McCaul border security plan gets support from Texas lawmakers

By Lisa Hagen, Washington Bureau

October 7, 2014

WASHINGTON — As the polarizing issue of immigration policy remains at a stalemate, Texas lawmakers from both sides of the aisle generally support House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul's plan to measure threats along the southern border and recommend resources to fill the gaps in existing security.

The Austin Republican's blueprint seeks to promote practices that could enhance border control, including more technology to expand surveillance.

“My proposal matches resources and capabilities to needs on the southern border to allow Border Patrol agents to finally gain complete visibility,” McCaul said in a statement. “This is the first step to providing Americans the secure border they demand and deserve.”

Some of the proposed technologies:

Integrated fixed towers to track illegal entries;

Radar blimps to increase monitoring in mountainous areas;

Ultralight aircraft linked to real-time sensor data;

And “game cameras” to monitor low-light areas, in concert with motion detectors.

The plan calls for increased funding for collaboration between law enforcement at local, tribal, state and federal levels.

McCaul's proposal maps out 11 sectors along the border, five of them in Texas. The report explains each sector's geography, current resources and recommendations for additional needs.

While he agrees with McCaul on assessing border threats and not “blindly” spending more money to secure it, Rep. Beto O'Rourke, D-El Paso, cautioned that further research should be done before purchasing new equipment and technology.

“A lot of what (McCaul) says is right on the money,” O'Rourke said. “One major point I agree with is the agreed-upon metrics and outcomes and a rational, comprehensive approach.”

But the Homeland Security Committee member added, “But I don't understand why he is then making recommendations for specific solutions before we have a comprehensive strategy.”

The Rio Grande Valley sector, which includes Houston and border cities such as McAllen and Brownsville, is labeled a “high-threat,” with drug trade controlled by the Gulf Cartel. Since 2012, this sector has seen the largest increase in the number of unaccompanied children and adults from Central America.

The proposal recommends that this sector increase use of mobile surveillance systems and radar blimps called aerostats. The sector already has 3,000 border security personnel and 54 miles of pedestrian fences.

Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, said McCaul's approach is overall a good strategy to determine and respond to threats on the border as well as coordinate with other federal and international agencies.

The Laredo sector, which includes Laredo, San Antonio, Austin and Dallas, has seen a decrease in apprehensions since the early 2000s, but drug seizures have remained constant over the last decade.

Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, said he will also work with his colleagues on the House Homeland Security Committee to find ways to secure the border.

“Americans — and Texans in particular — have repeatedly and overwhelmingly supported a strategy that puts border security first,” Smith said. “A nation that is serious about the security of its people must also be serious about the security of its borders.”

If his strategy becomes legislation, McCaul said funding options include money offset from another federal agency or reprogrammed spending to make it deficit-neutral.

http://www.expressnews.com/news/loca...om-5807886.php

We need this study first, than we need that study, then we better have a special committee to review and refine those studies. Then we will present it to appropriate congressional committees, probably 3 to five. How many more years will all that take (while we know that they have little to no intention of securing that border after 29 years of delaying experience)?


How many are willing to bet against that it is again re-election propaganda forgotten after November 5th, 2014?


The only way these proposals should be accepted as honest intent from candidates is that included is a militarized border to secure us while they conclude all this other studying, debating, and finally passing border security legislation. Otherwise in any way it is only refined B.S.!