U.S. Common Sense

I know immigration isn’t in the news today, so I thought it would be a good time to bring it up without any media influence. As we all know, the U.S. shares a 1,952-mile border with Mexico; much of it is “unsecured” in the sense that there isn’t a border wall dividing the two nations. Some individuals have called for a fence that stretches coast to coast, while others say no wall should exist at all. After months of debates, the House passed H.R. 4437 in December 22005 which calls for 698 additional miles of fence to be built on the border. In the Senate, the Secure Fence Act of 2006 was passed in October 2006 calling for only 370 miles to be constructed. In either case, half of the border would be left open for illegal aliens to cross into our country.

So, why didn’t Congress pass laws to build a complete fence? For starters, there is a lot of private land on the border that the U.S. would have to work out fair compensation to the landowners in order to build the fence. This will cost money. In other parts, there are environmental protected lands in the Rio Grande that could be negatively impacted if a fence is built. Trying to protect the environment and/or diverting the fence will cost more money. There are Native American nations that straddle the border between the two nations, resulting in dividing their land. Again, diverting the fence around their lands would cost more money, while potentially alienating legal residents of our own country by walling them off from the rest of the nation. These are just a few of the many complications facing the government if they were to attempt a coast-to-coast fence.

Is a 1,952-mile fence actually needed? Is a fence needed at all? According to the U.S. Border Patrol, over a million people attempt to cross the border in a year. Between October 2003 and April 2004 alone, the Border Patrol detained over 650,000 illegal aliens crossing into our country. With estimates of at least 13 million illegal aliens in our nation currently, one can only imagine how many more could be here if no wall existed at all. So some sort of fence is needed to stem the flow, but where should it be placed?

Fortunately, some portions of our border are either impassible due to terrain conditions or because of the desert (where many do die attempting to cross every year). These sections could be left without a physical fence, instead covered with video cameras or sensors to alert the Border Patrol if someone does cross. In other sections, such as the Native American nations, the tribes know who belongs and doesn’t belong on their land, and we can work with them to police their territory without the need of a wall. The Rio Grande protected area is tough to cross due to the river and natural vegetation. Sensors and cameras will be hard to install and monitor due to the conditions there, meaning that manned patrols would be required. Lastly, larger towns have enough local law enforcement to serve as a reasonable deterrent to potential illegal aliens, diverting them to other sections of the border.

While this still leaves over 1,000 miles of border to be protected either by a wall or with technology and patrols, it is a start that saves the nation money while providing reasonable protection. But what else should we do? A fence is just a Band-Aid. That is a discussion for next week. Until then, what is your opinion on the fence?

For some additional reading, check out these sites:
Border Fence Project - American Citizens Securing the Borders themselves…
Minuteman Border Fence - Border Security Can’t Wait for Congress to Act
The New York Times - “Power to Build Border Fence Is Above U.S. Law”
Rep. Duncan Hunter congressional web site - “Follow the Construction of Border Fencing”
Newsweek - “Parry and Thrust”