Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Support Our Annual Fund Drive! We only shake you down once a year, but when we do we really mean it. It costs a lot to keep the site afloat, and our growing audience, well over TWO million unique viewers a month, eats up a lot of bandwidth — and bandwidth isn’t free. We aren’t supported by corporate donors, advertisers or big foundations. We survive solely on your support.
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Why Border Police Don’t Deter Migrants

by

The Border Patrol apprehended twice as many unaccompanied minors trying to enter the United States this year as they did last year. In response to this surge in the apprehension of unaccompanied minors, President Obama is requesting $4 billion from Congress. These funds will be used on new Border Patrol agents, immigration judges, aerial surveillance, and new detention facilities – all designed to speed up deportations of people caught at the border.

Spending $4 billion more on enforcement will not alleviate the situation.

Pouring money into border enforcement has never been successful at deterring the flow of migrants. Professor Wayne Cornelius – who has studied this issue for decades – contends that “tightened border enforcement since 1993 has not stopped nor even discouraged unauthorized migrants from entering the United States.”

Speeding up deportations does nothing to address the root causes of this surge in the arrival of unaccompanied minors from Central America. These youth are fleeing violence and instability in their home countries. If we don’t address these issues, these youth will continue to come.

The United States government is already spending unprecedented amounts of money on immigration law enforcement: the total budget authority for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is $60 billion – one fifth of which goes to Customs and Border Patrol (CBP). Another $4 billion will not make CBP more effective unless there is a fundamental shift in policy.

More funding means more agents and more technology. DHS funds have been used to place increasing numbers of CBP agents along the border. There were over 18,000 CBP agents along the US-Mexico border in 2013, as compared to 2,500 in 1993. The number of agents has increased fairly consistently since 1993, even during those years when fewer migrants were attempting to enter the United States. This constant uptick in the number of CBP agents has made the agency more powerful, but has done little to stem the flow of migrants.

There is little correlation between the number of CBP agents along the border and the number of migrants apprehended. Instead, apprehensions are related to the number of people trying to enter. When a lot of migrants attempt to enter, CBP apprehends a lot of people. When fewer migrants attempt to enter, they capture fewer. These apprehensions also track well with economic changes – when unemployment is low, more people try to enter the United States. When there are no jobs, fewer migrants attempt to enter.

The economic recession in the United States and the accompanying high unemployment rates have meant that fewer people are trying to get into this country. This is evidenced by the fact that there were four times as many apprehensions in 2000 as there were last year. In fact, the 400,000 CBP apprehensions in the Southwest sector last year were the lowest they have been since 1974. With border apprehensions the lowest they have been in 40 years, why would anyone advocate for more CBP agents?

It is true that there are more unaccompanied Central American children crossing the border since 2011 than there have been in years past, yet overall border apprehensions are at a historic low. And, border enforcement spending must be understood in this larger context.

Central Americans have been migrating the United States in large numbers since the United States began meddling intensely in the affairs of their countries in the latter decades of the twentieth century.

Increases in the number of agents along the border does not deter migration. Instead, it makes the passage more difficult and dangerous for those migrants that are determined to enter. If we want to protect children, enhancing the number of CBP agents is a terrible idea.

Processing these 40,000 children requires special resources – both because they are children and because many of them are not from Mexico – where they can be more easily sent back. However, the solution is to develop new and better policies – not to throw more money at border enforcement. It seems hard to believe that an agency that apprehended 1.6 million people in 2000 with half the agents it has today needs additional funding in order to do its job.

There were 1.6 million CBP apprehensions along the US-Mexico border in 2000, when there were 8,5000 agents stationed along that border. Last year, we had 18,000 CBP agents along the border and there were 400,000 apprehensions – of which 40,000 were Central American children. In 2013, the average CBP agent apprehended 22 unauthorized migrants. This is compared to over 300 apprehensions per CBP agent in 1996. With these data, it is hard to make a case for more agents. Instead, it seems it is time to cut back.

A much more viable – and affordable – solution is to place the children in alternative-to-detention programs and provide them with a safe haven while the United States and Central American countries work together to develop solutions to the root causes of this rise in the emigration of children. President Obama could also grant refugee status to these children – a viable option under current laws.

The arrival of 40,000 unaccompanied children in the United States is not the crisis. The crisis is the decision to place these children behind bars, which is a clear violation of international human rights laws. The crisis is also the conditions that drove these children to leave their countries. These are the crises that demand our attention.

Tanya Golash-Boza is an Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Merced. She is the author of: Race and Racisms: A Critical ApproachYo Soy Negro Blackness in PeruImmigration Nation: Raids, Detentions and Deportations in Post-9/11 Americaand Due Process Denied: Detentions and Deportations in the United States. She blogs at: http://stopdeportationsnow.blogspot.com

Tanya Golash-Boza is the author of: Yo Soy Negro Blackness in PeruImmigration Nation: Raids, Detentions and Deportations in Post-9/11 Americaand Due Process Denied: Detentions and Deportations in the United States. Her new book Deported: Immigrant Policing, Disposable Labor, and Global Capitalism will be published by NYU Press in 2015.

More articles by:

2016 Fund Drive
Smart. Fierce. Uncompromised. Support CounterPunch Now!

  • cp-store
  • donate paypal

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

September 29, 2016
Robert Fisk
The Butcher of Qana: Shimon Peres Was No Peacemaker
James Rose
Politics in the Echo Chamber: How Trump Becomes President
Russell Mokhiber
The Corporate Vice Grip on the Presidential Debates
Daniel Kato
Rethinking the Race over Race: What Clinton Should do Now About ‘Super-Predators’
Peter Certo
Clinton’s Awkward Stumbles on Trade
Fran Shor
Demonizing the Green Party Vote
Rev. William Alberts
Trump’s Road Rage to the White House
Luke O'Brien
Because We Couldn’t Have Sanders, You’ll Get Trump
Michael J. Sainato
How the Payday Loan Industry is Obstructing Reform
Robert Fantina
You Can’t Have War Without Racism
Gregory Barrett
Bad Theater at the United Nations (Starring Kerry, Power, and Obama
James A Haught
The Long, Long Journey to Female Equality
Thomas Knapp
US Military Aid: Thai-ed to Torture
Jack Smith
Must They be Enemies? Russia, Putin and the US
Gilbert Mercier
Clinton vs Trump: Lesser of Two Evils or the Devil You Know
Tom H. Hastings
Manifesting the Worst Old Norms
George Ella Lyons
This Just in From Rancho Politico
September 28, 2016
Eric Draitser
Stop Trump! Stop Clinton!! Stop the Madness (and Let Me Get Off)!
Ted Rall
The Thrilla at Hofstra: How Trump Won the Debate
Robert Fisk
Cliché and Banality at the Debates: Trump and Clinton on the Middle East
Patrick Cockburn
Cracks in the Kingdom: Saudi Arabia Rocked by Financial Strains
Lowell Flanders
Donald Trump, Islamophobia and Immigrants
Shane Burley
Defining the Alt Right and the New American Fascism
Jan Oberg
Ukraine as the Border of NATO Expansion
Ramzy Baroud
Ban Ki-Moon’s Legacy in Palestine: Failure in Words and Deeds
Gareth Porter
How We Could End the Permanent War State
Sam Husseini
Debate Night’s Biggest Lie Was Told by Lester Holt
Laura Carlsen
Ayotzinapa’s Message to the World: Organize!
Binoy Kampmark
The Triumph of Momentum: Re-Electing Jeremy Corbyn
David Macaray
When the Saints Go Marching In
Seth Oelbaum
All Black Lives Will Never Matter for Clinton and Trump
Adam Parsons
Standing in Solidarity for a Humanity Without Borders
Cesar Chelala
The Trump Bubble
September 27, 2016
Louisa Willcox
The Tribal Fight for Nature: From the Grizzly to the Black Snake of the Dakota Pipeline
Paul Street
The Roots are in the System: Charlotte and Beyond
Jeffrey St. Clair
Idiot Winds at Hofstra: Notes on the Not-So-Great Debate
Mark Harris
Clinton, Trump, and the Death of Idealism
Mike Whitney
Putin Ups the Ante: Ceasefire Sabotage Triggers Major Offensive in Aleppo
Anthony DiMaggio
The Debates as Democratic Façade: Voter “Rationality” in American Elections
Binoy Kampmark
Punishing the Punished: the Torments of Chelsea Manning
Paul Buhle
Why “Snowden” is Important (or How Kafka Foresaw the Juggernaut State)
Jack Rasmus
Hillary’s Ghosts
Brian Cloughley
Billions Down the Afghan Drain
Lawrence Davidson
True Believers and the U.S. Election
Matt Peppe
Taking a Knee: Resisting Enforced Patriotism
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail
[i]
[i]
[i]
[i]