The AJC ran the below equal time column today, another viewpoint to an editorial by Mike King of the AJC editorial board [‘ Big fence blunder’ ].

We thank the AJC for the space. We hope that next time we are afforded the same courtesy as other writers and have our organization mentioned in the author’s short bio, as it was sent along with the column submission.

EQUAL TIME:

For illegal crossers, a fence fits the bill

By D.A. King
For the Journal-Constitution
Published on: 09/28/06

With a career grade of “D+” from the highly respected Washington-based Americans for Better Immigration, presidential hopeful Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), who has promised to push for Senate passage of the Secure Fence Act of 2006, has clearly heard the voice of the majority of the American voters on border security —- it would seem.

The will of the people aside, knowing that more than 10 percent of Mexico now lives in the United States and that more than 40 percent of the 100 million-plus citizens remaining there have made it clear in polls they would “migrate” to “El Norte” if possible, it is difficult to present a reasonable argument for not securing American borders.

Consider the undeniable crisis created in the United States by the costly organized crime of illegal immigration, along with the fact that the United States is involved in a war on terror. With these considerations in mind, the process of securing even a third of the Mexican-American border is a concept that is long past due. Futhermore, it is also old-fashioned common sense.

The potential efficiency of a physical barrier between the United States and Mexico is brilliantly illustrated by the 14 miles of fence in San Diego, erected in 1996 —- during the no-doubt “extreme” Clinton administration.

There, Border Patrol officials report that apprehensions of illegal crossers, an accurate measurement of attempted crossings, has declined by 95 percent. Crime rates —- in areas on both sides of the fence —- have dropped in similar proportions.

Another barometer of the effectiveness of a fence separating the most often used illegal crossing points is the volume level of the howls from the corporate-financed, open-borders/illegal-alien lobby.

Transparent cries of “human-rights violations,” “nativism” and “xenophobia” are perfect indicators of how desperately those who profit from an endless supply of taxpayer subsidized “cheap” labor and future constituents want to allow the influx of candidates for the next amnesty to continue.

For the Americans whose new American Dream is to have borders as secure as are Mexico’s and immigration and employment laws as enthusiastically enforced, 700 miles of fencing is merely a good beginning of returning to the rule of law and a secure republic.

If, as a nation, we are in fact in search of increased security and prosperity —- passing into law and then actually enforcing legislation aimed at increasing the number of immigration enforcement officers by using local police, and making it more difficult to walk, uninspected, into America —- the present immigration legislation under consideration in the Senate, which includes provisions from the House, is a classic example of a “no-brainer.”

> D.A. King is an anti-illegal immigration activist living in Marietta. [Note from D.A. – And president of the Dustin Inman Society, but the AJC doesn’t want its readers to be more aware of the Dustin Inman Society.]

This column is solicited to provide another viewpoint to an AJC editorial published today. To respond to an AJC editorial, contact David Beasley at dbeasley@ajc.com or call 404-526-7371. Responses should be no longer than 600 words. Not all responses can be published. Published responses may be republished and made available in the AJC or other databases and electronic formats.