Perry was against the 700 mile fence that was supposed to go like this
Since Texas' southern border is the Rio Grande River, just where would you build a complete fence? Since it can't be built in the middle of the river, for all practical purposes you would be ceding the entire 1200 miles of river to Mexico.
What about the land owners along the river. Are you willing to cut them off from irrigation and livestock water and leave them high and dry? This would result in years of litigation, regardless of the state's power of eminent domain.
The cost of building a fence in the rugged, isolated Big Bend country would be astronomical. The transportation cost alone would be prohibitive.
Go to Utube and watch videos of illegals scaling the AZ fence. One shows two women w/o a ladder going up and over in 18 seconds. As one poster put it, "a fence is only a speed bump unless you're prepared to use deadly force once they're over". Since this isn't going to happen, we'll STILL need "boots on the ground" regardless.
Texas has already spent 400 million and has doubled the budget this year for border security in a time of cuts.
The cost of buying the land necessary for a 1200 mile fence, fighting lawsuits, building and maintaining said fence would cost billions of dollars. And we'd STILL need those "boots on the ground". As a Texas taxpayer, I'm not willing to foot the bill.
No it is not "ceding" the river to Mexico.
The fence is not the significant engineering problem, the engineering problem is building the patrol road. The adjoining fencing is just a construction task.
There are at least a hundred counties in the United States with challenging geography that have managed to build a road near a river bank.
The engineers and the border enforcement personnel would decide on the siting of the road and fencing.
Yes of course there would need to breaks in the fence at appropriate places to allow people and animals to pass. But these choke points would make it easier for our security personnel to monitor the comings and goings. Fencing doesn't solve the problem, it makes it easier to manage it.
What about the land owners along the river. Are you willing to cut them off from irrigation and livestock water and leave them high and dry? This would result in years of litigation, regardless of the state's power of eminent domain.
The interest of the security of 300 million Americans and the survivability of our country has to outweigh the interests of some cattle ranchers. And there can be wells or pumps or some other way to address their needs.
The cost of building a fence in the rugged, isolated Big Bend country would be astronomical. The transportation cost alone would be prohibitive.
There are some areas such as a canyon or a lake where an alternative must be used. But in general the cost of fencing is NOT astronomical. What IS astronomical is the staggering cost imposed by illegals on our schools, hospitals, court system, jails and prisons, welfare and other societal costs.
The cost of a fence is tiny compared to that and is even small compared to the $30+ billion Zero is spending on "green jobs".
Go to Utube and watch videos of illegals scaling the AZ fence. One shows two women w/o a ladder going up and over in 18 seconds. As one poster put it, "a fence is only a speed bump unless you're prepared to use deadly force once they're over". Since this isn't going to happen, we'll STILL need "boots on the ground" regardless.
The newer, modern anti-climb fencing systems that have been recently installed work well. There is no getting to "zero." What we can do is reduce a flood to something much smaller and more manageable.
OF COURSE WE NEED THE BOOTS ON THE GROUND! We need that in addition to the fence, to aerial assets, to electronic surveillance systems and other measures.
We need to:
1. Use fencing along as much of the border as possible.
2. Additional boots on the ground assisted by electronic surveillance, aerial drones and whatever other measures would be helpful.
3. Allow cops to ask people they have lawfully stopped whether they are citizens of a foreign country in the USA illegally.
4. Deport.
5. Reverse the Supreme Court decision requiring states to provide K-12 education to citizens of a foreign country in the USA illegally. This was a decision back in the day by a very liberal court and the current court given the same question may reverse it.
6. Do not extend benefits to illegals.
7. States should require businesses to use something like e-verify to make sure employees are legal. (I'm not sure this is constitutional if mandated on private businesses by the federal government.)
Texas has already spent 400 million and has doubled the budget this year for border security in a time of cuts. The cost of buying the land necessary for a 1200 mile fence, fighting lawsuits, building and maintaining said fence would cost billions of dollars. And we'd STILL need those "boots on the ground". As a Texas taxpayer, I'm not willing to foot the bill.
All of these costs are MUCH less than the financial burden imposed by the presence of the illegals.
But what about an electric fence? With electric barbed wire on the top? And a moat filled with sharks with friggin’ laser beams on their heads beyond the fence? With a mile of quicksand beyond the moat filled with sharks with friggin’ laser beams on their head?
Think that would work? Git r dun!
“And we’d STILL need those “boots on the ground”. As a Texas taxpayer, I’m not willing to foot the bill. “
The other problem is that we’re not very confident that Perry would put those boots on the ground if he was President.
Apparently you guys would rather be shooting down women and children on the border than putting up a fence (and various barricades) to keep the narcotrafficantes from driving in.
Hmm.