PRI The World
September 7, 2011
by Ashley Ahearn
Imagine yourself for a moment on the slopes of Washington’s Mt. Rainier, near Puget Sound, one of the highest peaks in the western United States. “We are on the hike to Comet Falls in Mount Rainier national park. We’re looking at a number of cascades that are rushing down a rock canyon and we’re sitting over a wood trail bridge” says Tom Uniack who doesn’t have to imagine it.
As conservation director of the Washington Wilderness Coalition he comes here often. Mt. Rainier National Park is one of the natural jewels of the northwest. And it seems utterly untouched by the changes that have rippled across the US in the years since 9/11. But a bill now pending in Congress could change that.
HR1505, as the bill is called, would allow the Department of Homeland Security to build roads, transmission lines, and security installations on any federally owned land within 100 miles of the US coast or border.
Tom Uniak says that includes national Forests, wilderness areas and National Parks like this one. “The bill is written in a way that all these things, potentially, if seen as part of the national interest or national security, could apply and laws could be exempted.”
Altogether, the bill would allow DHS to override 36 environmental and other laws on these federal lands in the interest of border security, including such bedrock laws as the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act.
The idea gives some environmentalists night sweats. But supporters say it just makes sense.
Representative Rob Bishop is the Utah Republican who introduced HR1505: “Wilderness designation in no way should trump border security.” Bishop says current law allows federal land managers to “bully” the US border patrol on public lands. “They can do what they need to do on private property, it’s only on public property that they’re restricted and that is ridiculous. That’s simply asinine.”
The bill would allow DHS to basically do whatever it thinks it needs to do in order to achieve “operational control” of public lands within 100 miles of the US border. That means keeping out terrorists and illegal immigrants. In particular, Congressman Bishop says it’s necessary to secure parts of the US border in Arizona, where he says large numbers of illegal immigrants cross the border from Mexico.
“To my belief it’s because 80 percent of the Arizona border with Mexico is federal property, over half of that is wilderness designation, Endangered Species habitat, conservation habitat where the border patrol is limited to the kind of access they have and what they can do,” says Bishop
But opponents of HR1505 say the bill would give unprecedented authority to a single federal agency to ignore environmental laws. Jane Danowitz, of the Pew Environmental Trust in Washington, DC, says there’s a lot more at stake than just the Arizona desert or Mt. Rainier. A huge amount of public land would fall under the bill’s scope.
“We’re talking about some of the nation’s most popular national parks and beaches. Glacier National Park, the Florida everglades, beaches along Cape Cod, the great lakes and the California coastline.” Danowitz says the bill is overkill.
“After 9/11 national security for all the right reasons jumped to the top of America’s priorities but the sweeping waiver of our bedrock environmental laws has little to do with accomplishing that goal.”
What it does have to do with, Danowitz asserts, is a rising anti-environmental movement in Congress. “There’s going to be a lot of things happening this fall in Congress that are under the radar. There are more than 70 provisions that would undo longstanding protections for clean air, clean water, wilderness, endangered species.”
Regardless of the intentions of its sponsors, it’s not just environmentalists who oppose this bill. The very agency that supporters say will benefit the most from HR1505 – Customs and Border Protection – doesn’t want the power it would be given.
When asked about a testimony in July in which the Customs and Border Protection* said it opposes 1505, Congressman Bishop replied: “I will tell you right now privately, when I talk to people who are current Border Patrol personnel as well as those who are retired Border Patrol, they have a different story than this current administration has.”
Along with Representative Bishop, HR1505 has 48 co-sponsors in the House, all Republicans. The bill, which is officially titled the National Security and Federal Lands Protection Act, will begin working its way through the House early this fall.
http://www.theworld.org/2011/09/border-security-and-public-lands/
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Bond issue could help fix county's drainage system
Rio Grande Guardian
September 8, 2011
by Steve Taylor
McALLEN, Sept. 8 - Concerns have been raised as to whether Hidalgo County Commissioners can be trusted to spend money in the right areas if it is raised on the bond market for drainage projects.
Those showing concern, such as Alton Mayor Salvador Vela, point to the fact that $60 million raised in 2006 was spent not on fixing drainage problems in the Delta region, which is where voters were told the money would go, but was siphoned off to build a border wall near the McAllen Foreign Trade Zone.
“County commissioners changed their minds because of politics, to favor one group, a certain part of McAllen. They did not care about the poverty stricken people in the Delta. That really gets me,” Vela told the Guardian.
Asked if the people of Alton would vote for a bond issue if the money was used to fix the drainage system, Vela said no. “They would not. I would tell them. I would tell them not to vote for it. If I tell them, don’t vote for it they won’t. They know me,” he said.
Vela made his comments at the end of a meeting of the Hidalgo County Advisory Committee, which met at the McAllen Chamber of Commerce offices on Wednesday. The 25-member committee was set up by Hidalgo County Commissioners Court to advise on drainage matters and to disseminate information to the general public.
Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 Director Godfrey Garza defended the actions of county commissioners in a lively exchange with Ann Cass, executive director of Proyecto Azteca. “The money went to build the border wall, not the levees that were most vulnerable,” Cass said.
Not so, said Garza. He said that by leveraging the $60 million from the bond issue, county commissioners were able to “merge” their funds with $200 million from the Department of Homeland Security in order to reconstruct levees in the interior floodway.
Garza said if the levees had not been repaired, FEMA would have decertified them, leaving Hidalgo County residents and businesses unable to buy flood insurance. “We saw the need or the (Commissioner’s) Court saw the need. They said, ‘hey, this (decertification) could kill the economy of the county as a whole’,” Garza said.
Discussion on whether Hidalgo County Commissioners should go to the bond markets again to pay for the renovation of the county’s drainage system was initiated at Wednesday’s meeting by Sharyland businessman Joe Phillips.
Phillips said a one cent tax effort across Hidalgo County could generate approximately $2.6 million a year. That money could be used as collateral for a bond issue, he said.
“If we were to do a 30 year or 40 year bond issue going out, one penny, just a penny, could basically resolve our issues in the western part of the county, resolve our issues in Edcouch-Elsa, resolve our issues in the other part of Precinct 1,” Phillips said.
“I am a marketer. From a marketing perspective, selling one penny to resolve our drainage issues to me is a no brainer and very easy to sell.”
Phillips said he hoped Hidalgo County leaders would “think big” when it comes to raising the funds to fix the county’s drainage issues.
“Hidalgo County is growing tremendously. I think people are aware of the recent floods and what can happen. I think people in the metropolitan area of McAllen are aware of the fact that some of the monies were originally destined to go to Edcouch-Elsa came in to protect the industrial base. But that does not mean we do not need to very quickly get in and make that right. With record low interest rates, now is the time, probably to think big rather than small,” Phillips said.
Garza said the board of Drainage District No. 1, which comprises Hidalgo County Judge Ramon Garcia and the four county commissioners, agree with such an approach. He said the board was looking to find the best financing mechanism and that he could come back to the advisory committee in three or four months with such a plan.
Phillips said he has spoken to many business owners in Hidalgo County and he detects no opposition to a tax increase if the money is used to resolve the county’s drainage issues.
“I have heard people are say it may take three or four cents and that’s nothing to make sure we never get flooded out. There is a lot of sympathy, I think, within the business community of the whole Valley. It is not just the McAllen area or Mission area. We’ve got to make sure Edcouch-Elsa does not flood. We’ve got to make sure other parts of Precinct 1 do not flood. Everybody understands. The colonias were built, people bought because land was cheap. It does not matter. We’ve got to take care of them,” Phillips said.
Giving an overview of Hidalgo County’s efforts to improve the drainage system over the decades, Garza said the federal government has hardly ever come through for the county. He said in the absence of federal help, county leaders were taking the initiative. He said county commissioners are about to issue a ‘Request for Qualifications’ to hire a firm to begin updating of the county’s master drainage plan. He said the plan has not been updated for the last 14 years.
Asked by a reporter how much it would cost to develop a quality drainage system in Hidalgo County, one that would safeguard all residents, Garza said: “You are probably looking at anywhere between $500 million to $700 million.” Asked how much money the county has for such a project, Garza said: “Zero.” Asked how it could be financed, Garza said: “It is going to be a combination of state money, bond money, a project to recapture water where we would sell water and use the money to offset bonding needs so that we do not need to raise so much from taxes. We are looking at a bunch of different avenues that are out there.”
Fixing the levees and building a border wall is supposed to be the responsibility of the federal government. Drainage Advisory Committee member Virginia Townsend said she would like to see Hidalgo County recover the $60 million it spent on the levee-wall project. Garza replied that county commissioners are about to hire a firm that will seek to recover the funds.
One of the co-chairs of the Drainage Advisory Committee is Dr. Francisco Guajardo, a professor at the University of Texas-Pan American. When discussion turned to whether county commissioners were right to move drainage money earmarked for the Delta to the McAllen Foreign Trade Zone, Guajardo said: “I appreciate the business community… but San Carlos and Edcouch don’t feel good about the $100 million (bond issue) that was passed previously.”
“I do not blame them,” Phillips responded.
Guajardo said he would like to see more documentation about the state of the county’s drainage system posted online. “Let’s begin to post stuff that can help our community understand what this is,” he told the committee.
Guajardo also said that he and the other co-chair of the committee, McAllen City Commissioner Jim Darling, will be meeting with County Judge Garcia and the county commissioners within the next few days to ascertain the exact function of the advisory committee.
“There needs to be a clear communication between this committee and the elected officials. We need to understand what their thinking is. I see this as a reciprocal kind of communication. I do not think it will be a one sided thing,” Guajardo said.
http://www.riograndeguardian.com/rggnews_story.asp?story_no=20
September 8, 2011
by Steve Taylor
McALLEN, Sept. 8 - Concerns have been raised as to whether Hidalgo County Commissioners can be trusted to spend money in the right areas if it is raised on the bond market for drainage projects.
Those showing concern, such as Alton Mayor Salvador Vela, point to the fact that $60 million raised in 2006 was spent not on fixing drainage problems in the Delta region, which is where voters were told the money would go, but was siphoned off to build a border wall near the McAllen Foreign Trade Zone.
“County commissioners changed their minds because of politics, to favor one group, a certain part of McAllen. They did not care about the poverty stricken people in the Delta. That really gets me,” Vela told the Guardian.
Asked if the people of Alton would vote for a bond issue if the money was used to fix the drainage system, Vela said no. “They would not. I would tell them. I would tell them not to vote for it. If I tell them, don’t vote for it they won’t. They know me,” he said.
Vela made his comments at the end of a meeting of the Hidalgo County Advisory Committee, which met at the McAllen Chamber of Commerce offices on Wednesday. The 25-member committee was set up by Hidalgo County Commissioners Court to advise on drainage matters and to disseminate information to the general public.
Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 Director Godfrey Garza defended the actions of county commissioners in a lively exchange with Ann Cass, executive director of Proyecto Azteca. “The money went to build the border wall, not the levees that were most vulnerable,” Cass said.
Not so, said Garza. He said that by leveraging the $60 million from the bond issue, county commissioners were able to “merge” their funds with $200 million from the Department of Homeland Security in order to reconstruct levees in the interior floodway.
Garza said if the levees had not been repaired, FEMA would have decertified them, leaving Hidalgo County residents and businesses unable to buy flood insurance. “We saw the need or the (Commissioner’s) Court saw the need. They said, ‘hey, this (decertification) could kill the economy of the county as a whole’,” Garza said.
Discussion on whether Hidalgo County Commissioners should go to the bond markets again to pay for the renovation of the county’s drainage system was initiated at Wednesday’s meeting by Sharyland businessman Joe Phillips.
Phillips said a one cent tax effort across Hidalgo County could generate approximately $2.6 million a year. That money could be used as collateral for a bond issue, he said.
“If we were to do a 30 year or 40 year bond issue going out, one penny, just a penny, could basically resolve our issues in the western part of the county, resolve our issues in Edcouch-Elsa, resolve our issues in the other part of Precinct 1,” Phillips said.
“I am a marketer. From a marketing perspective, selling one penny to resolve our drainage issues to me is a no brainer and very easy to sell.”
Phillips said he hoped Hidalgo County leaders would “think big” when it comes to raising the funds to fix the county’s drainage issues.
“Hidalgo County is growing tremendously. I think people are aware of the recent floods and what can happen. I think people in the metropolitan area of McAllen are aware of the fact that some of the monies were originally destined to go to Edcouch-Elsa came in to protect the industrial base. But that does not mean we do not need to very quickly get in and make that right. With record low interest rates, now is the time, probably to think big rather than small,” Phillips said.
Garza said the board of Drainage District No. 1, which comprises Hidalgo County Judge Ramon Garcia and the four county commissioners, agree with such an approach. He said the board was looking to find the best financing mechanism and that he could come back to the advisory committee in three or four months with such a plan.
Phillips said he has spoken to many business owners in Hidalgo County and he detects no opposition to a tax increase if the money is used to resolve the county’s drainage issues.
“I have heard people are say it may take three or four cents and that’s nothing to make sure we never get flooded out. There is a lot of sympathy, I think, within the business community of the whole Valley. It is not just the McAllen area or Mission area. We’ve got to make sure Edcouch-Elsa does not flood. We’ve got to make sure other parts of Precinct 1 do not flood. Everybody understands. The colonias were built, people bought because land was cheap. It does not matter. We’ve got to take care of them,” Phillips said.
Giving an overview of Hidalgo County’s efforts to improve the drainage system over the decades, Garza said the federal government has hardly ever come through for the county. He said in the absence of federal help, county leaders were taking the initiative. He said county commissioners are about to issue a ‘Request for Qualifications’ to hire a firm to begin updating of the county’s master drainage plan. He said the plan has not been updated for the last 14 years.
Asked by a reporter how much it would cost to develop a quality drainage system in Hidalgo County, one that would safeguard all residents, Garza said: “You are probably looking at anywhere between $500 million to $700 million.” Asked how much money the county has for such a project, Garza said: “Zero.” Asked how it could be financed, Garza said: “It is going to be a combination of state money, bond money, a project to recapture water where we would sell water and use the money to offset bonding needs so that we do not need to raise so much from taxes. We are looking at a bunch of different avenues that are out there.”
Fixing the levees and building a border wall is supposed to be the responsibility of the federal government. Drainage Advisory Committee member Virginia Townsend said she would like to see Hidalgo County recover the $60 million it spent on the levee-wall project. Garza replied that county commissioners are about to hire a firm that will seek to recover the funds.
One of the co-chairs of the Drainage Advisory Committee is Dr. Francisco Guajardo, a professor at the University of Texas-Pan American. When discussion turned to whether county commissioners were right to move drainage money earmarked for the Delta to the McAllen Foreign Trade Zone, Guajardo said: “I appreciate the business community… but San Carlos and Edcouch don’t feel good about the $100 million (bond issue) that was passed previously.”
“I do not blame them,” Phillips responded.
Guajardo said he would like to see more documentation about the state of the county’s drainage system posted online. “Let’s begin to post stuff that can help our community understand what this is,” he told the committee.
Guajardo also said that he and the other co-chair of the committee, McAllen City Commissioner Jim Darling, will be meeting with County Judge Garcia and the county commissioners within the next few days to ascertain the exact function of the advisory committee.
“There needs to be a clear communication between this committee and the elected officials. We need to understand what their thinking is. I see this as a reciprocal kind of communication. I do not think it will be a one sided thing,” Guajardo said.
http://www.riograndeguardian.com/rggnews_story.asp?story_no=20
GOP Debate Touches On Borderland Immigration
KFOX 14
September 8, 2011
El Paso, Texas -- The republican front runners all had a battle plan for immigration reform, which became a topic in the GOP debate at the Ronald Regan Presidential Library in California on Wednesday evening.
Governor Rick Perry called for more border agents and attacked President Obama for not doing enough with immigration reform.
"For the President of the United States to go to El Paso Texas and say the border is safer than its ever been, either he has some of the poorest intel in the history of this country or he was an abject liar to the American people," said Governor Perry. "It is not safe on that border."
Mitt Romney talked about continuing the fence along the entire U.S. Mexican border, adding more border agents, and "stopping the magnet."
"I learned this while I was with Border Patrol agents in San Diego," said Romney. "'They said, 'Look, they could always get a ladder to go over the fence and people will always run to the country. The reason they come in such great numbers is because we've left the magnet on.' And I asked them, 'What do you mean the magnet?' And they said, 'When employers are willing to hire people who are here illegally -- that's a magnet because it draws them in.'"
Michelle Bachman called for more fencing and worried about the U.S. surrendering freedoms if the problem goes undetected for too long.
"In Mexico right now we are dealing with narco-terrorists," said Bachman. "This is a very serious problem. To not build a border or a fence on every part of that border would be an effect to yield United States sovereignty. Not only to our nation anymore but to yield it to another nation. That we cannot do."
Hermain Cain, a former CEO of Godfather's Pizza who has also joined the GOP race, also agrees with Bachman, Romney, and Perry that securing the border should come first.
Newt Gingrich avoided the border issue and jumped to the rights of illegal immigrants instead, citing the need for a legal guest-worker program.
Jon Huntsman referenced his Chinese and Indian daughters who are immigrants to the country and said he sees the issue through their eyes.
Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum pointed out his father is an Italian immigrant and suggested that immigrants have contributed to the building of America.
Ron Paul suggested the government start looking at ways to use border fences to keep people in, instead of keeping people out.
http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/29115292/detail.html
September 8, 2011
El Paso, Texas -- The republican front runners all had a battle plan for immigration reform, which became a topic in the GOP debate at the Ronald Regan Presidential Library in California on Wednesday evening.
Governor Rick Perry called for more border agents and attacked President Obama for not doing enough with immigration reform.
"For the President of the United States to go to El Paso Texas and say the border is safer than its ever been, either he has some of the poorest intel in the history of this country or he was an abject liar to the American people," said Governor Perry. "It is not safe on that border."
Mitt Romney talked about continuing the fence along the entire U.S. Mexican border, adding more border agents, and "stopping the magnet."
"I learned this while I was with Border Patrol agents in San Diego," said Romney. "'They said, 'Look, they could always get a ladder to go over the fence and people will always run to the country. The reason they come in such great numbers is because we've left the magnet on.' And I asked them, 'What do you mean the magnet?' And they said, 'When employers are willing to hire people who are here illegally -- that's a magnet because it draws them in.'"
Michelle Bachman called for more fencing and worried about the U.S. surrendering freedoms if the problem goes undetected for too long.
"In Mexico right now we are dealing with narco-terrorists," said Bachman. "This is a very serious problem. To not build a border or a fence on every part of that border would be an effect to yield United States sovereignty. Not only to our nation anymore but to yield it to another nation. That we cannot do."
Hermain Cain, a former CEO of Godfather's Pizza who has also joined the GOP race, also agrees with Bachman, Romney, and Perry that securing the border should come first.
Newt Gingrich avoided the border issue and jumped to the rights of illegal immigrants instead, citing the need for a legal guest-worker program.
Jon Huntsman referenced his Chinese and Indian daughters who are immigrants to the country and said he sees the issue through their eyes.
Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum pointed out his father is an Italian immigrant and suggested that immigrants have contributed to the building of America.
Ron Paul suggested the government start looking at ways to use border fences to keep people in, instead of keeping people out.
http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/29115292/detail.html
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Immigrant arrests nearing 40-year low
Arizona Daily Star
September 4, 2011
by Brady McCombs
Arrests of illegal immigrants trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border have fallen to levels not seen since the early 1970s.
With one month left in fiscal year 2011, the Border Patrol has apprehended nearly 305,000 illegal border crossers across the Southwest border. That puts the final year total on pace to be the lowest since 1972, when 321,000 apprehensions were made.
By comparison, the agency made 852,500 to 1.6 million apprehensions each year from 1983 to 2007 along the Southwest border before the sharp downturn in the last four years.
The precipitous decline is the latest measure to suggest illegal immigration, especially from Mexico, has fallen substantially.
The number of people leaving Mexico dropped by 60 percent from 2006 to 2010, according to a July report from the Pew Hispanic Center based on analysis of Mexican government data. The estimated number of illegal immigrants living in the United States has dropped to 11.2 million since reaching a peak of 12 million in 2007, found a February report from the Pew Hispanic Center.
Many immigration analysts say the U.S. recession - the worst in a quarter century - is the most likely cause of the slowdown. With fewer jobs available, it's probable would-be crossers are being warned by family and friends already here that the trip north is not worth the money or the peril, said Rey Koslowski, associate professor of political science, public policy and informatics at the University at Albany-SUNY in New York.
Federal border officials acknowledge the economy is a factor. However, they note the decline demonstrates that the two-decade-long buildup of agents, barriers, roads and technology across the border - along with the gradual reduction of the old 'catch and release' policy - is working.
Apprehensions began decreasing in 2007 before the economic recession began in March 2008, Alan Bersin, U.S. Customs and Border Protection commissioner, points out.
The "enforcement posture is greater than we've ever had," Bersin said this week while visiting Tucson. "The results are beginning to show."
In its recent report about fewer Mexicans leaving their homeland, the Pew Hispanic Center said factors in both the U.S. and Mexico are likely the cause. The report cited declining job opportunities and increased border enforcement in the U.S., and recent conomic growth in Mexico that may have reduced the "push" factors.
In the Tucson Sector - the busiest for illegal border crossings since 1998 - apprehensions are on pace to be as low as 1994, when 139,473 were made. The sector remains the busiest of the nine on the Southwest border, but only accounts for 38 percent of all Southwest border apprehensions this fiscal year, down from 44 percent to 47 percent from 2007 to 2009.
Bersin's goal is to see apprehensions in the Tucson Sector below 100,000, which hasn't happened since 1993.
He won't go as far as to predict when that will happen, but said it's now a matter of when - not if - arrests will drop that low.
"The fat lady hasn't sung in Arizona yet," Bersin said, "but I can hear her tuning up."
Imperfect Measurement
Using the Border Patrol's apprehensions statistics to gauge illegal immigration rates has been likened to judging a baseball player by his hits without knowing how many times he's been at bat.
Because the figures only reflect arrests and not how many people made it into the United States successfully, Koslowski cautions not to put too much stock in the border-arrest figures.
"In terms of apprehensions reflecting in any way flows of illegal migrants, it all depends on how many are getting past per apprehension," said Koslowksi, who is also a non-resident fellow at the Migration Policy Institute.
This "get-away" figure has historically been vague.
Bersin said the estimate he used as U.S. attorney in San Diego in the mid-1990s - that two people get past agents for every one caught - is outdated.
With an array of technology, aerial surveillance and more agents than ever, he said, the agency detects far more illegal entries and catches a greater percentage of them.
In most parts of the U.S.-Mexico border, including the Yuma, San Diego and El Paso sectors, agents are catching more than 90 percent of illegal crossers, he said.
In the Tucson Sector, agents are catching at least 70 percent of them, he said.
A rise in what the agency calls the "effectiveness ratio" makes the apprehensions figures more indicative of the illegal immigrant traffic than in past decades, Bersin said.
But the other drawback of using apprehensions as a gauge is that they count the arrest rather than track the person. For example, a person caught three times in one year is tallied as three apprehensions.
The Border Patrol tracks how many times each illegal immigrant is caught, but that information is not made public.
"You have to be very careful about extrapolating in any way the flow of illegal migrants into the country," said Koslowski, noting the arrest data the agency keeps secret.
While apprehension rates are an imperfect measure of illegal immigration flow, the slowdown is likely real, said Steve Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington-based organization that advocates for slowing immigration.
The decline began as far back as the summer of 2008, Camarota said, based on his analysis of the U.S. Census Population Survey data.
"Fewer folks are coming, and more are leaving," Camarota said. "This means that what was once thought to be inexorable is not."
It's important to remember, though, that a slowdown of border crossings may not mean all flow of illegal immigrants has declined proportionately, he said. In 2006, the Pew Hispanic Center estimated that as many as 45 percent of the then-12 million illegal immigrants in the United States overstayed non-immigrant visas after entering through legal ports of entry.
More consequences
As recently as the mid-2000s, the majority of illegal border crossers were dropped off at the nearest border city, often within hours of their arrest.
About four years ago, the Border Patrol ratcheted up its efforts to end this 'catch and return' policy by implementing and expanding a set of programs that levied consequences against more and more illegal border crossers.
Some illegal immigrants face a criminal charge of illegal entry in federal court, which could result in jail time. Other arrestees get deported hundreds of miles away from where they were caught in an effort to disrupt the smuggling route. During the summer months, many illegal immigrants are flown home to Mexico City.
With the exception of some juveniles and some humanitarian cases, every person caught crossing illegally into Arizona faces some type of consequence today, Bersin said.
"We say on the voluntary returns, 'no mas,'" Bersin said. "We are out of the voluntary return business."
With fewer arrests, federal officials have been able to prosecute a larger percentage of apprehended illegal immigrants each year since 2006, information from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University shows.
Through the first half of fiscal 2011, the Border Patrol had referred 46,125 illegal border crossers for prosecution, which represents 19 percent of total apprehensions made through that time. That was up from 16 percent in fiscal 2010 and 2 percent in fiscal 2006.
Bersin considers what he calls the 'consequence delivery system' the fourth pillar of the current border security strategy, along with agents, border barriers and roads and technology.
The threat of incarceration or being sent to border states far from where they crossed into the U.S. is absolutely a deterrent for would-be crossers, said Koslowski, the University at Albany professor.
"With the tougher border controls, the prices goes up," Koslowski said. "As the cost goes up, fewer will attempt to do it."
The Border Patrol wants all would-be crossers to know about the increased consequences. Bersin said the agency is hammering home that point through media in the five Mexican states that are home to the most illegal immigrants who come through the Tucson Sector: Puebla, Guerrero, Oaxaca, Sonora and Mexico State.
"It is a no longer a game of cat and mouse," Bersin said. "You get caught, you will be punished and a sanction will be levied against you."
The campaign also includes a warning about the risks of crossing the border.
"We're telling people that it's dangerous to come across this border," Bersin said.
"The coyotes (smugglers) are now controlled by organized crime, so even if you don't die in the desert, you will run the risk of being exploited."
No decline in border deaths
The number of illegal border crossers found dead each year in Arizona's desert has not decreased along with the apprehensions.
The disparity suggests that illegal immigrants trying to cross Arizona's desert face a deadlier trek than ever.
The rate of death - the number of bodies found per 100,000 Border Patrol apprehensions - has been on the rise for the last decade. Even with a decrease in deaths in 2011, following a record-setting 2010, the rate has increased again.
Through the first 11 months of fiscal year 2011, there were 144 known deaths per 100,000 apprehensions in the area covered in the U.S. Border Patrol's Tucson Sector, the Arizona Daily Star's border death database indicates.
That's up from 119 known deaths per 100,000 apprehensions in 2010; 39 known deaths per 100,000 apprehensions in 2004; and three per 100,000 apprehensions in 1998.
By the numbers: Border buildup
Agents:
18,415 Border Patrol agents on the U.S.-Mexico border today.
3,555 Border Patrol agents on the U.S.-Mexico border in 1992.
Barriers:
649 miles of border fences and vehicle barriers on the U.S.-Mexico border today.
143 miles of border fences and vehicle barriers on the U.S.-Mexico border in 2006.
Budget:
$11.4 billion budget for Customs and Border Protection, the Department of Homeland Security agency responsible for border security, in fiscal year 2010
$6 billion budget for Customs and Border Protection fiscal year 2004
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/article_6820eb26-3ec1-5e09-b6bb-959b757a1726.html
September 4, 2011
by Brady McCombs
Arrests of illegal immigrants trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border have fallen to levels not seen since the early 1970s.
With one month left in fiscal year 2011, the Border Patrol has apprehended nearly 305,000 illegal border crossers across the Southwest border. That puts the final year total on pace to be the lowest since 1972, when 321,000 apprehensions were made.
By comparison, the agency made 852,500 to 1.6 million apprehensions each year from 1983 to 2007 along the Southwest border before the sharp downturn in the last four years.
The precipitous decline is the latest measure to suggest illegal immigration, especially from Mexico, has fallen substantially.
The number of people leaving Mexico dropped by 60 percent from 2006 to 2010, according to a July report from the Pew Hispanic Center based on analysis of Mexican government data. The estimated number of illegal immigrants living in the United States has dropped to 11.2 million since reaching a peak of 12 million in 2007, found a February report from the Pew Hispanic Center.
Many immigration analysts say the U.S. recession - the worst in a quarter century - is the most likely cause of the slowdown. With fewer jobs available, it's probable would-be crossers are being warned by family and friends already here that the trip north is not worth the money or the peril, said Rey Koslowski, associate professor of political science, public policy and informatics at the University at Albany-SUNY in New York.
Federal border officials acknowledge the economy is a factor. However, they note the decline demonstrates that the two-decade-long buildup of agents, barriers, roads and technology across the border - along with the gradual reduction of the old 'catch and release' policy - is working.
Apprehensions began decreasing in 2007 before the economic recession began in March 2008, Alan Bersin, U.S. Customs and Border Protection commissioner, points out.
The "enforcement posture is greater than we've ever had," Bersin said this week while visiting Tucson. "The results are beginning to show."
In its recent report about fewer Mexicans leaving their homeland, the Pew Hispanic Center said factors in both the U.S. and Mexico are likely the cause. The report cited declining job opportunities and increased border enforcement in the U.S., and recent conomic growth in Mexico that may have reduced the "push" factors.
In the Tucson Sector - the busiest for illegal border crossings since 1998 - apprehensions are on pace to be as low as 1994, when 139,473 were made. The sector remains the busiest of the nine on the Southwest border, but only accounts for 38 percent of all Southwest border apprehensions this fiscal year, down from 44 percent to 47 percent from 2007 to 2009.
Bersin's goal is to see apprehensions in the Tucson Sector below 100,000, which hasn't happened since 1993.
He won't go as far as to predict when that will happen, but said it's now a matter of when - not if - arrests will drop that low.
"The fat lady hasn't sung in Arizona yet," Bersin said, "but I can hear her tuning up."
Imperfect Measurement
Using the Border Patrol's apprehensions statistics to gauge illegal immigration rates has been likened to judging a baseball player by his hits without knowing how many times he's been at bat.
Because the figures only reflect arrests and not how many people made it into the United States successfully, Koslowski cautions not to put too much stock in the border-arrest figures.
"In terms of apprehensions reflecting in any way flows of illegal migrants, it all depends on how many are getting past per apprehension," said Koslowksi, who is also a non-resident fellow at the Migration Policy Institute.
This "get-away" figure has historically been vague.
Bersin said the estimate he used as U.S. attorney in San Diego in the mid-1990s - that two people get past agents for every one caught - is outdated.
With an array of technology, aerial surveillance and more agents than ever, he said, the agency detects far more illegal entries and catches a greater percentage of them.
In most parts of the U.S.-Mexico border, including the Yuma, San Diego and El Paso sectors, agents are catching more than 90 percent of illegal crossers, he said.
In the Tucson Sector, agents are catching at least 70 percent of them, he said.
A rise in what the agency calls the "effectiveness ratio" makes the apprehensions figures more indicative of the illegal immigrant traffic than in past decades, Bersin said.
But the other drawback of using apprehensions as a gauge is that they count the arrest rather than track the person. For example, a person caught three times in one year is tallied as three apprehensions.
The Border Patrol tracks how many times each illegal immigrant is caught, but that information is not made public.
"You have to be very careful about extrapolating in any way the flow of illegal migrants into the country," said Koslowski, noting the arrest data the agency keeps secret.
While apprehension rates are an imperfect measure of illegal immigration flow, the slowdown is likely real, said Steve Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington-based organization that advocates for slowing immigration.
The decline began as far back as the summer of 2008, Camarota said, based on his analysis of the U.S. Census Population Survey data.
"Fewer folks are coming, and more are leaving," Camarota said. "This means that what was once thought to be inexorable is not."
It's important to remember, though, that a slowdown of border crossings may not mean all flow of illegal immigrants has declined proportionately, he said. In 2006, the Pew Hispanic Center estimated that as many as 45 percent of the then-12 million illegal immigrants in the United States overstayed non-immigrant visas after entering through legal ports of entry.
More consequences
As recently as the mid-2000s, the majority of illegal border crossers were dropped off at the nearest border city, often within hours of their arrest.
About four years ago, the Border Patrol ratcheted up its efforts to end this 'catch and return' policy by implementing and expanding a set of programs that levied consequences against more and more illegal border crossers.
Some illegal immigrants face a criminal charge of illegal entry in federal court, which could result in jail time. Other arrestees get deported hundreds of miles away from where they were caught in an effort to disrupt the smuggling route. During the summer months, many illegal immigrants are flown home to Mexico City.
With the exception of some juveniles and some humanitarian cases, every person caught crossing illegally into Arizona faces some type of consequence today, Bersin said.
"We say on the voluntary returns, 'no mas,'" Bersin said. "We are out of the voluntary return business."
With fewer arrests, federal officials have been able to prosecute a larger percentage of apprehended illegal immigrants each year since 2006, information from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University shows.
Through the first half of fiscal 2011, the Border Patrol had referred 46,125 illegal border crossers for prosecution, which represents 19 percent of total apprehensions made through that time. That was up from 16 percent in fiscal 2010 and 2 percent in fiscal 2006.
Bersin considers what he calls the 'consequence delivery system' the fourth pillar of the current border security strategy, along with agents, border barriers and roads and technology.
The threat of incarceration or being sent to border states far from where they crossed into the U.S. is absolutely a deterrent for would-be crossers, said Koslowski, the University at Albany professor.
"With the tougher border controls, the prices goes up," Koslowski said. "As the cost goes up, fewer will attempt to do it."
The Border Patrol wants all would-be crossers to know about the increased consequences. Bersin said the agency is hammering home that point through media in the five Mexican states that are home to the most illegal immigrants who come through the Tucson Sector: Puebla, Guerrero, Oaxaca, Sonora and Mexico State.
"It is a no longer a game of cat and mouse," Bersin said. "You get caught, you will be punished and a sanction will be levied against you."
The campaign also includes a warning about the risks of crossing the border.
"We're telling people that it's dangerous to come across this border," Bersin said.
"The coyotes (smugglers) are now controlled by organized crime, so even if you don't die in the desert, you will run the risk of being exploited."
No decline in border deaths
The number of illegal border crossers found dead each year in Arizona's desert has not decreased along with the apprehensions.
The disparity suggests that illegal immigrants trying to cross Arizona's desert face a deadlier trek than ever.
The rate of death - the number of bodies found per 100,000 Border Patrol apprehensions - has been on the rise for the last decade. Even with a decrease in deaths in 2011, following a record-setting 2010, the rate has increased again.
Through the first 11 months of fiscal year 2011, there were 144 known deaths per 100,000 apprehensions in the area covered in the U.S. Border Patrol's Tucson Sector, the Arizona Daily Star's border death database indicates.
That's up from 119 known deaths per 100,000 apprehensions in 2010; 39 known deaths per 100,000 apprehensions in 2004; and three per 100,000 apprehensions in 1998.
By the numbers: Border buildup
Agents:
18,415 Border Patrol agents on the U.S.-Mexico border today.
3,555 Border Patrol agents on the U.S.-Mexico border in 1992.
Barriers:
649 miles of border fences and vehicle barriers on the U.S.-Mexico border today.
143 miles of border fences and vehicle barriers on the U.S.-Mexico border in 2006.
Budget:
$11.4 billion budget for Customs and Border Protection, the Department of Homeland Security agency responsible for border security, in fiscal year 2010
$6 billion budget for Customs and Border Protection fiscal year 2004
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/article_6820eb26-3ec1-5e09-b6bb-959b757a1726.html
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Higher wall, harder falls
Nogales International
September 2, 2011
by JB Miller
The imposing new border fence running through Nogales is proving to be a treacherous obstacle for undocumented border-crossers – several of whom have been injured in recent weeks while descending the U.S. side of the barrier.
The victims, who include two women and one man hurt during a 10-day span, won’t find much sympathy from the Border Patrol, however. The agency says it’s not responsible for people who tangle with the 23-to-30-foot security fence.
On Aug. 12, a woman identified only as “Asian” broke her leg after climbing the border fence near East Hudgins Street, according to a Nogales Police Department report.
NPD officers responded to the scene shortly before 9 p.m. and met with Border Patrol agents who were treating the woman, who could not be identified because she could not speak English, the report said. The agents reportedly took the woman to Carondelet Holy Cross Hospital for further evaluation.
Two days later, on the afternoon of Aug. 14, NPD officers encountered another injured fence-climber after responding to a reported burglary on East Street.
The homeowner had called the police after finding 38-year-old Maria Sanchez of Veracruz, Mexico in her house. When the officers arrived, Sanchez told them that she went into the home in search of help after hurting her leg while jumping from the fence.
The Border Patrol took custody of the woman, the NPD said.
Then on Aug. 22, Border Patrol agents from the Nogales Station said they rescued a 21-year-old illegal immigrant from Fujhou, China after he fell from the wall and sustained a compound fracture to his left leg.
Rescue personnel from the Nogales Fire Department responded and took the man to the hospital.
“(The fence) is so high,” NFD Chief Hector Robles said. “We’ve seen some compound fractures, open wounds, a loss of fingers, the knees are blown...”
In addition to the height of the fence, Robles cited adrenaline and miscalculations in determining the distance and angle of a fall as potential injury factors.
Begun in March and completed in late July, the $11.6-million, 2.8-mile fence ranges from 23 to 30 feet in height and is topped by a 5-foot high, south-facing metal sheet to discourage climbers. The landing mat fence that it replaced measured 10 feet tall, and was also easier to cut through and burrow under.
Asked about the recent injuries, Eric Cantu, spokesman for the Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector, pointed to the new barrier’s principal purpose: providing better security for the United States.
“The intent of the design, structure and height of the fence is to make it more difficult to climb which gives us as an agency more time to identify, classify and respond to any threats. Which in turn makes us a nation safer, which everybody wants,” said
Colleen Angle, another Tucson Sector spokesperson, said did not know how undocumented immigrants are managing to climb the fence.
Human smugglers might be the ones who could better answer that question, she said.
http://www.nogalesinternational.com/articles/2011/09/02/news/doc4e60f41989d37118891105.txt
September 2, 2011
by JB Miller
The imposing new border fence running through Nogales is proving to be a treacherous obstacle for undocumented border-crossers – several of whom have been injured in recent weeks while descending the U.S. side of the barrier.
The victims, who include two women and one man hurt during a 10-day span, won’t find much sympathy from the Border Patrol, however. The agency says it’s not responsible for people who tangle with the 23-to-30-foot security fence.
On Aug. 12, a woman identified only as “Asian” broke her leg after climbing the border fence near East Hudgins Street, according to a Nogales Police Department report.
NPD officers responded to the scene shortly before 9 p.m. and met with Border Patrol agents who were treating the woman, who could not be identified because she could not speak English, the report said. The agents reportedly took the woman to Carondelet Holy Cross Hospital for further evaluation.
Two days later, on the afternoon of Aug. 14, NPD officers encountered another injured fence-climber after responding to a reported burglary on East Street.
The homeowner had called the police after finding 38-year-old Maria Sanchez of Veracruz, Mexico in her house. When the officers arrived, Sanchez told them that she went into the home in search of help after hurting her leg while jumping from the fence.
The Border Patrol took custody of the woman, the NPD said.
Then on Aug. 22, Border Patrol agents from the Nogales Station said they rescued a 21-year-old illegal immigrant from Fujhou, China after he fell from the wall and sustained a compound fracture to his left leg.
Rescue personnel from the Nogales Fire Department responded and took the man to the hospital.
“(The fence) is so high,” NFD Chief Hector Robles said. “We’ve seen some compound fractures, open wounds, a loss of fingers, the knees are blown...”
In addition to the height of the fence, Robles cited adrenaline and miscalculations in determining the distance and angle of a fall as potential injury factors.
Begun in March and completed in late July, the $11.6-million, 2.8-mile fence ranges from 23 to 30 feet in height and is topped by a 5-foot high, south-facing metal sheet to discourage climbers. The landing mat fence that it replaced measured 10 feet tall, and was also easier to cut through and burrow under.
Asked about the recent injuries, Eric Cantu, spokesman for the Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector, pointed to the new barrier’s principal purpose: providing better security for the United States.
“The intent of the design, structure and height of the fence is to make it more difficult to climb which gives us as an agency more time to identify, classify and respond to any threats. Which in turn makes us a nation safer, which everybody wants,” said
Colleen Angle, another Tucson Sector spokesperson, said did not know how undocumented immigrants are managing to climb the fence.
Human smugglers might be the ones who could better answer that question, she said.
http://www.nogalesinternational.com/articles/2011/09/02/news/doc4e60f41989d37118891105.txt
Perry tells NH no to border fence
Associated Press / Sacramento Bee
September 3, 2011
by Steve Peoples
MANCHESTER, N.H. -- He may have been 2,000 miles from the border, but Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry's immigration record in Texas quickly became the focus in New Hampshire Saturday afternoon.
Speaking to hundreds of Granite State voters at a private reception, the Texas governor was asked whether he supported a fence along the Mexican border.
"No, I don't support a fence on the border," he said. "The fact is, it's 1,200 miles from Brownsville to El Paso. Two things: How long you think it would take to build that? And then if you build a 30-foot wall from El Paso to Brownsville, the 35-foot ladder business gets real good."
The answer produced an angry shout from at least one audience member. And it exposed an ongoing rift with some conservative voters over Perry's immigration record.
Tea party activists in Texas have been particularly upset by his steady opposition to the fence. He also signed a law giving illegal immigrants in-state tuition for Texas universities. And Texas tea party groups sent Perry an open letter this year expressing disappointment over his failure to get a bill passed that would have outlawed "sanctuary cities," municipalities that protect illegal immigrants.
Perry has surged to the lead in national polls since joining the presidential race just three weeks ago. But New Hampshire Republicans are just getting to know him.
Saturday's visit marks the third time he visited the first-in-the-nation primary state since joining the race.
Despite having deep Southern roots and conservative social positions, the Texas native has indicated he will compete aggressively in New Hampshire, where both Republicans and independents vote in the primary election.
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/09/03/3882846/perry-tells-nh-no-to-border-fence.html
September 3, 2011
by Steve Peoples
MANCHESTER, N.H. -- He may have been 2,000 miles from the border, but Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry's immigration record in Texas quickly became the focus in New Hampshire Saturday afternoon.
Speaking to hundreds of Granite State voters at a private reception, the Texas governor was asked whether he supported a fence along the Mexican border.
"No, I don't support a fence on the border," he said. "The fact is, it's 1,200 miles from Brownsville to El Paso. Two things: How long you think it would take to build that? And then if you build a 30-foot wall from El Paso to Brownsville, the 35-foot ladder business gets real good."
The answer produced an angry shout from at least one audience member. And it exposed an ongoing rift with some conservative voters over Perry's immigration record.
Tea party activists in Texas have been particularly upset by his steady opposition to the fence. He also signed a law giving illegal immigrants in-state tuition for Texas universities. And Texas tea party groups sent Perry an open letter this year expressing disappointment over his failure to get a bill passed that would have outlawed "sanctuary cities," municipalities that protect illegal immigrants.
Perry has surged to the lead in national polls since joining the presidential race just three weeks ago. But New Hampshire Republicans are just getting to know him.
Saturday's visit marks the third time he visited the first-in-the-nation primary state since joining the race.
Despite having deep Southern roots and conservative social positions, the Texas native has indicated he will compete aggressively in New Hampshire, where both Republicans and independents vote in the primary election.
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/09/03/3882846/perry-tells-nh-no-to-border-fence.html
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Illegal immigration is flash point for Republican White House hopefuls
Washington Post
September 1, 2011
By Philip Rucker and and Amy Gardner
KEENE, N.H. — Mitt Romney opened his town hall meeting here talking about the economy — his thoughts on growing business, getting government out of the way — just as he does nearly every other campaign event. But when he opened last week’s forum for questions, the first voter he called on didn’t seem concerned about any of that. He wanted to know the Republican presidential candidate’s stance on border security.
A similar scene played out in South Carolina a few days later, when Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) attended a town hall meeting she assumed would center on the economy, jobs and the federal deficit — only to see the assembled voters react most passionately to her comments on illegal immigration.
Polls may not suggest it, and the candidates may not be catering to it, but immigration is an issue that voters won’t let the GOP White House hopefuls escape.
Republican primary voters keep bringing immigration up as the candidates campaign in back yards, opera houses and recreation halls across Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. To a sizable chunk of those who will pick the GOP’s presidential nominee, immigration is an urgent issue, even a litmus test.
“Immigration is not even close to the top issue for most Republicans today, but it is an issue that is heavy with symbolic importance to Republican voters,” said GOP pollster Jon Lerner, who advised Tim Pawlenty until he dropped out of the race last month. “If a candidate is squishy on immigration, that symbolically suggests that he’s probably unreliable on a whole host of other conservative issues.”
The view in the Republican Party on immigration has shifted dramatically to the right since 2006, when President George W. Bush proposed an overhaul that would have combined a legalization plan with tighter border security.
The issue is likely to take on even greater significance in the race for the Republican nomination with the recent entrance of Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who oversees the nation’s biggest border state and who has a longer and more complicated record on immigration than his opponents.
Since entering the race, Perry has taken a tough stance on the issue.
“Once we secure the border, we can have a conversation about immigration reform in this country, but not until,” Perry told reporters after a campaign stop last month in South Carolina. “You must have the federal government putting the resources, the boots on the ground, the aviation assets in the air, and secure that border so that we know that the border is secure before we have a conversation about any immigration reform.”
Perry’s history with the border is more nuanced than that. He has long advocated a more seamless border between his state and Mexico, and he has traveled there to drum up business for his state. In 2007, he called the proposed construction of a fence between the United States and Mexico “idiocy,” saying “it absolutely would not work.”
Ray Sullivan, Perry’s communications director, said that remains Perry’s position.
“Fencing a 2,000-mile border is not practical,” Sullivan said. “The governor does and has always supported what he calls ‘strategic fencing’ in urban and high-trafficked areas.”
During Perry’s first year in office, he signed a law allowing any student who has lived in Texas for three years and graduates from a Texas high school to pay in-state tuition at state colleges, regardless of their citizenship status.
The bill passed with overwhelming bipartisan support but now is criticized by some Republicans as a precursor to the federal DREAM Act, a Democratic proposal to create a path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants brought into the country as children.
On immigration, Romney’s position is to secure the border before considering comprehensive reform. At the town hall in Keene, he said that means to “turn off the magnet.”
“Employers in the U.S. who knowingly hire people who are here illegally — that’s the magnet,” he said. “So we have to crack down on employers that hire illegals, make it easy for them to determine who’s here legally and who’s not, and then crack down on those who hire illegals.”
Bachmann, too, wants to crack down on those who are in the United States illegally. On a recent five-day campaign swing, she was asked about immigration at virtually every stop. At one, a town hall meeting in North Charleston, S.C., she elicited the most passionate response of the evening when she took a question on immigration.
Bachmann promised to build a fence along “every mile, every yard, every foot, every inch” of the nation’s southern border, to “have the back” of enforcement agents, and to put an end to the provision of federal benefits to illegal immigrants.
But she really got her audience going with a series of lamentations about the border that places her to the right of her opponents.
“On the southern border, we are dealing with a narco-terrorist state today in Mexico,” Bachmann said. “Because 70 percent of narcotics are coming to the United States are coming from Mexico. Mexico is in a very different place right now. We are seeing criminals, felons, drugs, we’re seeing contagious diseases coming into our country. What is wrong with our government that it isn’t stopping this from coming into the nation?”
The applause was loud, yet the man who asked the question, Rich Wiedenhoft, left unsatisfied.
“The very town I live in is a sanctuary city, and I’m very ashamed of that,” Wiedenhoft, 63, an Air Force retiree, said later in an interview. “I served in the military for 20 years defending the flag. And I resent people coming in here and taking advantage of us. I consider them invaders.”
So which candidate might appeal more than Bachmann?
“That,” he said, “is what I keep going to these meetings to find out.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/illegal-immigration-is-flash-point-for-republican-white-house-hopefuls/2011/09/01/gIQAUb0LvJ_story.html
September 1, 2011
By Philip Rucker and and Amy Gardner
KEENE, N.H. — Mitt Romney opened his town hall meeting here talking about the economy — his thoughts on growing business, getting government out of the way — just as he does nearly every other campaign event. But when he opened last week’s forum for questions, the first voter he called on didn’t seem concerned about any of that. He wanted to know the Republican presidential candidate’s stance on border security.
A similar scene played out in South Carolina a few days later, when Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) attended a town hall meeting she assumed would center on the economy, jobs and the federal deficit — only to see the assembled voters react most passionately to her comments on illegal immigration.
Polls may not suggest it, and the candidates may not be catering to it, but immigration is an issue that voters won’t let the GOP White House hopefuls escape.
Republican primary voters keep bringing immigration up as the candidates campaign in back yards, opera houses and recreation halls across Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. To a sizable chunk of those who will pick the GOP’s presidential nominee, immigration is an urgent issue, even a litmus test.
“Immigration is not even close to the top issue for most Republicans today, but it is an issue that is heavy with symbolic importance to Republican voters,” said GOP pollster Jon Lerner, who advised Tim Pawlenty until he dropped out of the race last month. “If a candidate is squishy on immigration, that symbolically suggests that he’s probably unreliable on a whole host of other conservative issues.”
The view in the Republican Party on immigration has shifted dramatically to the right since 2006, when President George W. Bush proposed an overhaul that would have combined a legalization plan with tighter border security.
The issue is likely to take on even greater significance in the race for the Republican nomination with the recent entrance of Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who oversees the nation’s biggest border state and who has a longer and more complicated record on immigration than his opponents.
Since entering the race, Perry has taken a tough stance on the issue.
“Once we secure the border, we can have a conversation about immigration reform in this country, but not until,” Perry told reporters after a campaign stop last month in South Carolina. “You must have the federal government putting the resources, the boots on the ground, the aviation assets in the air, and secure that border so that we know that the border is secure before we have a conversation about any immigration reform.”
Perry’s history with the border is more nuanced than that. He has long advocated a more seamless border between his state and Mexico, and he has traveled there to drum up business for his state. In 2007, he called the proposed construction of a fence between the United States and Mexico “idiocy,” saying “it absolutely would not work.”
Ray Sullivan, Perry’s communications director, said that remains Perry’s position.
“Fencing a 2,000-mile border is not practical,” Sullivan said. “The governor does and has always supported what he calls ‘strategic fencing’ in urban and high-trafficked areas.”
During Perry’s first year in office, he signed a law allowing any student who has lived in Texas for three years and graduates from a Texas high school to pay in-state tuition at state colleges, regardless of their citizenship status.
The bill passed with overwhelming bipartisan support but now is criticized by some Republicans as a precursor to the federal DREAM Act, a Democratic proposal to create a path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants brought into the country as children.
On immigration, Romney’s position is to secure the border before considering comprehensive reform. At the town hall in Keene, he said that means to “turn off the magnet.”
“Employers in the U.S. who knowingly hire people who are here illegally — that’s the magnet,” he said. “So we have to crack down on employers that hire illegals, make it easy for them to determine who’s here legally and who’s not, and then crack down on those who hire illegals.”
Bachmann, too, wants to crack down on those who are in the United States illegally. On a recent five-day campaign swing, she was asked about immigration at virtually every stop. At one, a town hall meeting in North Charleston, S.C., she elicited the most passionate response of the evening when she took a question on immigration.
Bachmann promised to build a fence along “every mile, every yard, every foot, every inch” of the nation’s southern border, to “have the back” of enforcement agents, and to put an end to the provision of federal benefits to illegal immigrants.
But she really got her audience going with a series of lamentations about the border that places her to the right of her opponents.
“On the southern border, we are dealing with a narco-terrorist state today in Mexico,” Bachmann said. “Because 70 percent of narcotics are coming to the United States are coming from Mexico. Mexico is in a very different place right now. We are seeing criminals, felons, drugs, we’re seeing contagious diseases coming into our country. What is wrong with our government that it isn’t stopping this from coming into the nation?”
The applause was loud, yet the man who asked the question, Rich Wiedenhoft, left unsatisfied.
“The very town I live in is a sanctuary city, and I’m very ashamed of that,” Wiedenhoft, 63, an Air Force retiree, said later in an interview. “I served in the military for 20 years defending the flag. And I resent people coming in here and taking advantage of us. I consider them invaders.”
So which candidate might appeal more than Bachmann?
“That,” he said, “is what I keep going to these meetings to find out.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/illegal-immigration-is-flash-point-for-republican-white-house-hopefuls/2011/09/01/gIQAUb0LvJ_story.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)