Denton Ban against Fracking Appropriate

Denton city banned fracking in all areas within its borders. The northern city of Texas residents voted for the ban after associating it with the frequent earthquakes in the area. Their victory was fleeting after Governor Greg Abbot struck back with another ban. The ban prohibited all cities and towns in Texas from banning fracking. Fracking is like a timed bomb whose impact and time of explosion is unknown. Fracking should not be allowed until the link between it, and the earthquake is established.

In the past, serious disasters that would have been avoided or whose impact reduced occurred. They occurred because the relevant authorities ignored or dismissed the signs. The 2005 hurricane Katrina in New Orleans is one example. It is still fresh in the minds of many people. Three years earlier, the Times-Picayune, the city’s main newspaper had devoted several days to cover a special series, “Washing Away”. The city authorities ignored the warning and the hurricane killed many people.

Greg Abbot and his circles of politicians are interested in the revenue from the energy activities. They are aware of the danger posed by fracking. However, they decide to overlook the lurking danger.

Apart from the unknown magnitude of the potential earthquake, fracking has psychological effects. People are reluctant to invest in Denton for fear of a possible earthquake. As a result, the value of land in Denton is falling.

Fracking is an important source of energy that keeps the state and regions beyond in motion. The revenue generated goes into helping the same people who are against it. However, their lives are more precious than anything else.

The fight against fracking is founded on the wellbeing of the society. This is consistent with the state’s goal for its people. Consequently, the governor should collaborate with experts in the field of seismology to find whether or not fracking and earthquake are linked. Otherwise, before the real situation is established, the fracking should stop.

"Sanctuary Cities" In Texas

The issue of Sanctuary cities and their plan to have more control on immigration rules is in bad taste. This shows an intention of the said cities in using the laws as they wish, and disadvantage many immigrants who may not be having any issue to do with the immigrants, whose only aim is to work for the betterment of their lives, and that of their families. In essence, the history of the larger United States is such that the immigrants were very vital in its progress. Therefore, it will be wrong to punish them, when they do not have an outright offence.

What the sanctuary cities have in mind is that they will bring heaven by having more control on the immigration rules. That is not the case. They would not change anything at all, because, the people they are targeting are not the problem. They will therefore not be at a position of solving the issues they have. It is therefore wrong to have such a thought, simply because you are in power.

Factually speaking, the intention of the cities in coming up with such rules is not because there is something wrong.it is because of some selfish interests, where they want to put the immigrants at their mercy, so that they can use them as they wish, and if they feel they are not useful any longer, then they can dump them without any accountability to anyone. This means that the rules seek to demean the immigrants, and make them lesser people in the cities in question. The writing therefore is on the wall, and if there is any sensible leader, this should not happen.

Texas $800 Million Border Security Bill Inappropriate

            Leaders from Texas State have on several occasions called for a quick fix of border security issue and the immigration system. The approval of the $800 million by Abbot Gregg, the new governor of Texas, is the epitome of their concerted effort to solve the problem for good. The problem with the security border is not about money but rather a problem of the security system.

           

          A similar move by Rick Perry led to the purchase of six new gunboats with the ability to fire 900 rounds per minute and move at very high speeds. Ironically, the boats that cost the state $580,000 each were most of the time docked. The cost of the six gunboats combined, though smaller than what Texas intends to spend, did not yield any positive results.

            

        Reasonable people should build their judgment upon past experiences to realize that spending more money will not bring positive results. According to Texas public safety agency, a secure border is one that interdicts all people, contrabands, and drugs but the current situation is far from this definition. Adam Isacson, a longtime border analyst, says that “Even the most secure sectors of the border still have thousands of people get through,” an indication that the $800 million is not a solution.

            

       The problem is not money but accountability. Money put on border patrol is enough, but the problem is with performance evaluation. Texas has failed to follow up to ensure money mete out for border security yields results. The Republican lawmakers stripping out of the section that would demand monthly updates and crime data from an oversight board to be formed is a repeat of the same mistake.

     

     Governor Gregg Abbott should rethink his joke on Twitter that, “Dallas Cowboys. More porous than Texas border” as it might happen with the $800 million. The problem is with the security system and not funding, and until the lawmakers realize it, the border security problem remains unsolved. Otherwise, the issue of security is best solved by the federal government.