US‐Mexico
border
fence
 1


US‐Mexico
border
fence


By




Tommaso
Esmanech1


1.
Email:
tom_es@yahoo.com

 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 2








Abstract


In
2005,
US
Congress
has
approved
the
construction
of
the
US‐Mexico
border
Fence.


The
Border
fence
is
a
2
billion
dollar
project
meant
to
reduce
illegal
immigration,


drug
and
army
trafficking,
and
terrorist
threats.
In
spite
of
promising
results
from


the
San
Diego
County
border
fence
the
results
along
the
2000
miles
of
the
US‐Mexico


border
don’t
show
a
significant
slow
down
of
illegal
activities
on
the
US‐Mexico


border.
Illegal
immigration,
drug
and
army
trafficking
is
a
global
problem
that


United
States
can
not
solve
or
slow
down
by
just
raising
a
wall.
 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 3


In
2005,
Congress
mandated
to
the
U.S.
Homeland
Security
the
construction
of
the


border
fence
along
the
USA‐Mexican
border.

The
border
fence
is
a
2
billion
dollar


project;
it
has
a
completion
date
of
December
2008
(Skerry, 2007).
The
border
fence


is
expected
to
stop
illegal
immigration
coming
through
the
US‐Mexico
border,
to


reduce
drug
and
arm
trafficking,
and
to
lower
the
risk
of
terrorism.

American
Civil


Liberty
Unions
have
raised
the
concern
that
the
border
fence
is
just
another
“Berlin


Wall”
(Skerry,
2007);
it
will
not
achieve
the
objective
and
severely
impact
the


territory.


Despite
high
expectation
for
the
border
fence,
today’s
results
show
only
a


slow
down
and
not
a
solution
to
the
problems
affecting
the
US‐Mexican
border.


A
two
thousand
miles
long
border
stretching
from
San
Diego,
California
to


Brownsville,
Texas
connects
United
States
and
Mexico.
Though
the
relation
between


the
Mexican
immigrants
and
the
USA
government
and
immigration
law
has
been


turbulent
and
continuously
changing.
Until
World
War
I
people
from
Mexico
could


enter
in
the
USA
easily
and
freely.
During
the
Great
Depression
of
1930’
the
US


border
was
closed,
US
Government
repatriated
Mexican
decedents
in
spite
of
the


fact
that
half
where
already
US
citizens
(Amnesty
International,

¶17).
With
the
raise


of
World
War
II
the
border
was
open
again
welcoming
Mexican
workers
into
the
US


workforce
to
help
sustain
the
US
military
and
industries.

Since
the
1950s
the


acceptance
swing
has
been
going
on
from
expelling
immigrant
to
the
1980


immigration
amnesty
of
the
Regan
administration.
The
number
of
unauthorized


immigrants
has
risen
from
8.5
million
in
2000
to
11.8
million
in
2007
(Hoefer,
&


Rytina

&
Backer,
2008)




 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 4


Source:
U.S.
Department
of
Homeland
Security.


(cited
from
Hoefer,
&
Rytina

&
Backer,
2008)


During
the
probation
period
of
the
1920s,
Congress
instituted
the
Border


Patrol
with
the
objective
to
stop
smuggling
via
the
Mexican
border.

By
the
1950
the


Boarder
Patrol
had
shifted
to
immigration
control
and
officer
number
has
soared


through
the
years
to
respond
to
the
increase
number
of
immigrants,
projects
and


activities.

The
border
patrol
has
been
experiencing
a
high‐level
of
turn
over,


according
to
Mark

Kricorian,
executive
director
of
the
Center
for
Immigration


Studies
(cited
in
United
States
border
control
and
the
Secure
Fence
Act
of
2006,


2007).
In
consequence
the
Border
Patrol
is
under
staffed
to
support
the
current


control
plans
and
it
is
able
to
focus
only
on
certain
areas,
leaving
others
unattended



(cited
in
United
States
border
control
and
the
Secure
Fence
Act
of
2006,
2007).




 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 5


Country
of
birth
of
the
Unauthorized
Immigrant
Population:

January
2007

country
of
birth

 2007

Mexico
 6,980,000

El
Salvador
 540,000

Guatemala
 500,000

Philippines
 290,000

China
 290,000

Honduras
 280,000

Others
 2,900,000

Source:
U.S.
Department
of
Homeland
Security.

(cited
from
Hoefer,
&
Rytina

&
Backer,
2008)



 As
a
response
to
illegal
activities
the
border
fence
was
approved
looking
back


at
the
results
of
a
similar
structure
constructed
on
the
US‐Mexican
border
in
San


Diego
California.
According
to
the
proposal
from
Congressman
Duncan
Hunter
of
the


52nd
District
of
California
the
San
Diego
Boarder
fence
has
been
able
to
reduce
illegal


alien
apprehensions
from
“202,000
in
1992
to
approximately
9,000
in
2004”(Unites


States.
House
of
Representatives,
2005)
in
addition
according
to
the
FBI
Crime


Index,
“the
crime
in
San
Diego
Country
dropped
by
47.3%
between
1989
to


2000”(Unites
States.
House
of
Representatives,
2005).

The
report
from


Congressman
Duncan
Hunter
states
that
drive‐throughs
in
the
region
have


decreased
significantly
from
about
10
a
day
to
only
4
in
2004(Unites
States.
House


of
representatives,
2005).

These
encouraging
results
have
convinced
the
US


Congress
to
approve
the
construction
of
the
border
fence
along
the
US‐Mexican


boarder.



 In
spite
of
the
results
of
the
San
Diego
border
fence,
the
border
fence
was


never
approved
and
constructed
with
the
sole
objective
of
immigration
control


(Skerry, 2007).
The
border
fence
is
not
a
militarized
structure.
In
people’s
mind
the


border
fence
is
like
a
monolithic
wall
stretching
across
the
border.
In
reality
the

 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 6


fence
is
constructed
in
different
ways
to
address
the
territory
and
level
of
reactivity


of
the
Border
Patrol.
The
border
fence
is
not
constructed
directly
on
the
line
of
the


US‐Mexican
border,
but
it
is
positioned
in
the
US
giving
officials
the
space
to
make


appropriate
maintenance
(Skerry, 2007).

Lee
Bargerhuff,
part
of
the
United
States


Customers
and
Border
Protection,
explains
that
the
border
fence
structure
in
an


urban
area
defers
to
the
structure
present
in
rural
areas
(cited
in
United
States


border
control
and
the
Secure
Fence
Act
of
2006,
2007).
In
urban
areas
the
Border


Patrol
has
a
short
reaction
time,
while
in
rural
areas
the
officers
have
over
90


minutes
to
react
and
put
in
place
the
appropriate
plan
(cited
in
United
States
border


control
and
the
Secure
Fence
Act
of
2006,
2007).

Peter
Skerry
in
his
book
Foreign


Policy
explains
that
the
structure
is
neither
a
Berlin
Wall
nor
the
Israel’s
security


fence:
in
the
US‐Mexico
border
fence
there
is
not
a
razor
wire
to
stop
potential


terrorists
from
making
the
climb
(2007).
In
addition
Attorney
General
Janet
Reno


explained
that
the
role
of
the
border
control
resources
is
not
to
fix
the
cause
of
the


immigration,
drug
and
weapon
trafficking,
but
it
is
merely
to
stop
from
entering


”(cited
in
United
States
border
control
and
the
Secure
Fence
Act
of
2006,
2007).
The


border
fence
has
the
objective
to
reduce
the
flow
of
illegally
activities
going
through


the
US‐Mexican
border,
allowing
enough
time
for
Border
Patrol
to
react
promptly


with
appropriate
actions.




 The
increase
security
from
the
border
fence
comes
at
a
significant
cost
to
the


population
living
along
the
border
and
natural
reserve
areas.
American
Civil
Liberty


Unions,
Amensty
International,
Counties
and
Naturalists
associations
have
raised


concerns
and
complain
in
regards
to
the
construction
of
the
border
fence.

 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 7


Naturalists
have
raised
the
concern
that
the
border
fence
will
impact
wildlife:
the


border
fence
will
prevent
smooth
and
natural
migration
of
animals
from
the
US
and


Mexico
depriving
them
of
their
natural
habitat
and
food
supply.
Matt
Skroch,


executive
director
of
the
Sky
Island
Alliance,
a
non‐profit
organization
dedicated
to


the
preservation
of
natural
refuge
areas
says,
“Animals
don’t
know
about
borders,


different
countries,
languages
or
visa.
So
anything
that
prevents
the
animals
from


moving
is
gonna
be
a
problem”(2006).

Antonio
N.
Zavaleta,
vice‐president
and


professor
of
anthropology
at
the
University
of
Texas
branch
in
Brownsville,
raises


the
concerns
that
the
border
fence
will
cut
across
their
campus
and
wonders
if
the


passport
will
be
necessary
to
walk
from
class
to
class
(Blumenthal,
2007).
Further


more
some
Texas
county
have
filed
an
appeal
to
the
U.S.
supreme
court
to
stop
the


construction
of
the
border
fence
since
it
violates
the
10th
Amendment
of
the


constitution
(Caldwell, 2008, para.3) .
The
10th
Amendment
grants
states
the
right
to


enforce
laws
neither
prohibited
by
nor
delegated
to
the
federal
government.




 Moreover
the
border
fence
is
negatively
impacting
Tohono
O’odham
Nation,


a
tribe
of
25,000
people,
located
in
the
southern
Arizona.
Tohono
O’odham
Nation


have
complained
that
their
territory,
that
also
stretches
in
to
Mexico,
will
be
cut
in


half
by
the
border
fence
and
it
is
moving
the
illegal
flows
right
through
their


territory
(Morse,
R.
&
Lee.
M,
2006).
The
Tohono
O’odham
Nation
primary
concern


is
that
the
fence
will
impact
their
culture
and
habitat;
tribal
pilgrimage
for
O’odham


festivity
are
being
impacted
by
the
increase
number
of
border
enforcement
as
an


example
the
St.Francis
festival
did
not
take
place
in
October
2007
(Morse,
R.
&
Lee.


M,
2006).


 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 8


In
addition
the
O’odham
community
in
Mexico,
still
part
of
the
O’odham
Nation


territory,
had
its
electric
power
cut
off.

The
O’odham
Nation
opposes
the
fence;
they


have
compared
it
to
a
knife
cutting
off
mother
earth
(Morse,
R.
&
Lee.
M,
2006).



 Contrary
to
expectations
the
border
fence
has
not
reduced
the
drug


trafficking
through
the
US‐Mexico
border.
In
fact,
Donni
R.
Marshall,
administrator


of
the
Drug
Enforcement
Administration
(DEA),
reveals
that
the
volume
of
drug


trafficking
continues
to
increase
(cited
in
drug
trafficking
on
southwest
border,


2000).
Drug
is
concealed
in
vehicles
crossing
the
border
or
simply
tossed
across
the


border
fence.
Marshall
argues
that
the
DEA
does
not
have
resources
to
follow
the


small
desperate
smuggling
attempts
and
that
the
solution
to
a
drug
trafficking
is


global
and
not
just
on
US‐Mexico
border
(cited
in
drug
trafficking
on
southwest


border,
2000).


On
the
other
hand,
Rachel
Canty,
Chief
Operating
Officer
of
Secure
Border


Initiative
part
of
Department
of
Homelang
Security
(DHS),
without
commenting
on


the
border
fence
project,
provides
a
different
prospective
to
the
border
control


efforts.

Rachel
Canty
states
that
“in
order
top
stop
individuals
from
entering
the


United
States
illegally,
we
need
a
legal
avenue
to
entry,
such
as
the
Temporary


Worker
Program….We
need
employers
to
have
reasons
to
want
to
comply
with
the


law”(cited
in
United
States
border
control
and
the
Secure
Fence
Act
of
2006,
2007).


She
explains
that
the
ultimate
situation
would
be
when
employers
would
sue
a


competitor
for
unfair
competition
is
using
illegal
immigrants
in
their
workforce


(cited
in
United
States
border
control
and
the
Secure
Fence
Act
of
2006,
2007).

This


way,
she
continues,
the
solution
of
the
problem
would
shift
from
DHS
to
the

 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 9


community.

DHS
recognizes
that
individuals
will
continue
to
try
to
enter
in
the


United
States
in
search
for
a
better
life
cited
in
United
States
border
control
and
the


Secure
Fence
Act
of
2006,
2007).
The
United
States
will
not
stop
immigration
but


they
would
need
to
facilitate
the
process
in
respect
of
human
rights
and
US
laws.



 In
contrast,
Patrick
Buchanan
(2007)
in
his
book,
State
of
Emergency


presents
the
death
of
the
Western
culture
by
the
invasion
of
non‐Westerners.

The


author
argues
that
the
United
states
have
all
the
right
to
protect
their
boarders


because
the
Mexican
government
is
not
taking
appropriate
steps
to
slow
down
the


wave
of
immigrants.
According
to
Patrick
Buchanan
the
United
States
have
all
the


right
to
protect
their
borders
and
guaranteed
the
United
States
security,
lifestyle


and
standard.

Buchanan
(2007)
writes,
“It
is
not
American
duty
to
serve
as
a
safety


value
for
an
endless
series
of
failed
Mexican
regimes”(p.254).

Mexican
immigrants


make
up
the
majority
of
illegal
immigrants
in
the
United
States;
they
are
looking
for


an
escape
from
their
life
situation
in
a
State
of
Mexico
that
does
not
protect
them


from
corrupted
and
abusive
police
and
corrupted
government.

Only
by
improving


life
standards
in
Mexico
the
wave
of
immigrants
would
decrease.
The
border
fence
is


just
the
last
desperate
response
to
a
critical
situation.

 



 The
US‐Mexico
border
fence
is
a
huge
undertaking
in
terms
of
taxpayer


dollars
and
human
resources.

According
to
Homeland
Security
and
DEA
personnel


the
border
fence
is
not
the
solution
to
the
illegal
activities
affecting
the
area.
Further


more
the
construction
is
affecting
the
life
of
US‐Citizen
living
on
the
border.

The


truth
of
the
matter
is
that
if
the
Mexico
government
would
be
willing
to
sustain
and

 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 10


guarantee
a
similar
life
to
the
United
Stated
there
will
be
less
people
wanting
to


cross
the
United
Stated
border
and
live
as
illegal
alien
in
search
of
a
better
life.



It
is
a
chimera
to
think
that
just
by
building
a
wall
all
the
problems
of
the
US‐Mexico


border
would
be
solved.

The
border
fence
is
not
the
solution
and
the
2‐billion


taxpayer
dollars
could
have
been
allocated
to
revitalize
the
economy
or
given
to


support
law
enforcement
activities.





 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 11


References


United States border control and the Secure Fence Act of 2006. (Symposium: Holes in

the Fence: Immigration Reform and Border Security in the United States)

(Discussion). Summer 2007 v59 i3 p569(19)Administrative Law Review, 59, 3.

p.569(19). Retrieved December 07, 2008, from Academic OneFile via Gale:

http://find.galegroup.com/itx/start.do?prodId=AONE

Skerry, P. (Sept-Oct 2006). How not to build a fence: The United States may soon fortify

its border with Mexico. But what about the fence that is already there? A close look

at the disjointed, makeshift barrier reveals America's ambivalent and conflicted

attitudes toward immigration. Foreign Policy, 156. p.64(4). Retrieved December 07,

2008, from Academic OneFile via Gale:

http://find.galegroup.com/itx/start.do?prodId=AONE

Unites States. House of representatives “ Hunter Proposal for Strategic Boarder Fencing.”

15 December 2005.

http://www.house.gov/hunter/news_prior_2006/fence.amendment.html

Buchanan,Patrick J.. (2007). State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and

Conquest of America. Retrieved December 9, 2008, from

http://books.google.com/books

Hoefer, M., Rytina N., Backer C.B. (September 2008). Estimates of the unauthorized

immigrant population Rrsiding in the United States: January 2007. Retrieved from
 US‐Mexico
border
fence
 12


http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2007.pdf


Blumenthal, Ralph (2007, June 20). Some Texans fear border fence will sever routine of

daily life. The New York Times. Retrieved on December 10, 2008, from

http://www.nytimes.com

Morse, R., Lee. M (2006, December 24). Fence in the sky – Border wall cuts through

native land. New America Media. Retrived on December 09, 2008 from

http://news.newamericamedia.org

Amnesty International (n.d.). Human rights concerns in the border region with Mexico.

Retrieved from http://www.amnesty.org/

Caldwell, A. Alicia (2008, December 10). Texas county files appeal to stop border fence.

FoxNew. Retrieved on December 19, 2008, from http://www.foxnews.com

Turner, Margo (2000, April 17). Drug trafficking on southwest border. Media Monitors

Network. Retrieved on December 19, 2008, from http://www.mediamonitors.net/