Further bolstering our cost argument is the Senate's regrettable decision to add several pork items to the bill, including the construction of a figure skating hall of fame in Maine. We could convey our dissatisfaction that Congress has played politics with what was supposed to be border security legislation. This message should resound well with the public and will help establish your credentials as a fighter of government waste.

A also believe we can attack this bill based on the cultural perceptions it creates. While 57% of the public may support a border fence, that figure dips to 38% among people between the ages of 55-70. Baby boomers, who lived through the construction and deconstruction of the Berlin Wall, seem to be more opposed to the idea of a wall separating nations. We may be able to gain traction with this politically important group. Further, since NAFTA was passed, America's trade with Mexico has increased 18% and Mexico remains a vital economic partner. The Mexican government vigorously opposes the border fence and we can argue the fence would strain relations and would be bad for business. This argument may help us build political capital with the business community, particularly business owners who employ unskilled labor and would like to see a guest worker bill passed.

Finally, we can make the argument that the border fence is not practical. It is easy to see how it could turn into a $6 billion disaster - and we do not want your name attached...

The border fence is pure symbolism, as it will not stem the tide of illegal immigration if there are not enough people to man the fence. Independent panels have estimated that our border control program is short-staffed by approximately 6,000 agents and we simply do not have the manpower to monitor this fence. As people cut through the fence or find ways to climb over it, this fence could become a political embarrassment. When this fence fails to slow illegal immigration, taxpayers are going to wonder where their $6 billion went.
It is my opinion that there is very little political advantage to signing 1002-H. In fact, signing the bill could cost us victories in Southwestern states that we need for re-election. Further, most Americans do not feel very strongly about the bill, so I believe that this is not a hill worth dying on.

We should be able to deflect any criticism we receive for vetoing 1002-H. First, we can reasonably argue that the price tag for the border fence has been drastically underestimated by Congress and that the bill has been muddied by pork-barrel riders. Second, we can argue that the fence is bad for business - it will put a strain on U.S.-Mexico relations at a time when trade with Mexico is thriving. Finally, the fence will not work. It's $6 billion worth of symbolism that will not slow illegal immigration as there is insufficient manpower to monitor the fence. If we want to tighten border security, we should focus on manpower…