Secure Fence Act: a hoax and a scam? (Kay Bailey Hutchison, DHS)

I haven't been following the issues with the border fence*, and this article was written almost a month ago so I don't know if things have changed since then, however:

...In the fall of 2006 when Congress passed and the President signed into law the Secure Fence Act, most Americans thought they understood what they were getting. The plain text of the law states that "the Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide for [at] least 2 layers of reinforced fencing, the installation of additional physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors" along a specified range of the U.S.-Mexico border. The Act then stipulated the precise regions of the border, covering a total of 854 miles...

But the very same day that the Senate passed the Secure Fence Act, Senate leaders had already hatched a plan to, in essence, un-do the Act. More precisely stated, Congress passed another law giving the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)discretion over how and where the fence would actually be built. That night, after the Secure Fence Act was passed, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison rose to the floor of the Senate and expressed her concern that the Act was too restrictive and would impose too much of a burden on Texas' border communities. Hutchison then submitted into the record two letters written earlier that day. The first was a letter she had received from Majority Leader Bill Frist earlier in the day addressing Sen. Hutchison's concerns; the second, Frist's letter to House and Senate leaders issuing specific legislative directives related to Hutchison's concerns...

The directives gave DHS a large amount of "flexibility", which they've used to apparently only build a small part of the fence. The article goes on to give evidence that DHS doesn't want to build the fence, and Hutchison makes another appearance to give DHS yet another instance of "flexibility".

* My belief is that a fence covering much of the border is part "boob bait for Bubba" and to a lesser extent a boondoggle. Fencing serves a purpose in many areas, but it isn't really necessary in many others. Unfortunately, too many people concentrate on things like this rather than the more important "hearts and minds" issues. If we can get to the point where politicians, reporters, religious leaders, and others realize that supporting illegal immigration in one way or another would greatly damage their careers, the situation will solve itself. And, we get to that point by publicly discrediting those who support or enable illegal immigration by revealing their lies and inability to think things through. See, for instance, John McCain's poll numbers.

UPDATE: On a related note, Senator Joe Lieberman wants DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff to tell him why he wanted an environmental study on fencing in Texas, but waived environmental laws in Arizona: "While developing additional layers of border security is a priority for our nation, it should not impede our ability to also continue to be good environmental stewards".

Immigration2007b · Mon, 12/10/2007 - 21:22 · · Importance: 1