Thread: Bordering on neglect

Bordering on neglect
Thursday, March 26, 2009

If you've followed the immigration and border issue the past few years, perhaps you noticed the topic was conspicuously absent during last year's general election campaign.

Almost no one asked about it, despite the massive street demonstrations by pro-illegal immigration forces -- and the American people's rising up (twice) to defeat "comprehensive immigration reform," aka amnesty.

The reason, we suspect, is that the media knew there wasn't a dime's difference between Barack Obama and John McCain on the matter. Both were in favor of doing little except providing amnesty for illegals, at least until Americans stood up and demanded security.

Well, not even the Obama administration can avoid the border now, as an ultra-violent battle between the Mexican government and that country's ruthless drug cartels threatens to spill over the unsecured U.S. border.

A year or so late, the national media are finally reporting on the border -- and the Obama administration has belatedly decided to beef up the Border Patrol.

But as beef goes, this is sliced paper-thin. Officials from border states are already saying Washington's response is far short of what's necessary. We applaud the president for upping the number of Border Patrol agents by 350. But adding more analysts, liaisons and task forces, as the administration's plan focuses on, seems like so much window dressing.

What the border states need is more inspections and officers -- and Texas Gov. Rick Perry says the federal government still won't send the 1,000 National Guard troops he's requested.

"The state of Texas will continue to fill in the gaps until the federal government provides adequate resources necessary to secure our border and protect our citizens from those seeking to do us harm," Perry said.

Others note that the administration is fueling its enhanced border efforts with money that would have gone to immigration and drug enforcement in the rest of the country.

Mexican drug cartels are believed to be operating in 230 U.S. cities.

We still don't think the Obama administration considers the border war to be as serious as it is.

Moreover, here's this little gem: Tucked neatly into a Politico.com story about the border war is the fact that Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano says the Obama administration has no intention of ever finishing the border fence Americans demanded and Congress reluctantly approved.

"Discussing an ongoing project to build a fence along the border," Politico writes, "Napolitano said 'a wall is not the best way' to prevent smuggling of drugs, weapons or people. She said already-funded sections of the border wall will be completed, but additional barriers would be fortified through technological means."

That's it, then. We're going to blanket our violent, porous southern border with cameras.

This is just a guess, but we'd venture to say the bad guys have more than camera lenses in their tote bags.

Maybe this is why neither the national media nor the Obama campaign wanted to entertain these questions last year.


http://chronicle.augusta.com

Just a question. doesn't the governor of the state get to call on the national guard?

Signatures OK'd in Neb. city immigration petition
By JEAN ORTIZWednesday, Mar 25, 2009 - 02:46:40 pm CDT
OMAHA, Neb. - Voters in Fremont might get the chance to vote on a contentious proposal seeking to curb illegal immigration, now that a county official has verified some 3,300 petition signatures.

A letter released Wednesday from Dodge County Clerk Fred Mytty to Fremont Mayor Skip Edwards said Mytty stopped the process after verifying 3,343 of the more than 4,100 signatures turned in. About 3,000 valid signatures were needed to force a special election, which would take place this summer.

If approved by voters, the measure would bar anyone in Fremont from hiring or renting to illegal immigrants.

The council voted down a similar ordinance last summer.

City leaders have taken steps to block the proposal from being put before voters.

They have asked a court to determine whether the city can legally enact the proposed ordinance. Fremont officials argue that the city lacks such authority because the proposed ordinance would be pre-empted by federal law, would not provide sufficient safeguards to protect constitutional property rights and would violate the Fair Housing Act.

City leaders revised their argument this week, adding that the proposed ordinance isn't fit for the initiative process because it addresses several subjects. The proposal includes provisions against "harboring" and hiring illegal immigrants.

Kris Kobach, the Kansas City, Mo.-based attorney representing the petition organizers, said Wednesday that the city has prematurely asked for the court's opinion and doesn't have grounds to challenge the initiative in that way until after voters approve it.

"There's always the possibility the people might vote no," he said.

Kobach said he will ask the court on Monday to dismiss the matter.

The proposed ordinance has stirred strong opinions in the eastern Nebraska city of 25,000. Fremont is among a handful of Nebraska cities that have seen marked demographic changes primarily because of Hispanic work forces at meatpacking plants.

Supporters of the local measures say they're needed to make up for what they see as lax enforcement by federal officials.

Opponents say they fear such legislation could fuel discrimination and spur costly legal challenges for the city.

Associated Press Writer Margery A. Gibbs contributed to this report.

A service of the Associated Press(AP)