Thread: Congress should rethink border fence idea

http://www.dailybreeze.com/opinion/arti ... 90761.html

Today is Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Originally published Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Updated Monday, December 11, 2006
Congress should rethink border fence idea
Solving the immigration problem is going to take a lot more than a new fence at the border.
Daily Breeze editorial

Congressional elections can sometimes provide a valuable opportunity to change course after a hasty decision.

In the wake of the midterm elections, Americans have the opportunity to re-examine the idea of building 700 miles of fencing on the U.S.-Mexico border. We have never been convinced that walls and fences alone are adequate to curb illegal immigration. We prefer a comprehensive approach to immigration reform that includes a tamper-proof identification card, more border patrol agents, stiffer and readily enforced penalties for employers who hire illegal immigrants, a swifter means of deporting illegal immigrants, an end to "catch and release," guest workers, a rigorous and conditional path to legalization for illegal immigrants and a host of other reforms.

Apparently, scrapping the fence would also be fine with New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a possible Democratic contender for the White House in 2008. In a provocative speech at Georgetown University, Richardson made clear he thinks a border fence creates more problems than it solves.

Insisting the idea of building new fences "gets in the way" of achieving the sort of cooperative relationship between the United States and Mexico that is essential to stemming illegal immigration, Richardson is asking Congress to abandon the effort and concentrate on other reforms that stand a better chance of working, such as increasing the number of Border Patrol agents.

Besides, as Richardson points out, Congress didn't make clear how it was going to pay for the fence in the first place. Estimates are that it could cost as much as $10 billion. Congress approved a $1.2 billion down payment. Now that Democrats have won control of both houses, it's hard to conceive of how lawmakers will ever make up the difference, given the wide array of competing spending priorities facing the new Congress.

And there are no shortcuts. Going high-tech means a higher price tag. A so-called virtual fence that relies on cameras and sensors instead of metal and concrete would be more expensive, and could run as high as $40 billion.

It's one thing to talk about Congress spending enormous amounts of the people's money on a worthwhile project that might actually stand a reasonable chance of working. It's quite another to talk about wasting enormous amounts of money on something that likely won't work as advertised -- not until we cut off the magnet of jobs that lure illegal immigrants here in the first place.
Isn't it about time, in this immigration debate, that we learned to move beyond simplistic solutions?

Congress should dedicate its best effort to the immigration issue. Adding more fencing isn't enough.

What would be the sense of building a barrier if we have the Pelosi/ Kennedy/ McCain/ Bush welcoming committee waiting at the gates with open arms.

A fence! Alright lets see to build a fence that will take hard labor, I don't think that job can be accomplished with out the help of the same people that you guys are trying to keep out. I can't remember the last time I saw a non-hispanic construction worker. Moreover, I can't recall ever seeing a Anglo working in a warehouse.

TROLL!

Dixie

A fence or a wall can be built, let the Army Corp. of Engineers do the job, or let Washington hire American Citizens willing to do it. I'm sure their would be many volunteers gladly help out. I will.