http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/us/06napolitano.html
The article discusses a new initiative to keep the southern border of the country safe. The plan involves sending an additional 360 agents to the border with Mexico. The main point of the plan, along with increasing the effectiveness of already existing border patrol methods, is to conduct southbound investigations. Additionally, Janet Napolitano, Homeland Security Secretary, plans to complete the remaining 60 miles of fencing along the border, which has cost an estimated $4 million per mile.
Is this a good use of federal funding and agents? On the one hand, 360 agents is not something to treat lightly; they are very highly trained. Could they be put to better use? Also, an additional $240 million of federal spending when the economy is suffering should be considered unwise. After all, Napolitano herself said, “You show me a 12-foot fence and I’ll show you a 13-foot ladder.” The fence is obviously not foolproof and therefore may not warrant the additional spending. On the other hand, border security is something of extreme importance. People and illegal items leaving the country pose just as much danger as those entering it. This initiative also may prevent people from working in the United States while they live in Mexico. Especially with the country in its current economic state with fewer available jobs, this is of extreme importance. Southbound inspections will help to increase national security and decrease unwanted international travel.
One possible stance is to keep the additional agents there but abandon the plan, at least currently, to continue adding to the fence. This will still allow southbound inspections and also increase security against immigrants entering the United States without costing an additional $240 million. The southbound inspections are likely to decrease the trafficking of illegal substances and immigrants between the United States and Mexico. The initiative to decrease immigration from the southern border is of extreme importance and should not be discounted.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Upon first read, I thought this was a bad plan. Attending a school like Bentley, it seems like we are bombarded with business each and every day. It is what we read about, what we talk about, what we live. Naturally, the current recession has gripped our attention unlike anything I have personally experienced in quite some time. It is easy to forget that there are other pressing matters in the world today.
National security is the single most important issue that a government faces. A government can do all sorts of internal work; it can strengthen its economy, promote freedom, liberty and equality, it can make itself the best country in the world. But none of it matters if another country or some group of people destroys this nation.
America is,in many eyes, the strongest nation in the world. Any strong entity will have its enemies, it is a law of life. Should this country fall victim to any of these forces, then all the work that it has done will be worthless. Now, this strong nation is working on a problem in the economic recession. It is natural to direct all attention to this recession, but it is imperative to remember the importance of national security.
For this reason, I say the government directs some attention to this seemingly (in the last few months) forgotten issue. Enhanced border control means enhanced national security. The development of two way investigation makes the country even more safe. Anytime America is more cognizant of the traffic of guns and other dangerous items, the country and its people are more safe.
In the midst of an economic recession, it is imperative that we remember just how critical national security is. We cannot forget national security because enemies won't forget, not even in a recession.
While I understand the argument presented that the United States should not dismiss national security issues such as border control just because the economy is in a recession, a part of me thinks that the money being used in order to increase border control is extravagant. I fully understand that national security is an extremely important issue, but is it necessary to spend an additional 240 million dollars in order to better secure the southern border? I believe that with the economy in such bad shape, that money should be used more efficiently. Will 360 additional agents really make the southern border safer, or will it just waste resources in a way that our economy cannot handle at this moment.
In addition, if the United States spends 240 million dollars in order to build a fence on the border, who is to say that it will be effective. If individuals really want to get into the country, I do not believe a fence will stop them. In addition, this project is not going to be started and finished instantly. If individuals know that a fence is going to be constructed, chances are they will change their plans in order to cross the border before the fence is actually constructed.
Overall, I understand fully that national security is a key issue that should be addressed at all times throughout the United States, but with the economy in a recession, I believe federal money and resources should be used in other ways instead of guarding the southern border of the United States. If controlling the border can be made cost-efficient and will have an increased chance of being effective, I will fully endorse this action, but at the time being, I believe government resources can be used in much better ways.
In response to your article, I believe that the plan that you propose would be the most effective way of dealing with the current border issues that we are having. Like most have said already, we are in an economic crisis so each and every dollar that is spent needs to be spent wisely. This proposed plan is not completely fullproof either, as you quoted about if there is a 12-foot fence, a 13-foot ladder will appear. So putting $ 400 million into a job that is not guaranteed to work seems like a waste in my eyes.
Also, I do feel like national security is an important issue and should not take a back seat to the economy. As I have stressed in prior discussions, a poor economy is no reason to completely discount all other issues.
That is why I am a proponent of issuing the extra federal employees to guard the border but abandoning the proposed fencing plan in order to save some money. It seems as if every time money is spent on some activity or cause, it is scrutinized to every cent and said to be unnecessary. However, in some instances this money may need to be used to secure our Southern border. The immigration from Mexico is clearly a matter of national security and something should definitely be done to combat the recent influx of immigrants into America. However, the $ 400 million dollar price tag makes one hesitant to accept this plan.
It is in this time more than ever that America needs to strengthen our national security. Since our nation is struggling economically, many other nations can see this as an opportunity. Any possible “human attack” can reverse all of the hard work that Americans have put into fixing our economy. National security is clearly an issue to be concerned about, validating the need for more federal employees on our Southern border. However, I feel that we need to re-think the amount of money that is being put into this effort because while we know national security is important, we should not act whimsically with our nation’s finances. What would it say about our nation if the fencing plan did not work? Would we have then pretty much flushed millions of dollars down the toilet?
We should not be spending any more money on something like border control. Building a fence will do nothing to diminish the inflow of immigrants. There is always a way to get into the country if that’s really what one is determined to do. Building a fence to keep out immigrants is probably the biggest waste of money. Putting up signs across the border telling non-citizens to keep out would be just as ineffective, provide the same message, and cost millions of dollars less than building an entire wall.
With regard to the additional agents, I’d like to know what these agents do specifically and how many of them are already there. If there are thousands of similar agents already posted along the border, then I see no point in adding another 360. I am assuming that there are thousands of agents already, given the fact that our country is considering spending $240 on a wall along the border. So an additional 360 seems kind of pointless to me.
Overall, these increased border security measures are not worth it. Immigration doesn’t impact me at all, so border security isn’t that important to me to begin with. Sure, there are instances where the lives of citizens are put in danger, but those are very rare instances. Ultimately, we are a country of immigrants. More immigrants are not a problem in my mind.
If immigrants want to enter the United States, they are going to find ways to enter the Untied States. If new methods of security are established, they will find ways of getting around it. If people are determined to smuggle illegal goods in and out of the country, they will find ways of doing that too; it is inevitable. What this plan to complete the fence and add 360 more agents to the border should really be looking at is how effective would these measures actually be? Would they significantly decrease the amount of immigration and trafficking or would the efforts only skim the surface?
At a time like this, with the economy in the shape it is in, the only way this plan would be a beneficial thing to do is if it would have a major impact. Yes, it is a problem that there are countless illegal immigrants working in the United States and that these immigrants are taking work away from those who desperately need it because of their willingness to work for significantly lower wages; however, spending $240 million on a fence wouldn't be beneficial to the economy or the unemployed either.
I would agree that the best thing to do would be to keep the agents stationed along the border to complete inspections and catch more illegal trafficking. While the agents are there though, it would be smart to analyze their success over time and see if they are really having an impact on the illegal activity and border control. If they are not having that substantial impact then perhaps the agents would better serve the country being stationed somewhere else.
Because the majority of responses basically agree with my initial post I’m going to respond solely to the comment with the most drastically opposing view (Greg H’s).
Embedded within the response is the quote “Putting up signs across the border telling non-citizens to keep out would be just as ineffective, provide the same message, and cost millions of dollars less than building an entire wall.” While there is obvious exaggeration (nobody would actually declare that signs are as effective as a 12-foot wall with guards posted around it), this general view seems to be wrong. The wall is not ineffective. This is like saying, we may as well put up signs asking criminals not to steal from our house rather than attaching doors with locks to our houses. Obviously there are a few criminals that will spend the time and effort to figure out how to successfully break into a home and take something. However, leaving a door wide open in the middle of the night is simply asking people to steal. We do not want to make it easy to get into the United States from the border with Mexico. Sure, a few people will still cross, but not nearly as many. The wall certainly helps to keep immigrants out of the country; I agree that now is not the time to consider completing it and that there may be a better alternative, but stating that it serves no purpose is downright wrong.
The other point of the response is that immigrants and national security are not actual issues because they do not immediately impact you. Not caring about issues that have no direct bearing on you is somewhat ignorant; thousands of people being out of jobs due to immigrants during an already suffering economy should at least warrant some form of understanding. Additionally, not only immigrants seeking jobs cross the southern border to the U.S. If security is decreased or remains stagnant terrorists or other extremists may choose to attempt to enter the country through the border with Mexico rather than through another entry point. National security is of utmost importance and should not be compromised in the interest of saving a few dollars.
Post a Comment