I bet it works great!
There is no fence now. Let's see how a fence works then we'll get back to you.
What do you mean there's no fence now?
There's more than 100 miles of double fence. And you know what? It's only somewhat effective. Perry knows this. Anyone living near the border state knows this.
A fence for fencing's sake for the whole 1,900 miles across mountains, deserts and waterways make sense as a union boosting make work project and as a black hole of federal funding.
In 2007, the price tag for just 700 miles was placed at $50 billion excluding both labor and land acquisition costs. CRS 2007 numbers)
I'm in San Diego where we have the double-fence. It has been helpful but it's no magic bullet and that's Perry's point.
On top of those still climbing the fence, we have sophisticated tunnels pop up: tunnels with electricity, air conditioning, even rail cars. Here's an example in Nogales a couple weeks ago.
Speaking of the fence in San Diego, it took forever to get it across an area called "Smuggler's Gulch" because of "habitat" environmental battles! I suspect under Perry or any of the EPA-critical candidates, such obstructions and delays would be sharply reduced or eliminated.
Using federal funds to achieve the best bang for the buck on border control is responsible.
If it's a fence, it's a fence. If it's drones, choppers and spotter planes, it's those things. If it's boots on the ground, it's boots. That seems to be Perry's philosophy: use the best tools for the task.
Remember, it's all academic if we don't have the right Congress. Congress has to authorize the funds. Congress has to authorize the fencing. Congress has to allow exceptions to environmental law.
Perry's signed bills against human trafficking (HB 1372, 4008 & SB 11 of '07), on increased border security (Rangers on the border; HB1 of '07), for tougher employer sanctions (HB 1196 of '07), on document fraud (HB 126 of '07) and signed Voter ID. Source: http://www.txcc.org/illegal-immigration & Reuters (Voter ID signing)
The bill didn't just pass, he really did send Rangers to the border because Texas couldn't get the National Guard it asked for: Texas governor sends Rangers to Mexico border (2009) and he's called for 3,000 more border patrol on the Texas-Mexico border and another 1,000 from El Paso west to San Diego.
He's also mentioned aerial assets on the border:
On the Mark Levin Show last week, Perry repeatedly opposed the federal Dream Act as amnesty while defending Texas' right to have an in-state tuition program which he said requires 3 years residency, graduation from a Texas high school and being on the path to citizenship.
As you all look through the list on your purity tests, ask yourselves, what other candidate is running with a long record and actual action on immigration/border issues? Romney? Bachmann? Palin?
About a week ago, when Romney was in NH for a town hall, he said he's for a fence, employer sanctions and against in-state tuition. The question was about illegals already here which he dodged. Does anyone believe Romney's to the right of Perry?
What about Sarah Palin? She says she's for a complete fence and supported SB 1070 but what did she do in Alaska? She didn't tackle sanctuary cities, like Fairbanks, in her own state.
For those who say Perry's for amnesty because he's consistently supported a 24 month guest worker program requiring taxes paid and no citizenship offered then Palin's for amnesty. Not just because she supported McCain's policies in 2008 but because in 2010 told O'Reilly she's for a guest worker program for all 12 million illegals.
Numbers USA gives only Bachmann a B-, Cain a C- and the other candidates, including Palin, a D or worse.
That means the ones with the best "immigration" policy from Numbers USA's view, Bachmann & Cain, will be candidates you must take on faith. Neither have an executive record on immigration (or other issues) to back up their campaign rhetoric.