by David Safier
The Republic's Dennis Wagner presents a very interesting analysis: Political rhetoric ignores reality at United States border with Mexico.
Amid a growing national angst about illegal immigration, Americans keep hearing a chorus: Secure the border first. Then talk about immigration reform.
The idea appeals to public sentiment, and it seems like a simple demand.
But what do pundits and politicians mean?
Is a border secure only when no one crosses illegally and when no contraband slips through?
If some permeability is acceptable, what is the tolerable amount?
Political leaders mostly dodge those questions, and for good reason: Anyone with a minimal knowledge or understanding about the nearly 2,000-mile swath of land between Mexico and the United States realizes that requiring a secure border establishes an impossible standard.
So long as "securing the border" has to be accomplished before we do anything else, politicians who don't want comprehensive immigration reform will be able to say, rightly, "The border isn't secure yet" no matter how few immigrants or drug smugglers slip through.
And the cry for more forces on the border can go on endlessly as well, even though we have far more people on the border now than we used to.
Today, there are 22,800 U.S. Border Patrol agents, five times the number in 1993. About 17,000 agents work along the Southwest corridor, double the number from seven years ago. They are supported by National Guard troops, local police and thousands of port officers using everything from drug-sniffing dogs to gamma-ray machines.
When will we have a big enough force guarding the border? When will the border finally be "secure"? The answer from Pearce, Arpaio, et al, will always be, "It's not secure yet."
The anti-immigrant crowd will never — never — say, "OK, now we're ready for an immigration reform package like the one McCain and Kennedy proposed." They'll just keep moving the goal posts. "Nope, sorry, the border's not secure yet."