Skip to content

The Department of Homeland Security cancels the virtual fence on the Mexican border

January 15, 2011

  It was announced yesterday that Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security was doing away with the “virtual fence” on the Mexican border. The “virtual fence” was President Bush’s answer to securing the border without actually building a fence or putting people on the border, and the fact is that it simply did not work. I am not saddened to hear we will no longer be wasting money on this effort.

  However, the question which must be asked is this: What are we going to do about the border moving forward? According to Janet Napolitano, there are aspects of the “virtual fence” which proved to be effective and those which did are going to remain in effect.

DHS will utilize some of the existing technologies that were found to be useful in what the agency is calling a southwest border security technology plan.

The new plan “will utilize existing, proven technology tailored to the distinct terrain and population density of each border region, including commercially available Mobile Surveillance Systems, Unmanned Aircraft Systems, thermal imaging devices, and tower-based Remote Video Surveillance Systems.”

    According to the article I linked to above, most of the problems with the “virtual fence” centered around the radar systems and the cameras–while Boeing also had trouble delivering on time. So it appears to me as if the new Homeland Security plan for the border is not much different than President Bush’s plan, sans the radar and cameras. In other words, we are still using the “virtual fence” idea, we are just implementing less of it. Claiming that there is no “one size fits all” solution to virtual border security, the Department of Homeland Security is going to “tailor” the new plan to the differing areas along the border depending on which areas need it most. 

  I fail to understand how this is going to solve the problem of illegal immigration, all that we are doing is moving resources around, and while I think this will prove to be an improvement–both in cost and in effectiveness–it still isn’t good enough. This may reduce the amount of illegals that cross into the country, but it will not eliminate them.

  In my opinion there IS a “one size fits all” solution to the problem at the Mexican Border: The “virtual fence” should be replaced with a physical fence complete with soldiers with guns on the wall–that is the only way to effectively ensure that almost nobody will enter this country illegally by crossing the Mexican border. Will this end illegal immigration altogether? No, but it would be one hell of a deterrent. Until we get serious as a nation about this problem we will continue to have this problem, it really is as simple as that.

11 Comments leave one →
  1. January 15, 2011 9:47 am

    I wonder if they really ever wanted it to work. $1 billion can buy you an awful lot of good stuff to keep the bad guys out. That is what we spent.


    • January 15, 2011 10:20 am

      Yep, 1 billion to secure 53 miles of a 2000 mile border.


    • January 15, 2011 10:55 am

      And it would have reached $6 billion! It certainly seems like we could have built a wall for that kind of money.


  2. The Georgia Yankee permalink
    January 15, 2011 10:08 am

    I tend to agree, Steve. It’s nice to see that the boondoggle has been canceled, but the question remains: what next?

    It would have been nice to hear that the was so little illegal entry of our country going on the it made no sense to keep on paying for the virtual fence, but . . . wall, as they say, meybe next year.

    So we wait and see how they propose to protect our southern border.

    Take good care and may God bless us all!



    • January 15, 2011 10:56 am

      That is the question that needs to be answered TGY, we will have to wait and see but I am not hopeful the border will ever be secured.


      • The Georgia Yankee permalink
        January 15, 2011 2:22 pm

        I’ve got to agree – neither party wants it secured. And as Christians, it’s hard to slam the door in the face of people the majority of whom are just looking for work.

        Don’t misunderstand – the trade in illegal drugs, and the possible (probable?) involvement of terrorists makes it absolutely imperative that we take back control of our borders.


  3. January 15, 2011 10:23 am

    I wrote about this as well. Amazing how the obvious answer is the one we can not consider, an “actual fence”. Or even better, a huge freaking wall with razor wire across the top. Nope, we have an invisible fence and rest-stops in the desert so illegals don’t dehydrate.


    • January 15, 2011 10:58 am

      There is something a little funny when you think about it: it is almost like our elected officials are saying to us “there IS a wall there, it is just invisible. Trust us.”


  4. January 16, 2011 1:47 am

    Nappy said last year that this thing didn’t work. They’re just now cancelling this thing? I said at the time this was a scam. 7-11 can get their cameras working but not Boeing? Sure.


    • January 16, 2011 8:28 am

      We all know the truth is that they don’t want to secure the border at all. Nothing is going to change with this new “plan” that they have, and that is the way they want it.



  1. Here are some Sunday morning links… | The RIGHT Opinions

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: