In 1986, the San Diego Border Patrol sector accounted for approximately one-third of all apprehensions along the U.S.-Mexico border. Today, it accounts for only a small fraction.
How did the region go from one of the busiest sectors for illegal border crossings to one of the most secure? In our latest edition of “Underreported,” The Daily Signal visits the U.S.-Mexico border in San Diego to find out.
Monday, April 24, 2017
NBPC Local 1613 would like to thank the Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC) for their support of Law Enforcement officers at every level and their opposition of California Senate Bill 54 (SB 54).
NBPC Local 1613 would also like to state that the supporters of this bill fail to mention the fact that legal measures are already codified to protect victims of crimes and those reporting crimes such as "T" and "U" visas. They would have the public believe that victims and those reporting crimes would be the focus of immigration enforcement actions rather than the criminals we are trying to protect the public from. This bill would seriously inhibit the ability of Border Patrol Agents to protect the public by limiting our access to databases and our collaborations with other Law Enforcement agencies.
The following is the full statement from PORAC.
SB 54: “Sanctuary State”
Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León is attempting to keep law enforcement agencies from cooperating with federal immigration agents with his introduction of SB 54. This bill is one of the highest-profile bills in California, as it goes directly against President Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration.
SB 54 would place certain restrictions on state and local government entities in their interactions with federal immigration authorities. PORAC opposes this measure for three critical reasons:
The bill requires a local law enforcement agency to report to the Department of Justice if they are involved in special immigration task forces. These task forces can be costly and possibly non-reimbursable. Additionally, federal funding to our local agencies could be put at risk.
SB 54 plans to remove people with immigrant status from California jails and place them in an outside detention facility — thus separating them from their families, communities and networks, and creating even more difficulties in the family unit.
The breakdown of local, state and federal partnerships will prevent our officers from being able to do their jobs; therefore, violent criminals will remain on the streets and our families will be in danger.
PORAC’s main concern is public safety. We protect all Californians, immigrants and nonimmigrants alike. By targeting immigrants who are not criminals, we violate all that we stand for and lose the trust we have within our communities.
The National Border Patrol Council and Local 1613 continue to push for the resources and Agents needed to secure the border. A comprehensive package with the funding of the wall that includes increased manpower, pay parity (FLSA), vehicles, roads, radios and cameras is needed. This funding should be allocated to the Border Patrol directly. Changes also need to be made to the hiring process and the overall structure of CBP. Border Patrol Agents also need a better career ladder and actions must be taken to mitigate the high attrition rates. These are a few of the things that need to be addressed going forward.
NBPC Local 1613 is cautiously optimistic by the statements of Attorney Genreal Sessions and DHS Secretary Kelly. We encourage them to continue beyond the words and ensure the necessary actions are taken to give the Border Patrol the resources needed to truly secure the border.
The NBPC and McAllister and Quinn lobbying firm are optimistic that we will be able to get FLSA back for our members. There have been several factors that have made this more of a real possiblity. One being the Presidents executive order that called for the hiring of 5,000 new BPA's and 10,000 new ICE officers. Another is the fact that (A) CBP Commisioner Mcaleenan and DHS Secretary Kelly have made statements in favor of pay parity within CBP. These are but two of the reasons NBPC believes we can get FLSA back.
See the full notes for more information from the convention.
NBPC Local 1613
Election Committee Findings
On January 10, 2017, the Election Committee convened to review an election protest for the open position of Secretary for Local 1613. An allegation had been made that the AFGE Rules
Of Conduct For An Election, specifically Section 4(b) had been violated. Section 4(b) reads:
SEC. 4(b). No monetary or other resources of AFGE or any employer shall be contributed or applied to promote the candidacy of any candidate in an election. Such resources include, but are not restricted to, dues monies and assessments, publications, facilities, office equipment, union or employer email, stationery, or other supplies. While the preceding restrictions apply to use of AFGE resources to promote the candidacy of any candidate, such resources may be used for such things as notices, factual statements of issues not involving the candidates, and other expenses necessary to conduct an election.
A majority of the Committee determined that a violation did occur within the meaning of Section
4(b), specifically the use of resources and facilities in the promotion of a candidate. The majority of the Committee based it's conclusion on the following:
1. On December 5, 2016, Mr. Harris appeared on the Green Line podcast;
2. The Green Line podcast is an enterprise supported financially by the Union;
3. The Committee views the use of the podcast as a "resource" and "facility" in regards to its potential to promote a candidate.
While a majority of the Committee determined that a violation did take place, other observations made by the Committee are worth noting:
1. The Committee was unanimous in its determination that there was not an "overt" attempt by Mr. Harris to campaign for or promote himself as a candidate for the position of Secretary. At no time did Mr. Harris communicate his status as a candidate for a position within the Executive Board of Local 1613, nor was there any mention of an election in general terms referenced at anytime during the podcast.
2. While there was no overt campaign acts observed, the Committee does believe that Mr. Harris appearance on the podcast could have the potential to "elevate" Mr. Harris profile among listeners of the podcast.
3. The duties of the Director of Legislative and Political Affairs require the reporting and the dissemination of information, in relation to the purview of the Directorship, with the podcast being a vehicle for such distribution.
4. That the Union erred in allowing a candidate to access items, resources and facilities during what can be construed as a politically sensitive period.
The Committee is unanimous in seeking the following remedies:
1. Conducting a third run-off election for the Secretary position;
2. The temporary removal of the Green Line Episode 122 during the run-off period.
While there is an overarching theme of "fairness" desired for this and any election, the Committee does not feel that it is appropriate for Mr. Moriarty to appear on the podcast during the third run-off. We believe that having another candidate appear on the podcast would constitute another violation of Section 4(b).
John A. Guerrero
Alexander C. Roozen