Open Borders Put Public Health at Risk

Open Borders Put Public Health at Risk


May 1, 2009
Tom Fitton
President of Judicial Watch


A few weeks ago, I told you that Judicial Watch continues to battle aggressively for any and all documents related to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and its offshoot, the North American Competitiveness Council. I also cautioned that even though this "project" was launched during the Bush administration, it is still relevant today, given President Obama's globalist mentality and the fact that SPP border-blurring policies are still being implemented.

And now here comes the swine flu to prove my point.

Of course, this has been the story of the week. According to The Associated Press:

President Barack Obama pledged "great vigilance" in confronting the swine flu outbreak Wednesday night as it spread coast to coast across the U.S. The outbreak hit 11 states and closed schools amid confirmation of the first U.S. death -- a Mexican toddler who visited Texas with his family -- and the confinement of dozens of Marines after one came down with the disease in California...

...Despite calls from many U.S. lawmakers for tightening controls over the Mexico-US border, Obama ruled out that option, even though the swine flu outbreak has been at its most virulent and may have begun there...Earlier, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said, "Closing our nation's borders is not merited here"...

This appears to be at odds with the government's official policy as articulated in a 2005 Department of Homeland Security document entitled National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza:

The most effective way to protect the American population is to contain an outbreak beyond the borders of the U.S. While we work to prevent a pandemic from reaching our shores, we recognize that slowing or limiting the spread of the outbreak is a more realistic outcome and can save many lives. In support of our containment strategy, we will...Encourage all levels of government, domestically and globally, to take appropriate and lawful action to contain an outbreak within the borders of their community, province, state or nation.

Granted, it appears the disease has already made its way into the United States. But doesn't it make sense that limiting our exposure to the source of the outbreak would help curtail the spread of the disease? Why, for example, quarantine the Marines in California we suspect might have been exposed to the disease but allow people from the disease's host nation to cross virtually unimpeded across the border to potentially infect great numbers of people?

Unfortunately, it appears the Obama administration's policy is now more in line with recommendations cited in SPP documents uncovered by Judicial Watch. Here's the SPP strategy: "It is also essential that throughout a pandemic all borders and major roads remain open..."

Sound familiar?

In fact, an Obama official testified this week to the Senate that the borders would never be closed -- no matter the health risk. Here's what The Washington Times reported about the testimony of Rear Adm. Anne Schuchat, interim deputy director for the CDC's Science and Public Health Program:

Asked directly by Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, what conditions would require the closing of border, Dr. Schuchat said, "I don't think there are any."

Who stands for the public's health security in the face of this open borders radicalism!?

But even assuming it would be unreasonable do anything other than "passive surveillance" through controlled border crossings – what about the unsecured areas of our border that have no one checking illegal crossers for signs of this new swine flu?

Our government's willful neglience in securing our border with Mexico has caused much damage to our great nation. Now, with the emergence of this swine flu, you can bet the damage will now be far deadlier.


www.judicialwatch.org