Showing posts with label environmental justice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label environmental justice. Show all posts
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Sierra Club: More border walls is not the answer
Rio Grande Guardian
June 22, 2013
by Steve Taylor
HIDALGO, June 22 - The Sierra Club has denounced plans to build hundreds of miles of additional border walls, saying the only place left to add more barriers is through wildlife refuges and private property along the Rio Grande in Texas.
In a statement, the group said America and its environment can’t afford another “Border Splurge.” So far, six hundred miles of walls have been built along the U.S.-Mexico border. “What we’ve learned,” the Sierra Club states, “is that that these barriers do not stop immigration – they only devastate wildlife and habitat while bisecting communities and costing taxpayers millions of dollars per mile.”
Plans to build more border walls came via an amendment to the Senate immigration reform legislation authored by Republican U.S. Sens. John Hoeven of North Dakota and Bob Corker of Tennessee. The amendment, which has the backing of the so-called Gang of Eight U.S. senators, would require the construction of hundreds of miles of border walls, to be added to the existing 651 miles of fencing already built, in addition to a near doubling of the U.S Border Patrol by adding 20,000 agents.
There would also be a lot more towers, cameras, sensors and drones. The additional border security could cost $48 billion over ten years.
Dan Millis, of the Sierra Club Borderlands team, said the Sierra Club “strongly opposes this reckless and unrealistic proposal that would not only destroy habitat, cut off wildlife migration corridors and cause flooding, but also waste tens of billions of taxpayer dollars on technology we know has little impact on fixing our immigration system.”
Millis pointed out that last year the U.S. government spent $18 billion on immigration enforcement - more than all other federal law enforcement combined.
“Our borderlands are already overrun with excessive numbers of Border Patrol vehicles, agents, towers and buildings. We have more than 650 miles of border fence that only serve to bisect communities and devastate the borderlands environment. We already have a border splurge – we don’t need another one,” Millis said.
Millis said the proposed doubling of the Border Patrol is precisely that, another border splurge.
“While cutting basic services and environmental protections, they want to waste billions more building more fences. The truth is the only place left to build more fences is through wildlife refuges and private property along the Rio Grande in Texas, where Homeland Security estimates future wall construction projects to cost $9.4 million per mile. That means spending billions of dollars on hundreds of miles of fence that won’t do what they want it to do,” Millis said.
“Our communities, our wildlife, and our borderlands can’t afford another border splurge, and neither can American taxpayers.”
Another group that has come out strongly against the Corker-Hoeven amendment is CAMBIO, which stands for Campaign for an Accountable, Moral and Balanced Immigration Overhaul. Its members include the Border Network for Human Rights, the Southern Border Communities Coalition, the ACLU of New Mexico Regional Center for Border Rights, and the Northern Borders Coalition.
The group released the following joint statement in united opposition to the negotiated Senate deal:
“This is a bad deal for U.S. taxpayers, but especially for those that live and work in the border region. While the flow of migration is at a historic low, excessive enforcement remains unchecked and unaccountable to communities in which Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection operates. This proposal to increase enforcement without checks and balances is an example of excessive and wasteful government spending and represents an unnecessary expansion of the federal government's authority.
“We know the effects that these provisions will have on the daily lives of all border residents. Our communities have endured the painful reality of unchecked and unaccountable enforcement operations, which have led to decreased civil liberties and civil rights protections, interruption of commerce and trade, constant surveillance in our neighborhoods, excessive and deadly use of force by Border Patrol agents, and the outright militarization of border communities. The senators need to be reminded that border communities are still part of this nation and that there should be no further militarization of our neighborhoods. In fact, there has been an immediate and overwhelming response from mayors, local elected officials, law enforcement leaders and faith leaders along the border in opposition to the proposal.
“As border communities, we stand united in our resounding rejection of the Hoeven-Corker deal and urge the Senate to include accountability and oversight mechanisms to the already massive presence of border agents in our communities. This includes mandating lapel cameras for border agents, providing subpoena power to the DHS Border Oversight Task Force, applying geographic limits on warrantless Border Patrol stops in the southern border, and directing any increase in personnel to ports of entry where they are needed to facilitate trade that is fueling our economies.
“The Hoeven-Corker proposal to increase the number of Border Patrol, add additional fencing, and spend trillions in technology is expensive, extreme and wasteful, particularly at a time when we need to improve our schools, fix our roads, and grow our economy. It is an assault on our system of checks and balances and seriously threatens the quality of life of border residents. Overhauling the nation's immigration process is urgently necessary, but this should not be done without proper consultation with those communities who must live with the effects of poorly thought-out policy. We cannot not remain silent as politicians on both sides of the aisle continue to treat border communities as an endlessly expendable trade-off for immigration reform.”
Laredo Mayor Raul Salinas was one of the elected officials to welcome members of the Border Network for Human Rights when they participated in a caravan for immigration reform in Laredo on Tuesday.
This week, Salinas has been in Las Vegas for the Conference of Mayors’ summer meeting. Salinas offered a resolution in support of comprehensive immigration reform that was approved by both the Conference of Mayors' Immigration Reform Task Force and its Criminal and Social Justice Committee. This committee is chaired by Houston Mayor Annise D. Parker.
“I am grateful to Mayor Parker for carrying the resolution through her committee and I am prepared to carry the resolution on the floor of the Conference on Monday,” Salinas said. “Immigration reform is needed now more than ever, and I am pleased that the Congress and the GAO have now documented the Immigration Reform is not only the right thing to do, it will provide this nation a needed economic stimulus.”
Vice President Joe Biden spoke about immigration reform at the Conference of Mayors event. “The math is pretty simple, if you bring people out of the shadows and you give them a start they add to the tax base. They start investing in the communities where they live and they begin to lay down roots,” Biden said. Salinas was pleased with the remarks Biden made.
“Vice President Biden referenced research that documented that the majority of small business that are started today are started by immigrants. But, more than the research, I was pleased that the Conference of Mayors debuted a documentary on the DREAMERs. You don't need research to see the desire in those young people's eyes,” Salinas said.
http://www.riograndeguardian.com/green_story.asp?story_no=25#.UcZRCFtF_7s.facebook
Friday, September 16, 2011
Public meeting will address border fence
Brownsville Herald
September 15, 2011
by Jacqueline Armandariz
State Sen. Eddie Lucio Jr. is hosting a “Border Wall Impact” public meeting on Saturday, just two days before a federal committee hearing in Brownsville is set to address border security.
Saturday’s meeting will be at the Fort Brown Memorial Golf Course Clubhouse, 300 River Levee Road, from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
“In order for Texans to respond to federal policy, we need to have facts, figures and analysis,” Lucio said in a press release. “However, when it comes to the federal border wall, there exists very little centralized information. This public meeting represents an opportunity for Valley residents to unite and study the impact that the border wall is having on us.”
Immediately before that gathering, a group calling itself the No Man’s Land Association will hold its first meeting at the same place.
The local start-up group aims to discuss the effects of the border wall on property owners whose land is fenced off from other U.S. lands, and to lobby for a tax-free zone or enterprise zone to help them, according to organizer Bob Lucio. He is the state senator’s brother and runs the Fort Brown Memorial Golf Course Clubhouse.
Worry of spillover violence and the death of some Americans in circumstances related to the Mexican drug war have attracted attention to the U.S.-Mexico border. A national debate that connects border security and immigration policy has continuously brewed, while the miles of border wall for residents along the banks of the Rio Grande is a fact of life.
Through a spokesman, Lucio said the timing with the federal event on Monday is coincidental.
That hearing, the “Secure our Texas Border” forum, will be hosted by U.S. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Humble, and other members of the House Committee on the Judiciary. It begins at 10 a.m. at the UTB-TSC Arts Center. Prominent figures related to border security are scheduled to testify as witnesses.
At the Saturday event, there will be presentations from various law enforcement agencies, and the public is asked to provide input and discuss the impact of the fence on businesses, the environment, property values and border security.
While Sen. Lucio said there is little data on the effects of the border fence, in March two faculty members from the University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College discussed their study that found the fence negatively affects minorities disproportionately.
Jude Benavides and Jeff Wilson conducted the study that found Cameron County had one-third of the proposed fence gaps, more than any other Texas county.
With the combination of the Secure Border Fence Act of 2006 and another 2008 appropriations bill, the federal government was set to construct about 700 miles of barrier, about 315 miles of which is in Texas. Much of it is on private land, the study said.
Wilson, an environmental science professor, said: “We do not want to speculate as to the intent of the government on where it was placed but the results are clear: The wall is in the backyard of those who would be least equipped to negotiate.”
The findings were published in the 2010 edition of the annual journal “The Southwestern Geographer.”
UTB-TSC itself filed a civil lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security when it was proposed that the fence run through university property. The two entities reached a compromise in August 2008.
Today, No Man’s Land Association organizer Bob Lucio said it’s no longer an issue of debating the construction of the fence. It’s here, and now it’s time to deal with the effects, he said.
“What I’m trying to do is create an association that will give us numbers,” he said. “I do not want to fight battles that we fought five years ago when they were putting up the fence. ... We’ve got to go forward. ... We need to start asking questions.”
He said the several years he’s been a business owner dealing with the border fence have been “horrendous” and he believes property values are affected by it. The perception of danger the border fence conveys has also cut the number of memberships bought at his golf course, he said.
He calls the U.S. land between the river and the border fence a “no-man’s land.”
He said he worked with his brother to schedule the Saturday meetings together and brought his concerns as a business owner to the state senator.
“We’re on the border by the sea. That’s our city’s slogan, right?” he said. “Well, I say we’re on the border fence by the sea.”
Lucio said being on the banks of the river could be an asset, but the fence has ended that.
“Our kids don’t even see the river anymore,” he said.
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/articles/hosting-131258-lucio-address.html
September 15, 2011
by Jacqueline Armandariz
State Sen. Eddie Lucio Jr. is hosting a “Border Wall Impact” public meeting on Saturday, just two days before a federal committee hearing in Brownsville is set to address border security.
Saturday’s meeting will be at the Fort Brown Memorial Golf Course Clubhouse, 300 River Levee Road, from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
“In order for Texans to respond to federal policy, we need to have facts, figures and analysis,” Lucio said in a press release. “However, when it comes to the federal border wall, there exists very little centralized information. This public meeting represents an opportunity for Valley residents to unite and study the impact that the border wall is having on us.”
Immediately before that gathering, a group calling itself the No Man’s Land Association will hold its first meeting at the same place.
The local start-up group aims to discuss the effects of the border wall on property owners whose land is fenced off from other U.S. lands, and to lobby for a tax-free zone or enterprise zone to help them, according to organizer Bob Lucio. He is the state senator’s brother and runs the Fort Brown Memorial Golf Course Clubhouse.
Worry of spillover violence and the death of some Americans in circumstances related to the Mexican drug war have attracted attention to the U.S.-Mexico border. A national debate that connects border security and immigration policy has continuously brewed, while the miles of border wall for residents along the banks of the Rio Grande is a fact of life.
Through a spokesman, Lucio said the timing with the federal event on Monday is coincidental.
That hearing, the “Secure our Texas Border” forum, will be hosted by U.S. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Humble, and other members of the House Committee on the Judiciary. It begins at 10 a.m. at the UTB-TSC Arts Center. Prominent figures related to border security are scheduled to testify as witnesses.
At the Saturday event, there will be presentations from various law enforcement agencies, and the public is asked to provide input and discuss the impact of the fence on businesses, the environment, property values and border security.
While Sen. Lucio said there is little data on the effects of the border fence, in March two faculty members from the University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College discussed their study that found the fence negatively affects minorities disproportionately.
Jude Benavides and Jeff Wilson conducted the study that found Cameron County had one-third of the proposed fence gaps, more than any other Texas county.
With the combination of the Secure Border Fence Act of 2006 and another 2008 appropriations bill, the federal government was set to construct about 700 miles of barrier, about 315 miles of which is in Texas. Much of it is on private land, the study said.
Wilson, an environmental science professor, said: “We do not want to speculate as to the intent of the government on where it was placed but the results are clear: The wall is in the backyard of those who would be least equipped to negotiate.”
The findings were published in the 2010 edition of the annual journal “The Southwestern Geographer.”
UTB-TSC itself filed a civil lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security when it was proposed that the fence run through university property. The two entities reached a compromise in August 2008.
Today, No Man’s Land Association organizer Bob Lucio said it’s no longer an issue of debating the construction of the fence. It’s here, and now it’s time to deal with the effects, he said.
“What I’m trying to do is create an association that will give us numbers,” he said. “I do not want to fight battles that we fought five years ago when they were putting up the fence. ... We’ve got to go forward. ... We need to start asking questions.”
He said the several years he’s been a business owner dealing with the border fence have been “horrendous” and he believes property values are affected by it. The perception of danger the border fence conveys has also cut the number of memberships bought at his golf course, he said.
He calls the U.S. land between the river and the border fence a “no-man’s land.”
He said he worked with his brother to schedule the Saturday meetings together and brought his concerns as a business owner to the state senator.
“We’re on the border by the sea. That’s our city’s slogan, right?” he said. “Well, I say we’re on the border fence by the sea.”
Lucio said being on the banks of the river could be an asset, but the fence has ended that.
“Our kids don’t even see the river anymore,” he said.
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/articles/hosting-131258-lucio-address.html
Monday, March 21, 2011
Negative effects of border fence studied
Brownsville Herald
March 20, 2011
by Jacqueline Armendariz
The U.S.-Mexico federal border fence negatively affects minorities disproportionately, a study recently published by local university professors found.
The environmental effects of the fence on the people of the region, something little focused on amid the heated political debate surrounding it, was investigated by University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College professors Jude Benavides and Jeff Wilson.
"We do not want to speculate as to the intent of the government on where it was placed but the results are clear: the wall is in the backyard of those who would be least equipped to negotiate," Wilson, an environmental science professor, said. "This region suffers from extreme poverty and low education. The wall, given its placement, seems to exacerbate the undue burden that our already overburdened local community is trying to overcome."
The findings, published in the 2010 edition of the annual journal "The Southwestern Geographer," found that groups like Hispanics, those with low income and people who are foreign born, were most affected by the fence in Cameron County.
With the combination of the Secure Border Fence Act of 2006 and another 2008 appropriations bill, the federal government was set to construct about 700 miles of barrier, about 315 miles of which is in Texas with much of it on private land, the study said.
"It was an issue literally in our backyard," Benavides said in a press release. "No one was doing these types of studies, which would have been part of an environmental assessment study."
The research itself took place in 2007 and found Cameron County had one-third of the proposed fence gaps, more than any other Texas county, the study said.
Meanwhile, the government encountered significant resistance, the study said, some calling the fence’s placement "arbitrary."
The government was not forthcoming on its method to determine where the fence would go, so much so that eventually a lawsuit was brought against the Department of Homeland Security and Corps of Engineers to get the latest data, Wilson said.
He said researchers suspect the disparities may have been widened with the fence’s current location compared to its proposed location.
"Obviously, the groups more in position to negotiate are going to be the ones with greater means and educational qualifications," Wilson said.
UTB-TSC itself filed a civil lawsuit against DHS when it was proposed the fence run through the university’s property. The two entities reached a compromise in August 2008.
Benavides and Wilson collaborated with several other academic entities on the study, including the University of Texas at Austin’s Working Group on Human Rights and the Border Wall and the Rapoport Center for Human Rights and Justice.
Currently, Wilson said, he and his fellow researchers are analyzing the final location of the fence compared to its planned location to find any changes in disparities.
Future research is in the planning stages regarding the deaths of undocumented immigrants in Arizona and California border regions in the context of the fence’s construction, he said.
The fence has pushed undocumented immigrants further into remote locations where water and shelter are not readily available, which results in more deaths, Wilson said.
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/fence-124179-border-federal.html
March 20, 2011
by Jacqueline Armendariz
The U.S.-Mexico federal border fence negatively affects minorities disproportionately, a study recently published by local university professors found.
The environmental effects of the fence on the people of the region, something little focused on amid the heated political debate surrounding it, was investigated by University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College professors Jude Benavides and Jeff Wilson.
"We do not want to speculate as to the intent of the government on where it was placed but the results are clear: the wall is in the backyard of those who would be least equipped to negotiate," Wilson, an environmental science professor, said. "This region suffers from extreme poverty and low education. The wall, given its placement, seems to exacerbate the undue burden that our already overburdened local community is trying to overcome."
The findings, published in the 2010 edition of the annual journal "The Southwestern Geographer," found that groups like Hispanics, those with low income and people who are foreign born, were most affected by the fence in Cameron County.
With the combination of the Secure Border Fence Act of 2006 and another 2008 appropriations bill, the federal government was set to construct about 700 miles of barrier, about 315 miles of which is in Texas with much of it on private land, the study said.
"It was an issue literally in our backyard," Benavides said in a press release. "No one was doing these types of studies, which would have been part of an environmental assessment study."
The research itself took place in 2007 and found Cameron County had one-third of the proposed fence gaps, more than any other Texas county, the study said.
Meanwhile, the government encountered significant resistance, the study said, some calling the fence’s placement "arbitrary."
The government was not forthcoming on its method to determine where the fence would go, so much so that eventually a lawsuit was brought against the Department of Homeland Security and Corps of Engineers to get the latest data, Wilson said.
He said researchers suspect the disparities may have been widened with the fence’s current location compared to its proposed location.
"Obviously, the groups more in position to negotiate are going to be the ones with greater means and educational qualifications," Wilson said.
UTB-TSC itself filed a civil lawsuit against DHS when it was proposed the fence run through the university’s property. The two entities reached a compromise in August 2008.
Benavides and Wilson collaborated with several other academic entities on the study, including the University of Texas at Austin’s Working Group on Human Rights and the Border Wall and the Rapoport Center for Human Rights and Justice.
Currently, Wilson said, he and his fellow researchers are analyzing the final location of the fence compared to its planned location to find any changes in disparities.
Future research is in the planning stages regarding the deaths of undocumented immigrants in Arizona and California border regions in the context of the fence’s construction, he said.
The fence has pushed undocumented immigrants further into remote locations where water and shelter are not readily available, which results in more deaths, Wilson said.
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/fence-124179-border-federal.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)