The Border Fence — Part II

At his month’s meeting we continued our in depth look at the political dynamics of building the Border Fence.  We recalled how many of us believed that the Secure Border Act of 2006, was a sincere attempt by the Bush Administration and Congress to respond to the will of the people and get serious about securing our southern border.  A year later, in December, 2007, the news broke that Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison had placed an amendment into the Omnibus Appropriations Bill that seemed to undo much of the intent of the 2006 bill. 

Grassfire, Talk Radio, and conservative pundits exploded with anger denouncing this seeming move done in “the dark of night”.

Grassfire published:

Special Report
Border Fence Funding Hoax of 2006 and 2007
How Congress And The President Are Working Behind-The-Scenes To Un-Do The Secure Fence Act

UPDATE 12/20–Last night Congress passed the omnibus Consolidated Appropriations bill — which includes the Hutchison Amendment that guts the Secure Fence Act.
World Net Daily's Jerome Corsi was the first in the media to tackle the issue. As a result, although the bill passed, the Border Fence Funding Hoax has been exposed.

Michelle Malkin railed:  The Incredible Disappearing Border Fence
Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Do you know the story of the Incredible Disappearing Border Fence? It's an object lesson in gesture politics and homeland insecurity. It's a tale of hollow rhetoric, meaningless legislation and bipartisan betrayal.

Yet, CR wanted to know more, for example:

Why would Sen Hutchison, normally a reliable conservative, be the one to offer this amendment?

Hutchison is not known as a “maverick” and has little record of turning against her fellow conservatives.  It just didn’t ring true that her motivation was to “gut the fence” or that she was part of a hoax or a betrayal.

All politicians are one part sincere beliefs, one part responders to their constituents, and one part survivors of the next election, Senator Hutchison was the recipient of a determined coalition of Texas/Mexico border stake holders who demanded the fence not be built.
In her own words: “Throughout the process that led to passage of the Secure Fence Act, Sen. Cornyn and I were frustrated that local officials representing areas specifically cited in the act — particularly in the El Paso, Del Rio-to-Eagle Pass and Laredo-to-Brownville sectors — did not have the opportunity to participate in decisions regarding the location of fencing and other physical infrastructure near their communities.”

How is the Border Fence viewed and supported/opposed by people living on the Texas is different

• 1200 of the 2100 miles of border with Mexico is in Texas
• 95% of the land is private
• The entire border has the Rio Grande river
• The border of Texas and Mexico is the center of the Rio Grande.
• Strong relationships between Texas and Mexico
• Local stakeholders do not want the fence.

Introducing the Primariy Local Stakeholders:  The Texas Border Coalition

Texas mayors deliver border wall protest to D.C. decision-makers
January 20, 2007
By Bill Sontag, Feature Writer

 The group of Texas emissaries poses Wednesday for a commemorative portrait during their successful visit in Washington D.C. to protest the border fence. Corporate sponsorship and logistical support was provided by IBC Bank. From left, Dennis Nixon, CEO, IBC Bank, Mayor Richard Cortez, McAllen, Mayor Kevin D. Hiles, Rio Grande City, Mayor Raul Salinas, Laredo, Mayor Chad Foster, Eagle Pass, Rep. Ciro Rodriguez (D-23rd Congressional District of Texas), Mayor John Cook, El Paso, and Mayor Eddie Treviño, Brownsville. (Contributed photo/IBC Bank) (click image to enlarge)

Mayors of border towns and cities traveled to Washington D.C. (Jan. 17, 2007) to express their united and resolute opposition to a wall or fence along the Texas-Mexico border. Their message – “Don’t do it!” – targeted elected representatives and Bush administration officials, including Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.  On Wednesday, the mayors met with officials from the U.S. Department of Commerce… said [Eagle Pass Mayor] Chad Foster, adding that the Commerce contingent was very interested in the opposition to the border fence. “They’ve got a dog in this fight, too,” said Foster. “Since Mexico is Texas’ biggest trade partner, they were pretty passionate to continue good commerce with Mexico.”

In the afternoon, the mayors met with Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX). Both senators have been receptive to and supportive of the Texas Border Coalition’s deliberations on the border fence. The 2 p.m. meeting ensured coordination of the TBC pitch to Chertoff, at 4 p.m.
According to Foster, Chertoff was noncommittal on details, but said that, though it was his job to implement the law, and his decisions on how to do that, he is very receptive to the thoughts of communities that will have to live with those decisions. The secretary said conclusions about whether, when and where to build fence would be, in part, derived from input gathered from border communities and local “stakeholders” (elected officials, business community representatives, and citizen groups).

Chertoff assured the mayors they would be involved, “And he assured us he’ll be here on the border in the next 60 days,” Foster said. No specific itinerary or agenda has been established.

“But we’re planning on going back to Washington, within the next 45 to 60 days,” said Foster. “Just to make sure everything’s still on course. And the next trip we’re going to try to spread it out, and have some ‘quality time’ with the people working there.”
 “The dynamics of Washington have sure changed!” exclaimed Foster in a follow-up phone call Thursday morning (Jan. 18), after he returned to Eagle Pass. “We want to continue to spread the border gospel. We have very receptive elected officials up there, because they’ve lived it, they’re from here. So, it was a very productive trip.”
Please watch these video clips for more information

Texas Border coalition meeting/statements

Clinton Obama debate about border fence

News segment about Brownsville

So, with all of this as a context,  what happened in the Omnibus Spending Bill and Hutchison’s amendment? Was the fence truly “gutted”?

Critics of the amendment cite:  A provision in the fiscal 2008 Omnibus Spending Bill strengthens the hand of landowners, local governments and other groups opposed to fence building along the U.S.-Mexico border.
The bill (HR 2764) also requires the Homeland Security Department (DHS) to consult with local governments, American Indian tribes, property owners, and the secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture "to minimize the impact on the environment, culture, commerce and quality of life" in the area the fence is to be built.
The bill also requires DHS to build at least 700 miles of "reinforced fencing" along the approximately 1,933-mile southern border where it "would be most practical and effective." But it also strikes provisions of a 2006 law (PL 109-367) authorizing fencing in five specific areas along the Mexican border.

The operative text of the amendment that passed
 (A) REINFORCED FENCING.–In carrying out subsection
(a), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall construct reinforced fencing along not less than 700 miles of the southwest border where fencing would be most practical and effective and provide for the installation of additional physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors to gain operational control of the southwest border."

(D) LIMITATION ON REQUIREMENTS.–Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), nothing in this paragraph shall require the Secretary of Homeland Security to install fencing, physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors in a particular location along an international border of the United States, if the Secretary determines that the use or placement of such resources is not the most appropriate means to achieve and maintain operational control over the international border at such location.

CR Conclusion:

Congress is schizophrenic about the Border Fence.  It knows the people have spoken, but there is a reluctance to fully embrace this solution.  The Secure Border Fence Act of 2006 was itself a last minute, sop to the electorate, a “Hail Mary” thrown on the eve of what was to be an electoral disaster for the Republicans.

At the same time,  Hutchison made her desires to get some wiggle room for Texas well known.  The amendment in the Omnibus Spending bill was not “out of left field”.  It had been passed 4 TIMES altogether

[The border fence language passed four separate times over 7 months:
• The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 – May 23, 2007
• The FY 2008 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act – July 26, 2007
• The FY 2008 Department of Defense Appropriations Act – October 3, 2007
• The Omnibus Appropriations bill – December 18, 2007]

And as we have seen above, there is a very vocal, politically powerful group of border stakeholders strongly arguing against the fence.  It would be unrealistic to expect Hutchison to ignore this constituency.

The bottom line, however, from a Citizen’s perspective as to what is best for our country, is that national security trumps local economic development.  In this sense, Hutchison’s actions appear to betray this higher purpose.   On the other hand, If the Texas Border Coalition is telling the truth, they want "border security" as much as anyone, and will work with law enforcement and the nation to accomplish this in ways other than erecting a fence.  The question is, will they be true to their word?

So, What is Really Happening, Is There Progress on some of the Fence or Isn’t There?

CR next looks into what is really happening.  Is there actually enough going on in terms of new initiatives regarding Border Security, that the Texas Border, is in and of itself, not a deal killer?  Can we be encouraged about overall progress?  Again, the evidence is mixed, but not altogether discouraging.  There are hopeful signs.

Watch this video:

If we can believe Michael Chertoff, DHS is making a good faith effort.

Bill O'Reilly and Chertoff

Additional Evidence:

Homeland Security approves "virtual" border fence
'Virtual' border fence gets OK
Radars, surveillance cameras to try catch people entering country illegally
The Associated Press
updated 6:26 a.m. ET, Fri., Feb. 22, 2008

WASHINGTON - A 28-mile “virtual fence” that will use radars and surveillance cameras to try to catch people entering the country illegally has gotten final government approval.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff on Friday announced approval of the fence, built by the Boeing Co. and using technology the Bush administration plans to extend to other areas of the Arizona border, as well as sections of Texas. These projects could get under way as early as this summer, officials said.
The virtual fence is part of a national plan to secure the southwest border with physical barriers and high-tech detection capabilities intended to stop illegal immigrants on foot and drug smugglers in vehicles. As of Feb. 8, 295 miles of fencing had been constructed.

Feds sue Texas border towns over Homeland Security "fence"
A barrier many doubted would ever be built suddenly looks very real

Chicago Tribune; Jan 18, 2008

BROWNSVILLE, Texas — When Congress approved the construction of a nearly 700-mile-long fence along the U.S.-Mexico border two years ago to keep out terrorists, drug smugglers and illegal immigrants, many residents in this bustling border town were certain the idea was just politics and would soon be discarded as unworkable.

When President Bush signed a measure in December to begin funding the $1.2 billion project, many here couldn't believe the Department of Homeland Security was really planning to build a fence that would cut through back yards, farmlands, historic districts and even a college campus.  But this week, as the federal government began taking recalcitrant landowners to court to force them to open their properties to engineers and surveyors, the fence suddenly started to look very real indeed. And so did the rising anger felt by border residents, many of them Hispanic-Americans, who fear that centuries of cross-border culture and commerce will soon be imperiled by a fence that's as loathed here as it is loved in far-distant Washington.

"To appease people in middle America, they are going to kill our communities along the border," said Pat Ahumada, the mayor of Brownsville. "The rest of America has no idea how we live our lives here. We are linked by the Rio Grande, not divided by it. Our history, our families, our neighbors are tied together on both sides of that river."
 
This week, the U.S. Justice Department began taking those landowners into federal court, seeking judicial orders to compel them to grant the government the temporary right to enter their properties. Of 135 landowners in California, Arizona and Texas sent warning letters by last month, 102 have refused to comply, according to homeland security officials.

'Greater good' cited
Michael Chertoff, the homeland security secretary, has suggested that some fence opponents are motivated by not-in-my-back-yard attitudes.

"What we're not going to do is say that everyone gets to decide whether they're going to participate in the process and if they don't want to, then the greater good be damned," Chertoff told Copley News Service recently.