2009 March 24 Tuesday
US And Mexico Agree On Larger Border Law Security Plan

But where's the wall to stop the illegal crossers, the drug smugglers, and the criminal gang activity?

Mexico City and Washington - The United States unveiled Tuesday a beefed-up, multiagency security plan for the US-Mexico border that reflects President Obama's recognition of the "two-way" street responsible for rising drug violence. The plan allows Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to emphasize cooperative action when she visits the embattled southern neighbor Wednesday.

The border security policy includes the formation of a new FBI-directed Southwest Intelligence Group, relocating 100 federal agents to the border to curtail gun trafficking, and sending more federal agents to Mexico to coordinate counternarcotics operations. But it does not endorse Texas Gov. Rick Perry's call for National Guard troops on the border.

The border would not cause large scale lawlessness and criminality in Mexico if crossing the border with illegal goals was not so easy to do. Imagine that walls and ditches with lots of barbed wire made illegal crossings at uncontrolled locations impossible. Imagine that the scale of the effort to search vehicles and trains was ramped up by an order of magnitude. Fewer illegals and much less contraband (whether drugs, guns, or stolen goods) would get thru. In America we'd see a reduction in crime, a slowing of the growth rate of social pathology, and the demographic decay would be less bad. In Mexico the organized crime organizations would have much less money to fund their activities. More people in Mexico would engage in constructive activity instead of criminal activity. Both countries would be better off.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2009 March 24 09:22 PM  Immigration Border Control


Comments
Ned said at March 25, 2009 6:19 AM:

"Both countries would be better off."

True. But not both countries' elites. The Mexican elites live pretty comfy lives within their walled compounds, protected by armed guards. They like the idea that they can keep exporting their restless, underemployed peasantry to the US. And the US elites continue to desire lots of docile laborers and future Democratic voters. So it's a win-win situation, at least for the elites of both nations. The big losers are the US taxpayers who get stuck with the bill and low-wage American workers, who really get hammered. Don't expect that a liberal elitist like BHO will ever do anything about this - he clearly doesn't care a fig about US taxpayers or low-wage unemployed. But the Mexican elites might do something if they find that the situation in their country is getting bad enough to threaten their position.

Skot German said at March 25, 2009 7:51 PM:

Randall,
What you have said has been said before and our country's elites have surely heard. I doubt they want the "drug problem" solved beyond a certain level. Too many people profit. If the drug problem were solved by effective border security, there would be no need for all of the people employed in the interdiction industry, the legal industry, the prison industry, the drug testing industry and the rehabilitation industry.

Skot German said at March 25, 2009 10:52 PM:

Another possibly is that bribes from drug cartels are preventing the borders from being secured. According to some of material I saw while researching Los Zetas, Mexico has a big corruption problem. The Zetas will approach an official with a "plato o plomo" offer. A lot of police and politicians are getting money from the cartels. Surely some corruption has spilled over to the US side of the border. I also wonder if some of the organizations that make securing the border a racial/civil rights issue are working for the cartels.


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright