Thread: How to make better use of $37 billion border fence fund

You're going to love this dude!

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/16080452.htm

Posted on Thu, Nov. 23, 2006

THE OPPENHEIMER REPORT

How to make better use of $37 billion border fence fund

BY ANDRES OPPENHEIMER
aoppenheimer@MiamiHerald.com

If there was ever any doubt that the planned fence along the southern U.S. border is one of the dumbest ideas ever to come out of Washington, new estimates putting the price tag of the project at up to $37 billion should convince everyone to forget about the whole thing.

As you may know, Department of Homeland Security Inspector General Richard L. Skinner testified recently that the high-tech electronic surveillance of the border could cost up to $30 billion.

In addition, the 700-mile ''physical fence'' along the 2,000-mile border with Mexico that was recently signed into law by President Bush will cost up to $7 billion.

The total $37 billion price tag is more than twice last year's total foreign investment in Mexico, and it would not do much to stop Mexicans from crossing the border. As long as Mexicans and other Latin Americans can't find jobs in their home countries, they will find a way to go north. If they don't do it through Canada or by sea, they will continue flying into the United States as tourists and overstaying their visas, as nearly half of unauthorized migrants do now.

What would be a more effective way of spending this money? Here are three ideas that would help reduce migration by improving living conditions south of the border, rather than just helping Halliburton, Boeing and other major U.S. defense contractors get richer.

First, Congress should approve a bill sponsored by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, to create a North American Investment Fund to build highways, roads and broadband Internet lines in southern Mexico, where most migrants are coming from.

Half of the money would be paid by Mexico and the rest by the United States and Canada, linked to Mexico's responsible economic behavior.

Largely because the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement generated considerable foreign investment in northern Mexico, the north of Mexico has boomed, while southern Mexico has remained rural and poor.

People from southern and central Mexican states are moving first to northern Mexico, and later -- because they are away from home anyway -- to the United States.

Most experts agree that there are few investments in southern Mexico because -- while wages there are often three times lower than in northern Mexico -- there are no highways to ship goods to the U.S. market. All southern Mexico roads lead to Mexico City, one of the most traffic-congested areas in the world.

Robert Pastor, head of American University's Center of North American Studies in Washington, D.C., and one of the pioneers in seeking ways to reduce the U.S.-Mexico income gap, says southern Mexico could become a big magnet for investments with the proper infrastructure, and the incentive to migrate would be greatly reduced.

''If you build the roads, the ports, the communications in southern Mexico, foreign investment will come,'' Pastor says.

``The most important thing is to open a new highway corridor that avoids Mexico City and goes straight to the U.S. border, perhaps through Monterrey.''

Second, if U.S. public opinion is against giving Mexico matching grants, it should be done through low-interest loans.

Most Americans have long forgotten this, but after former President Clinton offered a $50 billion financial bailout of Mexico in 1995, drawing bitter criticism from U.S. Mexico-bashers, Mexico paid back its debt in full, ahead of schedule.

Third, the United States, Canada and Mexico should enter a North American healthcare treaty that would allow U.S-certified hospitals in Mexico to treat some of the estimated 100 million Americans who will reach retirement age over the next three decades. That would help Washington reduce its deficit, help American retirees reduce health costs and help Mexico develop its health, tourism and real estate industries.

My conclusion: Any of these ideas would be much more effective in reducing illegal migration than spending $37 billion on a fence that is not only being condemned by the world, but will be pretty useless.

P.S.: I had a fourth idea for using the U.S. funds, but I won't include it in the core of this column for etiquette reasons. It's buyingCNN's Lou Dobbs and other anti-Hispanic immigration zealots a one-way ticket to far-off New Zealand. It would only cost $1,206 per ticket (economy class).

P.S.: I had a fourth idea for using the U.S. funds, but I won't include it in the core of this column for etiquette reasons. It's buyingCNN's Lou Dobbs and other anti-Hispanic immigration zealots a one-way ticket to far-off New Zealand. It would only cost $1,206 per ticket (economy class).

Sorry, 37 billion wouldn't come close to shipping us all to New Zealand.

You know, I really don't give a darn about high-tech electronic surveillance on the border, but I want that damn physical barrier! It's my understanding the physical fence will only cost 2-3 billion. As far as I'm concerned, the other 34 to 35 billion can be used to deport illegal immigrants!

read this very carefully:

''If you build the roads, the ports, the communications in southern Mexico, foreign investment will come,'' Pastor says.

``The most important thing is to open a new highway corridor that avoids Mexico City and goes straight to the U.S. border, perhaps through Monterrey.''

Keep in mind the China connection as well as the Iranian connection.
Texas Corridor etc. etc.

This is pure propaganda with serious undertones and we all know where this is leading.

.

sis said:

This is pure propaganda with serious undertones and we all know where this is leading.

Thought the same thing.

I think that Robert Pastor has a legitimate arguement. However an even more effective way to help develop Southern Mexico would be to teach the immigrants here the difference in between productive investment and mere consumption. If you give a relative money it can be used to buy food and the benefit lasts that day. If you send tools and seeds insisting they feed themselves that can be even more effective in that it does not build dependency . If a million families were to do that it would soak up a lot of their unutilized labor and then create savings for health and education and their clothing and household goods.

With all due respect, RICHARD........although I certainly agree with you concerning teaching vs giving, Robert Pastor is only interested in building a North American Hemishperic entity.

He's nothing but a manipulator for his own goals and his goal is to decrease American standard of living in order to level out the playing field of the 3rd world countries.

He's been on this road to end our Soveriengty for decades.

However, considering that China controls more than a few of our ports and has agreements with mexico, Iran has agreements with mexico, cuba has agreements with mexico and other communist countries have agreements/ties with mexico........Pastor damn well knows exactly what lies ahead if we buy his well thought out manipulation.

Richard,
we've given mexico billions of dollars over the years........a never ending sucking hole taking American tax dollars. They don't want to help their people and our sinking more into them won't solve this problem. They are a seriously flawed government and their people refuse to see anything other than a socialistic view.

Also, American mega Ag has chased the farmers off of their land and is sucking up the little property that they do have to work. The deals that have been made with the mex gov is destroying the small farmer and moving big Ag and their genetically modified fields throughout mexico.
The plan is for the mega Ag to take over the hemisphere and now seeds won't be able to be polinated naturally. It's a horror and growing as we speak.

Your ideas would work in certain countries but I don't believe they will work South of the border, imho.

my 2 cents

Send billions to Mexi-hole to make it better? Yeah right. Just how many seconds do you think it would it take for the corrupt politicians and elite scum to pilfer all the cash and stuff their own pockets and bank accounts with that money? Actually, I think milli-seconds would be more like it.

How do you make Mexico better? Seal off the border for good, and the resultant clamor and revolt by the poor and desperate Mexicans will force their government to get the act together. As long as we have an open border with an olly-olly-in-come-free immigration system and a wide open welfare state for every illegal who can get their pregnant butt across the border in time to pop out an anchor baby(ies), the Mexican government will never do anything to help its people. Why should they? As long as we taxpayers provide for their illegals every need, the Mexican government will never lift a finger to change their corrupt ways. After all, why should they?

2ndsis is correct there Richard, also don't forget the many businesses in Mexico that are unable to find workers because they all want to come here. I don't believe that things will change in Mexico until the people there make the change themselves, there are jobs down there if they want to stay and work making a better country for themselves and their children.
The last time I was down there I was talking to a guy and asked him if he ever goes into America, he told me he has never been here, he has a good job and all his family close by so why leave.

reptile09 wrote:

How do you make Mexico better? Seal off the border for good, and the resultant clamor and revolt by the poor and desperate Mexicans will force their government to get the act together. As long as we have an open border with an olly-olly-in-come-free immigration system and a wide open welfare state for every illegal who can get their pregnant butt across the border in time to pop out an anchor baby(ies), the Mexican government will never do anything to help its people. Why should they? As long as we taxpayers provide for their illegals every need, the Mexican government will never lift a finger to change their corrupt ways. After all, why should they?

Bingo! My feelings exactly.

The best thing we can do for Mexico is to stop being their welfare system. Like reptile said, taking care of Mexico's poor gives the Mexican government no incentive to deal with the problem.

You know, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that an open border guarantee was one of the promises included in the NAFTA package (an under the table promise). What do you think, could it be possible?

You know, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that an open border guarantee was one of the promises included in the NAFTA package

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/trans...cks_06-17.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...mment-opinions