Congressional Democrats are cowards. They are so fearful of violating the party’s new orthodoxy on border security they are abandoning sensible policies. Democrats still serving in Congress voted for border fences in 1996, 2006, 2007, and 2013. This last a vote for a Senate bill (on which House Republicans failed to act) that had $7.5 billion to “deploy, repair, or replace fencing” on our Southern border. All Democrats in the Senate at the time voted for this, as did 14 Republicans. But today, mention the word “wall” and Democrats develop a nervous tic, denying what they had supported in the past.

In that environment it is hard to have a rational discussion about border security, or much of anything.

For a more reasonable view from a Democrat, look no further than the Obama Administration. You may immediately reject the idea of linking Obama to border security, but this example illuminates the craven cowardice of current congressional Democrats.

In one of the last budgets submitted to Congress by the Obama Administration, funding for fences was justified as follows:

“In support of other USBP [U.S. Border Patrol] mission elements, the pedestrian and vehicle fences provide persistent impedance by slowing, delaying, and acting as a USBP force multiplier. If the required fences are not properly constructed or replaced, access points will be available for cross-border activity. The gaps in the fence, particularly in urban locations, will in turn lead to an increase in crime and threats to national security and agent safety.” (Dept. of Homeland Security, Border Security Fencing, infrastructure, and Technology, FY 2016, page 21)

But that was then, this is now.  Congressman Pete Aguilar (D-CA) throws up this smokescreen: “We’ve seen that walls can and will be tunneled under, cut through or scaled. We can’t focus on archaic solutions in order to address this very modern problem. Technology works for securing the border.” (Washington Post, 1/31/19)

“Archaic solutions?” President Obama did you know you’ve become archaic?

Return again to the Obama administration. Confronted with the problem described by Rep. Aguilar the Obama administration sought funds to “remove and replace” a section of existing pedestrian fence that had failed.  As described in the administration’s budget request: “This section of fence has been successfully exploited by Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCOs) due to ease of concealment (the fence is within a populated area) and due to the inadequate design of the fence (the fence lacks adequate height, foundation, and strength). The funding requested will address these vulnerabilities.” (Dept. of Homeland Security, Border Security Fencing, infrastructure, and Technology, FY 2016, p. 42)

So fences are useful. When they are poorly designed or poorly constructed, fix them. Wow.

Obama administration border security budget requests talked about using both tactical infrastructure (“roads, fencing, gates, bridges, crossovers, lighting, electrical components, drainage structures, vegetation removal, debris removal, towers”) and technology.

Democrats will claim that fences have already been built, which is true. There is about 654 miles in fencing. But only 354 miles is pedestrian fencing and the rest is vehicle barriers, through which illegal immigrants can walk. So, the 1,954-mile border with Mexico is barely covered. In a survey of border patrol agents, 89% agreed that “a wall system in strategic locations is necessary to securing the border.” Sensible Congressional Democrats know what needs to be done. They are afraid of their radical shadows. Are any of them willing to write a new chapter in Profiles in Courage?