WE can speculate all day/week/year long about this. Perry’s views on the border concern me. Just as I find myself starting to like him, this keeps coming back up.
I get the “it would be ineffective and too expensive” - but without some viable and “better” alternative, then what do we have?
Maybe if his option is to much more heavily arm the border patrol, increase its numbers and training, and to supplement with our armed forces - then he has a legitimate view. But what are his alternatives?
“I get the “it would be ineffective and too expensive” - but without some viable and “better” alternative, then what do we have? Maybe if his option is to much more heavily arm the border patrol, increase its numbers and training, and to supplement with our armed forces - then he has a legitimate view. But what are his alternatives?”
I haven’t heard anyone who supports a border fence who is advocating disbanding the Border Patrol. I suspect most would be in favor of a fence, keeping the current level of the BP, and adding as many more agents as needed.
But what would be the cost (compared to constructing a fence) of federal salaries, benefits, and pensions for enough BP to stop the flow of illegals if there is no fence? Labor costs are always the highest expense of any endeavor. I suspect over a period of years, the labor costs of an adequate number of BP agents to secure the border without a fence would dwarf the cost of a fence.
And whatever the cost of the fence, it would be miniscule compared to various federal boondoggle programs that yield no benefit whatsover.
We need a fence and the overwhelming number of Americans support a fence. It’s a winning issue.
Does Perry oppose it because his Chamber of Commerce buddies have told him to oppose it?