« Carrots, Eggs or Coffee, which one are you? | Main | Stingray Stabs Another Man Near Heart »
October 18, 2006
BORDER FENCE UPDATE
by Jack Lee
The Washington Post article below is not as bad for the GOP as it may have been intended to be. The border fence is being built (thats good) and they are trying to do it smarter using the virtual fence concept, (thats good too). I never really supported that it be a completely solid structure anyway, as a solid fence can be easily breeched while giving some of us a false sense that it's more secure than it really is. Some of it has to be high tech using detection devices instead of fencing. The downside is, Congress wants some of the immigration issues worked out first, which could lead to considerably delay. So keep all that in mind when you read the latest on the border fence construction:
"No sooner did Congress authorize construction of a 700-mile fence on the U.S.-Mexico border last week than lawmakers rushed to approve separate legislation that ensures it will never be built, at least not as advertised, according to Republican lawmakers and immigration experts. GOP leaders have singled out the fence as one of the primary accomplishments of the recently completed session. Many lawmakers plan to highlight their $1.2 billion down payment on its construction as they campaign in the weeks before the midterm elections.
But, shortly before recessing late Friday, the House and Senate gave the Bush administration leeway to distribute the money to a combination of projects -- not just the physical barrier along the southern border. The funds may also be spent on roads, technology and "tactical infrastructure" to support the Department of Homeland Security's preferred option of a "virtual fence."
What's more, in a late-night concession to win over wavering Republicans, GOP congressional leaders pledged in writing that Native American tribes, members of Congress, governors and local leaders would get a say in "the exact placement" of any structure, and that Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff would have the flexibility to use alternatives "when fencing is ineffective or impractical."
The loopholes leave the Bush administration with authority to decide where, when and how long a fence will be built, except for small stretches east of San Diego and in western Arizona. Homeland Security officials have proposed a fence half as long, lawmakers said.
"It's one thing to authorize. It's another thing to actually appropriate the money and do it," said HYPERLINK "http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/c001056/"Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.). The fine-print distinction between what Congress says it will do and what it actually pays for is a time-honored result of the checks and balances between lawmakers who oversee agencies and those who hold their purse strings.
Political calculations In this case, it also reflects political calculations by GOP strategists that voters do not mind the details, and that key players -- including the administration, local leaders and the Mexican government -- oppose a fence-only approach, analysts said.
President Bush signed the $34.8 billion homeland security budget bill Wednesday in Scottsdale, Ariz., without referring to the 700-mile barrier. Instead, he highlighted the $1.2 billion that Congress provided for an unspecified blend of fencing, vehicle barriers, lighting and technology such as ground-based radar, cameras and sensors.
"That's what the people of this country want," the president said. "They want to know that we're modernizing the border so we can better secure the border."
Bush and Chertoff have said repeatedly that enforcement alone will not work and that they want limited dollars spent elsewhere, such as on a temporary-worker program to ease pressure on the border. At an estimated $3 million to $10 million per mile, the double-layered barrier will cost considerably more than $1.2 billion.
HYPERLINK "http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/g000445/"Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who chairs the Senate subcommittee that funds the Department of Homeland Security, said that before the legislation was approved, the department had planned to build 320 miles of fencing, secure 500 miles of hard-to-traverse areas by blocking roads and monitor electronically the rest of the 2,000-mile-long southern frontier.
"I think there'll be fencing where the department feels that it makes sense," Gregg said, estimating that "at least 300 to 400 miles" will be built.
Congress withheld $950 million of the $1.2 billion, pending a breakdown by Chertoff of how he plans to spend the money. It is due in early December, after the midterm elections.
'Virtual fence'
Asked whether Homeland Security would build 700 miles of fence, department spokesman Russ Knocke would not say. Instead, he noted that department leaders announced last month that they will spend $67 million to test a remote-sensing "virtual fence" concept on a 28-mile, high-traffic stretch of border south of Tucson over eight months, and then adjust their plans.
"We plan to build a little and test a little. . . . Stay tuned," Knocke said. "We're optimistic that Congress is going to provide the department with flexibility."
The split between GOP leaders hungry for a sound-bite-friendly accomplishment targeting immigration and others who support a more comprehensive approach also means that the fence bill will be watered down when lawmakers return for a lame-duck session in November, according to congressional aides and lobbyists.
The office of HYPERLINK "http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/h001016/"Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.) yesterday released a letter from House Speaker J. HYPERLINK "http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/h000323/"Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Senate Majority Leader HYPERLINK "http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/f000439/"Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) promising to ensure that Chertoff has discretion over whether to build a fence or choose other options. Homeland Security officials must also consult with U.S., state and local representatives on where structures are placed.
The letter was inserted in the Congressional Record on Friday night because Congress ran out of time to reach a final deal, aides said.
"State and local officials in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas should not be excluded from decisions about how to best protect our borders with their varying topography, population and geography," Hutchison said in a statement added to the record.
Congress also hedged on when a fence would be completed. The law mandating it said Homeland Security officials should gain "operational control" of the border in 18 months. But the law funding it envisions five years. Chertoff has set a goal of two to three years, but only after completion of an immigration overhaul.
Staff writer Peter Baker contributed to this report.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
Posted by Post Scripts at October 18, 2006 08:32 PM
Comments
Jack, Thank you for posting the report. The thing I like about the report is that it is just that...a report.
The report underscores the complexity (entanglement) that is now BIG Gov'ment.
It underscores the complexity of the problem given the number of states involved, the various kinds of topography, the varying needs and levels of urgency, and the numbers of departments, agencies and constituencies
involved.
It underscores the emotional frustration (well justified to a great degree) and demands of the people within a system of gross complexity and layers.
It underscores the trouble we find ourselves in and the incredible first response of placing blame when, surprise, this impossible bureaucracy doesn't run like a perfectly designed and well oiled machine.
Everyone is sick of THEM. (R's and D's) yet how have we arrived at this place? Are we that certain that if we were given the job of solving this mess we would do better? Are we that certain that our solutions would be
accepted and enacted with ease? Is placing blame and finding fault the highest level of participation we can muster? Are we really this stupid, that we expect miracles instantly? Are we really so arrogant that we
cannot see we have created this enormous bureaucratic mess? We the people have little to gripe about now. It is we who built this city. We built it with apathy, passing the buck, placing blame, letting people off the hook, and failing to educate ourselves. We did it by taking the easy road. We did it by taking the position that all things must be
solved through the government and we built it and built it and built it.
It would take a very long time to undo the damage that's been done in creating this monster government and now we don't have time...or so it would seem.
This generation lacks spirit, will, determination, and the ability to take responsibility. We are unable or unwilling to set aside differences to reach even the simplest of goals.
Posted by: Tina at October 19, 2006 09:27 AM
Thanks for your comments Tina and I don't really disagree with anything you said. You asked, how did we arrive at this low point of distrust in government?
I would say its because of the rhetoric.
When you have two sides saying almost two different versions of the same story all the time, you have to believe somebody is lying or at least not be completely forthcoming.
This attempted deception goes back and forth at times and the attempts to decieve the vote mounts up and then voters get disillusioned because they don't know who to believe.
That I think is the primary reason how we reached this low point, but massive spending, ineptitude, stupid programs, lethargic reaction to security issues, boodoggle waste, corruption, criminal wrong doing... it's all taken its toll.
Posted by: Jack at October 19, 2006 09:36 AM
The fence, virtual or otherwise, was a baldly simple-minded sop tossed to an appallingly simple-minded electorate. Which is not to say that money won't be spent. Contractors with an "in", will build portions of a fence, and collect a nice fee, for doing not diddly to deter illegal immigration. I think it's Lockheed Martin that gets to develop the "virtual" fence, which will fatten up their balance sheet a bit. It will never, however, stop illegal immigration. The only way to slow illegal immigration is to promote foreign and domestic policy that encourage the development of productive employment in their own countries. Which will be difficult if, say, American producers continue to take jobs abroad, specifically, explicitly, SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY THE HELP !!!
Excuse the hollering, but when are you people going to grasp this? When? Ever?
Posted by: Libby at October 19, 2006 06:09 PM
Jack, I guess this is why we do what we do, just as you have said on many occassions. Maybe too. no matter what we do a good number of people are going to be unhappy.
Libby:
"I think it's Lockheed Martin that gets to provide the "virtual" fence, which will fatten up their balance sheet a bit."
Gosh we can't have business making a buck that wouldn't be social...ist!
I don't think that Mattel or General Mills have the technology to bid this particular job though so what the hey.
"Which will be difficult if, say, American producers continue to take jobs abroad, specifically, explicitly, SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY THE HELP !!!"
"specifically, explicitly"? How many board meetings have you personally attended where these decisions were made? People compete for jobs Libby...the people in those foreign countries have an advantage...they are willing to do the work for less. Guess what? The companies have to compete for work too. Without a profit the doors close and then everyone is out of an opportunity. When will you ever get that?
A job that pays more than you can get anywhere else in your country is a blessing to the people of that country and in that economy. Both parties win. It's always like that.
If workers in America hadn't played a virtual extortion game for across the board raises and benefits regardless of merit, they wouldn't have priced themselves completely out of the market. They were, however, holding the hammer and they greedily wielded it for about fifty years...long past the "company store" era.
...and as far as promoting "foreign and domestic policy that encourages development of productive employment"...you lefties fight that kind of policy at every turn...as evidenced by your slavishly biased and slanted rant on American Corporations. It isn't honest and it isn't based on any real assessment of what actually goes on in most cases. It is decidedly socialist and meddling. The world is becoming equalized despite government intervention because companies have been willing to take business opportunity to other countries...and let's face it, sometimes they go there because the work takes them there...as with bridges and damns.
Posted by: Tina at October 19, 2006 08:47 PM