Funny Numbers for Perry’s Border Security?
May 3rd, 2007 at 8:12 am
Back several months ago, the El Paso Times had an explosive story, the importance of which was somewhat buried in the body of the article. The Times‘ Capitol reporter Brandi Grissom seems to be the only mainstream journalist who is truly looking into Gov. Rick Perry’s extravagant claims that operations conducted out of his office on the border are having a dramatic impact on crime in the area.
“Border sheriffs are using federal dollars meant to fight drugs and violent crime to enforce federal immigration laws,” Grissom found.
Perry has been touting similar “surge” operations since before the election, and they are often cited as evidence that the governor’s border plan, which he has been implementing without a legislative mandate, is working. This is given as the rationale for why that the governor needs the extraordinary new law enforcement authority that would be granted to him if House Bill 13 passes.
The data seem shaky enough that it prompted a rare open letter from the border police chiefs, who are responsible for combating the majority of crime along the border, yet are receiving no funds for the “surge.”
The letter criticizes the operations:
(We) are also concerned about the results the Governor’s Office of Homeland Security has so far claimed to have obtained through its programs with the border sheriffs. Therefore, we openly question how their statistics and success rates have been calculated.
We believe that these programs have been based on “surge” operations thus far. Using the “surge” tactic may in instances temporarily reduce crime in an area while the operation is undergoing, but it in no way produces a sustained effect. In fact, we recommend the DPS practice of disrupting and dismantling crime rather than the method currently used by the Governor’s Office of Homeland Security, which is disrupting and deterring crime and includes these “surge” operations.
It’s time that citizen journalists helped Brandi out. The Observer is making available the Texas Border Sherrif’s monthly reports, the supposed audits that form the basis for one of Perry’s successes: Operation Linebacker. Here are PDFs of December ‘05, January ‘06, February, March, April, and May. (If you need to rotate some of those docs, it’s easiest to do by opening the Adobe Reader program, as opposed to viewing them in your web browser. Then go View -> Rotate View.)
These reports raise lots of questions. We are hoping that you kindly reader, will review them and help add to our list. Here are a few general ones to get the ball rolling, but feel free to be more specific:
Why do the sheriffs need so much overtime to cover their own counties, particularly if they have so little to show for it?
It appears that actual drug interdiction has been limited. Is that so?
Where did y’all come up with these outcome measures?
What is happening to the assets seized in these operations?
Happy hunting and have fun!
May 7th, 2007 at 9:20 am
[…] In fact, it is Swinford who has been playing politics: The $100 million is in the House budget not in HB 13. Over the weekend, Grits for Breakfast ably debunked the ridiculous assertion that Culberson could somehow determine funding and/or its destination. Scott Henson pointed out that Culberson, in the minority in Congress, is not in a position to promise much of anything. Steve Taylor at the Rio Grande Guardian has already reported that U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, a subcommittee chairman on the Homeland Security Committee, has made it clear that congress has no intention of giving money for border protection to the state. “If we are successful in getting more border security funding we are not looking at it as reimbursement to the state for the funding they provide to the border. Our money would go straight to the border sheriffs,” Cuellar told Taylor. Assertions that Perry’s homeland security department—acting through the border sheriffs—has done a competent job of protecting the border don’t hold up to scrutiny. A perfect example can be seen in today’s El Paso Times or you can judge for yourself. […]