Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-08-23/homeland-security-secretary-janet-napolitano
Janet Napolitano, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, tells the 131st National Guard Association National Conference meeting in Nashville, Tenn., on Sept. 13, 2009, that the National Guard is essential to homeland security.
U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Jim Greenhill for The National Guard via Flickr
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on why more is better when it comes to securing the border. She describes the $600 million federal commitment for technology and personnel to make the country safer.
Guests
Janet Napolitano
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, former governor of Arizona.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Why isn't there more discussion on changing immigration laws? Wouldn't laws that include worker permits reduce stress at the border and allow border agents to concentrate on terrorists and drugs?
Secondly, drugs are so readily available in this country anyway, way not legalize it and do away with that problem at the border as well?
Bob
Raleigh, NC
Al Gillis, in San Antonio TX I have read that the Mexican border is only 27 percent of the immigration problem. Also I was in Rockaway NYC when the oriental ship ran aground. Islanders immigrate along Atlantic coast... Where di we REALLY need security and protection. Thank You
Al Gillis, in San Antonio TX I have read that the Mexican border is only 27 percent of the immigration problem. Also I was in Rockaway NYC when the oriental ship ran aground. Islanders immigrate along Atlantic coast... Where do we REALLY need security and protection. Thank You
I am currently trying to submit a From I-612 (A form in the legal immigration process to request a wavier for a J1 visa holder -my wife) to the US Department of Citizen and immigration Services, which is under the Department of Homeland Security. And, I am unable to do so due to the failure of the department to up date the submission address for more than two years after closing the address that is currently listed and given out by ALL USCIS Officers. I have noway to file a legal from that you are, by law, required to allow me to file. Why do you believe that the Federal government can administer the processes concerning illegal immigration when it is unable to administer the LEGAL processes?!
With all the discussions about keeping people from crossing the Mexican border I can't recall any review of punishment of employers and people who employ illegal immigrants. If people can't get jobs here they won't cross the border. As long as there are jobs they will come here to work - and who can blame them??
Why are we focused on people who just want to better their lives and totally ignoring the the American companies that are breaking laws put in place prevent their hire?
I remember a huge arrest of illegal immigrants and thier employer in Massachusetts several years ago but nothing since.
Anne
Washington, DC
love the interview, I would be interest in hearing about how HLS is addressing or reviewing issues with technology and job being outsourced to other countries around the globe.
invidiual laws cultures of each country seem to be something we should be concerned about. seems to me we are potentiually opening ourselves to a lot of trouble.
John
Greensboro, NC
I would like to comment as a certified school nurse. I feel that we have spent billions in Iraq fighting against WMD that were not there. If we had spent even a fraction of that money on homeland security, maybe tragedies like Virginia Tech could have been minimized. Schools have made some progress in security, but have a long way to go, and I am sure money is a big part of the issue.
All school must have a method of locking doors from the inside, (so you don't have to stepout on the hall to lock it-and possibly be in view of a shooter). All campuses must have a way to contact all students and staff to trigger a lockdown if danger is present.
Safety is important anywhere we work or play. Home grown terrorism is here right now. Recently not far from my home in Mi a group was arrested for plotting to kill police. We need more resources at home.
LM, M.Ed., BSN, RN School Nurse
These new government initiatives to resolve social problems (War on Drugs, Immigration, War on Terrorism...) are built into multi-million dollar programs and agencies without any timeline/bench marks to denote when they should be resolved and discontinued. They become more bureaucratic, expensive and entrenched in government and society. The result is a continued drain on the American economy without solving the problem. There is something wrong when people make careers or look forward to a career in Homeland Security, the War on Drugs, etc. This eludes to the fact these problems will not be resolved by the current strategies, but rather endure providing income for some and despair for those caught in the cross fire. The hundreds of thousands quoted as working for Homeland Security is not a comforting thought if there is no estimated timeline to begin down sizing.
Cubans are still allowed to immagrate to this country, and given resident status immediatly. Yet, they come form a country that our government continues to traet as a rogue state. Why are they allowed in unconditionally when Mexican immigrants are hunted down and returned to their country. They are from a "friendly" country.
If we're talking about Muslim terrorism, let's not forget that the bombing of abortion clinics and the assassination of abortion doctors are examples of terrorism by so called Christians.
The problem is not Islam or Christianity, but extremism.
Arizona is overrun with illegal immigrants and drug cartels shooting our law enforcement officers. How are you measuring success in immigration enforcement? What are the metrics?
I have listened with interest to the questions that were allowed to be asked of the Secretary of Homeland Security. It seems apparent that the question screening eliminated any questions that would be difficult to answer or embarrassing for the Secretary. Is there anyone in NPR interested in asking tough questions?
Hello! In addition to spending most of my life living in Arizona, I undertook extensive research for my doctoral dissertation and my recent book "Nation, Immigration, and Environmental Security" (published by Palgrave). I investigated Clinton and Bush Administration security documents and immigration policies, college-level, U.S. mainstream media articles and letters to the editor, introductory political science textbooks, and position papers from several non-governmental organizations.
Among other things, I found that the vast majority of today's anti-immigration, and indeed anti-immigrant, discourse is deeply embedded in stereotypes, misinformation, and DIS-information, much of which is virulently racist, sexist, and xenophobic, not to mention wholly inaccurate. This enables immigration across the U.S./Mexico border to once again become the scapegoat for a whole host of problems ranging from crime, economic downturn, and the depletion of social resources, to environmental destruction and insecurity.
I genuinely implore everyone to do your own research, to investigate a variety of resources (not simply those that reinforce your own opinion), and to interrogate your own thinking, i.e. where do your beliefs come from? What interests do they serve? And most of all, investigate state and federal domestic policy; investigate US foreign policy including economic policy; investigate IMF, World Bank and WTO policies and rulings. In short, rather than taking the easy way out by scapegoating immigrants, and communities of color more generally, investigate the structural and systemic causes of the economic, social, political, and environmental crises we as a world community are facing. As Vandana Shiva and others have argued (to paraphrase), simplistic analysis leads to simplistic solutions, and these "solutions" have very real, life and death consequences for many, many people.
I was very disappointed in the interview this morning with Janet Napolitano. Kid gloves, check; pulled punches, check; soft balls; warm and fuzzy cozy chat with the host, check; sane sounding callers for support, check; crazy callers for opposition, check. How in the world do you call this a real interview when she was allowed to smooze her way around, make excuses, exaggerate the effectiveness of the department has given. Why not allow a real, intelligent critic also appear on the show at the same time so she would have to answer real questions and not be able to weasel out of answering tough questions.
What a pitiful, partisan waste of time.