Speech #1040190466

Chairman. the amendment I am offering would replace the bills requirement for the construction of 14 miles of triple fencing along the San Diego border with an authorization for the installation of additional physical barriers in all areas of high illegal entry into the United States. As a cosponsor of H.R. 2202. I agree completely with my many colleagues who support the need to better reinforce physical barriers along the border to deter illegal immigration. But this particular barriera triple fenceis one which is opposed by the very law enforcement officials who will be responsible for patrolling it. The San Diego triple fence is opposed by the Border Patrol. by the Department of Justice. and by the union representing Border Patrol agents in the San Diego area. largely becausein their opinionthe fence would subject Border Patrol agents to unnecessary danger. and would merely shift the illegal entry problem to other areas of the 1.500mile United StatesMexico border. Douglas Kruhm. the Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol. who is a uniformed agent who worked his way up through the ranks. explained the Border Patrols opposition to the triple fence in a letter to the Judiciary Committee. in which he said: This proposal threatens to endanger the physical safety of Border Patrol agents... by enclosing them in areas without easy escape routes. and [it] will reduce our ability to prevent illegal entry along the border... In our view. the deployment of personnel. physical barriers. technology. and operational Judgments are decisions best left to the border patrol agents who are responsible for the daytoday operation at the ground level. The Border Patrol agents union echoed this position in a recent statement. when they said that "there is no support from U.S. Border Patrol Agents in the field for the threetiered fence. We see it as a dangerous situation." And in a letter to the Speaker of the House. the Department of Justice made this plea: We request that the House defer to the experience of those in the Border Patrol who are responsible for the safety of the Patrols men and women and strike this section from the bill. The triple fence proposal was developed 5 years ago by Sandia National Laboratories. a weapons laboratory that was asked by the Bush administration to do a study on drug traffic. Without considering the practicality or danger to Border Patrol personnel of such a fence. Sandia concluded that a triple fence would more effectively prevent illegal crossing than the existing single fence. While their conclusions may be valid in theory. they make no sense to those who have experienced the reality of patrolling a 1.500 mile border. Sandias experience with triple fencing is in settings where the authorities can control both sides of itlike surrounding a secure national laboratory or a prisonwhich is quite different from the United StatesMexico border. In addition. much has changed since Sandia issued its reportthere are more agents. more sensors. more single fencing. more night scopes and other technology on the border. all of which were not evaluated by Sandia and have proven to be enormously effective in deterring illegal immigration. Some supporters of the triple fence say that it is supported by Silvestre Reyes. the former head of the El Paso Border Patrol. whose "Operation Hold the Line" cut the number of illegal crossing from 8.000 to a few hundred a day. But the fact is that. while Mr. Reyes agrees that fences. when supported by adequate staffing. can help to deter illegal immigrants. he opposes the triple fence proposal for the same reasons voiced by other agents. Finally. even if a triple fence were a good idea. the $12 million authorized in the bill is inadequate to fund a 14 mile triple fence. Depending on the cost of land acquisition and the type of fence used. and assuming there is no road construction involved. the total cost will range from S87 million to $110 million. according to estimates made by the Department of Justice in conjunction with the Department of Defense. This amendment before us would strike the triple fence requirement and replace it with a new subsection that authorizes a $110 million appropriation for the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS] to install additional physical barriers and roadsincluding the removal of obstacles to detection of illegal entrantsanywhere along the border where improvements are needed. This approach would ensure that Congress is not requiring the INS to construct a barrier that it does not have sufficient funds to build. And. more importantly. by deferring to the expertise and experience of border enforcement personnel on the type of barriers that would be most useful. it would ensure that taxpayer dollars will be spent wisely and effectively. Finally. Mr. Chairman. I think an editorial in the San Diego UnionTribune said it best when it said. "If thetriple fencewere free. it would be a lousy idea. The fact that it could cost as much as $110 million * * * makes it an extraordinarily bad idea." The same newspaper wisely urged that rather than trying to micromanage how the Border Patrol does it job in the San Diego sector. Congress should give the agency the financial support it needs to stem the flow of illegals as it sees fit. Mr. Speaker. instead of jeopardizing the safety of our Border Patrol agents and merely shifting the problem of illegal crossings away from 14 miles of the San Diego border. we need to put our resources where they can do the most goodas determined by the officers on the line. Only then will we have a demonstrable impact on stopping illegal immigration into this country. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. E3 2115 Mr. Chairman. instead of jeopardizing the safety of our Border Patrol agents and merely shifting the problem of illegal crossings away from the 14 miles of the San Diego border. we need to put our resources where they will do the most good as determined by the professionals on the line. Only then will we have a demonstrable impact on stopping illegal entry into the country. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.