There is a moral, however.
"Never send a monkey to do a man's job."
~ Captain Leo Davidson
Posted on 12/06/2007 1:17:42 PM PST by SwinneySwitch
WASHINGTON — Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff is giving Texas landowners opposed to a border fence one last chance to allow access to their land before he takes court action against them, a Texas senator said Thursday.
Sen. John Cornyn said letters from the Department of Homeland Security are expected to go out Friday. But for those who refuse access, the department would likely seek a court order to enter the property, he said.
"He assured me that negotiations would continue and his hope is the vast majority of these cases could be resolved without litigation, maybe in handful of cases litigation would be required," he said.
A Homeland Security Department spokesman was not immediately available for comment.
President Bush last year approved 700 miles of fencing and barriers on the U.S.-Mexico border. Unlike other states, most land in Texas is in private hands.
Some landowners along the border have opposed government plans to build fencing to curb illegal immigration on the Texas-Mexico border.
"All that will do is fire people up more down here," John McClung, president of the Texas Produce Association, said of the impending letters.
"Nothing makes a landowner more unhappy than the idea of condemnation of land, the idea of being forced to turn land over to government," McClung said.
Several members of the group could lose access to the Rio Grande, which they rely on for irrigating crops or to rich farm land that abuts the river.
Opponents have criticized the government for failing to keep them fully informed on fence plans and refusing to listen to residents' proposals for alternatives to the fence. Others say the fence is a waste of taxpayers' money and will hurt border economies.
"It's just a continuation of a battle with our government. We are for security, however the way they are approaching solving security problems, we just disagree with," said McAllen Mayor Richard Cortez. "We just don't see how a non-continuous fence, when you have 6,000 miles of land borders, is going to stop terrorism and illegal immigration. We continue to believe it is a waste of taxpayers' money."
Federal officials say they need access to the land to assess possible sites for the fence. They say the fence is one of several tools being used to curb illegal border crossings, including "virtual fence" and more patrols.
Cornyn said Chertoff told him about 40 landowners have refused to provide access to their land. Of the total, 110 have not responded or can't be located and 258 have given the government the access, a congressional official familiar with the statistics said on condition of anonymity because the Homeland Security Department had not released them.
About 127 miles of land are being considered for the fencing and about 15 miles of that is on property where the government cannot get access, the aide said.
THIS is where a proper exercise of eminent domain is warranted.
I would be in favor a simple choice to those in the pathway.
Do you want to be on the Northside of the fence or the Southside?
Ping!
If you want on, or off this S. Texas/Mexico ping list, please FReepMail me.
127 miles? Thats all? As for those 15 miles, go around them and they can become citizens of Mexico.
If they want access to the river, why not build a gate?
Otherwise, I’m suspect of the reasons.
If it was just a developer who wanted Mrs. Crabapples acres for a mall, the bulldozers would have already rolled across her house.
So far several US cities have been hit by Islamonazis and Chertoff does NOTHING .. except to delay and work to give them Amnesty.
Chertoff et al simply hope to divide and conquer - pitting private property rights against the constitutionally mandated federal charge to protect the borders - and to delay the construction for as long as possible. We of course won't see any of this humming and hawing with the TTC (or gated retirement complexes).
Livestock can't use keys or unlock combination padlocks.
But, honestly, based on their actions to date, it sounds like the government has no interest in accommodating the landowners or listening to their (legitimate) requirements.
They're being ham-handed. Either, by nature...or intentionally.
John McClung, president of the Texas Produce Association opposes the fence. Hmm...Texas Produce Association. Who uses a lot of illegal alien labor?
That’s what makes me think that this is a ploy - that the land selected was picked specifically to cause an uproar and the Chertoff knew at least some landowners would balk.
“...This is hilarious coming from a Democrat Mayor of a federal money sinkhole located 8 miles north of the border.”
Amen. The eastern third of Mexico is receiving US food stamps and WIC payments. Talk about a federal money sinkhole!
The Tennessee Valley Authority was unconstitutional?
I’ve been to McAllen and that whole area. A lot of those land owners are farmers. They can get water from the Rio Grande through pumping and standard plumbing. The real reason they don’t want a fence is because they rely heavily on illegals to work the fields down there, especially the cane fields. This is about super cheap labor.
You may own the land, but you don’t own the border. There is a compelling government interest, here. This is a legitimate use of eminent domain.
Maybe they would prefer it if we fenced around the other side of their property and ceded their land to Mexico so we could have a defensible border...
bttt
Exactly.
Why is it justified. Homeland Security is riding roughshod over us for no reason — we’re already the only American citizens who have to put up with the jack-booted thugs of the federal government dictating how we live our lives (not to mention depriving us of our water and livelihood). Would those of you in Minnesota or northern NY (where terrorists have entered the United States) accept this kind of treatment?
What gives you the right to decide who is a second-class citizen?
This is valuable land. I can understand concerns about not wanting the government to come in and look around for how much they want. After assessing for what is needed then fence around them if an agreement can’t be met.
127 miles? Thats all? As for those 15 miles, go around them and they can become citizens of Mexico.<<<<
--------------------------------------------
Even worse, look at this highlighted excerpt from this article:
>>>..."SBInet," it may eventually monitor 6,000 miles of the U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada. The government has withheld final payment on the initial $20 million contract while Boeing fixes glitches.<<<<<
Is this what Chertoff allocated the PHYSICAL border fence money to????
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119689136413514923.html?mod=hps_us_whats_news
Concerns Raised on Border Fence: Lawmaker Seeks To Delay Handover Of the Boeing System
In a letter sent late yesterday to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D., Miss.) cited continuing concerns by the committee that problems with the virtual-fence system known as Project 28 aren't fixed. The committee also is concerned that the effort doesn't give agents the technological advantages Boeing has promised.
Further delay of a project already almost six months behind could set back the credibility of both the effort and of Boeing. It also signals a determination by lawmakers to keep a sharp eye on how Homeland Security buys from the defense industry. Boeing's project is part of a larger effort estimated to cost taxpayers at least $8 billion through 2013, although a government watchdog has warned the costs could triple.
The effort is designed to make agents more effective at stopping smugglers and illegal immigrants by substituting technology for personnel. Known as "SBInet," it may eventually monitor 6,000 miles of the U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada. The government has withheld final payment on the initial $20 million contract while Boeing fixes glitches. Representatives for both Boeing and Homeland Security said they hadn't seen Mr. Thompson's letter.
Boeing has been waiting to turn over the first 28-mile section of the fence since the end of November. If the project is accepted, the government will operate the system alongside Boeing during a 45-day test period that may result in a formal handoff early next year.
...To track a smuggler, an agent in a vehicle can remotely operate a camera and radar system mounted atop a 98-foot tower. Officials have said the system will be capable of locating a person five miles away or a moving car at three times that distance. The network will be overseen by command centers that have the ability to tap into every tower.
(snip)
What they really need are pumping plants and piped diversions to pull water out of the river for either irrigation or livestock. The government could nullify these arguments quickly by providing the equipment and the installation of same, and then turning title to the water infrastructure over to the owner of the land.
Trouble is, this goes against the government’s established policy in the BLM and other agencies where, even if a landowner furnishes all the equipment and pumping plant himself to gain access to water on federal lands, the landowner must turn title of the equipment over to the feds.
Chertoff is an extremely narrow minded puppet.
There is a moral, however.
"Never send a monkey to do a man's job."
~ Captain Leo Davidson
I thought we were all sunk once they silenced Curt Weldon.
OK, then we can build the border fence about 15 miles on THIS side of the border?????
Bingo!
The government took some of my family’s land for Lake Sam Rayburn. Surely they can take some of this land for the “common” good!
Cindy, they don’t just fence around you. They take your land and you are compensated as they see fit.
Eminent domain is a legitimate function of government, provided the government is acting on a compelling public interest. Controlling the border is a compelling public interest, therefore eminent domain is reasonable. The homeowner may not like it, but his property right is not absolute.
Send renio down there with a couple of tanks the FBI and a couple of Marshall's along with the atf, they'll get the ideal.
According to the 4th amendment there is!
More likely they are going after private land FIRST in the hopes of generating some controversy and reduce public support for the fence. After all, we all know how Americans feel about eminent domain since Kelo v. New London...
As much as I am a fan and support the fence...Chertoff has once again proven his inability to do the job and task at hand correctly...
Threatening is not the way to do this, even if someone doesn’t warm up to the idea of having the Federal government do something on their private property, in this case, not the damn TTC, property owners can be courted in a more positive light, and in a better, more contrite manner than this...
If we have gaps in our fence, then that is directly on the head of Chertoff and his minions in that department...
Thats where I believe some in the government realize that this idea of covering those gaps will work in their favor as far as putting surviellance in that “vitual fence” (bovine excrement!) idea...High-tech and high dollar do not give you the same kind of security that a physical wall will...
But they are trying like the dickens to sell us and put in a system with more holes in it than a dike in Denmark!
And I am not talking about a woman in comfortable shoes either!!! ;-)
You're not the only one with that sentiment.
bump
thanks
Threatening is not the word for it. Talk to some of the Lipan Apache families around Candelaria and Redford... and then tell me they’re ONLY threatening... geeze, they’re ORDERING American citizens off their own property. You guys up in Yankee-land (Minnesota or Houston or wherever) may favor fascism, but we’re good Americans down here who want our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness untrammelled by corporate interests backed up by the power of an overgrown federal agency.
I really believe that Chertoff's "inability" to do the job is related to his orders from George W. Bush.
The majority of the citizens of the USA want those borders secured against invasion.
Do you want your property lines to be inside or outside of the border fence?
Trick question!
Your private property has long been defined by the USA border.
So sorry all those “gentlemans” agreements you may have had in the past with foreign governments regarding informal easements are now null and void.
Will you lose a lot of coyote payola?
The US Gov didn’t plan for an easement along the southern border? IIRC, a property owner on the Canadian border was told to tear down a wall because it was on the governments’ easement.
Build The Fence!
Ha, good one!
As for those who complain their economies might be hurt, screw 'em. If you are making money off of criminals, don't complain when a cop comes around.
Yep, that is a factor in all of this...
Or it was selected because it’s on the border with Mexico?
Easy solution here, just build the fence on the other side of their land and let them deal with the culture they seem so fond of. Given that choice, I don’t think there’ll be a major difficulty in finding neighbors who’d be willing to have the fence on the south end of their property. Mind, we won’t be giving up US territory, we’ll continue to patrol it, we’ll just be offering those who oppose the fence the opportunity to experience the full consequence of their actions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.