The New Ellis Island: Visions from the border for the future of America

Border Network for Human Rights | 1

The root of the problemIf nothing else, we could all agree on this point. There is a prevailing narrative about the U.S. border and it is false and it is dangerous to border communities.

There are untruths out there about our border region that ultimately make it difficult for entrepreneurs to conduct business, for religious communities to serve as they see fit and for local and federal law agencies to keep the public safe. But these untruths also make it difficult for anyone to seek out rational policies for the border.

Together or independently, many of us had already tried to promote rational border policies. So far, those efforts have been stymied by rhetoric and political grandstanding. We see the evidence of this when Texas Gov. Rick Perry tries to underscore his political position that the border is not secure by saying that a car bomb has gone off in downtown El Paso. Despite this statement being completely false, it was quickly and widely reported. The sad fact is that the car bomb story, however false, fits the media and political narrative about life at the border.

We could all agree that we cannot just aim for impacting policy discussions. We have to start at the stories people are telling about us — the border narrative. And we came together as border community members and religious communities, border academics, local elected officials and law enforcement to face this challenge.

The Border Network for Human Rights asked representatives from all along the border including religious communities, border academics, local elected officials and law enforcement to gather a group of their peers to write a new narrative of the border. These documents represent each sector’s new vision to challenge the current, prevailing narrative.

It’s our belief that the border is a window into the future of the U.S. This is not just a demographic argument. We believe that policies tested at the border will one day make it into the interior. Whether those are policies of criminalization and militarization or policies of community development and the protection of peoples’ human rights remains to be seen.


Our common principles toward a new narrativeHere we examine the many commonalities found across each subsequent narrative

Today’s Border is Tomorrow’s America As many sectors with different philosophies and priorities came together to draft their vision for a better-understood border, several common principles emerged. They focused on security, the economy and human rights, issues of great importance for border communities. These principles deny the stereotypes generally applied to the border and decry the negative consequences that emerge from applying said stereotypes. By reestablishing the truth about border life, a new reality emerges and a new lesson can be learned: With its peaceful, diverse and dynamic present, the border provides a positive roadmap for the America of tomorrow.

1. The border is an asset to national security. The notion that the border is a national security threat, because it is porous to terrorists and immigrants, leads some to believe that we need to continue securing the border at great cost to the taxpayer. In reality, the border is not an area of national security threat, immigration is at an all time low, the security apparatus is at saturation levels and we should demand more quality than quantity when it comes to border security in the future.

In reality, the border is not an area of national security threat.

4 | Border Network for Human Rights

• Therearenothreatsofterrorismattheborder: According to the Department of State’s annual Country Reports on Terrorism (2011)1, “No known international terrorist organization had an operational presence in Mexico and no terrorist group targeted U.S. citizens in or from Mexican territory.”

• Immigrationisatanall-timelow: In 1999-2000, more than 700,000 Mexican immigrants came to the United States each year. By 2007, they were 280,000; then 150,000 in 2009 and even lower in 2010 (Pew Hispanic Center2).

Fences, technology, arresting immigrants and militarizing the border are strategies that don’t work and are a burden to the tax payer:

• AccordingtoareportbytheGovernmentAccountabilityOfficeentitled“BorderSecurity:DHS Progress and Challenges in Securing the U.S. Southwest and Northern Borders3” (2011) a total of $2.4 billion dollars has been spent in constructing the border wall which has failed to prevent people from entering the United States illegally. Illegal immigrants find other ways of entering the United States. For example, tunnels are now being created underground and are now being used to cross over into the United States. It will take an additional $6.5 billion dollars to maintain the border wall over the next 20 years. In 2010, there were 4,037 documented breaches that cost the tax payers an extra $7.2 million dollars to repair ($1,800 per breach). In total, the expense of the border wall is estimated at a sum of $16.1 billion dollars.

• TexasGovernorRickPerry’sVirtualBorderSurveillanceProgramhasalsobeenprovenin-effective. In a report produced by Brandi Grissom, a reporter for the Texas Tribune (2010)4 the goal of the program was to install 200 cameras along the Border Wall to help aid in at least an approximate 1,200 arrests. In reality, only 29 cameras have been installed and only 26 arrests have been made. A total of $4 million dollars has been spent in support of the VirtualBorderSurveillanceProgramatacostof$153,800perarrest.

• OperationStreamline,whichgoalistofunnelallapprehendedundocumentedmigrantsintothe federal criminal justice system and eventually into U.S. prisons, burdening the justice and prison systems with non-criminals, according to a study by Berkeley Law School.5 The

1 U.S. Department of State, Country Reports on Terrorism 2011, July 31, 2012, http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2011/195546.htm.2 Pew Hispanic Center, “Net Migration from Mexico Falls to Zero and Perhaps Less,” May 3, 2012, http://www.pewhispanic.

org/2012/04/23/net-migration-from-mexico-falls-to-zero-and-perhaps-less/3 GovernmentaccountabilityOffice,“DHSProgressandChallengesinSecuringtheU.S.SouthwestandNorthernBorders,March30,

2011, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-508T4 Texas Tribune, “Border Produce Little in Two Years,” April 20, 2010, Brandi Grissom, http://www.texastribune.org/search/?q=border+su

rveillance+program+brandi+&x=0&y=05 BerkeleyLawSchool,“AssemblyLineJustice:AReviewofOperationStreamline,”January2010,JoannaLydgate,http://www.law.

berkeley.edu/files/Operation_Streamline_Policy_Brief.pdf


study found that the operation created unprecedented caseloads in eight of the eleven fed-eral districts along the border, forcing many courts to cut prosecutorial corners by conduct-ing en mass hearings and distracting resources from criminal cases. Meanwhile, a report by National Public Radio6, found no deterrent effect on the likelihood that migrants would cross again.

Finally, military personnel and equipment deployed on the border have been costly and inefficient. The 1,200 National Guard troops posted on the border in 2010 have helped Border Patrol agents apprehend 25,514 illegal immigrants at a cost of $160 million — or $6,271 for each person caught, according to The Washington Post7. An internal Department of Homeland Security audit8 found that CBP used its nine Predator drones (purchased for around $18 million each) at only 37% of the minimum desired capacity. “Despite the current underutilization of unmanned aircraft, CBP received two additional aircraft in late 2011 and was awaiting delivery of a tenth aircraft in 2012,” the audit notes. According to statistics cited by The Washington Post9, the drone program led to the apprehension of 4,865 undocumented immigrants between 2006 and 2011 (compared with 327,577 captured in 2011 alone.)

Weshouldrethinkborderenforcementpoliciesandaimforquality,notquantity: Long-term goals related to border security need to be the vision of the U.S. Congress especially in regard to immigration and immigration enforcement to prevent inconsistencies in the implementation of federal programs throughout the nation. We can only build so many fences and pour so much money into hiring federal agents to place along the border. Passing comprehensive immigration reform should be part of this strategy.

2. Border communities are safe.A popular view of border communities is that they are unsafe because their are inhabited by a large immigrant population and because they are in the path of immigrants and immigrants are criminals. This misconception often leads to demands that local police enforce immigration laws. The reality is that most immigrants are not criminals, border communities have low crime levels

6 National Public Radio, “Claims of Border Program Success Are Unproven,” September 13, 2010, Ted Robbins, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129827870

7 The Washington Post, “National Guard Deployment on U.S.-Mexico Border Has Unclear Results,” December 5, 2011, William Booth, http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/national-guard-deployment-on-us-mexico-border-has-mixed-results/2011/11/21/gIQAly6qXO_story.html

8 Department of Homeland Security, “CBP’s Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the Nation’s Border Security, May 2012, http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/2012/OIG_12-85_May12.pdf.

9 Washington Post, “More Predator Drones Fly U.S.-Mexico Border,” December 21, 2012, William Booth, http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/more-predator-drones-fly-us-mexico-border/2011/12/01/gIQANSZz8O_story.html


and immigrants are often the ones who feel targeted and unsafe. To keep border communities safe, we should support community policing strategies that engage, not alienate, immigrant populations.

• Immigrantsarenotcriminals:A century of crime data finds that crime rates are lower for im-migrants than for native-born, research by the Immigration Policy Center10 found. Even as the undocumented immigrant population doubled since 1994, violent crime declined by a third and property crime by a quarter in the United States. In addition, immigrants are five times less likely to be in prison than native-born. Most undocumented immigrants are non-criminals, having only entered the country without the necessary paperwork, an administrative violation. It is their interaction with immigration authorities that earns them the label “criminal.” Under “OperationStreamline,”asharplyincreasednumberofundocumentedpersonsarebeingchargedin the U.S. criminal justice system for the federal crime of being here illegally.

• Bordercommunitieshavelowcrimerates:Despite a violent drug war that has devastated North-ern Mexico, the U.S. side of the border has been largely spared from a spillover. The crime rate in border counties is lower than in non-border counties and crime levels have been decreasing for years. According to a July 2011 USA Today11 report reviewing crime data from 1,600 law enforcement agencies in border cities in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California, homicide and robbery rates were lower than the states’ averages. They also found that “violent crime along the U.S.-Mexico border have been falling for years -- even before the U.S. security buildup that included thousands of law enforcement officers…” According to FBI data, from 2005 to 2010, in Texas, California, Arizona and New Mexico violent crimes rates went down 11%, homicide rates wentdown19%(WashingtonOfficeofLatinaAmerica12).

10 ImmigrationPolicyCenter,“ImmigrantsandCrime:AreTheyConnected?”,October25,2008,http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/immigrants-and-crime-are-they-connected-century-research-finds-crime-rates-immigrants-are

11 USAToday,“U.S.BorderCitiesProveHavensFromMexicoDrugViolence,”July18,2011,AlanGomez,JackGillumandKevinJohnson, http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-07-15-border-violence-main_n.htm

12 WashingtonOfficeonLatinAmerica,“BeyondtheBorderBuildup,”April2012,http://www.wola.org/files/Beyond_the_Border_Buildup_FINAL.pdf

Therealityisthatmostimmigrantsare not criminals, border communities havelowcrimelevelsandimmigrantsareoftentheoneswhofeeltargetedandunsafe.


• Immigrantsaretheoneswhofeelunsafebecauseofunfairtreatment:Several community or-ganizations along the border report that their immigrant communities suffer a high level of harassment by law enforcement and are living in fear of the police. This situation invariably materializes in locations where the local police chooses to enforce immigration laws. This leaves immigrants in a very vulnerable position: They may be afraid to report crime as a victim or a wit-ness if they fear they or their loved ones could be deported. Criminals have been known to prey on undocumented immigrants for this very reason.

We should support community policing for the safety of all:

• Alllawenforcementagenciesshouldbeaccountabletothecommunityandworkinpartner-ship with residents, including immigrants, because they are part of the solution.

• Locallawenforcementagenciesshouldrefrainfromenforcingimmigrationlawsonnon-criminals in their communities because 1) they do not have the resources to meet this unfunded mandate, 2) they are not experts in immigration law, 3) many officials doubt that asking people for papers could be done without engaging in racial profiling, and 4) it would undermine the trust and cooperation that officers have spent years building in immigrant communities. With this trust and respect comes cooperation from the community that offers law enforcement agencies to a reliable source of information that will help to protect the border area.

• Federalgrantstoborderstatesshouldtrickledowntolocallawenforcementagencies,hos-pitalsandprojectstoimprovecommunitysafetyandqualityoflife.TheCOPSgrants,forinstance,havepouredmoneyintoTexasbuttheElPasoCountySheriff ’sOfficehasbeenpassed over for two years.

• Weshouldopposeanti-sanctuarylawsthatwoulddenystatefundingtoanygoverningentity that prohibits local law enforcement from doing immigration checks.

3. The ports of entry deserve our attention.The widespread image of criminality at the border is of drug and people smuggling taking place in the stretches of wilderness between ports of entry and therefore, the conventional wisdom is that we need to to focus security resources there. Most of the criminal activity at the border, however, takes place at the understaffed ports of entry. In addition, all of the legitimate border crossings and trade takes place at ports of entry.


• MostofthedrugsthatentertheUnitedStatesatthebordercomeinthroughtheports-of-entry: According to the Department of Justice, 90% of illegal drugs entering the United States come through ports of entry, hidden in cargo shipments, cars or in pedestrians’ belongings, not be-tween ports of entry13.

• DrugmoneyandweaponscrossbackintoMexicoatportsofentry:Drug traffickers would not be able to operate if they weren’t able to import their profits back into Mexico or if they weren’t able to import high-powered, U.S.-made weapons. U.S. law enforcement concerning weapons and money going into Mexico exists, but has been found wanting as evidenced by the Fast and Furious operation in which the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives lost track of hundreds of firearms they allowed into the hands of Mexican drug cartels14.

• Yet,portsofentryareunderfundedcomparedwithenforcementeffortsbetweenportsofentry. A 2010 spending supplement added 1,000 new Border Patrol agents but just 250 new cus-toms agents at ports. In 2010, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol spent nearly $1 billion more onsecurityinbetweenportsthanatthem,accordingtotheGeneralAccountingOffice15. The president’s proposed 2012 budget funds 670 new Border Patrol agents but just 300 new CBP positions at ports16.

• Weneedtoinvestinourportsofentry:During a 2007 study by the Government Accountability Office,officialsmadethefollowingobservation.‘‘Atsevenoftheeightmajorportswevisited,officers and man- agers told us that not having sufficient staff contributes to morale problems, fatigue, lack of backup support and safety issues when officers inspect travelers—increasing the

13 U.S.HouseofRepresentativesCommitteeonHomelandSecurityHearing,“UsingResourcesEffectivelytoSecureOurBorderatPorts of Entry Stopping the Illicit Flow of Money, Guns and Drugs,” April 5, 2011, p. 57, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-112hhrg72225/pdf/CHRG-112hhrg72225.pdf

14 Los Angeles Times, “ATF’s Fast and Furious Scandal,” 2012, http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/atf-fast-furious-sg,0,3828090.storygallery

15 GovernmentAccountabilityOffice,“DHSProgressandChallengesinSecuringtheU.S.SouthwestandNorthernBorders,”March30,2011, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11508t.pdf

16 Homeland Security budget, 2012, http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/budget-bib-fy2012.pdf

Mostofthecriminalactivityattheborder,however,takesplaceattheunderstaffedports of entry.


potential that terrorists, inadmissible travelers and illicit goods could enter the country.’’17 It is essential that our ports of entry receive adequately staffing, technological support and infrastruc-ture maintenance and upgrade in order to increase vigilance and permit a smooth and orderly flow of border crossers.

4. The border economy is crucial for the nation.The border is often looked down upon as a depressed area of no overall importance for the economy of the United States. This view unburdens politicians from considering the economic impact of stringent, security-only measures and even allows them to regularly call for the United States to close the border. In reality, the border economy is thriving and security measure increasingly choke it and diminish its potential.

The border is an important economic hub for the border states and for the United States:

• MorepeoplecrosstheUS-Mexicoborder–morethan430,000perday--thananyotherborder in the world. According to the US Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 111 million passengers in personal vehicles, 2.7 million bus passengers, 40 million pedestrians, and 4.9 million trucks crossed to the United States from Mexico in 201118.

• AccordingtotheU.S.ChamberofCommerceborderreport(2010),Mexicohasbecomethe third largest U.S trading partner and is the second largest export market for U.S. busi-nesses. In 2011, Mexican exports to United States totaled $263 billion and U.S. exports to Mexico $198 billion, with the great majority coming from the four contiguous U.S. states. The report indicates that $1 billion of cross border commerce is taking place every day; this translates to $45 million an hour.

• Mexicoalsoservesasourlargestproviderofpetroleumandthelargestforeignsupplieroffresh produce such as fruits and vegetables with 80% of most products carried across the border by truck.

• OneineveryfiveU.Sjobsarelinkedtotheexportingandimportingprocessoftradeandcommerce. Thirty-one million American jobs are sustained due to doing cross border trade with Mexico 19.

17 GovernmentAccountabilityOffice,GAO–08–219,November5,2007,page7,http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GAO-08-192T/html/GAOREPORTS-GAO-08-192T.htm

18 Bureau of Transportation Statistics, http://www.bts.gov/data_and_statistics/19 U.S. Chamber of Commerce, “Steps to a 21st Century U.S.-Mexico Border,” 2010, http://www.uschamber.com/reports/steps-21st-

century-us-mexico-border


Securitymeasureschoketheeconomicflowontheborder. Ports of entry all along the border have reported increasing wait times in the past 10 years, from a former norm of about 20 minutes to the current delays up to three hours. These delays discourage tourists, shoppers and workers from crossing, a situation that leads to a sizable economic loss. According to the Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration, border wait time of an hour (in 2008) cost the United States economy $116 million per minute, 26,000 jobs, $6 billion in output, $1.4 billion in wages and $600 million in tax revenue annually. The cumulative loss in output due to border delays over the next ten years is estimated to be $86 billion.20 In addition, individuals stalled on the border are exposed to the health risks of pollution, heat exposure and fatigue.

Weshouldinvestholisticallyineconomicdevelopmentattheborder:Poverty is still a dim reality on the border. According to the Census Bureau’s Small Area Poverty and Income Estimates for 2009, the average percentage of those living below the poverty level in the 23 counties that border Mexico is 28.3 percent, or twice the national average21. The federal government should address needs in housing, education, water, environmental issues, not just security. Helping border residents thrive will help the region achieve its economic potential.

5. Border residents are treated differently when it comes to rights. Proponents of callous border security either do not believe that human and civil right are being violated at the border, or they don’t care that they are under the theory that immigrants are not entitled to such rights. The truth is that constitutional rights should apply on the border as they do everywhere in the United States but the reality is different.

Rightsareforeveryone: While it is the purview of nations to make and enforce immigration laws, these laws should not be used as a tool to deny core rights to person, regardless of immigration status.Ourcommonhumanityandourcommonvaluesofjustice,freedom,rights,equalityandopportunity connect us far more deeply than immigration status.

Theborderisa“de-constitutionalizedzone”thatpermitsalevelofgovernmentintrusionintoprivatelivesthatwouldbeunthinkableelsewhere: The so-called border search exception is an exception to the Fourth Amendment which normally requires that a search or seizure conducted by a government agent be reasonable and supported by reasonable cause, which the Supreme Court has

20 DepartmentofCommerce,InternationalTradeAdministration,“ImprovingEconomicOutcomesbyReducingBorderDelays,”2008, http://shapleigh.org/system/reporting_document/file/487/DRAFT_Reducing_Border_Delays_Findings_and_Options_vFinal_03252008.pdf

21 U.S. Census, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/


interpreted as meaning a warrant is required22. This means that border agents can search and detain U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens and their properties at the border and in border communities much more freely than police officers and without as much oversight.

Abuses of border residents are a real problem: • Themilitarizationoftheborderhasledtoatragicepisodeofexcessiveforcein1997when

an unarmed teenage goat herder named Ezequiel Hernandez was shot and killed by U.S. Marines in Redford, Texas, showing that military tactics are not appropriate for civilian policing.

• Agreatdealofabuseofpower,corruptionandmisconductbyCustomandBorderProtec-tion personnel continues unchecked, leading to the death of eight Mexican citizens in the pasttwoyears,a2012PBSdocumentaryrevealed.Nonehasresultedinindictment.Oneof them was Anastasio Hernandez-Rojas, who died after being beaten and shocked with a Taser by a group of CBP officers at the San Ysidro port of entry near San Diego.23

• Inadditiontothedeaths,bordergroupsandPBSdocumentedabusesinandoutofde-tention including sexual assault and harassment, verbal, psychological and physical abuse and torture, denial of water, food and medical care, deliberate overcrowding, separation of families, dangerous transportation at high speed in rough terrain and dangerous repatriation practices such as sending female deportees back to crime-ridden Mexican cities after dark.

• Humanrightstrainingandsupervisionareinsufficient: Since 2004, the number of Border Patrol agents along the Southwest border has increased by nearly 85% to more than 17,700 today24.

22 Congressional Research Service, “Protecting the U.S. Perimeter: Border Searches Under the Fourth Amendment,” June 29, 2009, Yule Kim,http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL31826.pdf

23 PBS,“NeedtoKnow:CrossingtheLineattheBorder,”April20,2012,BrianEpstein,http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/security/video-first-look-crossing-the-line/13597/

24 Department of Homeland Security, http://www.dhs.gov/secure-and-manage-our-borders

Thetruthisthatconstitutionalrightsshould apply on the border as they do everywhereintheUnitedStatesbuttherealityisdifferent.


This rapid expansion has been plagued by unsuitable hires, inadequate training, especially when it comes to human rights education, and a reduction in the ratio of supervisors to new agents, border organizations reported.

• Abusiveagentsareunaccountableandrarelyprosecuted: In a 2011 report, the Arizona group No More Deaths25 wrote that while the Border Patrol is quick to investigate and sanction agents for their involvement in drug trafficking, human smuggling or other corruption activities, they rarely address and investigate abuses against migrants. For instance, since January 2010, Arizona organizations have filed more than 75 complaints of Border Patrol abuse with the Department ofHomelandSecurity’sOfficeofCivilRightsandCivilLibertiesandnoactionhasbeentaken.Instead, officials routinely deny that abuses are taking place. No More Deaths blamed weak in-ternal accountability mechanisms, a culture that resists addressing human rights violations, the delegation of authority sector chiefs, the use of private contractors and a haphazard complaint process.

• Weincarceratenon-criminalimmigrantswhichisinhumaneandcostlytothetaxpayer:CBP immigration detention facilities or “hold rooms” are set up like law enforcement facilities ill-equipped to deal with women and children and other vulnerable populations. In addition, we spend an extreme amount of money on the detention of immigrants. According to a report by the National Immigration Forum, entitled The Math of Immigration Detention (2011)26, it costs $166 a day per immigrant detainee. There is an expected 33,400 immigrants who will be detained in 2012 and the costs continue to rise. There are other cost effective ways of monitor-ing the majority of immigrants who are not being convicted for serious crimes, such as electronic monitoring or release on one’s own recognizance. Taxpayers could save over $1.6 billion a year, an overall 80% reduction in annual costs, and a much more humane way to deal with economic migrants and families.

• U.S.citizenscanbethevictimofabusesontheborder: Many U.S. citizens of Hispanic descent have suffered from abusive treatment and racial profiling by CBP of themselves and their prop-erty (such as wrongful detentions and deprivation, and verbal and physical abuse) especially at the ports of entry.27

25 No More Death, “A Culture of Cruelty: Abuse and Impunity in Short-term U.S.Border Patrol Custody,” 2011, http://www.nomoredeaths.org/cultureofcruelty.html

26 National Immigration Forum, “The Math of Immigration Detention,” August 2012, http://www.immigrationforum.org/images/uploads/MathofImmigrationDetention.pdf

27 American Civil Liberties Union, “Border Agents Charged With Abusing U.S. Citizens and Non-Citizens Alike,” May 10, 2012, http://www.aclu.org/immigrants-rights/border-agents-charged-abusing-us-citizens-and-non-citizens-alike


Communities should get involved in keeping border agents accountable:

• Weshouldcreateanindependentborderenforcementoversightandaccountabilitycommis-sion that would include every sector on the border.

• Weshouldimprovethedocumentationofrightsabuses,requiringamorerobustsystemofaccess, oversight, and community engagement in documentation.

• Alllawenforcement,atthelocal,stateandfederallevels,shouldreceivethepropertrainingin civil and human rights that would best serve the border communities, including train-ing to deter from racial profiling and from violating the human rights against travelers or residents. A functional complaint system should be available in all agencies.

• Weshouldencouragetheparticipationofbordercommunitymembers,NGOsandcom-munity organizations in discussion with law enforcement agencies and legislators. Integrat-ingNGOsanddueprocessandcivilrightsprotectivemechanismsintotheenforcementprocesses can help preserve the rights of immigrants, and especially assist in dealing with victims of trafficking, refugees and children attempting to cross.

6. Migrant deaths are a preventable disaster.The notion that deaths of migrants at the border are few and unavoidable is a misconception that prevents us from saving the lives of men, women and children who are, in the great majority of cases, only trying to provide for their families. The reality is that the number of death at the border, from dehydration, exposure, drowning and assault are shockingly high and a direct result from U.S. border enforcement policies.

We should create an independent border enforcementoversightandaccountabilitycommission that would include every sector on the border.


• Migrantsdeatharesignificant: While illegal migration to the United States has fallen dramati-cally in recent years, migrant crossing deaths mostly from dehydration, heat stroke, and drown-ing remain extremely high. The Border Patrol reported roughly 360 migrant deaths in 201128, but these estimates count only known deaths and do not include those who perish in Mexico. Notonlyarebordercrossersdyingatrecordrates,butmanymigrantssuffercriminalpredation–dozens have been murdered in recent months -- before they reach the border.

• U.S.borderenforcementandimmigrationpoliciesplayalargepartinmigrantdeaths:We must recognize that U.S. policy has played a major role in encouraging undocumented immigration and pushing migrants to take life-threatening risks in the pursuit of a livelihood in the United States. Economic policy, with treaties such as NAFTA, have displaced agricultural workers in Mexico, causing them to emigrate to find work. Meanwhile, immigration policy with its quotas and delays has made it all but impossible for would-be migrants to obtain visas even though there is a demand for workers. And finally, the tightening of border security has pushed migrants farther into the unpatrolled rugged wilderness or into the clutches of smuggling and trafficking networks that prey on them29.

• Weshouldpushforcomprehensiveimmigrationreform: A bill that includes path to citizenship and a worker program to address current and future trends would de-incentivize immigrants from crossing the border illegally.

28 The Arizona Republic, “Migrant Deaths in Arizona Fell in 2011,” December 29, 2011, Daniel Gonzalez, http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2011/12/29/20111229arizona-migrant-deaths-arizona-fell-2011.html

29 National Foundation for American Policy, “Death at the Border,” May 2010, Stuart Anderson, http://www.nfap.com/pdf/0505brief-death-at-border.pdf

Therealityisthatthenumberofdeathatthe border, from dehydration, exposure, drowningandassaultareshockinglyhighandadirectresultfromU.S.borderenforcement policies.


7. The border is the Ellis Island of our time.From 1892 to 1954, over 12 million immigrants entered the United States through Ellis Island30, a small island in the shadow of the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor. Today, this modest portal is a national monument that receives almost 2 million visitors each year, visitors seeking to learn about the experience of their ancestors and other early immigrants who built America.

The border is the immigration portal of our time. Like Ellis Island, the border should become a place of pilgrimage where all can remember their family histories of crossing over, the struggles of establishing a foot-hold in a new country and the triumph of becoming American. Like Ellis Island the border should be celebrated as a symbol of hope, hard work and the American Dream.

30 The Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation, Inc., http://www.ellisisland.org/genealogy/ellis_island_history.asp


Rethinking the U.S.-Mexico Border Region from a Faith Perspective

As people of faith, we view the reality and potential of the US-Mexico border region through the lensofoursharedvaluesandbeliefs.Ourfaithimpelsustoenvisionanewrealityrootedinthestrength of our families, religious communities, civic associations, neighborhoods, colonias and cities. We believe that we must act as good stewards of the land we have inherited, must build on the traditions of hospitality that endure amidst the divisions in our region, and must cultivate the generosity of spirit that defines our communities at their best. We find these qualities in the day-to-day life of the border. We do not see them reflected in the reports of a violent, chaotic and lawless region.

Ourvaluesareexpansive.WebelieveintheGod-givendignityandequalityofallhumanbeings.We believe in solidarity with our brothers and sisters, particularly those in need. We identify with immigrants based on our own family histories and our religious convictions. We believe that our common humanity connects us far more deeply than immigration status. We think that laws should safeguard the well-being of all of our residents, and should not be used as a tool to deny core rights to any of us. We decry violence in its many forms as an affront to God and the human person. We support the need to secure our nation from attack and our communities from harm, but we believe that national security starts with human security.

We believe in a nation united not by race, religion or ethnicity, but by a shared commitment to values like justice, freedom, rights, equality and opportunity. We believe that sovereign states do not create rights, but exist to protect rights and to promote the common good. We respect state citizenship, but we believe more deeply in the Reign of God and citizenship in God’s kingdom. We believe that the border must serve the good of all of its residents, including new arrivals who havefledintenseprivationandpersecution.WeknowthatGodcrossesborders,accompanyingus–particularly the poor and marginalized -- wherever we go.


The Border We SeeThe border region contains great political, demographic, religious and cultural diversity. Its residents hold sharply divergent opinions on many issues. These differences can be complicated by the international character of the region and the way in which national policies play out in its communities. Before speaking to these challenges, however, we would like to make an obvious point. Despite our differences, many million border residents live cooperatively and peacefully with each other. They attend school, raise children, care for the elderly, comfort the afflicted, work, worship, recreate, socialize, celebrate and mourn together. The border is not primarily a testing ground for national policies, but an extraordinarily rich community that people from countless backgrounds and walks of life call home. It is a region of stark, physical beauty where family and community values thrive amidst intense poverty and artificial barriers; where young people promote a culture of peace in the face of appalling violence; and to which its residents feel passionately attached.

We believe that the vitality of this region and the needs of its residents receive insufficient consideration in the debates and policies that influence its life. We would like to highlight four overarching characteristics of the border region as we know it.

First, the border is a community shared by the residents of Mexico, the United States, Native American nations, and persons of countless nationalities, races and religions. As a result, its deepest aspirations cannot be realized and its most pressing challenges cannot be met in isolation. The 1983 La Paz agreement officially defined the region as the area within 100 kilometers, north and south, of the international line between the United States and Mexico. The region joins two nations, four US states and six Mexican states, 44 counties (24 contiguous to the international boundary), and 14 pairs of sister cities where more than 90 percent of its residents live.31 Its bi-

31 http://www.nmsu.edu/~bec/BEC/Readings/10.USMBHC-TheBorderAtAGlance.pdf

We support the need to secure our nation from attack and our communities from harm, but we believe that national security starts with human security.


national cities share air sheds, drainage basins, aquifers and ecosystems.32 Its inter-dependence also manifests itself in less edifying ways, as illicit drugs cross the border heading north, and drug profits and guns head south, fueling the horrific violence in Mexico.33

Second, the border is a case study in the anomalies and paradoxes of a globalized world. Goods, services, monies, and information flow with relative ease across the border. More than 40 ports-of-entry connect the two countries. Several million Mexicans possess border crossing cards that allow them to enter the United States for short periods to visit family, conduct business, shop, attend schoolandreceivehealthcare.MorepeoplecrosstheUS-Mexicoborder–morethan600,000per day -- than any other border in the world. According to the US Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), 125 million passengers in personal vehicles, 2.7 million bus passengers, 40 million pedestrians, and 4.7 million trucks crossed to the United States from Mexico in 2010.34 In 2011, Mexican exports to United States totaled $263 billion and US exports to Mexico $198 billion, with the great majority coming from the four contiguous US states.35

Hundreds of maquiladoras line the Mexican side of the border. Most are owned and supplied by US corporations. They assemble products for sale in the United States and throughout the world, employing hundreds of thousands of Mexican nationals and large numbers of workers in US border communities. Mexican workers regularly cross the border to purchase goods in U.S.U.S. stores.

In the globalized world, people will move, must move, and have the right to move to sustain themselves. Yet hundreds of thousands of Mexicans and others who have been displaced by globalization cannot legally cross borders in order to work. This fact offends the very logic of globalization, as do the substantial government subsidies provided to the U.S. agricultural industry that have made it impossible for small family farms in Mexico to survive. The region has seen significant lay-offs and displacement caused by the global economy, including the departure of theLeviStraussplantsinElPasoandtheRioGrandeValleyinthelate1990s,andtheclosureofmany maquiladoras in recent years.

Moreover,globalization–particularlyintheformoffreetradeagreements–hasnotmeaningfullyreduced poverty or inequality in the border region. The region has grown significantly, but remains riven by stark socio-economic divisions. According to U.S. Census Bureau statistics, the poverty rate in counties along border is twice the national average.36 Low-wage, dangerous jobs are endemic. If it were counted as a U.S. state, the border region would rank last in access to

32 http://www.usmcoc.org/b-nafta13.php 33 http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/newsroom/congressional_test/vv_guard.ctt/vv_guard.pdf 34 http://www.bts.gov/programs/international/transborder/TBDR_BC/TBDR_BCQ.html). 35 http://tse.export.gov/TSE/TSEhome.aspx36 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/average-poverty-rate-twice-high-us-counties-bordering-mexico-rest-us


health care; last in per capita income; first in the numbers of impoverished school children; and first in the number of children without health insurance.37 The region also contains thousands of unincorporated communities (colonias) that lack sufficient services and infrastructure.

Third, the border region has witnessed an unparalleled expansion in immigration enforcement over many years. Residents live in what has been characterized as a “de-constitutionalized” zone that permits a level of government intrusion in their lives that would be unthinkable elsewhere. Federal officials can board and search the vehicles of residents and access their property with scant restrictions. The number of Border Patrol agents has doubled over the last decade and increased more than five-fold in 20 years.38 Persons who illegally enter the country now face criminal prosecution,notsolelydeportation.Overthelast15years,largenumbersoflong-termresidentshave been detained and deported, countless families divided, and children separated from their parents. The Supreme Court has upheld, at least tentatively, a provision of Arizona’s SB 1070 that affords local police broad authority to enforce federal immigration law, thereby ensuring that many immigrants will not cooperate with the police. Arizona-like laws seek to deny unauthorized persons the ability to subsist as part of a deportation-by-attrition strategy. The reach and influence of the U.S. immigration enforcement system on border communities can be suggested by the fact that CBP’s budget alone rivals in size the “general fund” (local taxpayer-supported) budgets of all the counties that touch the international boundary.

While illegal migration to the United States has fallen dramatically in recent years, migrant crossing deaths remain extremely high. The Border Patrol reported roughly 360 migrant deaths in 2011, but these estimates count only known deaths and do not include those who perish in

37 http://www.nmsu.edu/~bec/BEC/Readings/10.USMBHC-TheBorderAtAGlance.pdf38 http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/180681.pdf; http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/border_security/border_patrol/usbp_

statistics/staffing_92_10.ctt/staffing_92_11.pdf;

IfitwerecountedasaU.S.state,theborderregionwouldranklastinaccessto health care; last in per capita income; firstinthenumbersofimpoverishedschoolchildren;andfirstinthenumberofchildren without health insurance.


Mexico.39 Not only are border crossers dying at record rates, but many migrants suffer criminal predation–dozenshavebeenmurderedinrecentmonths--beforetheyreachtheborder.Migrants who survive this gaunt let must negotiate a summary removal process, detention and possible criminal prosecution if they are apprehended.

The immigration enforcement build-up has been accompanied by a steady stream of rhetoric by nativist politicians and media figures on the violence and mayhem in the region. Religious communities know from painful experience the immense dangers that migrants face at the hands of smugglers and ordinary criminals on both sides of the border, and the way in which strict enforcement policies can exacerbate these threats. At the same time, the rates of violent crime in border communities have fallen precipitously over many years: border cities are far safer than similarly sized cities elsewhere in the country.40

The Border We Imagine Prophets denounce and announce. In the prophetic tradition, we denounce the stark inequalities in our communities, the high rates of poverty, the under-investment in children, the abuses against low-wage workers, the shortage of affordable health care, the polluted air and water, and the lack of basic infrastructure. We decry the attitudes of privilege, entitlement, selfishness and indifference that perpetuate these injustices. We denounce political and economic arrangements that uproot people and then prevent them from crossing the border legally in search of work. We denounce the horrific violence and the gross failure of the rule of law in Mexico. We denounce the illicit flow of firearms and drug profits from the United States that inflame this violence.

We denounce the obscenity of border crossing deaths, and the disappearance of this ongoing tragedy from the U.S. immigration debate and (even worse) from our national consciousness. We denounce the continued undercounting of deaths and the government’s failure to report on them consistently and accurately. We denounce abuses against migrants on both sides of the border. We stand with virtually all U.S. faith communities in denouncing immigration policies that separate families and that treat hard-working, self-sacrificing people like criminals and security threats. We believe that the border, as currently structured, does not express God’s will for us as children of God. We reject state laws that would deny fundamental human rights as a means to a dubious end. We decry the historical amnesia and false sense of entitlement that separates natives from newcomers, and that underlies the hostility and derision of recently arrived (U.S. citizen) border residents towards long-settled “unauthorized” residents. We denounce the failures and shortcomings of government policies on both sides of the border.

39 http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/180681.pdf40 http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-07-15-border-violence-main_n.htm


Building on the best traditions in our communities, we also wish to announce a new vision for the border region. We imagine a region that celebrates the shared values embedded in the different cultures and traditions of its residents. We see a place of hospitality, empathy and solidarity with newcomers, particularly those fleeing privation and persecution. We envision a region in which laws and policies reflect the needs, priorities and decisions of community residents. We imagine immigration policies that serve the needs of immigrants, their families, and sending and receiving communities, and that support local, regional, national and bi-national development and anti-poverty strategies. We see a region in which a misguided sense of patriotism does not separate residents from their neighbors.

We picture a border where virtually all migration is legal, not because the United States and Mexico cede their authority to regulate admissions, but because immigration laws align with the labor, family, development and protection needs of residents, visitors and passers-through. We see a region in which laws safeguard God-given rights and promote the common good. We envision a region in which constitutional rights and protections fully apply to its residents.

We see a region that has maximized its potential as a conduit for tourism, economic development, job creation and trade relations. We hope for a region that has made meaningful progress in addressing its shared environmental, public health, education, and economic challenges. We picture a place in which the benefits of economic globalization are broadly and equitably shared through robust enforcement of environmental and labor standards, living wage laws, and fair trade rules. We envision trade agreements that provide meaningful support to the human beings that they displace, and that allow them to travel legally across borders in pursuit of employment. We see a region where globalization has been infused with an ethic of solidarity and a commitment to the well-being of its residents.

Weseeaplaceofpilgrimagewhere–likeEllisIsland--residentsandvisitorscanremembertheirfamilyhistoriesofcrossingover,livingas“strangers,”andstrugglingforafoot-holdintheirnewcountry.


We imagine a border that is no longer characterized by walls, migrant deaths, illegality, human and drug trafficking, and violence in all of its forms. We see a place of opportunity and encounter. Weseeaplaceofpilgrimagewhere–likeEllisIsland--residentsandvisitorscanremembertheirfamily histories of crossing over, living as “strangers,” and struggling for a foot-hold in their new country. We imagine a region which, 50 years from today, serves as a symbol of hope for border communities throughout the world. We picture a border that crosses, but does not divide families and communities. We see a border of faith communities converted by their own core values and beliefs. We envision a gathering place for God’s scattered children, where residents and visitors in all their diversity can work together to build the human family. We hope, pray, and vow to work for such a border.

Authored by:DonaldKerwin,CenterforMigrationStudies,NewYorkJoanne Welter, Catholic Diocese of Tucson, AZMichaelSeifert,EqualVoiceNetwork,RioGrandeValley,TXRev. John Fife, Presbyterian, Tucson, AZHectorRodriguez,Social&EconomicJusticeOfficeoftheEpiscopalChurch,NationalFarmWorker MinistryLuzdy Stuckey, Mennonite Central Committee MikeWilson,TohonoO’dhamNation,BorderActionNetworkRabbi Larry Bach, Temple Mt. Sinai, El PasoAnnie Wilson, Lutheran Immigrant Refugee Services West Cosgrove, Border Network for Human Rights

Endorsed by: Monsignor Arturo J. Bañuelas, El Paso, TX

Sr. Rosemary Welsh, Laredo, TX

Ruben L. Garcia, Executive Director, Annunciation House, Inc., El Paso, TX

Rev.KellyS.Allen,Pastor,UniversityPresbyterianChurch,SanAntonio,TX

SharonAltendorf,PBVM,JusticeContact,U.S.ProvinceofPresentationSistersoftheB.V.M.,SanAntonio,TX

Sr. Barbara Sullivan

Sr.CorinaPadillaOP,DomincanSistersofPeace,Tucson,AZ

Fr. Bill Remmel, SDS, Most Holy Trinity Catholic Church, Tucson, AZ

Jacqueline White Ph.D., RN, Secretary, Corporate Board of Directors Most Holy Trinity Parish, Tucson, AZ

Rita Smiling, St. Philip’s in the Hills Episcopal Church, Tucson, AZ

Petra Falcon, Executive Director, Promise Arizona

Rev. Julia B. Johnson, St. Phillips in the Hills, Tucson, AZ.

Rev.SeanCarroll,SJ,ExecutiveDirector,KinoBorderInitiative,Nogales,AZ

Fr. Pat Murphy, CS, Director, Casa del Migrante, Tijuana, Mexico

David Hollenbach, S.J., Director, Boston College Center for Human Rights and

International Justice

RegMcKillip,OP,SistersofMercyInstituteJusticeTeam

Rev. Mari Castellanos D. Min Justice and Witness Ministries United Church of Christ, Washington D.C.

WinifredDoherty,Representative,CongregationofOurLadyofCharityoftheGoodShepherd,NewYork,NY

Fr. Leonir M. Chiarello, Executive Director, Scalabrini International Migration Network, New York, NY

Br.KevinCawley,EdmundRiceInternational,NewYork,NY

Clare Nolan Good Shepherd International Justice Peace Training Facilitator, Sisters of the Good Shepherd, New York, NY

Griselda Martinez Morales CSJ, Main Representative, Congregations of Saint Joseph, New York, NY

Rev. Rosanna C. Panizo, The Corridor District. Hispanic / Latino Ministries Coordinator, The North Carolina Conference, The United Methodist Church, Durham, NC

Rev.DanielDaríoRobayoHidalgo,Rector,EmmanuelEpiscopalChurch,Harrisonburg,VA

Sr. Rose Marie Tresp, Director of Justice, Sisters of Mercy South Central Community, Belmont, NC

GeorgeKanuck,Co-ChairLowcountryImmigrationCoalition,HiltonHead/Bluffton,SC

GeorgeKanuck,SocialJusticeAdvocate,Unitarian-UniversalistCongregationoftheLowcountry,HiltonHead/Bluffton,SC

Eric Esquivel, Co-Chair, Lowcountry Immigration Coalition, Hilton Head / Bluffton, SC

Sr.MarthaHernandez,Coordinator,SisterofOurLadyofCharity

Diane Randall, Executive Secretary, Friends Committee on National Legislation, Washington D.C.

Barbara Dawson, RSCJ, Provincial, Leadership Team of the Society of the Sacred Heart, United States Province, St. Louis, MO

RosaHernandez,OurLadyofCharity

StevePaveyPh.D.SeniorResearchScientist,OneHorizonInstitute,Lexington,KY

Catherine Ferguson SNJM, Superior General, Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary

Rev. Paula Clayton Dempsey, Minister for Partner Relations, Alliance of Baptists

Carol Blythe, President Alliance of Baptists

Sr.NoelleO’SheaCSJ

Carolyn Jaramillo, The Latin America Caribbean Committee of the Loretto Community

ElenaSegura,Director,OfficeofImmigrantAffairs&ImmigrantEducation,ArchdioceseofChicago,Chicago,IL

Fr. Leonardo Rocha, CS, Roman Catholic Priest

Margaret Mayce, Representative, Dominican Leadership Conference, New York, NY

CharlesW.Dahm,OP,Co-Coordinator,JusticeandPeaceforDominicansinNorthAmerica,Chicago,IL

Francisco J. Murray, Passionists International

VeryRev.ThomasH.Smolich,SJ,President,JesuitConferenceoftheUnitedStates

Rev. Richard Zanotti, CS, Missionaries of St. Charles, Scalabrinians

MaryEllenGondeck,CSJ,Member,OfficeofPeaceandJustice,CongregationofSt.Joseph,MadisonHeights,MI

Jim Perdue, Coordinator for Immigration and other social concerns, National Plan for Hispanic / Latino Ministry, United Methodist Church

CeliaMartin,NDS,SistersofOurLadyofSion,Brooklyn,Brooklyn,NY

CeliaDeutsch,SistersofOurLadyofSion,Brooklyn,Brooklyn,NY

Sr. M. Roswitha Wanke, RGS, Province Coordinator, Province of Germany / Albania of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd

Sr.DanielaKubiak,RGS,ProvinceLeader,ProvinceofGermany/AlbaniaoftheSistersoftheGoodShepherd

Sr. Sally Duffy, SC, President, SC Ministry Foundation

Carol Regan, SUSC, Holy Union Sisters


DinaPotter,ShortTermRepresentative,UnionoftheSistersofthePresentationoftheBlessedVirginMary,U.S.Province,New York, NY

Sr.LoisGreene,PBVM,Asst.CongressionalLeader,SistersofthePresentationofNewfoundlandandLabrador

JudyMannix,RGS,SistersoftheGoodShepherd,St.Croix,USVirginIslands

Fr.RonOakham,O.Carm,Pastor,St.CyrilofAlexandriaCatholicParish

Fr.VincenzoL.Ronchi,CS,Administrator,R.CatholicChurchofSt.JosephPatronoftheUniversalChurch, Brooklyn, NY

Rev.JosefinaBeecher,EpiscopalDioceseofOlympia

KatherineSalinaro,Deacon,EpiscopalChurch,DioceseofCalifornia

JohnConverset,Director,JPICOffice,ComboniMissionaries,NorthAmericanProvince

Rev. Deborah Fox, Chaplain, Episcopal Campus Ministry Raleigh, Raleigh, NC

Sr. Anne Curtis RSM, Institute Leadership Team, Sisters of Mercy of the Americas, Silver Spring, MD

Rev. Christine Leigh-Taylor, Rector, St. Clement’s St. Clement’s Episcopal Church Church, Rancho Cordova, CA

Bill Mefford, Director, Civil and Human Rights, United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society, Washington D.C.

Newland F. Smith 3rd, Member, Diocese of Chicago Peace and Justice Committee

Fr. Richard J. Aguilar, Episcopal Priest, Unite HERE, local 355, Miami, FL

Carol Barton, Executive for Community Action, United Methodist Women Immigrant & Civil Rights Initiative, United Methodist Women, New York, NY

Rev.FredKammer,SJ,ExecutiveDirector,JesuitSocialResearchInstitute/LoyolaUniversityNewOrleans, NewOrleans,LA

Bro.BrianMcLauchlin,SVD,DivineWordMissionaries,Chicago,IL

Organizations Endorsing: United Methodist Women

United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society

General Board of Global Ministries of The United Methodist Church


Lessons on community security from the El Paso experience: A border narrative by a local border law enforcement executive

El Paso is a very unique and diverse West Texas city. In the 2010 census, the city had a population of approximately 650,000. It is the sixth-largest city in Texas and the 19th-largest city in the United States. Its metropolitan area is within El Paso County, whose population in the 2010 census was approximately 800,000.

El Paso stands on the Rio Grande, across the border from Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico. The two cities form a combined international metropolitan area, sometimes called Juarez-El Paso, with Juarez being the significantly larger of the two in population. Together they have a combined population of 2.3 million, with Juarez accounting for 2/3 of the population. In 2010 El Paso was awarded an All-American City Award; this prestigious award is the oldest community recognition program in the nation.

El Paso is home to the University of Texas at El Paso and the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center at El Paso. Fort Bliss, one of the largest military complexes of the United States Army, lies to the east and northeast of the city, with training areas extending north into New Mexico, up to the White Sands Missile Range and neighboring Holloman Air Force Base in Alamogordo.

The Border Area in West Texas was a quiet peaceful place back in the 1950s and 1960s. Citizens from both sides frequently crossed the international border to go shopping, eat or drink at restaurants and bars or visit relatives. In the 1970s and 1980s those days were replaced by the hustle and bustle of the maquiladora industry, and there was still frequent daily interaction between U.S. and Mexican Citizens. Unfortunately about this same time the Mexican Drug TraffickingOrganizationsbegantoflourish.Inthe1990sandearly2000stheseorganizationshad


a strong foothold in the area and in late 2006 their greed and egos set the wheels in motion for the war that was to kill over 7,240 Juarez residents in narcotics related executions. The war not only caused devastation in Juarez, Chihuahua (230,000 residents fled, 6,000 businesses closed, 100,000 abandoned homes) but it also impacted our border society by severely limiting the daily interactions between the citizens of both countries. While violence continues to take place in Juarez, El Paso has a different story to tell. A city of law abiding citizens who work hard every day to support their families and make their community a better place to live, work and play. Citizens trust and respect a Police Department and Sheriff ’sOfficethatareCALEAaccreditedandsupportthephilosophyofCommunityPolicing.Additionally, because we are a large city on a border with major ports of entry, we are home to many other law enforcement agencies from the U.S. Federal government and the State of Texas.

There is a cooperative working relationship between federal, state, county and local law enforcement agencies in El Paso This is certainly one of the reasons that El Paso has been recognized as the safest large city (over 500,000 populations) by CQ Press which produces the Annual Safest City Award. Prior to this recognition, El Paso has been named either the 2nd or 3rd safest large city for the last 12 years. Quite an accomplishment given the situation currently taking place in Juarez.

There have been significant staffing increases in the Border Patrol, ICE, ATF and other federal agencies and this has clearly had a positive impact on preventing “spill-over” violence as well as maintainingasenseofsecurityinourcommunity.Ofcourse,thereneedstobeacleardistinctionbetween criminal issues that fall within the jurisdiction of local and county law enforcement and federal issues such as immigration, that are the sole responsibility of the U.S. Federal Government.

Leaders of the U.S. Border Patrol will tell you that the vast majority of undocumented immigrants that come to the U.S. do so because of economic reasons. And, it is clearly understood that the U.S. Federal Government is responsible for securing our national borders and dealing with the issues of illegal immigration. Recent statistics from Homeland Security show that Border Patrol

While violence continues to take place in Juarez,ElPasohasadifferentstorytotell.


apprehension–akeyindicatorofillegalimmigration–havedecreased36percentinthepasttwoyears, and are less than half of what they were at their peak.

Prior to the increase in staffing for the Border Patrol, there were calls by some in Congress to have local and county law enforcement officers engage in federal immigration enforcement. This is bad policy for the following reasons:

1. Local and county law enforcement does not have the resources to take on additional responsibil-ities. They belong in the neighborhoods of our communities providing the services of crime pre-vention and order maintenance. They should not be pulled out of the neighborhoods to have to handle a federal responsibility. Additionally, recent reports indicate that while local and county law enforcement agencies are having to cut back on staffing and equipment (due to loss of both local revenue and access to federal and state grants), federal agencies have actually maintained staffing levels or seen increases.

2. Federal immigration law is complex and contains both criminal and civil penalties. Mistakes are made by those whose sole job is immigration enforcement. Local and county law enforce-ment has enough statutes, codes, case law, etc. to learn and apply and should not be expected to become experts in immigration enforcement.

3. If a local or county officer does enforce immigration law and then makes a mistake, who is going to represent the officer in court and who is responsible to pay any settlements or judgments. The local taxpayer should not be burdened with this added expense.

4. Lastly and most importantly, it will undermine the trust and cooperation of immigrant com-munities. People may be afraid to report crime as a victim or a witness if they fear that police will ask them to prove their citizenship. Criminals have been known to prey on undocumented immigrants for this very reason. Also, is the issue of officers stopping people to ask for their immigration status. The safety and security of everyone in the city/county is clearly the main re-sponsibility of local and county law enforcement. This responsibility can and must be discharged without engaging in racial profiling which, by its very nature, is illegally invasive of personal liberties.

It is unquestionable that federal, state, county and local law enforcement must work together and collaborate to make our communities safe. El Paso is a good example of this collaboration and cooperation resulting in a success achieved by few other large cities.


Where the issue is solely the responsibility of one level of government, those agents are responsible for carrying out their duties. For example, the security of our nation’s borders and the resulting immigration issues are the responsibility of the federal government and this responsibility is shared by everyone in our nation, not just by taxpayers that happen to live along the border. Traffic enforcement, on the other hand, is the responsibility of local and county government and as such, is handled by local and county law enforcement.

However, where the issues cross over jurisdictions, such as drugs, human trafficking and smuggling, andcertaincriminaloffenses,wemustanddoworktogether.TheElPasoCountySheriff ’sOfficeis part of the Southwest High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA). We work with the U.S. Border Patrol on Stonegarden operations. We assist ICE by fingerprinting and identifying bodies from the Juarez violence in order to gain intelligence. And, because of the desolate areas of El Paso County in which back-up is few and far between for federal and county officials who work in these areas, we assist each other on calls to provide for officer safety.

The El Paso / Juarez metroplex will continue to be a vibrant and dynamic community that will continue to grow with the certain influx of military and medical industry, among others. Long-term goals related to border security need to be the vision of the U.S. Congress especially in regard to immigration and immigration enforcement to prevent inconsistencies in the implementation of federal programs throughout the nation. We can only build so many fences and pour so much money into hiring federal agents to place along the border.

Long-term goals and objectives of our federal government need to be clear and consistent. The federal governments’ enforcement efforts are not sustainable given economic realities. As such, comprehensive immigration reform with a shared vision of local communities along the border is needed in order to ensure the prosperity of our country.

Authored by:El Paso County Sheriff Richard Wiles

We can only build so many fences and pour somuchmoneyintohiringfederalagentstoplacealongtheborder.


Two alternative paths to the future: A vision from border scholars

A concern specific to the academic sector is poor communication of results and analysis of sound scholarly research into public decisions and public opinion formation. For example, the U.S. side of the border has low rates of violence, unlike the Mexican side of the border. However, the U.S. side is often viewed as violent and risky. Bridging this gap between narratives and research information—which will take concerted effort on all parts—is crucial, since public policies need to be based on realistic understanding of the world as well as thoughtful value choices. Scholars must do a better job of doing policy-relevant research and communicating it to the public. Community-based organizations from the border and elsewhere must create a political climate that allows the reception of realistic knowledge about the border. The media should go beyond superficial, panic-mongering depictions, including seeking out knowledgeable researchers for information and contextualization. And politicians must take responsibility for seeking, accepting, and broadcasting well-grounded information and analysis. Facts by themselves do not convince people; facts must be supported by a constructive and receptive narrative in the public domain.

The defining characteristics of the border today are threefold. 1. Continental, indeed global scale flows of investment capital, manufacturing, commodity trade,

and migration. This has resulted in a high degree of economic dynamism, but low levels of plan-ning for and investment in human communities and the environment.

2. Governmental regulation of flows of people and commodities into both nations, Mexico and the United States. This has been concentrated on policies of police-military control of illegalized flows, in particular immigration and drug law enforcement on entries into the United States. Law enforcement concerning weapons and money going into Mexico exists, but is underfunded, considering the level of criminality and violence in Mexico. As a result of U.S. enforcement-oriented policies, some of them projected into Mexico, most investments in the border region go

into enforcement, not civilian development. This is exacerbated by well-documented issues of deaths, promotion of criminal enterprises, and violation of human and constitutional rights.

3. A socio-culturally distinctive regional population, burgeoning in size and importance. The

border region has a long history of interchange between the two countries, resulting in personal linkages, cultural brokerage, bilingualism, and social-economic dynamism and creativity. This is reinforced by the centrality of the border zone to continental and global development, stimulat-ing the rapid demographic growth of the region. But it is also neglected in the standard “border as risk” narrative, and negatively affected by the lack of investment in community needs and environmental justice during a period of poorly planned, rapid expansion.

Two possible paths face us over the next 50 years. 1. Areductionoftheregiontoopposedclassesofgovernmentenforcementagencies(andtheiremploy-

ees)andlarge,capablecriminalorganizations.This can be termed the “police and thieves” future. It is likely that this would ultimately negatively affect the climate for global/continental trade and manufacturing, due to violence and slowed movement of people and goods, and the civilian economy of the region would shrink. The academic sector expressed strong concern about this path of regional development.

OR:

2.TheemergenceoftheborderregionasaprimarycenterforNorthAmericandevelopment,takingadvantageofitsbicultural,bilingual,andbinationalpopulation.This will require investment in its current communities, which have great potential, but lack currently sufficient planning, services, infrastructure, and human development. Global/continental trade and manufactur-ing will be a main base for this future border, but with more attention to coherent planning and integrated social development. While aware of social and environmental flaws in this path of border economic development, the academic sector still sees this as offering more promising potentials for integral human development than the “police and thieves” scenario. Enforcement will shift from mass migration and commodity drug flows toward smaller numbers of high-risk criminals and threats to civilian safety. Border crossing will become easier and less costly for le-gitimate visitors, shoppers, traders, and manufacturers. Not only will continental scale commerce benefit, but also other kinds of economic potential in the borderlands, such as small-scale trade (sometimes called globalization from below), that will flourish on the basis of regional bicultural, binational skill sets.


The three main general challenges for border development are:

1.Rapideconomicgrowthatrelativelylowwages. This results in rapid urban population growth, with little or no investment in physical and social infrastructure (e.g., shortage of well-serviced but inexpensive housing or sites to build, resulting in marginal self-built communities).

2.Theinternationalborderresultsinverylimitedbinationalplanningandcoordination,despite cross-border linked development and shared issues (such as potential emergencies).

3.ThemassmigrationanddrugenforcementpoliciesoftheUnitedStates,plusclumsyandrepressivemilitarizationinMexico(supportedbytheUnitedStates) have set back social development (e.g., reduced participation in democracy) and even in some regards economic development (e.g., slowed down and sometime arbitrary border crossing through standard ports of entry).

The main general opportunity for the border region is that it is very dynamic, with excellent bilingual, bicultural, and binational human resources. Unlike many areas of entrenched poverty in the United States or Mexico, the region has both the potential economic wealth to tap and outstanding human energy to create a region of integral human development. Investment in education at all levels, from kindergarten to graduate school, can make a large difference. Utilizing some revenues from economic development to address democratically selected planning goals is essential. An example is the need but also the possibility for coherent water resource planning, achieving both access and sustainability in this arid to semi-arid region. This sun-drenched region is also well suited for research and implementation of alternative energy technologies. Binational planning will be particularly challenging, because of national institutions and political cultures, but it represents a vital frontier for cutting-edge development. A good example of the need for a truly binational approach to planning, and also a positive vision for border agencies rather than only restrictive enforcement, is joint preparation for cross-border emergencies (public health, natural disasters, hazardous wastes, etc.).


There are two main challenges in particular in border enforcement. 1.Thecreepingspreadof“securitization”ofsocietalissues. Securitization refers to treating issues as

threats to the very existence of civilian life, as if they are matters of fundamental national secu-rity. It justifies huge investments in police and military resources, and reduced rights and demo-cratic values (accountability, participation, etc.). Some phenomena clearly do threaten civilian lives, such as violent criminal organizations, but many issues not of that nature (e.g., labor and family migration, health effects of substance abuse) have been securitized with negative effects at the border.

2.AninequitablefocusonU.S.-drivenconcerns,migrationanddrugs(whicharethensecuritized) with less focus on Mexican concerns, money going to criminal organizations and especially the southbound smuggling of weapons and munitions. More widely, the border is driven by U.S. interior obsessions, and is not producing greater real security of border dwellers of either nation, interior dwellers in Mexico, or even interior dwellers inside the United States.

Border enforcement, however, does present genuine and clearly visible opportunities. We do not hold that there should be no organized border enforcement, but rather that it should start from the principle of reducing the threat of arbitrary physical harm to civilians, both border residents and passing migrants. Border enforcement should focus on high-priority threats of violence;

We do not hold that there should be no organizedborderenforcement,butratherthat it should start from the principle of reducingthethreatofarbitraryphysicalharm to civilians, both border residents andpassingmigrants.


otherwise, legislation and regulation should be used to address social issues such as migration and drug consumption. Enforcement in the short term should be focused on weakening the money and guns driving criminal organizations. Likewise, enforcement should concentrate on selected individuals and flows, rather than mass arrests and interdictions. Ports of entry are a complicated topic, since enforcement there makes sense but also threatens to slow down border visiting and trade, but some form of smart enforcement at ports needs to be prioritized over expensive and unproductive measures such as walls, mass Border Patrol operations, and military technologies, tactics, and personnel.

The border can become the source of a new, more thoughtful, more effective, and more civilian-safety oriented policing approach for the entire North American continent.

A combination of factors could bring about a realization of our vision of the borderAs we have said, the academic sector can and should provide excellent scientific and humanistic research and analysis. But this can only have an effective in combination with mass democratic participation by border residents, especially through community organizations, in conjunction with border politicians who are leader-servants. Likewise, key actors from the private sector need to step forward and lead in favor of what we called Path 2 above, the border as dynamic civilian economy.

Specifically,bordercommunityorganizationsneedtogainvoiceandposition--–notonlyalongtheborder but also in national narratives--to hold agencies in both nations of all types (and especially police and military agencies) accountable to the public. Practices of democratic participation need to be cultivated inside and between the two nations, not just by voting but by constant community education and consultation; politicians and businesspeople need to cultivate this participation rather than avoiding it. Democratic participation requires, of course, respecting the rights of individuals and minority groups. Democratic participation needs to be conducted consistently in a bilingual and bicultural fashion, befitting the regional population. State agencies need to be respectful of the public and its dignity and rights while at the same time being effective at their jobs; change in bureaucracies and upper leadership takes place when they face a strong public with knowledge and voice. The border should become a demonstration region for a new deepening of active democracy in both nations, and in particular for the growing Latin@ population of the United States and the newly democratizing public of Mexico.


Underlying values and principles that shape our vision for the borderThis can be divided into general (non-border specific, but border-applicable) values and specific border values. The general values of course deserve a lengthy discussion, but briefly can be categorized in three parts:

1.Rights, drawing on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and on constitutional rights in the United States and Mexico;

2. Capabilities, a concept developed by Amartya Sen to encompass the resources needed to exercise genuine freedom of action (thus, income, education, health care, nutrition, and so forth); and

3.Dignity, the quality of mutual and equitable respect among persons of all backgrounds. Each of these presents serious challenges and opportunities when applied at the border. The border enforcement process, for example, often impinges seriously on rights. Marginalized households and communities on both sides of the border have serious deficits in terms of capabilities, such as public utilities and services. And the stigmatization of Mexican origin people, and border people more generally, injures their dignity in painful ways. Yet each critical statement based on these values also represents a positive vision for how we can seek to fulfill our values.

Importantly, the academic sector—both as scholars and as long-time border residents—gave particular value to positive vision of border life. Border life is a rich tapestry of personal relationships, geographic visits, cultural exchanges, linguistic interaction, and so forth. Borders offer a special place to combine ordinarily separate nations and societies/cultures. This is a special source of creativity and future potential. The increased securitization of the border undercuts the

Thisisaspecialsourceofcreativityandfuturepotential.Theincreasedsecuritizationoftheborderundercutsthe conditions for this special value of the border.


conditions for this special value of the border. But the positive future of the border outlined above as Path 2 builds on this quality of the border as a distinct and important asset.

How to measure success when it comes to border operationsFor rights, we see the documentation of rights violations as essential, including deaths and other physical and legal harms. This requires a more robust system of access, oversight, and community engagement in documentation. Success would be accountability for rights violations, well-documented reductions in them, and sustainable approaches to systematically reduce their occurrence.

For capabilities, there is a well-developed human quality of life index applied specifically to the border in Joan Anderson and James Gerber, Fifty Years of Change on the U.S.-Mexico Border. This can be used to track improvement in border quality of life. In particular, there needs to be improvement across social classes and in both nations, not just in overall averages—and this can be tracked using the methods in Anderson and Gerber. A specific capability, security against arbitrary violence—objectively and subjectively experienced—done by both state and non-state actors, needs to be tracked independently of biased agendas of “securitization” by the two nation-states (this obviously overlaps with the discussion of rights measures just above).

For dignity, we need sensitive but objective scholarship on the quality of everyday interactions, especially across social lines, both across the border (between Mexicans and Northamericans) and within each country. We need to examine also the dignified portrayal of the border region throughout both nations. While dignity is the least well developed area of measures of success, we consider it important and worth developing.

In response to the first question, we outlined two possible futures. For the securitization-based first path, which we would not consider a “success,” we can measure the percentage of police and military and criminal organization expenditures, employment, etc., as a proportion of the entire border region economy—in other words, are we seeing a trend toward a regional society made of police and thieves. The rights and security measures described just above are also sensitive indicators of this path.


The other path, that builds on the binational-bicultural-bilingual character of the border, can be measured by looking for evidence of this region as a dynamic source of innovation and leadership in North America, in social, cultural, political, and economic terms (note: economic growth is important but cannot be the sole measure of this path). We expect positive developments in measures of capabilities and dignity to be associated with the unfolding of this path. Internal to the region, we can measure integration of economic growth into balanced, cohesive, planned development, both within and across nations, and evidence of greater binational cooperation and coordination across a variety of domains.

Authored by:Josiah Heyman, University of Texas at El Paso

Endorsed by:Robert R. Alvarez, University of California, San DiegoHoward Campbell, University of Texas at El PasoErnesto Castañeda, University of Texas at El PasoLeo Chavez, University of California, IrvineSusan Bibler Coutin, University of California, IrvineMiguel Diazbarriga, University of Texas PanamericanMargaret E Dorsey, University of Texas PanamericanRoxanne Doty, Arizona State UniversityMerrill Eisenberg, University of Arizona (retired)Julie A. Murphy Erfani, Arizona State UniversityIñigo García-Bryce, New Mexico State UniversityNeil Harvey, New Mexico State UniversityJosiah Heyman, University of Texas at El PasoYolanda Leyva, University of Texas at El PasoMark Lusk, University of Texas at El PasoCecilia Menjivar, Arizona State UniversityRaymond J. Michalowski, Northern Arizona UniversityMaria Cristina Morales, University of Texas at El PasoEva Moya, University of Texas at El PasoAurelia Lorena Murga, University of Texas at El PasoGuillermina Gina Núñez-Mchiri, University of Texas at El PasoAnnaOchoaO’Leary,UniversityofArizonaTony Payan, University of Texas at El PasoLuis F.B. Plascencia, Arizona State UniversityDoris Marie Provine, Arizona State UniversityNestor P. Rodriguez, University of Texas at AustinMary Romero, Arizona State UniversityRaquel Rubio Goldsmith, University of ArizonaRogelio Saenz, University of Texas at San AntonioJeffrey P. Shepherd, University of Texas at El PasoRichard J. Schaefer, University of New MexicoDavid Spener, Trinity University (Texas)KathleenStaudt,UniversityofTexasatElPasoSusan Tiano, University of New MexicoMarcelaVásquez-León,UniversityofArizona


Changing Discourse: the local government perspective on issues facing the United States International Border

U.S. International Border: Brief Facts According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the length of the International Boundary line of the U.S.-Canadian border, excluding Alaska, is approximately 3,987 miles, while the length of the U.S.-Mexican border is estimated at 1,933 miles. The length of the Alaska-Canada border alone is 1,538 miles. The tables below list the 13 U.S. states that share international boundaries with Canada and the four states that share an international border with Mexico, with information from the International Boundary Commission and the U.S. Geological Survey.

Length of U.S.-Mexico Land and Water Boundary by StateState Border Length

Texas 1,241.00

Arizona 372.5

New Mexico 179.5

California 140.4

Total 1,933.40

Source: U.S. Geological Survey the Congressional Research Service Report to Congress entitled “U.S. International Border: Brief Facts.”41

IntroductionDeveloping a local voice in all cross-border relations is essential to maximizing our objective of creating a network of positive exchange. For so many, the borders are unknown and feared. Ourworkwillhelptotransformoldborderpoliciesandmythsintonewandbetterpoliciesthatwill promote unification and understanding; there is no shortage of creative possibilities in this

41 CRS Report for Congress: U.S. International Borders: Brief Facts: Janice Cheryl Beaver: November 9, 2006 http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21729.pdf


work. This New Border Narrative concentrates on putting together varying local government perspectives from both the southern and northern borders surrounding the U.S. The border region is greatly defined by our relationship to our sister cities in Mexico and Canada. Not many understand the realities of living in a border community. It is by living on the border or spending an extended period of time that one can truly appreciate its many unique opportunities and challenges. Though we are three separate countries, in many ways we are able to function as unified partners. We are linked together economically and socially with many communities sharing similar cultures and traditions. What is beneficial for our sister cities, is also beneficial to us in the United States. A connection has been made that has tied us together without any notice of an actual border meant to divide communities.

According to Texas Borderlands: Frontier of the Future (2009) the border region has been struggling to keep up with the rest of the United States. For example, border communities tend to have a population whose education level suffers. Most of the populations who are under educated have not yet mastered English and also continue to be the poorest areas in the country with many rank last in per capita personal income. Border counties have historically also had some of the nation’s highest unemployment rates.42

The U.S-Mexico border region consists of 44 counties and 80 municipalities, and 15 pairs of sister cities among 4 U.S. states. According to A Blueprint for Action on the Border (2010), 24 of the U.S. counties were studied as if it were its own state.43 As a whole, the border region ranked 40th

42 Texas Borderlands: Frontier of the Future. State Senator Eliot Shapleigh. 2009. http://www.epcc.edu/AboutEPCC/Documents/Texas_Borderlands.pdf

43 “A Blueprint for Action on the U.S.-Mexico Border.” Thirteenth report of the good neighbor Environmental board to the president and congress of the United States. GNEB. June 2010.

Notmanyunderstandtherealitiesoflivinginabordercommunity.Itisbylivingontheborderorspendinganextended period of time that one can truly appreciate its many unique opportunities andchallenges.


in per capita income, 5th in unemployment, 7th in diabetes, 50th in insurance coverage, and 50th in high school completion rates and lower than average in personal incomes per capita.

In 50 years, we envision a border community that is thriving economically through border trade and commerce. We envision a more effective system of border management that will create a faster and smoother flow of people and goods between the United States and Mexico than the current scenario we are dealing with now. It is important to enhance the security at our current ports of entry, while respecting those who are trying to cross. In 50 years, we should demand a renaissance of positive change at the border, but only if we are successful in preventing the mounting militarization which would sacrifice our communities for an illusion of security.

Most importantly, we envision a border community that is no longer misunderstood as violent and destructive. Policy makers who are unfamiliar with the border region do not understand the potential and unique opportunities that our borders hold. Some see it as relevant to link illegal immigrants with high crime rates, but state level data shows that border communities have lower crime rates than do non border communities. For those of us who live in border communities, we understand that the most efficient way for our communities to prosper is to work in peaceful synchronization with our sister cities.

Economic Development Through Trade And Commerce Commerce:Since the passing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Mexico has been closely trailing behind Canada and China in the foreign import/export market. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Border Report (2010), Mexico has become the third largest U.S trading partner and is the second largest export market for U.S businesses. Mexico is now the top choice of 22 states that depend on their export market. The report indicates that $1 billion of cross border commerce is taking place every day; this translates to $45 million an hour. In 2010, Mexico purchased $163 billion in U.S goods and also serves as our largest provider of petroleum and the largest foreign supplier of fresh produce such as fruits and vegetables with eighty percent of most products are carried across the border by truck.

Canada and the United States enjoy one of the most prosperous relationships in the world with approximately 11 million jobs on both sides of the border depending on bilateral trade agreements. According to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, in 2010, $645 billion worth of goods and


services crossed the U.S./Canadian border. It is estimated that approximately a third of this trade is the delivery of materials to build certain products.44

Ports of Entry:The greatest advantage of living in a border town is our unique ability to prosper economically through cross border trade and commerce. El Paso, Texas for example is dubbed as the largest bi-national metroplex in the world and as has the greatest potential of being one of the most significant and vital gateways into the United States. Though having the greatest potential economically, El Paso’s Ports of Entry have not kept pace with the rapid increase of cross border commerce. Many land ports along the Mexico border region are suffering as well. For example, in Imperial County, the Port of Entry into Calexico, California has been scheduled for new infrastructure over the last three fiscal years yet no changes have been made to date. Elected officialsacrosstheborderregionarestrugglingtohavetheirvoiceheard.Ourgatewayshaveturnedinto parking lots. Potential consumers, visitors, and American citizens coming into the United States suffer as they wait to cross into our country. Aside from the long wait times, individuals stalled on the border are exposed to breathing in the excess pollution due to the overwhelming volume of vehicles entering the United States. Along with motorized crossing, pedestrian waits are inhumane to say the least.

While billions of dollars are being spent on a useless border wall, there have been no improvements on our Ports of Entry, where revenue can be generated. In the last 10 years, the average wait time for passenger vehicles to cross the international bridges in El Paso, TX have jumped from an average of 20 minutes at peak periods to two hours or longer. According to the Canada Border Services Agency (2011), border wait times are not as prevalent as those found along the U.S./Mexico. Wait times along the northern border range from 0 to 20 minutes.45

44 TheJointCanadianChamberofCommerce–U.S.ChamberofCommerceSubmissiontotheBeyondtheBorderWorkingGroup.The Canadian Chamber of Commerce. 2010 http://www.chamber.ca/images/uploads/Reports/2011/CCC-USCC_BBWG_Submission_110602.pdf

45 Canada Border Services Agency http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/bwt-taf/menu-eng.html

Whilebillionsofdollarsarebeingspenton a useless border wall, there have been noimprovementsonourPortsofEntry,whererevenuecanbegenerated.


There are 52 in all, of which 8 are rail lines, 43 are roadways (24 bridges, 2 dams, and 17 roads), and1isaferry.ElPaso,TexashasfourinternationalportsofentrywithMexico.Othernearbyports of entries are located in Tornillo, Texas and Santa Teresa, New Mexico. In the year 2010, an estimated $71.1 billion in trade value moved through our El Paso Ports of Entry. This represents 18% of the total trade value between the United States and Mexico. There was a 50% increase in trade value compared to 2009 and is expected to be even higher in 2012 (Plan El Paso, 2012).46

The Border area is highly dependent on cross-border business and without the sufficient technology and improvement at the Border crossings; we are averaging a loss of $116 million dollars per minute of delay. According to the Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration (2008), these delays cost the United States economy nearly 26,000 jobs and $6 billion in output; $1.4 billion in wages and $600 million in tax revenue annually.47 The Department of Commerce further estimates that by 2017, average wait times will probably increase to 100 minutes or more costing the U.S. more than 54,000 jobs, 12 billion in output, 3 billion in wages and 1.2 billion lost in tax revenue annually.

ArecentportofentrystudycommissionedbyTxDOTforElPasoPorts(2011),showsthatatpeak periods during the business day, our ports of entry are at operational failure, meaning there is at least a two-hour wait time.48 According to the study, if we do nothing, forecasted congestion and wait times in 2035 will contract El Paso’s economy by $54 billion (or 21.8% of regional economic activity) and could cause a net job loss of about 850,000 or 17.4 percent. That means our region would be less competitive and less able to contribute to the state and national economy. Not only do congested ports batter our economy, they also endanger our physical and commercial health. When you have traffic idling for two to three hours, that poses a huge risk to people and cargo. It is in the country’s and the state’s best interest to have ports of entry that move people and goods safely and efficiently.

Border Infrastructure/Manufacturing:Mexico is now competing against China in manufacturing and trade. We need to seize this opportunity by investing in better technology at border crossings. By using new detection technologies and risk management strategies we can improve border security, while also improving the way we do business.

ElPasoCounty,forexample,haspartneredwiththeirMetropolitanPlanningOrganization(MPO)toaccessFederalHighwayAdministrationfundsforaSouthwestBorderTrade

46 “Plan El Paso: A Policy Guide for the next 25 years and beyond.” City of El Paso, Texas Comprehensive Plan. 6 March 2012. http://www.planelpaso.org/

47 Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration (2008) http://shapleigh.org/system/reporting_document/file/487/DRAFT_Reducing_Border_Delays_Findings_and_Options_vFinal_03252008.pdfImprovingEconomicOutcomesbyReducingBorder Delays

48 “Economic Role of the El Paso Border Crossings.” Texas Department of Transportation. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Feb 2011.


Demonstration Project (SBTDP) that will use the latest technology to track trucks coming across our ports of entry. It’s a solution that, if successful, will help ease the congestion and help create smarter, more secure and efficient ports of entry that keep people and goods moving. We need more solutions like this for our ports of entry so that they are not complete bottlenecks where cars and trucks sit idle for hours, polluting our air and harming our economy.

It is essential that our Ports of Entry are adequately staffed and more inspection officers are provided in order to prevent them from being overworked. More lanes will be able to open, allowing for a greater flow of cross border tourism and commerce. With adequate staffing our security at the border will also be heightened given in increase in officers and vigilance.

Corporations are now realizing that it is more cost effective to do business with markets that are closer to home. Strengthening our relationship with Mexico and Canada will help contribute to our economy by bringing back more job opportunities that were lost due to doing business with countriesoverseas.OneineveryfiveU.Sjobsarelinkedtotheexportingandimportingprocessof trade and commerce. According to Steps to a 21st Century U.S. Mexico Border (2010) thirty-one million American jobs are sustained due to doing cross border trade with Mexico.

Byusingnewdetectiontechnologiesandriskmanagementstrategieswecan improve border security, while also improvingthewaywedobusiness.


Compelling Facts about the U.S.-Mexico Economic Partnership

• U.S.exportsreach233destinationsworldwide,butNAFTApartnersMexicoandCanadaaccount for nearly one-third of the total.

• MexicoandtheUnitedStatestrademorethan$1billionworthofgoodseachday($397billionin 2010).

• Mexicospent$163billiononU.S.goodsin2010,including$14billiononagriculturalproducts.

• NAFTA-relatedtradewithMexicohasadded1.7millionjobstotheU.S.economy.

• Twenty-sixU.S.stateshadexportstoMexicoinexcessof$1billionin2010.

• Twenty-twostatescountMexicoastheNo.1orNo.2exportmarket;Mexicoisatop-fivemarket for 14 more.

• TheUnitedStatesprovidesupto50%ofallinputsforMexico’smaquiladoramanufacturingandassembly firms, which translates to more than $41 billion in annual sales.

• Mexicoisakeysourceofhealthy,counterseasonalfruitsandvegetables,includingtomatoes,melons, and peppers for supermarkets and restaurants nationwide.

• Nearly50,000smallandmedium-sizeU.S.businessesexporttoMexico,collectivelyselling$41billion in goods to Mexico.

• ForU.S.farmersandranchers,Mexicoisthetopexportdestinationfordozensofkeyproducts,including beef, rice, soybean meal, sugars and sweeteners, and apples.

*Taken from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Border Report: Steps to a 21st Century U.S./Mexico Border, 2011. 49

49 Steps to a 21st Century U.S. Mexico Border. 2010. U.S. Chamber of Commerce. http://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/reports/2011_us_mexico_report.pdf


2011: U.S. Trade In Goods With MexicoNOTE: All figures are in millions of U.S. dollars on a nominal basis, not seasonally adjusted unless otherwise specified. Details may not equal totals due to rounding.

Month Exports Imports Balance

January 2011 14,846.9 19,606.4 -4,759.5

February 2011 14,025.2 19,053.6 -5,028.4

March 2011 17,322.5 23,269.5 -5,947.1

April 2011 16,024.4 21,359.7 -5,335.3

May 2011 16,843.0 22,970.2 -6,127.2

June 2011 16,595.4 22,714.3 -6,118.9

July 2011 16,052.1 21,090.8 -5,038.7

August 2011 17,708.6 23,152.4 -5,443.8

September 2011 17,064.0 22,302.3 -5,238.3

October 2011 17,621.5 22,848.1 -5,226.6

November 2011 17,912.9 23,146.4 -5,233.5

December 2011 16,361.1 21,350.7 -4,989.6

TOTAL 2011 198,377.6 262,864.4 -64,486.9

2011: U.S. Trade In Goods With CanadaNOTE: All figures are in millions of U.S. dollars on a nominal basis, not seasonally adjusted unless otherwise specified. Details may not equal totals due to rounding.

Month Exports Imports Balance

January 2011 20,644.1 24,792.9 -4,148.8

February 2011 20,493.4 23,215.4 -2,722.0

March 2011 25,657.1 28,305.7 -2,648.6

April 2011 23,799.1 25,936.4 -2,137.3

May 2011 24,452.6 26,965.3 -2,512.7

June 2011 24,258.5 26,857.5 -2,598.9

July 2011 22,228.5 25,446.5 -3,217.9

August 2011 24,959.8 27,146.6 -2,186.8

September 2011 23,958.0 27,235.0 -3,277.1

October 2011 24,539.3 26,725.1 -2,185.9

November 2011 23,240.1 26,172.3 -2,932.1

December 2011 22,659.1 26,547.8 -3,888.8

TOTAL 2011 280,889.6 315,346.5 -34,456.9


Border Security & ImmigrationWe are constantly looking for ways to improve our border enforcement policies, but some of the challenges that our border region faces involves working with policy makers who do not grasp the reality of living in a border area.

Living along the border area, it seems as if we were at war with Mexico even though we share many economic partnerships. Immigration policies have made the border region into a militarized zone. The construction of the border wall has had a demoralizing and destructive impact on the border region. Communities have been split apart. There is a feeling of indifference in the border region when determining the best way to improve border security. The border wall built in many neighborhoods along the United States/Mexico border has further divided our communities and not proven to be an effective method by which to secure the border.

The border wall encompasses over 600 miles of the border region has proven to be a waste of tax dollars that could have been spent more wisely. According to a report by the Government AccountabilityOfficeentitledBorderSecurity:DHSProgressandChallengesinSecuringtheU.S. Southwest and Northern Borders (2011) a total of $2.4 billion dollars has been spent in constructing the border wall which has failed to prevent people from entering the United States illegally.50 Illegal immigrants find other ways of entering the United States. For example, tunnels are now being created underground and are now being used to cross over into the United States. It will take an additional $6.5 billion dollars to maintain the border wall over the next 20 years. In 2010, there were 4,037 documented and repaired breaches that cost the tax payers an extra $7.2 million dollars ($1,800 per breach). In total, the expense of the border wall is estimated at a sum of $16.1 billion dollars.

GovernorRickPerry’sVirtualBorderSurveillanceProgramhasalsobeenprovenineffective.Ina report produced by Brandi Grissom, a reporter for the Texas Tribune (2010) the goal of the program was to install 200 cameras along the Border Wall to help aid in at least an approximate 1,200 arrests. In reality, only 29 cameras have been installed and only 26 arrests have been made.

50 GovernmentAccountabilityOffice.“BorderSecurity:DHSProgressandChallengesinSecuringtheU.S.SouthwestandNorthernBorders.” 30 March 2011. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-508T

Immigrationpolicieshavemadetheborderregionintoamilitarizedzone.


Atotalof$4milliondollarshasbeenspentinsupportoftheVirtualBorderSurveillanceProgramat a cost of $153,800 per arrest.51 We need to start making intelligent decisions when it comes to deciding what it best for not only our Border cities, but for our Nation as a whole.

Comprehensive Immigration ReformRather than placing our attention on the arrest and detainment of undocumented nationals from Mexico, greater focus needs to be concentrated on drug trafficking and capturing dangerous criminals who are trying to cross into the United States. We spend an extreme amount of money on the detention of immigrants. We are pouring billions of dollars to detain immigrants who cross into the United States solely looking to better their quality of life. They are not criminals and they do not pose any danger to our community. At least 85% of undocumented immigrants caught have no criminal record whatsoever and are driven to make the dangerous crossing in search of employment and a better life in this country. That means that a maximum of only 15% of them are “criminals,” broadly defined. This also means that 85% of our resources are being spent chasing after and detaining economic migrants.

We would save billions of dollars if we encourage them to stay rather than have them removed. The 2012 budget request to detain an immigrant is currently at $2 billion, this is $5.5 million a day. According to a report by the National Immigration Forum, titled The Math of Immigration Detention (2011), it costs $166 a day per immigrant detainee. There is an expected 33,400 immigrants who will be detained in 2012 and the costs continue to rise. When the numbers are compared, there was a $254 million increase since FY 2010.52 There are other cost effective ways of monitoring the majority of immigrants.

51 The Texas Tribune. “Border Cameras Produce Little in Two Years.” Brandi Grissom. 20 April 2010. http://www.texastribune.org/texas-mexico-border-news/border-cameras/border-cameras-produce-little-in-two-years

52 National Immigration Forum, August 2011, The Math of Immigration Detention: The Runaway Cost for Immigration Detention Do Not Add Up to Sensible Policy. http://www.immigrationforum.org/images/uploads/MathofImmigrationDetention.pdf

85%ofourresourcesarebeingspentchasingafteranddetainingeconomicmigrants.Wewouldsavebillionsofdollarsifweencouragethemtostayratherthan have them removed.


The wiser alternative would be to monitor the detained population who do not pose a threat to the community and only detain those that are being convicted for serious crimes. It would cost as low as 30 cents to $14 dollars a day to only hold those individuals who are a threat to the community, taxpayers could save over $1.6 billion a year. This would be an overall 80% reduction in annual costs. More attention needs to be focused on creating alternate solutions that actually make sense and that are not wasting money.

If we finally had comprehensive immigration reform that took into consideration the vast number of non-criminal migrants and created an approach that focused on the criminal element crossing the border, we could re-direct some of that funding to promoting true border security.

Drug TraffickingThe border wall has had little effect on illegal drug trafficking, most illegal drugs are being transported through our Ports of Entry. Tunnels are not only being used for the crossing of immigrants, but are also being used to smuggle in illegal drugs. In El Paso, the discovery of tunnels are rare though, due to the concrete channels of the Rio Grande; making it harder to cross underground. Let us not forget that there is also a flow of trafficking being transported into Mexico from the United States. Massive amounts of money and weapons are being transported back into Mexico. According to a report entitled Beyond the Border Buildup (2010) during 2005 and 2010, we have seen an increase of the flow of drugs into the border region. The border seizures of marijuana have increased by 49%, methamphetamine has increased by 54%, heroin has increased by 297%, and MDMA (ecstasy) has increased by 839%. The reason why drug cartels are careful not to let the eruption of violence spill into the United States because we are their primary source of income. If we were to close down our Ports of Entry drug cartels will suffer economically. Despite the United States looking to aid Mexico via projects such as the Merida Initiative, many local U.S. communities have been left with little funding opportunities to combat the realities of being a border community.

Policy makers in Mexico and the United States have not been well coordinated. Many disconnected efforts have been made. The solutions to our problems have continuously been to hike up security budgets; this has not helped with our problems. Rather than spending our energy prosecuting immigrants for serious crimes such as gun and drug trafficking, more energy is spent on misdemeanors on illegal entry cases. More and more dangerous crimes are being left to state and county officials, but local law enforcement does not have the finances to handle this federal responsibility.


Local Law EnforcementThe continued discussion in the local government sector is the debate on ant-immigrant legislation. Elected officials are opposed to having a similar immigration law such as the one in Arizona be passed in other communities. The anti immigration law in Arizona makes being in the country illegally a state crime. Local communities cannot afford to handle the responsibilities of the Federal government. Many local communities are suffering given the economic recession. To place additional, an unfunded mandate, such as local law enforcement serving as de facto federal law enforcement officers is unwarranted and fiscally irresponsible.

If this law were to be passed in Texas, more officers would need to be hired through the Sheriff and Police Departments and all new and current officers would need to be trained according to the immigration policies. Currently, the federal agency already has the authority to question the immigration status of detainees held in the County Jail.

A majority of representatives in El Paso County are in favor for House Bill 12, which would restrict cities, counties, and school districts from enforcing immigration laws. There are still anti-sanctuary bills being taken into consideration that would deny state funding to any governing entity that prohibits local law enforcement from doing immigration checks. It is important for our local law enforcement to maintain the mutual trust that has been built between officers and their community. With this trust and respect comes cooperation from the community that offers law enforcement agencies to a reliable source of information that will help to protect the border area. Local enforcement agencies should not assume the duties or the role of federal immigration enforcement. Border enforcement agencies need to put more focus on capturing dangerous criminals and traffickers who are trying to cross into the border, rather than placing so much energy on the common immigrant who is only looking for work.

Ratherthanspendingourenergyprosecutingimmigrantsforseriouscrimessuchasgunanddrugtrafficking,moreenergyisspentonmisdemeanorsonillegalentry cases.


Alongwiththepopulationgrowth,theU.S.–Mexicoborderregionhasalsoexperiencedanincrease of agents in the Border Patrol agency. The problem with this rapid increase is that many times Border Patrol agents do not receiving the proper training in civil and human rights that would best serve the border communities. While improving our border security and our infrastructure, we also need to consider the importance of the relationship that agents have with our community. Agents need to be trained to deter from racial profiling and from violating the human rights against travelers or residents. A better system of filing complaints against agents who are not respecting Customs and Border Protection policies need to be held accountable.

Assistance from State and Federal Government to Secure Local Border CommunitiesThe federal government has been aware of the costs associated with the challenges facing communities on the border and the burden carried by local property tax payers. Programs such as the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) and High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) funds are important for helping safeguard our communities and provide additional dollars to our law enforcement personnel. However, according to the El Paso County Sheriff ’s Office,HIDTAfundshaveremainedrelativelystablesincetheprogram’sinceptionover10years ago. Meanwhile, salaries, benefits and equipment costs have all increased over time leaving communities having to scale back operations or fund increases on the backs of local property taxpayers. SCAAP funds are also very much appreciated but only cover a small portion (10-15%) of the costs of housing these offenders. And, unfortunately, in the 2012 federal budget, SCAAP funds are being reduced by 60%, which would mean yet another increased burden on the local property tax payers.

Federal grants offer a supplement to local communities, but they can be inflexible. For example, the2010OperationStonegardengrantdidnotallowforthepurchaseofvehicles,whichforsomecommunities is very much needed. For communities, such as El Paso, TX which 1,060 square miles, 47 miles of which is adjacent to our international border.

We need help with investments that supplement our ability to recruit and hire more officers. The COPSgrantshavepouredmoneyintoTexasbuttheElPasoCountySheriff ’sOfficehasbeenpassed over for two years. The El Paso Police Department likewise has been ignored. Meanwhile cities like San Antonio, Dallas, Houston, and Austin have received funding for as many as 50 new officers. Sheriff ’s departments need “boots on the ground” and while receiving funding to pay for overtime our officers are getting burned out.


WhenthewarbetweencartelsbegantoreachacriticallevelinCiudadJuárez,ElPasosawapatternemergethatweneverpredictedandhasn’tstopped.Ourcountyhospitaldistrict,whichhouses the only Level 1 trauma center in our region—the next closest center is 275 miles away—began seeing victims of the violence who were rushed through our ports of entry and into our ER. Since 2008, the El Paso County Hospital District spent $4.9 million in trauma care specifically for these victims; to date, we’ve been compensated for only $1.2 million, leaving local property taxpayers to pick up $3.7 million in uncompensated costs. Communities such as El Paso have repeatedly requested funding from the Merida initiative to help off-set the costs borne by local propertytaxpayersbecausewejustdon’tseethatfinancialburdendiminishing–unlesstheU.S.changes its drug policies or the cartels suddenly declare a cease fire.

Misrepresentation Of The Border The eruption of violence in Mexico has taken its toll on the entire border community causing the world to target our border region as dangerous war zones. For instance, since the outbreak of violence in 2006, El Paso’s sister city in Texas, Ciudad Juarez, Mexico has become of the most dangerous cities in the world. Since then, El Paso has been denounced publicly by policy makers who have recklessly stated that El Paso is an unsafe city. This is simply not true; in fact, while Ciudad Juarez has had the highest homicide rates, El Paso has consistently been ranked the top safest city with a population over 500,000 in the United States with the lowest crime rate.

This in no way can compare to Houston, Texas, which was ranked one of the most dangerous cities in the United States due to their extremely high crime rate. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation our four border states are even becoming safer. According to a report entitled Beyond the Border Buildup (2012) between 2005 and 2010, the violent crime rates have dropped by 11% and homicides have dropped by 19%.53 Counties along the border have lower crime and robbery rates compared to other state averages. This proves that border communities are just as safe as any other community in the United States. For example, in Presidio County, communities havenotbeenaffectedbytheborderwall.Outsiderswouldbesurprisedtoseehowpeacefulitisin their area. With the proper identification, citizens and visitors are able to freely cross back and forth into the United States. The reality is that border communities such as El Paso, Texas have not been affected by the violence in Mexico.

Yet, this has not stopped elected officials such as Rick Perry, the Governor of Texas from announcing to the media in a speech, “You’ve got bombs exploding in El Paso.” This incident that he is referring to took place in Ciudad Juarez. Media and news networks who are not familiar

53 Isacson, Adam. Meyer, Maureen. “Beyond the Border Buildup: Security and Migrants along U.S. Mexico Border.” WashingtonOfficeon Latin America. April 2012.


with the border region have also been contributing to the negative comments being made. Every time someone on the state-wide or national stage makes erroneous statements about us, it costs us a convention, or talent that doesn’t want to relocate to our community, or business expansion and retention opportunities. It’s not good for El Paso, it’s not good for Texas, it’s not good for the nation. And it doesn’t make us more safe. Perceptions such as these are destructively impacting the border region by discouraging potential travelers from visiting our communities, which then affects prospects to create tourism revenue. While, we are working hard to encourage tourism in potential cities such as El Paso, there are those who are straining the efforts being taken to improve the border region’s reputation.

Conclusion Ourbordercommunitiesshouldbeseenasbi-nationalmetropolitandistrictswherewetakeeveryopportunity for developing transactions of positive cross border exchange. We should work harder to encourage positive community participation. Initiatives need to be taken to secure our Ports of Entry and increase Border Security, while maintaining respect for those who are only looking for abetterqualityoflife.OurPortsofEntrieshavethepotentialtobecomeworldclassGatewaystoborder tourism and commerce. There are so many great possibilities for the future, but we have to act now in order to make a change.

Authored by:CountyJudgeVeronicaEscobar,CountyofElPaso,TexasCounty Judge Paul Hunt, County of Presidio, TexasSupervisor Manny Ruiz, County of Santa Cruz, ArizonaSupervisor Raymond Castillo, County of Imperial, CaliforniaSupervisor John Renison, County of Imperial, CaliforniaCounty Council Member Barbara Brenner, Whatcom County, Washington

Border Network for Human Rights

bnhr.org