Other Than Mexicans
Department of Public Safety Director Steve McCraw testified before Senate Finance today, sharing his concern that crime in Dallas, Houston, Austin and San Antonio is very much connected to Mexican drug cartels, operating though the potent prison gangs Texas Syndicate and Texas Mafia.
For most, that’s not particularly “new” news. But McCraw also shared some statistics that gave his audience great pause: Last year, law enforcement agencies operating in the Rio Grande Valley apprehended what they refer to as 287 OTMs (other than Mexicans) — illegal immigrants from countries with active Al Qaeda cells or Taliban activity. Places like Yemen, Iran, Pakistan, etc. Even more startling was a federal General Accounting Office statistic that law enforcement’s net catches only about 6.5 percent of the criminal activity coming across the border. In the hearing, Sen. Dan Patrick suggested that we could extrapolate that the 287 potential “terrorists” represents only 6.5 percent of the total threat.
McCraw gave the Finance Committee solid reasons to believe that investment in border security operations reaps dividends. Last year, thanks to an additional state-funded DPS presence on the border, drug seizures increased 124 percent and cash seizures jumped by 137 percent.
Neither the Senate or House proposed bills cut too deeply into DPS border operations, but my prediction is that this is one area of the budget that won’t be trimmed.
Betsy Ross says:
Old news. DPS has been testifying as to these OTM numbers in committee since at least 2007.
Reply »
Cow Droppings Reply:
February 21st, 2011 at 7:57 pm
every year the Texas Transportation Institute release a report that comes to the same conclusion: traffic is getting worse. And yet, somehow it still makes national news each time. Why? Because it is a big deal.
Reply »
longleaf Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:10 am
And Road Warrior Rick Perry can say, in keeping with our theme here, “‘AyahTOLLya’ so.”
Reply »
Danielle Patrick says:
Did Senator Patrick offer up an amendment to force DPS to give all pregnant female OTMs to have sonograms, in case running across South Texas ranch land and barbed wire fences might injure their babies?
Reply »
In that Case... says:
…I have just discovered information that says that without adequate education funding, Al Qaeda will win the state UIL football championships.
Man, if I could sell that, even Debbie Riddle would vote to support education funding. (By the way, her FBI agent is my source.)
Reply »
Deborah Riddler Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Rape, incest, health of the mother—and OTM terror babies?
Reply »
Fear the fear-mongers says:
But by all means, continue the drug prohibition that has funded this violence. The drug war gives aid and comfort to our enemies, more than all the islamo-fascists put together.
If it is not ended, it will be the death of this country.
Reply »
Joaquin Castro says:
This is probably the only issue where the border region has (funding) priority over the rest of the state (for obvious reasons); not higher ed, public ed, transportation infrastructure, etc.
Reply »
anita Reply:
February 21st, 2011 at 8:20 pm
Sadly, that’s correct.
Reply »
John Johnson says:
Everyone seems to want to make this a racial issue, but it is not. It is just easier for the other side to debate their case when they bring race into the equation.
What if all Latinos coming across our southern borders were light complexioned, sandy headed, and had surnames like Smith and Jones? Would we not still be faced with the same problems? Would not the ground swell of support for reform be the same? I think it would.
I liken it to Texas being a large life boat. We have been floating around for years plucking illegals out of the choppy water. The life boat is now full. Some want to keep on pulling them in; others say we can’t afford to.
Commonsense tells us that if we overload the boat, everyone is going to drown. I think we are at this crossroad.
Tough decisions have to be made and they have nothing to do with race. They have to do with what is best for future generations of Americans….for my children and grandchildren.
Our federal government is responsible by law for protecting our borders, yet their efforts are rudimentary, at best. Some would say that this is because both political parties have a vested interest in seeing that the status quo is maintained. The Dem’s want to come across as kind hearted and the Latino’s best friend because it means votes; the Repub’s large business and agricultural base needs the cheap labor to stay competitive. Therefore, the fence gets ridden.
Arizona took bold steps to protect themselves from the ongoing illegal migration, but the fed’s took exception and have thrown up roadblocks and brought the courts into the battle. I’m going to have to side with Arizona.
Let’s say that the local laws in your area make it the responsibility of the local fire department to rush to your home and extinguish a blaze if your house catches on fire.
Let’s say that your house does catch on fire, and you call the fire department but they don’t come. The flame leaps over to a neighbor’s house; he calls the fire department, but they still don’t respond. When a third neighbor’s house is set ablaze, he grabs water hoses and begins fighting the fire himself knowing that two structures have burned to the ground due to the fire department’s failure to show. Once he gets the fire put out, the fire marshal appears and arrests the man for performing a job that he is not authorized to do.
What is the difference with this scenario and the battle that Arizona is fighting right now with the federal government? Arizona after repeated calls for help takes matters into their own hands to protect their state and way of life. They are threatened and rebuked by the federal government when they do so.
We need definitive federal action to shore up our porous borders and determine how to handle the illegal’s already here. Cutting DPS funding makes matters only worse.
Reply »
anita Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 9:49 am
Under what theory are we “drowning” — how is “our life boat full”?
If you are referring to our fiscal situation, no objective source cites immigrants as a primary cause of our $27B hole.
If we don’t have jobs for people, that seems to run directly counter to our Governor’s mantra.
Immigrants, legal or otherwise, pay the exact same taxes as citizens, and their willingness to work for lower wages subsidizes many of the things we purchase every day, from a new house to a meal at a restaurant.
And I think it’s a stretch to say that “Arizona took bold steps to protect themselves from the ongoing illegal migration, but the fed’s took exception and have thrown up roadblocks and brought the courts into the battle.” We have a Constitution, and it was invoked by private parties in bringing suit, as well as the DOJ. In fact, it was the Arizona Legislature that first recognized that their staute was likely unconstitutional on its face, so they made last minute changes in an attempt to mend it.
It’s fair to say you oppose immigration, but to say Texas is “drowning” because of it has no basis in fact.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:22 am
“If you are referring to our fiscal situation, no objective source cites immigrants as a primary cause of our $27B hole.”
Anita, it is ridiculous to posit the idea that illegal immigrants are a financial net gain because of the taxes they pay and jobs they do. Look at what has happened in California– hospitals and health care facilities closing because they are overrun by illegals who get free care courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer. This what JJ is talking about– if the lifeboat is not full we are heading down that road unless we do something about border security.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:49 am
Anita did not say illegal immigrants were a financial net gain — you’re twisting words. If her post is so ridiculous, why don’t you cite the objective source finding immigrants as a primary cause of $27B in the hole?
John Johnson Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 5:30 pm
Anita, I believe that you are the one that is “twisting words”. Nowhere in my post did I say a thing about illegal immigrants(they are not immigrants) being the primary cause of our defict. They certainly do contribute.
They do pay taxes; they pay fees; they buy from local retailers, but they do not cover their way.
Much of what they make is sent back home and never spent here.
It is the free medical, free school feeding, free legal aid, cost of incarceration, etc. that creates the problems.
With regards to the Arizona’s legislation, you miss my point entirely. The Fed’s are required by law to help stem the flow and they are not doing it. This is the bottomline.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Well said John J.
Reply »
roadgeek says:
Well, here we go again. Paul, you point out that 287 OTM’s were found on the border, thus highlighting, in my mind at least, the need for more security and fortifications on the border. Yet a book review I read today, in your magazine no less, suggests the utter pointlessness of a border wall. I know that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds but you simply can’t have it both ways. I wonder how many OTM’s made it across and into the country, if the Border Patrol caught 287? Paul? Any thoughts?
Reply »
cb says:
The category “OTM” includes many other countries, including Latin America – it is used to refer to Central and South Americans, for example. So I wonder if those 287 were OTMs or more specifically people from “countries of interest,” as the Department of Homeland Security deems Iran, Pakistan, etc. There is also nothing to indicate that any of those 287 were in fact members of Al Qaeda or the Taliban – to this day, DHS has not confirmed apprehending a single terrorist on the U.S.-Mexico border. Furthermore, these individuals are apprehended by the Border Patrol, which is very heavily staffed now and is fully funded by the federal government. So, how do we go from supposed terrorists to the need for more state border security funding? Sure, the higher presence of DPS troopers on the highways raised drug and cash seizures by more than 100 percent last year, but that is still a drop in the bucket given the real scope of drugs and weapons trafficking. This is not the way to reduce border crime.
The rhetoric and numbers sound impressive and scary, but they must be understood in context. The state has a bigger responsibility to public education, but that’s a subject that doesn’t score political points like border security. And this is coming from a resident of the border who wants to see it secured.
Reply »
Cow Droppings Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:45 am
border patrol fully funded? We have enough federal agents to secure the border? Really???
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
Leaving our borders open has far reaching consequences. I sat on a jury a couple of years ago. An illegal from South America working in the US since 1987, had been charged with DWI. We found him guilty of DWI. He elected the judge sentence him. He received jail time served, no fine, no court costs, and kept his TDL.
He had a Texas driver’s liscense, so I’m assuming he could vote here. He didn’t respect our laws. He didn’t want to assimulate, he had a wife and kids back homeand only came here to work 6 mos a year.
No wonder our culture is changing.
Reply »
anita says:
“He had a Texas driver’s liscense, so I’m assuming he could vote here.”
He cannot vote here. He is not a citizen.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:35 am
of course he can’t…wink wink
Reply »
anita Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:58 am
Seriously, can you cite a single instance of a non-citizen prosecuted for voting in Texas? At some point, it becomes difficult to logically converse about public policy when you want to assert that something is happening that is illegal today, has been illegal forever, and there’s never been an instance presented or proven in a court of law of a person violating the law.
Reply »
Nick Manning Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 12:38 pm
Of course he cant.
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 1:34 pm
Of course he cant.
“In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens.”
The author Hans A. von Spakovsky served as a member of the Federal Election Commission for two years. Before that, he was Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice, where he specialized in voting and election issues. He also served as a county election official in Georgia for five years as a member of the Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections. This report was produced for The Heritage Foundation.
http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=691
FortBend5yearold Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 1:48 pm
Mom, Mexicans are scary!!!
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 2:45 pm
Bill White said it was the feds fault,
“On Tuesday, Mayor Bill White said the disclosure about the immigration status of Wilfido Joel Alfaro, who was fatally shot by officers executing a drug search warrant Thursday night, highlights the federal government’s failure to identify and deport illegal immigrants convicted of crimes. Officer Richard Salter, shot in the face during the raid, in southeast Houston remains at a local hospital.
White said the federal government has “let us down.”
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/6303176.html
anita Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 10:17 am
“In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens.”
JBB, I hate to burst your bubble about civic responsibility, but folks have been known to avoid jury duty by claiming an exception to service. And different states use different pools to set juries — this sampling is not from Texas. Bottom line, how you make the leap from a person checking a box to avoid service on a jury to actually showing up and voting in an election escapes me. It’s illegal today, its been illegal forever.
Vernon says:
Paul or anyone: Can you provide more details on those 287 OTMs? How many were from each country? Were any of those arrested confirmed as operating under Al Qaeda, Taliban, etc.?
I would think if state law enforcement arrested a bona fide terrorist operative(s) crossing into Texas, it would’ve made major headlines. Or, did I just miss that story?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 2:59 pm
good article jbb. naturally you didn’t mention it was from march 2009. Hmmm, I wonder who was in charge of the federal government from 2001 to 2009 and did nothing about illegal immigration?? care to venture a guess?
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 6:09 am
I think in 2009 it was Obama/Pelosi/Reid and I won’t pile on and and mention Joe Biden.
If memory serves me correct the democrats had control of the US House and Senate from 2006.
Your point?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 8:30 am
so, republican hold the presidency from 2001 to 2009, the house from 1994 until 2006 and the senate for a portion of that span. in all that time NOTHING was done about immigration but all the blame lies with obama, pelosi and reid??? Do I have that correct? I suggest you get your meds checked out.
Anonymous says:
You did not miss a story Vernon.
Reply »
Anon says:
It’s not $27 billion, it’s $15 billion.
Reply »
Tim says:
I’m sure this has nothing to do with the fact that he’s looking at getting his budget slashed.
Reply »
Vernon Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 2:23 pm
It does seem like a stretch to imply we’re apprehending Middle East terrorists at the TX/MX border in the hundreds and possibly missing hundreds more.
It’s especially suspect to make that fearful implication at a finance hearing.
Have these implications ever been presented in any other committee hearing? Border/Intergov Affairs? Homeland Security and Public Safety? Defense and Veteran’s Affairs?
Reply »
Pat says:
The nightclubs in Dallas are well-known to be “retail shops” for the cartels. In the West Village there’s a Zeta who bounces for a popular club – GAFE tatoos, red mohawk, and walky-talky. The cops just look on. Many of the kids who drink there have no idea who they’re walking past.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
“Illegals” are welcomed to Texas because they cost us nothing in welfare, medical care, edu etc.
However, Federal dollars pays for a clinic in Rosenberg, where you can get “free healthcare”, “braces” for the kids. The director of the clinic estimates 95% of their client base are illegals.
Reply »