Homeland Security kills virtual border fence
I have to admit, when I first read the story about Homeland Security giving up on the Boeing virtual fence idea, I was ticked off, but I also figured if it was not going to work, I’d be fine with ditching the idea and coming up with a new one … like maybe a real fence.
From the New York Times…
Citing a plague of “cost overruns and missed deadlines,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Tuesday that she would cut millions of dollars intended for a high-tech “virtual fence” along the Mexican border that has produced little more than headaches for the federal government.
Ms. Napolitano said her department would divert about $50 million in federal stimulus money intended for the project to other technological needs on the border, including laptops, radios, thermal-imaging devices and cameras requested by border guards.
In addition, she said, no money will be spent on expanding the project beyond two areas in Arizona where it is being tested until the department completes a reassessment she ordered in January. …
It [the Government Accountability Office] has released 14 critical reports that, taken together, point to a system that “was over-promised and under-delivered,” said Richard Stana, director of homeland security and justice issues for the office.
Just now, I read a post by Steve Gilbert at Sweetness & Light who sums up the issue.
Let’s say we start cutting every federal program that has been “was over-promised and under-delivered.” Let’s see what we have left.
Good point. We could save a lot of money and solve many problems by nixing over-promised and under-delivered programs. I wonder where we can start?
Maybe a real fence design?
Allah at Hot Air is also commenting, and my cool newsreader search engine reminds us that in June of 2007, the new system was to be the backbone of the secure border initiative. Unfortunately, my newsreader also reminds me the border fence was scrapped the first time two years ago.
So the question stands. Why are they willing to ditch the purported backbone of the secure border initiative but completely unwilling to totally scrap other federal programs with lifespans of more than 40 years that are, well, total crap and have wasted not just millions, but billions of dollars?
Jim Geraghty notes another expiration date. Investors Business Daily notes…
SBInet [the Boeing virtual fence experiment] wasn’t what Congress had in mind. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 required the construction of 700 miles of new border fence along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border. “The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide for at least two layers of reinforced fencing, the installation of additional physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras and sensors,” the act said.
6 Comments
The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.
You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.
The site is not broken.
"Over-promised and under-delivered". Why, you've just perfectly described Obama and his band of merry Marxists!
Too bad, according to Pelosi, we will have to "wait until the bill is passed, so you can see what is in it" to see how that will apply to their fraudulent healthcare "reform" bill.
The diagram of the proposed fence is nice, but instead of a road between the fences, I would suggest a fairly dense array of land mines. And plenty of appropriate signs. In Spanish, naturally. Unless that is racist. Add some Arabic signs too….
I've been very pro-border fence, until it came to my attention that there are some big private property issues along some of the stretches. These govt bozos weren't going to build the fence right along the border, but cut straight across people's ranches and across a wildlife preserve, cutting people off from their property, and cattle and other stock or animal life from the Rio Grande and other water resources. For me the private property and water rights have to trump a big ol' fence.
I think the fence (plus landmines) is great where they can do it, but then there has to be high tech solutions of various kinds, which might actually be more effective in the long run. I mean, these guys build sophisticated tunnels.
Well, there is the idea of using the border as a practice shooting range for the armed services. Just set up targets and practice away. That would be pretty discouraging to invaders.
Government bozos is redundant, and it should be noted that these are the same bozos some want to run our health care and energy systems. Naturally, the direction will be right into the ground, just like their shining accomplishments in education, social security etc., etc.
"The border as a practice shooting range" 😀