Thread: Brewer signs virtual border fence bill

by The Associated Press
Posted on April 24, 2014 at 12:40 PM
Updated Thursday, Apr 24 at 3:02 PM


PHOENIX (AP) -- Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has signed a bill allowing Arizona to build a "virtual fence" along the Arizona-Mexico border but providing no money to do so.

House Bill 2462 was signed Wednesday and would allow the state to place high-technology radar and video sensors on 300 towers along 375 miles of the border to monitor human and drug-smuggling activity. The sensors would send signals to a publicly accessible site and could also be monitored by law enforcement agencies.

The proposal from Sen. Bob Worsley of Mesa originally had a $30 million appropriation but it now only says a virtual fence could be built.

The federal government tried to construct a "virtual fence" along the border in 2006 but abandoned the project in 2011 after spending more than $1 billion.

http://www.azfamily.com/news/Brewer-...256584001.html

Caracas,
Sunday
April 27,2014
Latin American Herald Tribune



WASHINGTON – The Mexican Consulate in Phoenix, Arizona, strongly criticized plans for a “virtual fence” on the southern border of that state and warned that such state projects “negatively affect” relations between the two countries and “impede” collaboration on migration matters.

“The government of Mexico is watching the funding and implementation process, while recalling similar efforts that never achieved their established goals,” a communique from the Mexican Consulate in Phoenix said Friday.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed into law (HB 2462) a measure this week authorizing the state to install high-tech radar and cameras on 300 towers along 600 kilometers (375 miles) of the border with Mexico in order to keep a lookout for people- and drug-smuggling.

The original bill specified a funding of $30 million but the final approved text makes no mention of funds for creating a “virtual fence,” it simply authorizes that one be built.

“The government of Mexico insists that local projects of this nature negatively affect bilateral relations and impede effective collaboration between the two countries by planning to create systems of migration control different from those specified by federal legislation,” the consulate note continues.

“Mexico condemns the construction of any kind of border fence, considering that it does not resolve the migration phenomenon, nor is it consistent with a modern, secure border, and in no way contributes to the development and competitiveness of the region that both countries wish to promote,” it said.

For Mexico, the passing of HB 2462 contrasts with the “current of positive initiatives” passed in other states of the U.S. to promote the integration of immigrants as an acknowledgment of the contribution they make.

http://oneoldvet.com/

http://www.laht.com/article.asp?Arti...tegoryId=14091

Originally Posted by Jean

The original bill specified a funding of $30 million but the final approved text makes no mention of funds for creating a “virtual fence,” it simply authorizes that one be built.

Not spending money on this is actually a good idea. No amount of fencing will keep illegals out. To keep them out, we need to eliminate the reason that they sneak into our country in the first place. The sneak in here, because they can make more money here than they can make in their own countries. Universal E-Verify would eliminate the jobs lure. Implement Universal E-Verify and we elimminate mass illegal aliens. Then we can concentrate on apprehending potential terrorists.

As for eliminating drug smuggling, demand creates supply. The only "solution" to our drug problem is legalization, regulation, taxation, and education. Anything else is a delusion.

As for our "joint interest" with Mexico, Blanco has been dumping his poor on us for decades. If there were honesty at the top of our own gorvernment, all Americans would already know this.
******************************************
Americans first in this magnificent country

American jobs for American workers

Fair trade, not free trade