Posted on 09/08/2011 3:24:28 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
A famous poet once wrote that “good fences make good neighbors.” However, this author did not have to deal with the realities of homeland security where a wall is only as strong as it is fortified by law enforcement personal. Building a wall along the entire Texas-Mexico border would not only be cost prohibitive – in the range of billions of dollars – it would create a false sense of security. And unless the federal government is willing to put enforcement personnel all along such a barrier – something it has refused to do for decades along a border without fencing – it will be no more successful at keeping illegal immigrants out of Texas than the Rio Grande River.
Strategic fencing in high-population areas makes sense. But I would like to see the federal government invest resources in increased border security operations like Operation Rio Grande rather than build a 1,200-mile wall.
With joint law enforcement operations we have managed to reduce crime in areas patrolled by border sheriffs by up to 60 percent during surge operations. With fixed wing and rotary assets in the air, more law enforcement boots on the ground, and a stronger boat patrol presence along the Rio Grande, we have virtually shut down drug and human smuggling activity during intensive operations. The success of these operations is the reason I will be asking the legislature for $100 million to secure our border.
As I have said repeatedly, you can’t have homeland security without border security, and there is no sense in reforming immigration laws if we cannot enforce them. And I have said equally as often that immigration reform without border security is meaningless.
Divisive language on the subject of border security and immigration reform is simply not constructive or useful in solving the problem. We cannot be a nation that is anti-immigrant because we are in fact a nation of immigrants. In fact, foreign-born citizens are some of the strongest supporters of tougher border security measures. Clearly, something has to be done because our hospitals, schools, and other service providers are being flooded with illegal immigrants at a great cost to taxpayers.
But to me neither amnesty nor mass deportation is the answer. The first unfairly rewards those who broke our laws, and the latter is not only unrealistic and unenforceable, but it would devastate our economy. That’s why I support a guest worker program that takes undocumented workers off the black market and legitimizes their economic contributions without providing them citizenship status.
I would rather know who is crossing our border legally to work instead of not knowing who is crossing our border illegally to work. A guest worker program that provides foreign workers with an ID removes the incentive for millions of people to illegally enter our country. It also adds those workers to our tax base, generates revenue for needed social services and it can be done without providing citizenship.
Along with millions of Americans, I think it is wrong to reward those who broke our laws with citizenship ahead of those who have followed the law and are waiting to enter this country legally. And like millions of Americans I do not support amnesty.
With a more secure border and a reasonable guest worker program we can allow guest workers to help build our economy without offering citizenship. Many don’t even want to become citizens – they just want to provide for their families back home.
We just finished an election where the Washington politicians gave us a lot of rhetoric on immigration reform, but no real solutions. We need Washington to be a part of the solution. For us it is not just a subject of intense debate, it directly impacts how we live.
As Governor, I understand that I represent all the people of Texas, and not everyone sees eye to eye on this issue. But, I do promise that I will use reason and fact, not emotion and fear, to help us resolve this issue in a spirit of unity. We need to work toward solutions, not slogans. We need immigration reform that doesn’t compromise our security, and security that doesn’t compromise our economy. And I believe we can accomplish all of this with a guest worker program and real security measures that utilize our law enforcement tools to help secure our border.
There are probably parts of NM where a fence would not even be needed because trying to get anywhere safe after crossing the border is pretty much a death sentence walking in the desolate desert and heat.
Perry wants to talk about social security, fine, how damn much money has been taken out of social security and spent on illegals, on their free health care, on their free education, on their stolen tax credits, on aide to sluts, etc, etc. Never will get an answer on that one.
Some of the sound walls along the highways leading into Detroit are 20 and 30 feet tall, maybe more. They appear to be poured concrete and they go for miles. I doubt they cost $70 million per mile.
The fact is that the argument is packed with straw men on the open border side. Simply stated, what is America worth to us? If it costs $50 billion for that first line of defense, so be it. In fact, no price is too high to save America.
Something else that needs to be considered is the stability of Mexico. If we stop releasing the pressure on Mexico, Mexico will eventually stabilize. After all, there’s a reason we don’t have a massive illegal immigration problem from Canada.
I saw it, not on THAT wall. Actually if this isn’t stopped soon, we will have absolutely no choice but to build a fortress like that.
Perry has been my governor for 11 years. And in that time, my town has become inundated with illegals. Perry has talked tough on the issue, but with my very eyes I’ve witnessed things get worse and worse and worse. So, frankly, I don’t really care what Perry ‘says’ about the issue. My daily reality is what I see.
When Jan Brewer passed that tough law in AZ, I’d hoped maybe Perry might finally see the light and join in. But, nope. He just dissed her and the law. It was really the final nail in the coffin for me on this issue with Perry. He just talks, talks, talks, and does nothing. I have a genuine fear that he’ll be just like Bush, and start pushing for some kind of amnesty the moment he makes it to the White House.
I compare it to parents who commit crimes and go to prison. They can't take care of their children when that happens. Same thing. You are selfish when you have a anchor citizen, nor should you bring up the boo hoo story of hurting the child. It's your fault, not the Gov't.
If that is the only option, do you think that no one will attempt crossing?
As you probably remember, Dubya wanted amnesty (i.e., “comprehensive immigration reform”) back in early 2001 but “9/11” foiled that effort.
Walls work. Look.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2775603/posts?page=3#3
After a real wall, then electronic measures to keep them from going under or around by sea.
An electric wild animal fence charger will stop the ladder stuff in a new York second.
Bingo!!!
New York City is full of illegal immigrants (chiefly from Africa and Ireland). They didn't swim there. They got a 2-week tourist visa, flew into JFK Airport, cashed in their return ticket and disappeared. If we build a fence along the Mexican border, the illegal Mexican immigrants will do the same thing. Unless we want to abolish all tourism, we are never going to stop illegal immigrants from coming in; what would work is effective sanctions on employers who hire illegals.
I don’t think she really wants the job. As long as people pay thousands to hear her talk, why go through the misery.
I don’t fault her. But, she is on the line of losing her credibility.
It's much easier for Palin to say this because her state is as far removed from the problem as can be and still be in the United States.
Perry has to keep running for office in a state with a large Hispanic population where a "Let's build a Berlin Wall along the Rio Grande and deport every wetback we catch" declaration is a sure way to get voted out of office.
Further, the rhetoric is easy if nobody is examining the pricetag. I'm all for the most efficient cost-effective solution out there. I'm just not convinced that a sea-to-sea fence is the smartest way to go about it.
That's not what she was saying in 2008 and that's because it's a stupid idea. High traffic areas? Yes. Fence off the Rio Grande and cede it to Mexico? Moronic. She is advocating giving a natural border of the Rio Grande to the Mexicans? I don't think she's dumb, she's pandering and would never ever deport 12 million or build the fence from Brownsville to San Diego. Not only that but she was for path to citizenship and against deportation just a couple years ago.
Fences seem to work in every part of the world except for Texas. Why is that? If we can’t afford it, how is it that third world countries with hostile nations on their borders can? And if Perry had been supportive of the fence from the beginning, how mañy people who think it’s unworkable would be swinging in the breeze to the opposite side of the argument? One more dumb question and I’m done.
Do Texas penitentiaries have fences around them? And if so, why?
It sure was for Israel right? /s
Bwhahahahahaha! Palin took more in the last five years then Bachman or any of the others could dream of. Palin gets more air time then any of the other candidates and doesn’t need the drag of announcing at this point. If she runs she will announce when the time is right.
Logic. You appear to live in Massachusetts. You have a border along the Atlantic Ocean. Do you want a wall along your border, so that you cannot get to the beach?
I suppose there is someone in this country that wants a wall all around the entire United States. Nobody sane does.
More specifically, nobody talking about building a border fence with Mexico is talking about building a fence up the coast to San Diego, or along the Gulf of Mexico, even though it is relatively easy to put boats in the water.
Fence is good idea if it is electrified. Solves the fence height + 5 feet ladder problem.
Perry’s plan for border security is laughable. He has no desire to end the illegal entries into the US.
1. If he thinks a border wall or fencing would be expensive, just wait until someone estimates the cost of keeping adequate personnel on the border 24/7/365. We pay for a wall or fence once, and pay for maintenance. We’d pay the personnel 24/7/365. for as long as presidents kept them there.
2. No one including Perry is likely to put enough personnel on the border to ‘secure’ it.
3. And, IF a president ever did provide some degree of borer security with personnel..
4. Guess what? The next president who might want no border security can easily and quickly remove most personnel from the border and leave it wide open again.
5. Does anyone serious think that succeeding presidents would always keep sufficient personnel on the border? Does anyone think any president from GHWB to Obama would have kept adequate personnel on the border?
6. Putting personnel on the border is very much a TEMPORARY situation, and easily undone by the next president. How many times have we seen National Guard troops moved to border, then off the border after political heat died down?
7. The best way to secure the border is known: double fencing, adequate border patrol and the use of useful surveillance devices and sensors.
Perry is not at all serious about border enforcement. His ‘plan’ for temporary methods is nothing but a ruse from someone who wants little or no border security.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.