It’s now the witness panel’s turn
April 28th, 2008, 9:01 am · 1 Comment · posted by ksieff
First we hear from a member of the Department of the Interior, who calls calls the effect of the fence “a mixed bag of environmental benefits and adverse affects.”
Next is Ronald Vitello, head of RGV’s Border Patrol. Vitello discusses the fence’s importance to border security, though he says it won’t be enough on it own. It must be complemented by BP deployment.
He also says alignment has changed to reflect community and environmental concerns.
Chad Foster, mayor of Eagle Pass, has long been one of the fence’s biggest critics. Eagle Pass was the first entity sued by the federal government over land for the fence.
“We’ve met with Sec. Chertoff…and he said Congress tied his hands (with waivers).”
“Most illegals enter through ports of entry,” Foster said. “No border fence will solve these problems.”
Dr. Juliet Garcia, UTB’s President, is up next.
She outlines the university’s interactions with the federal government over the fence.
“We could not in good conscience sign the document granting right of entry (to federal surveyors).”
“Seizing land for a border fence poses a great risk to our property investment,” Garcia said. “To support a plan that would build an 18-foot-high steel barrier between two friendly countries would directly contravene our mission and destroy the campus climate…”
April 28th, 2008 at 9:26 am
Hi,
From the distance of the University of Maryland, the proposed fence appears to be an awful course of action. A fence along the river (cutting visibility?) and within Brownsville (cutting off territory). I find it amazing that there is so much paranoia regarding some people entering the USA without papers - people who come to work, thereby enhancing the USA economy. Better a few people entering undocumented than destroying some of the beauty of the area and severing one part of the sister cities from the other part.
Bill Hanna