No one knows more about the immigration issue than Michelle Malkin, so when she says the final intelligence bill was better than commonly recognized, we pay attention:
UPI’s Christian Bourge and Washington Times occasional writer Joel Mowbray each have good pieces providing details of immigration-related provisions that made it into the “intel reform” bill.
The final product gives lie to the criticism that immigration/homeland security was “extraneous” to the measure. In truth, it was the other way around! As Bourge notes:
In fact, while the majority of congressional and public attention was paid to the intelligence-restructuring portions of the bill, most of the measure deals with immigration and security issues.
As I mentioned in my column last week, H.R. 10 — the controversial House version — included important provisions to beef up the Border Patrol, detention space, interior enforcement, identity fraud, terrorist travel, and streamlining of the deportation process. Many of these made it through. Mowbray reports:
[One of Rep. James Sensenbrenner’s] victor[ies] was the so-called lone wolf provision. Under current law, tracking terrorists who are believed to be acting separate from a terrorist organization