. The person that was in charge of the funds for this project should be the one catching it for this one.

    September 17, 2009 at 3:50 pm |
  23. Bizz, Quarryville, Pennsylvania

    It means when promises of transparently are used in campaigns to get elected, it only amounts to a bunch of bull. But what is worse we have come to expect this and are not surprised when such things are revealed. Listing to a politician during a campaign is the same thing as listening to a used car salesman trying to sell you a car. You end up getting screwed.

    September 17, 2009 at 3:51 pm |
  24. Doris/St Louis

    This is just another example of how middle income Americans are shafted, we are told that the economy is taking a free fall, while the elected officals and wall street are having a free for all, on our dime.

    September 17, 2009 at 3:52 pm |
  25. Jim


    There are two sides to every argument. Commentators like you, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, and others present one side as if it's the only possible side. I'd like to know the real rational behind the Montana project. Maybe you're right and it's a silly waste, but I'd like to know precisely why that site was chosen for a $15 million dollar project before I start calling for Napolitano's head.

    Reno, Nevada

    September 17, 2009 at 3:53 pm |
  26. george

    Just like a flat tire Jack, sometimes you have to patch a tiny prick in the tire to stop all of the air from escaping. Guess we have to thank the guy who counted just three people a day, and brought this to the forefront, or is it just info from one of those "NO" people? By the way this guy should be commended for stopping those three people, or did he just count them?.

    September 17, 2009 at 3:56 pm |
  27. Michael, Alexandria, VA

    It says that we need some degree of vigialance at any border that al Queda can use. We have caught them coming from the north before. It would be moronic to let down our guard now.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:00 pm |
  28. Pete - Augusta Ga

    Jack –

    Ludicrous – clean house & start over with proper Congressional oversight. I'll even move there & guard this border crossing & carefully screen the 3 folks crossing every day.
    I can't be bought, but for $15MM I can sure be rented.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:05 pm |
  29. Jayne

    I suppose if that's the next border crossing a terrorist chooses to use, it will all be worth it. I have to admit though, this really sounds like a plan the Bush administration might have cooked up.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:07 pm |
  30. Wilhelm von Nord Bach

    notice the address of thhis money wasting project, Jack? Whitetail, Montana? looks like Senator Max "Bogus" Baucas STRIKES AGAIN!!!

    September 17, 2009 at 4:07 pm |
  31. david doherty

    Are you kidding me Jack, not only should Janet Napolitano be fired but anybody that had anything to do with this project or any like it, should be put on the streets. What do you spend 15 million dollars on at a border crossing that only see's 3 crossings aday, this is so unbelievable I can't even think straight. Jack please don't let this fade away, keep the heat on this, please!!!!!

    Dave from NH.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:07 pm |
  32. Bill from pa

    Maybe we should elected Ted Stevens president. He also seemed to champion minoritys

    September 17, 2009 at 4:08 pm |
  33. Dee in Palm Coast

    Well, YOU found out about it, right? So now it is transparent and we all know it.

    But what you SHOULD be asking is, WHERE IS THE $15 MILLION GOING?

    September 17, 2009 at 4:08 pm |
  34. Tina Tx

    What a waste of money. Business as usual.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:11 pm |
  35. andyzag Lynn, MA

    Again. I thought the days of waste were coming to an end. It shows Homeland Security can always live down to the moment. Any Committees in Congress investigating? Will anyone be fired over this? Jack, the sad point here is as soon as you discuss this on the air it will be forgotten. No one reprimanded, no one losing their job. Besides its only a few million.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:11 pm |
  36. Don (Ottawa)

    Let's face it Jack; this smells like another scheme to discredit the Administration and embarass the President. Remember Obama inherited not only the problems that were created by the Bush Administration, but many of the bureaucrats that caused them. This is just one more example.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:12 pm |
  37. CJ in Roanoke, VA

    Isn't gov't the "King of Waste"? If the gov't were a publicly traded company, it would be a penny stock. Come to think of it, the USD has been tanking lately with all of the money that has been printed and excessive debt.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:14 pm |
  38. JWC in Atlanta

    You know darn well what it says, Jack. But I can't help wonder why those brilliant Homeland Security folks just don't give those three people a million each NOT to cross. That would save 12 million and they could give themselves big bonuses for being so frugal with public money. Isn't that how it works these days?

    September 17, 2009 at 4:14 pm |
  39. Cameron in SF, CA

    This project is an example once again on how the stimulus package is too focused on short-term benefits instead of really investing in long-term growth. As much as I disagree with just putting billions into the economy when we don't have the money to begin with, if you're going to do it, do it right and spend it wisely.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:15 pm |
  40. Rufus in Twentynine Palms, CA

    Did I hear you correctly Jack? $15 million dollars for 3 border crossers? Since the Federal Government spends our tax dollars like a drunken sailor, each time one these 3 lucky border crossers approaches the border checkpoint, they should pass go and collect 200 dollars. The process of passing through the border in Whitetail, Montana should be referred to as "Cash for Crossers."

    September 17, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  41. Rich McKinney, Texas

    Jack the problem is not stepping up enforcement for where we already know people cross the border. The problem is not knowing where, who and when these people illegally cross the border and then hiring those that do. If there was no work in America for people that come here because they could not be employed by laws that prevent and are enforce those laws there would be no reason for them to come here in the first place. If we deported those illegally here then there would be no families for those that want to come here to see and be with. It is a vicious cycle Jack and America is a nation of laws. Unfortunately America is also a nation that does not adequately enforce its laws too.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  42. Dave, Brooklyn, NY

    If the money is to beef up security, that might be OK, as terrorists may find there way to a place like that and then we may wish we had spent a lot more. But for aesthetics – forget it. Even if a crossing looks like hell those who want to get into this country will cross there no matter what it looks like. To wit: we have hundreds of miles of border crossing points with high fences and barbed wire and that doesn’t seem to stop anyone. There are a lot better uses for that money, I know it, you know it, Congress knows it and the president knows it. What fool doesn’t know it and approved this? That is the question.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:17 pm |
  43. Joe from Fairfield Bay Arkansas

    It is no different than the Pentagon wanting to close a military base and our elected officials force them to keep it open. Pork and lobbying run the spending in Congress. I don't blame Obama for this. However, I have noticed he has backed as far away as he can from the line item veto. We need to clean house in Washington. Until we do, they will not get the message.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:17 pm |
  44. Ray from Lake Charles, La.

    Jack, What is proves is that we have a long way to go before prudent Government spending is a reality.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:18 pm |
  45. gymgalca

    I am seriously considering applying for the job of RUNNING the government. In the face of the Fly-by NYC fiasco, the "shots fired on the Potomac" fiasco and now this, I figure they need somebody with common sense.
    Why is it called common sense if it's not common Jack?

    September 17, 2009 at 4:18 pm |
  46. Greg, Ontario

    It says they dared to do something without clearing it with the media first. Only you would take a simple work project and turn it into some big deal. I'm sure if you looked into it the money was probably put aside for this a couple of years ago and is only now getting started.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
  47. Denis Duffy

    Promises, promises! Could it be that the President, oops there's that word again, lied to the American people about transperancy? President Obama is just another politician who will say anything to get elected. No more and as usual, a lot less.

    Upper Saint Clair, Pa.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:22 pm |
  48. Terry, TX

    Hey.....Americans screamed not to do the Job Pork Recovery Stimulus Bill.....because of the corruption in our government....this surprises theat money is going down the toilet.......how about getting the 80% that hasn't been spent yet.....and pay CHINA off.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:24 pm |
  49. Jay1975

    My God, fraud and waste from our government. I refuse to believe it. Left, right, it doesn't matter, they will take and waste our money.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:25 pm |
  50. Rob in NC

    I am always concerned when "homeland security" is involved. I usually feel anyhting but secure when they are involved. They are like a secret society answerable to no one. Supposedly under the guise of protecting the American people. Very Orwellian!! Rob in Nc

    September 17, 2009 at 4:26 pm |
  51. Jennifer, Canada

    Most Americans do not understand the border crossings between Canada and the US. It is so different from the Mexican/American border. You do not have to worry about illegals entereing at the rate they do from Mexico. The little border crossings in the western US and Canada are used mainly by the people living in the area and most Americans/Canadian do not know they exist. But now they will because of the insane spending to ensure the safety of the American border. Our border is safe, there are not the illegals crossing such as those with Mexico. In most cases it is difficult to distinguise a Canadian from an American, which is why many Americans travelling abroad put the Canadian flag on their lugguage and back packs so they will be treated better. I believe Janet Napolitano contributes to this as she is not very familiar with the traffic between our two countries. We are so entwined, and she is from Arizona, and would have no knowledge of the industry/vacation travel between our countries.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:27 pm |
  52. Sandra in Temecula, CA

    Wheres the promised transparency and the line by line elimination of wasteful spending that Obama promised? And they wonder why there are Tea parties and Town hall protests.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:29 pm |
  53. Tom Mytoocents Fort Lauderdale Florida

    When will we wake up and realize Homeland Security as Homeland Stupidity. Born of good sound logic it has become a useless waste of taxpayer money. Nothing good has come from this agency. Plagued by embarasment and a poster child of inefficeincy

    September 17, 2009 at 4:29 pm |
  54. Hubert Bertrand Oberlin La.

    This is what is happening everyday,We can't do a danm thing about it. It's their way of life.We need to end this world and start a new one, The next world people should not be so smart.have more love for each other, Just nice dreams Jack May god Bless you,

    September 17, 2009 at 4:32 pm |
  55. george charles paree

    Nuts jack people need jobs the president sleeps at night how muck can he care he doesnt. anderson in.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:32 pm |
  56. Lynn, Columbia, Mo..

    Three people is enough to fly a plane into a building. Two people blew up the Federal building in Oklahoma City. Our borders need to be secured and we need to be protected, no matter where.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:38 pm |
  57. Schyular Phillips Wilton, Iowa

    What a shameful waste of taxpayer money.They should of spent that money at every major checkpoints,and spots where more patrols need to be done because of illegal crossing of our borders.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:38 pm |
  58. honestjohn in Vermont

    Gee Jack, let me think about this. Crunch the numbers. 3 people per day cross that border and we will spend $15,000,000 for the construction of the checkpoint. Hhhmmm. So thats about $10,000 per person crossing the border each day. Jack, why this is certifibility INSANE. I wonder what the yearly budget for the checkpoint is? Maybe I can get a job there? Or at least get a job at DHS.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:43 pm |
  59. ed in ri

    With Obamas election win last year, and all the encouraging speeches and ideas he brought forth in his campaign, that were in complete opposition to the Bush Administration; I felt that we would finally get our country back in order.
    Wow! I ignored the political facts about campaign promises. I'm sorry to say, "Nothing has changed!"

    September 17, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
  60. Ken in Pinon Hills, California

    The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was transparent at it's passing. The administrations, and Congress that followed closed their eyes and failed to enforce the law that was to prevent hiring of illegal immigrants. Non-enforcement was the come one come all signal for millions to come here to illegally work , an invasion that has deprived too many citizens of work. Any wonder we have lost faith in our government.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:50 pm |
  61. Ryan from Wisconsin

    $15 million so 3 people a day can cross into Canada????? Are you kidding me?

    September 17, 2009 at 4:53 pm |
  62. Matthew from Orange,CA

    Apparently the border is more porous than Obama's transparency policy.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:53 pm |
  63. I. B., Rocky Mount, North Carolina

    I hope the secret construction approval by Homeland Security does not involve national security secrets because it is now on CNN. How many terrorists does it take to pose a threat to national security?

    September 17, 2009 at 4:53 pm |
  64. Steve Batts

    It tells you what I have thought for years. There is no leadership in Washington. No one is watching the going on of big government and the department bosses are spending our tax dollars and then giving themselves bonuses for a job well done. It is time to issue two checks. This weeks check and your termination check for a job not done.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:56 pm |
  65. Jackie in Dallas

    Actually, Jack, the entire Homeland Security Agency is the biggest boondoggle of them all! There is NOTHING in their charter that is not covered by other agencies already…but it was good PR following 9/11 to establish it. But that is how you grow federal government if you are a Republican — you hide it under waving flags and threats to national security!

    True, this is a lack of transparency that I deplore, and that I expect our President to address Secretary Napolitano using some strong language. This is NOT change that I’m proud of, and I doubt that President Obama is proud of it, either.

    But as an agency founded by President Bush, and staffed under his administration, I wonder just how much she knew, and when, about these contracts. Lets see the dates on them — and compare them to when she took over. Did she even see them? There’s a lot more to this than meets the eye.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:56 pm |
  66. Bryan Salisbury NC

    It says that our Government is making three people a day very happy!

    September 17, 2009 at 4:57 pm |
  67. Dan, Chantilly VA

    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

    September 17, 2009 at 4:58 pm |
  68. Jay in Texas

    It says that the more you follow the trail of not only where all the stimulus money went but also where all the gigantic Bailout to the bankers last fall went, Americans will be outraged and will vote all the crooks out of office.
    Brownwood, Texas

    September 17, 2009 at 4:59 pm |
  69. kj

    I think its great, maybe a little over priced however I don't think we want those crazy Canadians coming in to this country.

    And if we can keep them out then maybe we'll also keep out Al Qieda and the Taliban Yes folks we do want strong borders.

    With that said it's by design that we have open boarders to Mexico. We want them working here in the USA to keep inflation down and paying into Social Security while never being able to collect. Who knows we may be behind fake green cards just so we can track them!

    September 17, 2009 at 5:04 pm |
  70. Bruce - Delaware

    It says they are whacked nut jobs being financed by loony braindead dots with no clue about where their butts are even if in a lit room.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:04 pm |
  71. Rufus in Twentynine Palms, CA

    Did I hear you correctly Jack? 15 million dollars for 3 border crossers? Since the Federal Government spends our tax dollars like a drunken sailor, why not each time one these 3 lucky border crossers approaches the border checkpoint, they should pass go and collect 200 dollars. The process of passing through the border in Whitetail, Montana should be referred to as "Cash for Crossers."

    September 17, 2009 at 5:05 pm |
  72. Christine

    Jack: This is outrageous! $15 million? For only 3 people? HOW DID THIS GET PASSED? Someone had to propose it, read it, agree to it, pass it and so what the HELL is going on? That is $5M per person! I guess Obama just can't be transparent like he promised. I guess he has already turned into a Washington politician.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:06 pm |
  73. Molita Austin, TX

    Jack, it means that Obama has lied to us once again. The man is not to be trusted any more than W was – new face, same nonsense – he can give great speeches (over and over and over). Our government is so crooked there may not be a way to correct it without out & out revolution OR dissolving it like Russia did.
    The entire administration needs to be replaced because they are at the whim of the lobbyist & lobbyist are who decide everything. Those with the most money WIN! $15 Million? The politicians responsible for the deceit should have to pay it back to taxpayers out of thier own pockets. Folks are suffering and the govt spends all this $$???? That is INSANE and where the hell is my stimulus money?

    September 17, 2009 at 5:08 pm |
  74. Linda in Arizona

    Oh, "transparency", is it? You don't get it, Jack. Transparency was just something Obama talked about during the campaign. It's gone the way of the Dodo bird now. You know, like ending torture, restoring civil liberties, closing Guantanamo, broadcasting negotiations on C-Span, and others. Please. Try to keep up.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:08 pm |
  75. Annie, Atlanta

    It says transparency is a figment of our imaginations. It does not exist. It will not exist. We’ve been played again by politicians, just like we have since we could stand up straight and communicate with one another, maybe even before. And the money – oh well, it's not theirs so what do they care.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:09 pm |
  76. Kelvin Kola

    Hey Jack,

    I don't understand why this is linked with Obama; let a thorough investigation be done since this is done and let the American people know what's the truth and not speculation!

    September 17, 2009 at 5:09 pm |
  77. ingrid, new york

    there are several points to be made here: president obama is not god, Jack; how on earth is he supposed to keep track of every little thing each of the many depts. in the fed. gov. does? transparency is not only about the president knowing, seeing and tell all, it is about what does he do once he finds out about these types of things are still going on. The second point, jack, how is one person supposed to change everything within a system that is so very entrenched and functions in such a habitual manner. I mean how long does it take families to change their pathological patterns, even after they all decide to change? from the second day of his being in office people have been screaming that he is not being transparent. let me repeat the president is not god, and he is not our omnipotent father, got it?

    September 17, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  78. John B

    It appears we need a Boarder Crossing Czar!

    September 17, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  79. Adrian Z from Toronto

    Umm. Jack. The fact that we know about it, IS open and transparency. All of these projects are done by the individual agencies, and then released publicly when completed. As far as I know, the highways and other infrastructure aren't being reported nationally, so what is your point on the transparency bit?

    Though as far as spending $15m for a crossing that maxes out at 3 people daily is disturbing. Napolitano should go.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  80. Travis Nelson

    Jack this is crap. This is the reason why out politicians are always being blasted, for these bone head mistakes. Whoever decided that Montana should get this renovation needs to be fired, and told that the should work at McDonald's and service the lobby.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  81. graham

    Jack, I don't know what it says about transparency but if Wolf tells me he's on twitter one more time, I'm going to head for the border.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  82. Phil Congdon

    Fire Napolitano. She's just a politician and not worth a yellow hole in the snow.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  83. Brad (San Diego, CA)

    There should definitely be a check in place to ensure politics aren't resulting in bad decision-making, as happens so often in Washington. However, at the same time, I don't think we want to publicly publish a list of things about our homeland security apparatus that need to be fixed. I'm sure those who want to do us harm would love to know where are weak spots are. Ultimately I think the DHS Secretary has to be held responsible, unfortunately after the fact, for the decisions made because we cannot allow a public debate about homeland security weaknesses.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  84. Charles

    An administration that promises transparency and fiscal responsibility that allows this and they want to run healthcare too? Sure I believe nothing will be added to the deficit, this just shows how the government doesn't know how to control spending.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  85. Pat S SINY

    Welcome aboard the good ship "Common Sense, " Jack. I guess Napolitano figures its worth it if those three are right-wingers. You know how dangerous they can be. As far as transparency, remember when the President promised all health care negotiations would be viewed on C-Span? Seems like so long ago.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  86. Louise

    If the people who perpetrated a terrorist attack entered the United States through that border, then perhaps you would think that this border station should have been better managed and that takes money.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  87. Elaine in Dothan, AL

    Give those contractors who have already signed 10% of the proposed contract and cancel–ASAP. Name a new Homeland Security director and move on–this time with transparency that we don't mind seeing!

    September 17, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  88. Rich

    Jack, President Obama selected heads for each of the departments. He should be able to depend on those heads to fix or clean up the departments. Janet Napolitano should do her job or resign. We continue to see waste of taxpayers dollars in each of the major departments. Another issue is that the people that work in the departments have lifetime jobs. perhaps we need to fire all of them and get in some new people. R. Addison, TUcson, Az

    September 17, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  89. Shelby Morrison

    To me, the question is more about how tax money is spent than about transparency. A border where only three people cross per day does not need strengthening.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  90. Mark from Boston

    It says that it’s government as usual. What Change?
    Whether it’s Post Offices across the country delivering five pieces of junk
    mail to rural areas of the country every day at huge losses or grants for
    20 million dollars a year to study butterfly migrations, It’s all asinine.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  91. Ben

    It shows that the transparency works, especially since the fact that this story got out is somewhat damning of those in charge at DHS.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  92. Lucy, Austin, Texas

    You found out about it...a little late...so there is transparency. Welcome to the world of 24 hours news.

    I am mad that politicians can take all that lobby money from corporations (remember corporations don't have a vote in elections) and pass laws that benefit the corporations. I am mad that long term senators can get enough power to have roads to nowhere built in their states. I am mad that after this nightmare of corporate greed America isn't voting to make sure that lobby money ends and we hold our Congressmen accountable state by state.

    Our congressmen represent the voters. Did you vote for them to sell out their state to friends and corporations. Surely you don't think your "politician" used his influence to build a $15 million border crossing that handle 3 people a day for his constituents? A junk yard dog could handle that border corssing single handedly for a year's supply of Kibbles and Bits and would be loyal to whoever feeds him.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  93. Dave J. (Scoop0901)

    Jack, our border crossings should encourage legal passage into and out of the country. That said, as part of the $15 million package, is a free-for-all coffee shop included? How about a "rest area" for road-weary drivers so they can take a 90-minute nap? You know, for $15 million for a remote border crossing, perhaps DHS is trying to encourage an additional three people per day to cross at that location with coffee-and-a-nap incentive packages. With this administration, incentive packages is what it's all been about - at any cost.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  94. keith ,lancaster ky

    It says that transperancy is "JUST WORDS" that don't really mean anything after the election, suckers!

    September 17, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  95. Gary W Roseville CA

    I guess it depends on the 3 people? Because this country would be in an uproar if three middle eastern Muslims who have had flight training were to some how get in. Come on now, Secretary Napolitano is doing a fine job, why don't we cut her a little slack.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  96. James from Illinois

    Well Jack,
    sense the 9/11 hijackers came from Canada and not Mexico that really get rid of the argument of where the attention should go. But 15 mil for one place just points out the over paying our government pays for sorry products. this doesn't just happen in Home land security it is going on everywhere Federal and State.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  97. Martin

    There is no reason to by pass Montana's need for a secure crossing between the United States and Canada. After all, one of those three people could be a terrorist and one of three every day for a month adds up to thirty possible terrorists coming into our country.
    That is a ridiculous paragraph as is just about everything Homeland Security does with every problem they look at. It is a boondoggle of an agency..

    September 17, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  98. Victor

    Well, this has less to do with transparency and more to do with accountability. Transparency was promised, and this president's already gone above and b eyond to ensure that (how do you think you found out about it?); do we realy think that this action – several levels below him – was approved/masterminded by the president? C'mon. That kind of promkise will take mass adherence/enforcement in a complex administrative structure; Obama can't be villified for every little thing that happens! THe best we can hope for is the action taken when things like this under the auspices of 1 of the "arms" makes it ti the "head". I'm sure that when he finds out, he'll deal with it appropriately – let's give the man a chance to run the country – doin' pretty darn good so far.

    – sitting on the the other side of the recession...

    September 17, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  99. Noel Sundby

    You are kidding me right? And the government called in CEO's to explain their gross mis-conduct over financial incompetence. What a joke.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  100. Graeme in Ottawa, Ontario

    D.H.S. has always been a political agency; it’s the way Bush set it up. Bush has turned most of your institutions into political extension of the executive branch and Obama out of political expedience is continuing this policy. Political corruption threatens the very core of your democracy and mine.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  101. Troy - Calgary, AB

    Will this $15 Million checkpoint help stop all the contraband cigarettes being smuggled up into Canada?

    September 17, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  102. Jorge

    Where would I cross into the US en masse if I were a terrorist?

    September 17, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  103. Flyingwolf, Manchester NH

    I'm not astute enough to say what it means about transparency, but I do remember that the Millenium Bomber and the 9/11 hijackers all came through Canada. Now you tell me which border crossings should be beefed up.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  104. Eva Posner

    I'm with you, Jack. Where is the transparency? Canadians are not a majority of our immigration issues. What about all the drugs and gangs and illegals coming from down south? And how secure are our ports? I don't want my tax money spend on something stupid. You should all be fired.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  105. Peter Namtvedt

    A great way for Homeland Security employees to get "hardship duty pay."

    September 17, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  106. Steve Levine

    I don't know what it says about transparency, but it does say volumes about bureaucratic stupidity. Shades of $600 toilet seats; these idiots never learn that it's REAL MONEY they're wasting - OUR money.

    It's time we gave intelligence tests to all cabinet appointments and government employees.

    At the very least, whoever made this decision should be fired.

    Jericho, NY

    September 17, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  107. Joe

    It says alot for transparency. The government thinks we can't see what they are doing with our money.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  108. Josh Nicholls, SE Arizona

    Napalitano was a horrible governor while in office here in Arizona. She turned a blind eye to many of the situations right here in her state and nothing has changer since her "promotion." What a disgrace and abuse of position i allowing this to happen on her watch... resignation accepted!

    September 17, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  109. Alexander Kolokotronis

    Homeland security sometimes looks to be as broken as our health care policies; disproportionate spending and just flat our unnecessary costs. I've been looking for Obama and the administration to initiate action instead of what seems to be strictly a pattern of reaction.

    Astoria, NY

    September 17, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  110. Ernest

    Jack, what is wrong with all those talking boneheads in washington, they seem to think that the american people are as stupid as they are ?

    September 17, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  111. Gary W


    How "secret" can it be??? YOU know about it!

    Gary W
    Youngstown, OH

    September 17, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  112. Chuck

    While this certainly sounds suspicious, I'm not sure we should be evaluating the security risks of border crossings solely on how many people cross there per day. There are plenty of other factors that should be factored in when making these decisions, such as the existing security measures at these checkpoints and whether they could be considered easy targets by those planning on infiltrating this country. That being said, I think this should be investigated, and if it turns out these decisions were made for political and not security reasons, those responsible should be held accountable.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  113. Carolyn in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

    Maybe Ms. Napolitano gave the go ahead for the upgrades to the Canadian border crossing during the period she was delusional about the 9-11 terrorists coming into the US from Canada?

    September 17, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  114. Grayson

    Transparent? Yea, that's about as transparent as my toilet water. 15 million on 3 people/day...I just threw up.

    New Braunfels, TX

    September 17, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  115. Jeremy, Myrtle Beach South Carolina

    It goes to show when it comes to protecting the american people from terrorrist or illegal immigrants, the government has it wrong. The government takes care of their own, Republican or Democrat. You might want to look at reciepts because the projcet probalbly costs 10 million and 5 million went to the governers political party.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  116. Bill

    Maybe Home Land Security should move their office to this 15 million dollar project as I am sure they have plenty of room their.
    Too many heads of government and their agency think public money grows on trees, I guess they right because that all dollar is worth PAPER.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  117. Rudy Haugeneder, Victoria, Canada

    $15 million for three people daily at a remote Montana border spot. Wow, you people have too much money to spend. Oh, I forgot - it's borrowed money because of America's not so tiny international debt.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  118. Sue Bakken

    There hasn't been any true transparency in government in a long, long time. Obama is just doing "business as usual". He campaigned with promises of being the most transparent administration ever but of course he can't do that. You can't remain in absolute power if everyone knows exactly what your hands are doing behind your back.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  119. Cindi Freeburn

    It defies all logic that we as American citizens are called upon by our President to believe in his theory of transparency when news reports are rife with examples of WASTE by our government in the use of the stimulus money that we the taxpayers, many of whom have lost our jobs due to the recession, are paying for.

    And he and his administration want us to support GOVERNMENT CONTROL of our Health Care? How ludicrous. We may be unemployed, but we're not stupid. It's one thing to rob us of our tax money, it's another thing to steal what chance we have for a healthy life! Our government has not EARNED our trust...to the contrary, they deserve our contempt! Were the GOVERNMENT a BUSINESS, they'd be "shuttered" !

    September 17, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  120. JD Castle Rock

    Jack what bridge have you been sleeping under? Our new Gestapo, KGB aka better know at the Department of Homeland Security has been dogged by persistent criticism over excessive bureaucracy, waste, and ineffectiveness since inception. 22 Major Departments were centralized. Oh my.

    Congress estimates that the department has wasted roughly $15 billion in failed contracts (as of September 2008 The department was blamed for up to $2 billion of waste and fraud after audits by the Government Accountability Office.

    Given all this you are concerned with a $15 million dollar check point crossing..................

    September 17, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  121. Sara in ND

    I live in a border town where "improvements" were made to the local port of entry, including putting 2 to4 "border protection agents" on duty at any given time for a crossing in one of the least populated portions of the state into one of the least populated provinces of Canada. There are 3 teeny ports within 100 miles along this border, and this has ocurred in all 3 of them. This, however, happened under the previous administration, along upscaling the facilities beyond all reason. Unfortunately, the Democrats appear no less profligate than the Republicans have been.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  122. Dan in Texas

    What is with the sudden concern over cost? Where were all the cost conscious people when we are giving:

    – huge tax breaks to corporations for sending jobs overseas
    – tax breaks to oil and energy companies
    – bailout to Wall Street
    – no bid contacts to military vendors
    – Iraq war projected at 3 trillion, etc.

    There seems to be some hypocrisy here.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  123. Eric, Flemington, NJ

    What this does is remind us about the corruption of government officials and their departmements. After all, it's not their money, so they just keep spending it like monopoly money. It's much too easy for legislators to spend taxpayer money for all kinds of dubious programs – who's looking over their shoulders? Were integrity not such a scarce commodity, this kind of corruption would not be so widespead. Jack – keep shining a light on this kind of stuff on CNN and online – the crooks prefer to slither in the dark.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  124. Lyle

    Janet Napolitano can't even take the pressure of a Coast Guard drill on thePotomac River and yet she wants to spend 15 million on a border check point that only sees maybe 3 people at the most in a day.
    The Coast Guard should have been commended for the drill instead of critcized, which proves we have NO homeland security.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  125. J. Paul Adkins


    Which politician or government official made money by placing a checkpoint at this location. Secrecy in government is always due to dishonesty. Not very transparent to me. By the way, how many mounties do the Canadians have on the other side of the border and how much did they spend on their checkpoint?

    September 17, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  126. Margaret Ray

    Jack, About Homeland Security spending money. - best question you've asked this week.

    Forget the "little stuff". Homeland Security just announced they are building a $3.4 BILLION headquarters. Don't you think they could muddle along with their current digs until we can get the economy out of the ditch.

    Margaret, Pearisburg, Virginia

    September 17, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  127. Jorge

    Our country is only as strong as its weakest link.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  128. michael Kirkwood

    Calling a healthy expenditure to improve a remote border checkpoint insane is a little shortsighted, Cafferty. The isolation of this border-crossing increases its value as a terror target. Are those who oppose our national security likely to try to drag Little Man across a busy, well-funded checkpoint? I think that maybe some of the people who did the risk assessment of our border security might have actually done their job in identifying the security concerns associated with forgotten holes in our borders.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  129. Doug Rusta

    We know of an earlier attempt by a terrorist to cross the US/Canadian border, and we know that Canada is a porous target for such people. It is thus reasonable to pay attention to these lightly manned ports of entry. Also, if there is new technology to be evaluated, these may be better sites than along our hectic Southern border. Please don't go the way of Lou Dobbs.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  130. Ron

    Transparency or not, this is the way our government works. And it does so because we want it to work this way. We just don’t want the rest of the country to be informed of the situations. So, in reality, we don’t want transparency. No Representative or Senator will be re-elected in Montana (or any other state) unless he/she can tell their constituents that THEY brought some of their Federal taxes back into their state. When was the last official elected because they told their constituents that they voted against every single allocation of Federal funds targeted for their state? NEVER. They would be tarred and feathered for doing so. We taxpayers hate pork – but only when it benefits SOMEONE ELSE. We LOVE it when it benefits US. Until that changes, nothing will change in Government. Transparency or not.


    September 17, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  131. Lance, Ridgecrest, Ca

    Jack, it says the same thing more and more Americans are saying lately. Obama's promise to change Washington D.C. and the way government does business isn't worth a damn. Pork, smoke and mirrors, outright lies, spend–spend–spend. Get used to it, 3+ years yet to go.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  132. Hollis Shewmake

    Home Land Security couldn't track a giant elephant in fresh snow with its throat cut and bleeding bad.

    Levelland Texas

    September 17, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  133. Conor in Chicago

    I wonder how many high level government employees with Republican leanings

    A) Made this happen
    B) Made money doing it
    C) Purposely got this story out in order to discredit the President

    Democrats would do the same thing. It’s happened before and it will happen again. This is what happens when you have two dominant political parties who don’t give a damn about their country and only care about their bottom lines-like corporations.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  134. Mark from Boston

    Cash for Crossers?! That's hilarious...


    September 17, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  135. johnchristopher saskatchewan

    Janet needs to be replaced obviously. Among several other things she is the latest American official who has perpetuated the myth of ignorance that some of the 9/11 terrorists entered the United States through Canada. False information like this causes serious problems which we do not need. In these debates about health care or border security, why does reality have no seat at the table?

    September 17, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  136. Uncle Sam in Florida

    Remember that old saying, "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours".
    If you look deep enough, someone is doing this for a brother-in-law or a favor of some kind. A 15 million dollar contract to accomodate 3 people a day. This is beyond absurd.
    We need some kind of watch dog in Washington DC to go around and do nothing but blow the whistle on people that are guilty of these kinds of deeds. But these days, everyone seems to have a price and can be silenced with the right amount of cash.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  137. Sue Bakken

    "there are several points to be made here: president obama is not god"

    Thank you. Someone finally realized this.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:24 pm |
  138. Sergio

    Jack, I always thought you were always one sided when it came to Presidnet Obama. You suprised me on this report. What an embarrasing thing for Homeland Security. $15 Million would of been better spent on survailence equipment in EL Paso Texas to detect Cartel Criminal Movement in Juarez .
    Thanks for your report.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:24 pm |
  139. Ed (in Kingsland, Georgia)

    It simply means we have been sold a box of wolf cookies. This Homeland Security department is just another useless government entity that sucks tax dollars into a bottomless pit. Ditch this department along with all of those "Czars" and streamline the executive branch back to what it was set up to be. Hold those people accountable who are confirmed to be cabinet members, and make them go before a senate committee and explain, on the record before the public, just what and where all those bucks are being used for. I'm getting sick and really tired of financing these endless "Bridges to Nowhere".

    September 17, 2009 at 5:24 pm |
  140. Mike in Texas

    Jack – I love your stuff. But just as sure as the 4th or 5th person came through a checkpoint, this one included, that was not updated and set off a bomb anywhere in the US your question would be why did they not improve this checkpoint to insure this would not happen. And your commentary would be about the insanity of not updating our border crossings.

    $15 million at this crossing and others is a lot smarter than a half mile or less of fence on the other border that will have tunnels under it before they can build it.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:24 pm |
  141. Ken in NC

    It's on CNN Jack and besides, Wolf knows about it so it can't be a secret

    September 17, 2009 at 5:24 pm |
  142. AJ from just North of the border

    I was just looking at Google maps and wondering why a terrorist would check in at the border crossing anyway.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
  143. C. Farrell, Houston, Tx

    Maybe they expect some high profile individual like Osama bin Laden to enter at that border checkpoint.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:28 pm |
  144. Bill

    Jack: This is why I understand the frustration of Senator Wilson. We are dealing with a bunch of liars. Nepolitano should be fired immediately. She is secretly doing everything possible to keep open borders and ignoring the American people.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:29 pm |
  145. Matt

    It's pretty transparent that Homeland Security is doing a poor job of allocating resources.

    Matt from Santa Barbara

    September 17, 2009 at 5:29 pm |
  146. Adam Simi Valley, CA

    People on this blog don't seem to get it. No one is saying it isn't important to have a station there, they are questioning the need to pay $15MM for upgrades. The government is riddled with waste and corruption, which is why it doesn't make sense to socialize all our industries. There is no accountabiltiy. People need to get a clue.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:29 pm |
  147. Mike M

    Jack, shouldn't we find out who approved the HLS construction expenditures first prior to going after someones head? For example, who's Congressional districts do these off the wall expenditures fall in? What construction companies got the jobs? Do they (the sub contractors) use exported labor?

    September 17, 2009 at 5:29 pm |
  148. Drew Meltz from Boynton Beach, Fl

    I agree with you that Napolitano should go. Forget the wastefulness and broken commitments on transparency. If the Secretary of Homeland Security treats this like it is the first time she has been made aware of the economic and construction details at Mexican border crossings, we have problems. This is either an example of negligent incompetence or an insincere explanation to a bad choice. The most important point of this story is its an example of where the priorities of border security and illegal immigration fall on the Obama Administration's to do list. Coming from a fellow Democrat who wants you and this country to succeed, remember Mr. President, Less Spocky and More Rocky (Maureen Dowd NY Times 9/08/09.)

    September 17, 2009 at 5:29 pm |
  149. Riddle

    Jack everything the Homeland Security Department is secret. The president can't possibly be expected to hold them accountable since Bush created the department, consolidated boo koo departments and put numerous groups to oversee this group. I don't even think Hitler knew what the Gestapo was spending. This $15 million is for some black ops plan on the border. As an aside Jack you are starting to sound more cranky as the weeks go by.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:31 pm |
  150. Dan

    I'm an Obama supporter and I am not surprised. I knew the transparency promise was one that would not be kept. Since the Nixon Administration every viable Presidential candidate has promised to have an open administration and every single one of them since then has broken that promise. He made promises he could not keep. He is a politician and that's what they do.
    St. Louis, MO

    September 17, 2009 at 5:31 pm |
  151. David in Natchez

    This should be one safe and secure border crossing.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:32 pm |
  152. Jasmine in Germany

    It can't be too secret if "Wikipedia" mentions it under "Whitetail, Montana", page was last updated 27 August 2009.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:33 pm |
  153. Wm in PA

    Let's see: a little math. Home Land Security total budget since it was created in our post 9/11 psychosis -about $440 BILLION dollars. Number of American lives saved 0. Cost per life saved – infinite. Can't divide a real number by 0.
    Why would we consider 3 1 thousandths (0.003) of 1 one percent of the Home Land Security Dept.budget anything but trivial? Not even a drop in the bucket.
    But then again, it is a government bucket and tax payers provide the drops. Dopes duped again by fear.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:35 pm |
  154. Gary In Lexington

    Jack: The President should appear with Secretary Napolitano and disclose how, when where and why "stuff" like this is occurring on their watch. To do anything less, will only serve to further erode this administration's credibility as it relates to transparency, one of the important reasons I voted for him. More importantly, we must demand full disclosure as to why we would waste $15M on this type of scam, because your question should also question, how could any honest, reasonably intelligent contractor NOT turn this scam into the proper authorities? Think about what it says about ALL of those involved in the overall scope of this scam, they are ALL guilty of defrauding the American tax payers!

    September 17, 2009 at 5:36 pm |
  155. Sylvain

    I live in that area Jack. All I can say is that 15 millions injected in our local economy is very welcome here! You complain about our borders being easily tresspassed! This is were it is easy to get in and out of the country, not the most popular or heavy traffic ones! Obama is investing money to make us more secure and he's creating jobs in our region in a slow economy. I don't see anything wrong with that!

    September 17, 2009 at 5:37 pm |
  156. Joy in Colorado

    This is all news to me! Depressing and angering on one side, curiousity on the other. Does anyone know what the $15M pricetag includes? Perhaps some exotic electronics? Of course, that kind of information might be withheld for security reasons. I agree with the writer who said cancel the contracts with the subs, pay them the portion already expended and start over.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:37 pm |
  157. Mike Armstrong TX.

    Looks like they need to build a town there that way they will have 4 people crossing insyead of three .

    September 17, 2009 at 5:37 pm |
  158. R. Richardson from TN

    I believe that instead of spending all of this money on tiny boarder check points, they should spend it on larger check points. They should also be putting more money into unemployment benefits until they can find a way to help the people who really want jobs get them. There are too many people in America who want jobs and can't get them because of age or lack of education. For some of the people who lost jobs when factories began closing and people quit building new homes, it is too late in life to be taken seriously when seeking education opportunities, and for some it has been so long since they have done anything that even resembles educational they are too scared to try to get an education now. When you are already 50 years old, by the time you get educated, you're too old for anyone to hire, and not that anyone hires 50 year old construction or factory workers. That is what money needs to be spent on now.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:38 pm |
  159. Noel J. Munson

    Rather than spend the money, we should secure a sworn promise from the terrorists that they will not use the 3-a-day crossing.

    Noel Munson

    September 17, 2009 at 5:38 pm |
  160. Kris Castle Rock

    Jack here is the definition of Homeland

    "One's native land. A state, region, or territory that is closely identified with a particular people or ethnic group." It is clear that this word was carefully selected since the ultimate goal right now in our country is one ethnic group overall. As a secret group their budget irresponsibility will never be held accountable. Who knows what they are up to? This $15 Million is going somewhere but not to that border crossing.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:41 pm |
  161. Mary

    Gee is that all.? 15 million dollars for 3 people to cross back and forth from Montana. to Canada. Why are the politicians fussing so much about how much health care will cost the government, when something like this is allowed??????

    September 17, 2009 at 5:44 pm |
  162. Patrick Denver

    Jack when you have time please read this. Thanks.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:48 pm |
  163. sam

    15 mil for 3 crossing border checkpoint? What's the big fuss about. remember 100mil for a bridge for 0 crossing. this is the good old u.s. of a. land of opportunity. giant petro const. companies turned cafeteria caterers, hurricane relief services, military equip transporters and so on. time for my via. i mean valium.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:49 pm |
  164. Troy - Calgary, AB

    Maybe that $15 million would be better spent at the Washington State/B.C. Border than at the Alberta/Montana border. Didn't one wanted fugitive from California managed to walk across the Canadian border not too long ago?

    September 17, 2009 at 5:50 pm |
  165. Brian

    Who are these three people??

    September 17, 2009 at 5:54 pm |
  166. STAN - IL.

    Is this a bill that Bush and company passed when in office? Will you please check this out? He was so for open borders. You're sounding like you are joining up with Dobb's, Beck, Hannity, Rush Limbag, etc. God forbid that. I always tuned in to listen to your questions but am going to switch to something else. Clean up your questions and quit be a Republican, it just doesn't suit you.

    September 17, 2009 at 5:56 pm |