Via the CSM: Record drug seizures on US-Mexico border

Seizures of illegal drugs – from marijuana to heroin – are on the rise along the US-Mexican border again this year, breaking the previous record for major busts set just last year.

“We’re overwhelmed with marijuana,” says Anthony Coulson, assistant special agent in charge of the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in Tucson. “We passed last year’s record about two months ago.”

Marijuana is the most-seized drug, followed by cocaine, methamphetamine, and heroin, Mr. Coulson says. “All of them are trending up.”

While seizures are up in part owing to increased border security, such increased seizures have historically had more to do with increased levels of supply than anything else. Indeed, this was, as the story notes, a good year for the crops in question, which further suggests that the main variable here is increased availability of the products.

Whenever we seize large amounts of drugs, some take this to mean that we have increased our interdiction capabilities, and therefore that we are making progress. However, the records for seizures constantly fall and the supply of the products in question continue unabated.

WaPo has an interesting piece on the El Paso-Ciudad Juarez border in today’s edition: Border Crackdown Has El Paso Caught in Middle.

One of the issues that it notes is one that is frequently under-discussed in the immigration/border security debate, i.e., the economic interchanges that cross the border daily and the degree to which security has economic costs:

“Every major auto manufacturer in the world gets the parts to their cars manufactured in Juarez or Chihuahua, from the wire harness in the dash to the lights in the overhead, the headlights, stereo system, you name it. Just about every component is manufactured here,” said Richard Dayoub, president of the El Paso Chamber of Commerce.

“If we take it to a point where the application of these laws in order to more secure our borders slows down commerce from Mexico into the U.S. . . . we’ll all feel it throughout our economy,” he said.

The piece also has this interesting tidbit, that puts some of the economics into perspective:

Now North America’s fourth-largest manufacturing hub — after Los Angeles, Chicago and Dallas-Fort Worth — El Paso and Juarez’s surrounding state of Chihuahua have 270,000 manufacturing jobs, three times as many as Detroit, in 400 maquiladoras, or duty-free factories, economic development officials said. About 78 percent of residents are Hispanic, and 25 percent are foreign-born. Families send breadwinners across the bridge daily to work, and children to study.

Via the AP: Senate blocks immigration bill

The Senate drove a stake Thursday through President Bush’s plan to legalize millions of unlawful immigrants, likely postponing major action on immigration until after the 2024 elections.

The bill’s supporters fell 14 votes short of the 60 needed to limit debate and clear the way for final passage of the legislation, which critics assailed as offering amnesty to illegal immigrants. The vote was 46 to 53 in favor of limiting the debate.

Senators in both parties said the issue is so volatile that Congress is highly unlikely to revisit it this fall or next year, when the presidential election will increasingly dominate American politics.

I have expected, from the very beginning, that this bill was not going to pass, and it appears now that those suspicions have been confirmed.

No doubt there will be much rejoicing and chest-thumping on conservative talk radio and at blogs like Michelle Malkin’s.

Now, I was never convinced of the merits of this particular bill and I have long taken a somewhat neutral (if not almost disinterested) view towards it, given that I never thought it would pass–so I have considered much of the discussion a bunch of sound and fury signifying nothing. Still, the one thing I find curious about the outcome, especially from the point of view of the more vociferous critics of the bill, is that with the bill’s defeat, nothing changes: we still have at least 12 million illegal immigrants in the US, and more will come. And despite all the hand-wringing over “amnesty” the bottom line is that we have de facto amnesty at the moment, and that isn’t going to change. Further, we seem, as a country, farther away from dealing with the economic realities of supply and demand that bring these people here in the first place than before this debate started a few years ago.

Any solution (if that is even the right word) for this situation is to recognize that short of making Mexico a first world economy, there will continue to be a serious influx of immigrants from the south no matter what we do. That is simply reality. From there the only policy solutions will have to be oriented towards managing that flow, not stopping it or even “controlling” it.

Some other suggestions for a sane debate:

• There is no serious reconquista movement–unless the goal is to conquer the right to clean McDonald’s and pick vegetables. yes, there are fringe groups that have talked about retaking the Southwest–but they are kooks.
• This isn’t about al Qaeda: if al Qaeda or other jihadists want to get into the US, there are easier ways to do than going to Mexico and trudging across the Sonoran desert.
• We will never truly “control” the southern border–it is too big and real control (if by control is meant actually dictating all crossings) would take resources so vast as to be ridiculous.
• Ultimately we have to focus on integration of new populations as a policy goal, rather than segmentation.

As I said before, there are a large number of very important issues that need to be debated here, and yes there are negative consequences of illegal immigration–but the balance sheet is not all negative (it certainly isn’t as dire as some would make it out to be).

It would be nice if we could have a serious debate about this issue and if that debate would result in sane policy. However, I shan’t be holding my breath.

Via the AP: Immigration bill fails key Senate test

- A fragile bipartisan compromise that would legalize millions of unlawful immigrants suffered a setback Thursday when it failed a test vote in the Senate, leaving its prospects uncertain.

Still, the measure — a top priority for President Bush that’s under attack from the right and left — won a brief reprieve when Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he would give it more time before yanking the bill and moving on to other matters.

His decision set the stage for yet another procedural vote later Thursday that will measure lawmakers’ appetite for a so-called “grand bargain” between liberals and conservatives on immigration.

If that fails, Reid threatened, “The bill’s over with.”

[…]

By a vote of 33-63, the Senate fell far short of the 60 votes that would have been needed to limit debate on the immigration measure and put it on a path to passage.

Quite frankly, one of the reasons I haven’t said much of anything about this bill specifically is because I have felt from the beginning that its chances of passage were quite slim.

Via Fox News: Brothers Charged in Terror Plot Lived Illegally in U.S. for 23 Years

Three brothers charged in the alleged Fort Dix terror plot have been living illegally in the U.S. for more than 23 years and were accepted as Americans by neighbors and friends who had no idea they would scheme to attack military bases and slaughter GIs.

A federal law enforcement source confirmed to FOX News that the three — Dritan “Anthony” or “Tony” Duka, 28; Shain Duka, 26; and Eljvir “Elvis” Duka, 23 — also accumulated 19 traffic citations, but because they operated in “sanctuary cites,” where law enforcement does not routinely report illegal immigrants to homeland security, none of the tickets raised red flags.

The brothers entered the United States near Brownsville, Texas, in 1984, the source said, which would put their ages at 1 to 6 when they crossed the border.

The source said there is no record of them entering by way of a regular border crossing, so they are investigating whether they were smuggled into the country.

Now, I will confess that I am surprised to learn that they possibly came across in Brownsville (although how this is known is unclear), not because I don’t see how it could happen (I can), but more because Brownsville is a long way from Jersey (and because there are so many ways to get in that going via Brownsville seems like a lot of trouble). Still, the fact that they were brought in as children hardly shows some vast al Qaeda plot to use the Mexican border as a means of penetrating the United States. Of course, that hasn’t stopped Michelle Malkin from crowing about how the Duka brothers came across the Mexican border (which is one of her great areas of interest). It is noteworthy that Malkin’s post doesn’t comment on the fact that the alleged crossing took place when the brothers were still in diapers (her update does have the information in a block of quoted information, and it is, to be fair, highlighted along with some other bits of information). Debbie Schlussel, not surprisingly, also finds the case to be evidence that terrorists are entering via the South and that we need a law that requires all traffic stops to result in immigration status checks (which would likely translate into checks of mostly darker hued persons with funny accents, not checks of everyone stopped). Indeed, since I carry neither my passport nor my birth certificate around with me at all times, I must confess that I couldn’t prove that I was in the country legally were I to be stopped. Indeed, unless Schlussel wants a national ID card to go along with her law, I am not sure how it could work.

There is a legitimate debate to be had about border security, but to date the notion that the southern border is letting in droves of terrorists continues to be a fear rather than a reality. That some kids were smuggled across the border who then lived in the USA for two decades and ended up being part of a plan to attack Fort Dix hardly proves that the southern border is a major problem in regards to counter-terrorism.

Indeed, if al Qaeda is so smart that it was able (before it even existed, mind you) to smuggle in toddler sleeper agents who would one day be poised, in the post-911 world, to wreak havoc on New Jersey after some paint-ball training, well then we are as good as doomed and might as well quit now.

BTW, I am betting that the lack of immigration checks were as much about bureaucratic inefficiency and inadequacy as was some issue of giving sanctuary to illegal aliens who commit traffic violations. Further, the issue of whether city police are concerning themselves with immigration status has more to do with the fact that they don’t have the resources to be the INS and the local police at the same time as it does with any specific desire to create “sanctuary” per se (I know that some will object to my characterization, but there it is–indeed the whole question of what local law enforcement can and should do with illegals is a long and involved discussion and not as simplistic as many think that it is, but that is a side issue to this post).

Unfilled tunnels a weak link at border - Los Angeles Times:

Seven of the largest tunnels discovered under the U.S.-Mexico border in recent years have yet to be filled in, authorities said, raising concerns because smugglers have tried to reuse such passages before.

Among the unfilled tunnels, created to ferry people and drugs, is the longest one yet found — extending nearly half a mile from San Diego to Tijuana. Nearby, another sophisticated passageway once known as the Taj Mahal of tunnels has been sitting unfilled for 13 years, authorities say.

Though concrete plugs usually close off the tunnels where they cross under the border and at main entrance and exit points, the areas in between remain largely intact. Filling the seven tunnels would cost about $2.7 million, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials. Accessing tunnels that run under private property is also a problem, as is a lack of coordination with Mexican authorities.

[…]

In recent years nearly 50 tunnels have been discovered running under the border from San Diego to Arizona. Most are small, crudely constructed passages — called gopher holes — that are easily destroyed.

The frequently irrational nature of border policy is well illustrated here:  we can work towards building a fence, but we can’t find the cash to fill in tunnels.

And, of course, the tunnels themselves raise the question of whether the fence is a wise expenditure.  If we have extensive tunneling now in a non-fence world, imagine how many there will be in the future if the fence is ever constructed.

Some of the tunnels in question are listed below:

Some pretty amazing stuff.

Via NPR: Border Fence Firm Snared for Hiring Illegal Workers

The Golden State Fence Company’s work includes some of the border fence between San Diego and Mexico.

You just can’t make this stuff up.

h/t: Greg Weeks

Via Reuters: Bush signs border fence bill

The legislation did not provide funding for the fencing, but simply authorized its construction. Part of the funding for the fence, $1.2 billion, was included in a homeland security bill he signed earlier this month.

Congressional Republicans had passed the legislation weeks ago but held off sending the legislation to Bush for signing so it could be used as an election-year tool.

Democrats called the legislation a political stunt.

Gee, why would they say that? Just because the bill doesn’t provide any money and because it was delayed until two and half weeks before the election? Perish the thought!

Of course, I consider the entire fence notion to be a costly inefficacious stunt, so what do I know?

Border agents let fake IDs go through

Undercover investigators entered the United States using fake documents repeatedly this year — including some cases in which Homeland Security Department agents didn’t ask for identification.

At nine border crossings on the Mexico and Canadian borders, agents “never questioned the authenticity of the counterfeit documents,” according to
Government Accountability Office testimony to be released Wednesday.

I have no comment. I just cannot bring myself to say anything at the moment.

“This vulnerability potentially allows terrorists or others involved in criminal activity to pass freely into the United States from Canada or Mexico with little or no chance of being detected,” concluded the GAO.

Gee. Ya THINK?!

From Yahoo News.

Via Angus Reid Consultants: Riley Holds Upper Hand in Alabama Ballot

Incumbent Bob Riley could earn a new term as governor in Alabama, according to a poll by SurveyUSA released by WKRG-TV, 51 per cent of respondents in the Yellowhammer State would support the Republican, while 40 per cent would back Democratic lieutenant governor Lucy Baxley.

A separate study by Rasmussen Reports gives Riley a 14-point lead over Baxley.

Hardly a surprise. Indeed, I ultimately expect Riley to win by fve to six points.