Contempo Magazine Blog

The election of President Obama has not resulted in any real change as regards the border fence rumpus between the Texas and Mexican border.  An Obama spokesperson told Time that Obama supports the fence “as long as it is one part of a larger strategy on border security that includes more boots on the ground and increased use of technology.”The new administration has promised to work with local communities and the private sector to formulate border zone security. His new Homeland Security chief, Janet Napolitano, has not made any comments consistent with change from the Bush administration about the border fence specifically along the Texas-Mexican border.

The CATO Institute, Heritage Foundation, and the New York Times are among the many voices that are saying the stability of the Mexican government is in peril.  Violence in border cities is increasing and civil order is now only keep by military forces in the absence of an effective civilian police force. Although many principals of the Mexican cartels have been captured or killed so far there remains a stalemate between government forces and the cartels. National and local American law enforcement agencies are reporting increasing crime associated with Mexican criminals moving across the border.

Conversely, many cities on the U.S. side of the border have been spared the severe consequences of the recession due to trade with Mexico. Millions of people cross the border every day to carry out commerce and trade which continues to be of  great benefit to both countries.

Eight Democratic Congressmen including Texas members Solomon Ortiz, Silvestre Reyes, Ruben Hinojosa, Ciro D. Rodriguez, and Henry Cuellar have sent a letter to President Obama to halt construction of the fence because local communities and local Border Patrol chiefs didn’t have “meaningful input.”As yet no response has been given.

All along the lower Texas-Mexican border under a federal mandate there is supposed to be a border wall constructed along the banks of the Rio Grande River. At the same time the levee system along the river is in need of repairs because if a major hurricane were to strike the area such as Hurricane Beulah in 1967 there could be massive economic damage and loss of life. Local government officials have had a difficult time getting funds to repair the levee system (under the law the levees actually should be under federal budgets since they fall within the International Boundary and Water Commission) from the federal government.

In Brownsville, Texas the situation has gotten very heated as reported in a continuing series of reports by the Rio Grande Guardian. Last year local residents were insulted when Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo was rude to them in a local Congressional hearing inferring they should live in Mexico.  For the most part almost all local government officials and local Congressman have been against the border wall as proposed. Local officials have tried to broker compromises with the Federal government to repair levees as substitutes.

Now a dispute has arisen between Brownsville Mayor Pat Ahumada and City Councilman Charlie Atkinson about whether to proceed with a contract to build a temporary border fence agreed upon with the Bush Administration. Mr. Atkinson inflamed the situation when according to the Rio Grande Guardian he said in reference to supporters of the Mayor the following “A lot of those people are border crossers, they don’t have a right to vote, they’re not U.S. citizens they’re border crossers or Mexican nationals he (Ahumada) is going to bring in”. For now the decision about what to do is tabled because the new Homeland Secretary has not yet reviewed the case. 

Many Hispanics remain troubled that whole border fence issue was initially brought up along with frankly racist rhetoric being given in support of the border fence by Congressmen Tom Duncan (CA) and Tancredo (CO). They were confounded by the wide endorsement of many national Democrats including then Senator Obama which occurred in the fervor of national panic in the post 9/11 era.  Even though the perpetrators of 9/11 crossed the Canadian border the lack of need to build a fence along that border suggests obscured prejudice.

The recent problems between Israel and the Gaza Strip along which there are intensely built and patrolled border fences ( between Gaza and Egypt as well as Gaza and Israel) needs to be considered in re-evaluating the American border fence plan.  Smugglers regularly build tunnels under the fences and shot rockets over them.   Hundreds of lives have been lost, millions of dollars in construction costs used to build a useless fence that could have gone to better uses, and of course that fence has contributed to building more animosity between the two parties making peace ever harder to contemplate.

Along the United States-Mexican border the situation has become strikingly similar. Already Mexican smugglers have built special pick-up trucks that they drive up to the fence to allow a quick access of the area. Portions of the fence have been stripped by Mexican thieves and sold for scrap metal. Along the Arizona border massive tunnels similar to those seen along the Israeli fence have been built to allow drug and human smuggling. All this clearly points to the fact that a fence that is only patrolled and maintained on one side such as is the case in Israel and the U.S. is worthless. Certainly the attitude the fence represents is not one that is going to engender the Mexican government to be supportive. The California fence is under investigation because government contractors used poor grade imported Chinese steel and did not follow other specifications.

It is absolutely proper and necessary that the United States improve border security however its obvious that present course is the wrong one. True border security will absolutely depend upon the cooperation of the Mexican government to maintain their side of the border.  They clearly have an incentive to do so to stop the importation of guns into Mexico. A fence cannot be a substitute for human intelligence, patrols, and surveillance.

The border security issue must be solved concurrently with repairing the levee system of the Rio Grande River and again in consultation with the Mexican government.  The poor levee and drainage system on the Mexican side of the border must be addressed to be sure the American side is adequately prepared for a major storm. The latest proposal does not address all the issues together.

The recent behavior of Mayor Pro Tem Charlie Atkinson is more than reprehensible. There was no reason to hasten construction of the border fence when nothing new has been offered by the new administration. The egregious statements he made to fellow Brownsville citizens are so severe that one wonders how Mr. Atkinson can really continue to serve in government. On the other hand, Mayor Pat Ahumada who demonstrated a cool and steady head during the last hurricane landing is showing his usual common sense and reason. Today there is a report that Homeland Security is offering a temporary fence proposal basically the same as before.

The Obama Administration needs to address the border fence controversy now. Some estimate the overall cost of the whole U.S.-Mexican border fence to be in excess of 70 billion dollars which could be better appropriated in other ways. The failure to act in a timely fashion by the President and his Secretary for Homeland Security is only further fomenting controversy. The legislation which mandated the border fence needs to be repealed.

Tony Magaña grew up in McAllen Texas, attended Texas A&M University, served as an officer in Army Reserve, and holds a doctorate from Harvard University. The co-founder of Contempo Magazine has participated in Valley business for over 20 years.He is a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.

Recently an article appeared in The Monitor, a newspaper in McAllen TX, by the columnist, Andy Comer, entitled Hispanic Wal-Mart is Muy Racist  The writer of the article who admits he has no familiarity with the local culture takes it upon himself to be a judge for whether an Hispanic themed Wal-mart would be appropriate for local Hispanics. The article has ignited controversy in the South Texas border region called the Rio Grande Valley where the population is 90% Hispanic.  For some residents it evoked strong emotions and memories of times past when paternalismo de los anglos was the rule of the day. The following is my own opinion.

Imagine growing up in a place where your ethnic group, the majority,  made up more than 80% of the population but had no elected leaders. The wealth was held by about 10% of the population who were in an different ethnic group. For the majority group if you spoke the language you learned from your mother in school you could spanked by the principal or even expelled. Over half of the majority ethnic group never graduates from high school while most of the minority group goes to college.

The majority group volunteered to fight in war to prove it’s patriotism but still got hassled by border security forces when they drove out of the area where they were a majority. You were always referred to by your ethnic label not your national label. Your ethnic label was not a term that could be considered synonymous with your nationality.

You had to fight for the right to be called a citizen, to be buried with honor as a fallen soldier serving your country, to vote, to go to college, to get a better job, and just to be accepted as everyone else.

No, I am not talking about South Africa instead I am talking about what it was like for many of us and our parents who grew up in the Rio Grande Valley years ago. Today many take it for granted that being a Hispanic and being an American are equal and not mutually exclusive terms but it was not always so. No group of Americans is prouder than the Hispanics of the Rio Grande Valley to be Americans but we all know that it came at a price when we were forced to blend in as much as possible and not be different.

Now we celebrate our American and our Hispanic status together. We can listen to English or Spanish media and freely speak both or either language we want. We can shop in an Anglo grocery store or in the bodega en el barrio. We do not let anyone define for us what is Hispanic or what is American. It is especially not up to you, Andy Comer, columnist of The Monitor newspaper which by the way has been cited by the National Association of Hispanic Journalists for not participating in programs to give Hispanics opportunities in journalism like other newspapers such as the Corpus Christi Caller- Times, to determine for Hispanics what they will and won’t accept and what they think is racist or not.For us racism is not a joke or something to be make light of in a cute newspaper column. With all due respect it is not something you are in a position to ever understand. By your own admission you have not tried to learn any Spanish and it seems have not tried to learn the culture of the people your newspaper serves. You are missing out on how special we hold our unique Rio Grande Valley.

Tony Magaña grew up in McAllen Texas, attended Texas A&M University, served as an officer in Army Reserve, and holds a doctorate from Harvard University. The co-founder of Contempo Magazine has participated in Valley business for over 20 years.He is a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.

The liberal media is presenting the economic recovery debate as having occurred between a united populist Democratic party with a single coherent plan and Republicans who wanted no stimulus plan at all which is far from a true picture. News has been leaking out all week that the Democrats in Congress are anything but united. Progressive social liberals and more conservative centrists are locking horns more and more. There is increasing tension between Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and her fellow Democrats which is being further wedged by the Obama administration.

Congressional Democrats have become divided into three groups. Traditional urban progressive liberals who have held their seats for decades are still in the leadership positions but are finding increasing dissent from two other groups. Forty-Seven mostly Southern Democrats are fiscal conservatives called Blue Dogs who also tend to support gun rights but tend to avoid outright criticism of liberal social issues. Their membership includes the Chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Joe Baca (D-43). Another group called the New Democratic Coalition consisting of 58 members includes South Texas Congressman Henry Cuellar (D-28) has more recently come into focus as a centrist group which is beginning to join forces with the Obama administration in opposing Speaker Pelosi. The New Democratic Coalition has been in existence since 1997 but has been especially active in the 110th Congress. They are promoting business, economic growth, trade growth, and technology. They have distanced themselves away from the primary social focus of traditional urban Democrats. The President’s Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, was an influential member of the New Democratic Coalition when he was in Congress.

Congressman Cuellar announced this week that “the economy recovery bill recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives invests $3 billion in Texas infrastructure:  shovel-ready projects that will create jobs today and serve our communities for decades.  It includes $7.3 billion for Texas schools:  money that will strengthen the economy immediately and improve our children’s lives for a generation.  It invests $1.15 billion in land ports of entry, creating jobs in Texas and harnessing the power of trade to jumpstart our economy.  And it will cut taxes for 95% of working Texans.”

Speaker Nancy Pelosi was widely criticized in a letter sent to the second highest Democrat in the Congress, Representative Hoyer,(D-MD) by 68 members of Congress from the Blue Dogs and New Democrats. They complained that the usual protocol for discussing and writing legislation was not carried in formulating the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (H.R. 1) which is the same complaint that the Republicans have made. There are many reports that the Obama administration has been encouraging Democratic members of Congress to vote to modify the differences between the House version and Senate version more towards the Senate version in defiance of Speaker Pelosi.

While in his public news conference Obama painted the picture of debate in the Congress as being between Democrats and Republicans many are saying privately the big issue emerging is that Obama needs to get the message across to Speaker Nancy Pelosi that Obama is calling the shots. At a retreat for Democratic lawmakers last weekend as reported by The Hill the Speaker stated the urgency of the situation forced her to rush the legislation but relented in saying that future legislation would be handled correctly. Congressional staffers have written anonymously in Politico.com that less than 10 Democratic Congressman were involved in the writing of the House stimulus plan.

Although the public is still giving high ratings to President Obama and appears to agree in general with his plans, a new Rasmussen poll indicates that 62% of Americans want a stimulus plan with more tax cuts and less spending and that 48% believe that increased spending is bad for the economy. Centrist and conservative Democrats are well aware that their potential for re-election in 2010 may hinge on perceptions of how they handled economy and that many economists have predicted that the economy may not improve by the next election.

Tony Magaña grew up in McAllen Texas, attended Texas A&M University, served as an officer in Army Reserve, and holds a doctorate from Harvard University. The co-founder of Contempo Magazine has participated in Valley business for over 20 years.He is a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.