Reactionary Politics and the Bridge

My buddy Jaime Abeytia penned his latest "Lion's Den" article on www.Newspapertree.com and tackled the recent fight over the study on a new port of entry in the Lower Valley.

I'd like to first say....

Jaime doesn't like Steve Ortega at all and stomps on him unfairly in the piece.  A guy like Jaime sees Ortega as an "uppity Mexican" who is trying to be white.  He thinks Ortega is a sell out.  I think Ortega is just trying to be Ortega and is popular in his district.  Ortega is great about meeting with constituents and at least shows up when asked to. 

That is in direct contrast with Jaime's hero, Norma Chavez who refuses to meet with constituents and refuses to show up to anything she doesn't control.  More on that in a minute.

I wrote the above because I think NPT is letting Jaime take out some anger on his enemies while running cover for his buddies like Norma Chavez.  Although he claims to have been hard on her, he's hardly been that at all.  He needs to see what the EP Times and I have written to get the definition of "hard on her."  She's an unintelligent toddler who is screwing her district and the rest of El Paso.  Jaime needs to realize that that's how you are hard on someone.  You do not follow up a light punch to the gut with a back rub and a foot massage i.e. his penchant for always giving her compliments after a little tiny bit of criticism.

Back to the bridge...

Here's the funny thing about the bridge - at least in my mind.  It wasn't long ago that all the local politicos were screaming for the border fence to be stopped.  They had their reasons for hating the fence and they varied from moronic to stupid.  Senator Shapleigh went as far as to claim that the border fence would hurt commerce between the two countries, which was odd because the only commerce conducted by illegally crossing the border is drug trafficking and human trafficking.  I guess Shapleigh felt those two activities were vital to the bi-national economy.

The crux of the issue for Chavez, Ortega, Byrd, Holguin and all the others was that we should have open borders with Mexico. We should have more travel between the two cities.  Faster access to Mexico and America via unregulated travel between the two cities.  Unfortunately for them the cartels started killing people like it was a sport and public opinion on the fence quickly changed.  No longer were the local politicos willing say a damn word about the only thing between us and a bunch of blood thirsty cartel henchmen.  Sometimes it's politically expedient to shut up.

When the idea of studying a new port of entry in the valley came up it was interesting to me to see which politicos were going to stick with their "open borders" mantra.  Remember, a port of entry is a sign of love for our southern neighbors.  So who stayed on the ball?

Well it seems that nobody is actually saying, "screw you citizens we're putting it in your back yard and you're just going to have deal with it because we want open borders with Mexico."  However, some people are taking the fact that a study is being done as a sign that city council doesn't care and is going to build the bridge.  The one thing they don't understand is that the feasibility study is the one thing most likely to prove their point about traffic in their neighborhood and stop any future plans for a border crossing there.

Politicos like Ortega and O'Rourke are trying to let the process work, while others are just playing the reactionary role handed to them by the crowd.  Norma Chavez, who has zero power over this, gets in front of her constituents and sees they want to bitch and complain and gets on board - she reacts to a mob mentality instead of being an idea person.  If the mob was screaming for the eating of children under ten, she's be all for it.  If the mob wanted to burn her house down with her in it, she'd be all for it.  She, like other politicos will sell their right moves for the wrong moves as long as the angry mob is behind them.  Popularity is very important!

Yes they booed Steve Ortega at that meeting.  Of course they did, the Lower Valley always has some bat shit crazy rumors going around and guys like Steve Ortega aren't going to pretend they don't know the truth just to fit in.  Norma and Holguin will.  They know that no school or any other place was going to be demolished.  Do you know why?  I do - there are no plans!  Not one document saying "here's exactly what is going to happen."  If they approved the idea tomorrow, it would be five years before there would even be a set of plans for construction created!  There is zero basis for anyone's fears.

The valley loves drama and they have plenty of rumor mongers down there that start bullshit stories in order to scare the hell out of people.  Those people turn themselves into a mob and some politicos feed off of it.  It's intellectually dishonest for the politicos to have fake outrage over something that doesn't exist in order to gain popularity. It's actually dishonest period.

I'm not saying I'm pro-bridge at all.  I don't think we should be building any bridges to Mexico until they pay for at least half. 

The bridge on the west side will happen at the ASARCO site.  It's a done deal and it's been in the works for years.  Once they get the land (by stealing it basically) it will go through the process and be a port of entry. 

This is not a Chicano vs. Whitey issue as Jaime would have you believe.  Not everything comes down to race.  This is a misinformation campaign started by folks like Norma Chavez who are looking to gain some sorely needed popularity.  Her buddies invented the rumors about the bridge and she conveniently came to the rescue of her people.  She's not actually doing anything at all, other than promoting herself after she failed miserably in the last session. 

I love politics.

Comments

[observer]

you mentioned in a past blog about why they would want a new bridge. you thought it didnt make sense. now "you" want to bring in drama, bash holguin, jaime, and mainly chavez and say the study is ok.
we know you despise chavez and rightly so, but dont bring her into this bridge thing. she makes zero difference.

the "people" in that area "dont want the bridge" and they "dont want the city" to waste 900 k on a study.
do you want the study because beto does ?
hum, we will get back to that in a moment.

if you were a frequent bridge crosser you would know that most of the time our customs agents do not
have all the lanes open at any of the bridges at the times when the traffic to the bridge is at the max. the typical government worker wants to work 8-5 and not 4 to 12 am. to keep flow of traffic over the bridges at a max you need to have all lanes open before peak hours start to not cause a bottle neck. after crossing for many years i can tell you that this is not the case. the first study that "wouldn't" cost any money is to open all lanes at peak times and then see how long it takes to cross.

as far as the people in the area around riverside are concerned. can you really say that the bridges at cordova, stanton, and el paso street have really made those areas better ? little korea and the flea markets ? if i were you i wouldnt take my white butt down there around those bridges at night.

ortega wants the study because his "toke" buddy beto wants the study which is the only reason i can see you changing from your original opinion.

also a study would involve some engineering firms making money and we know where you have always been on that subject whether its fiscally responsible(conservative) or not.

chavez has nothing to do with this, so dont drag her and your "hate" for her into it. she doesnt have a dog in this fight.

beto wants the study and spend 900k whether the people in the area want the bridge or not. its not his district either. if he has any future aspirations about running against reyes and getting a few votes in that area i would back off if i were him.

beto also wanted the 600k traffic study in the upper valley. im just wondering how much money has been wasted on studies at the city in the last 4 years? dont you ?

[mektx]

Government loves studies. Remember there are 50+ downtown plan studies on the shelves at City Hall. But DavidK is correct. You have to "study" before you can select. How responsible would it be to direct that only certain parts of the city can be considered for a new bridge. Regardless of what the study determines the process is approximately 7-10 years to obtain a Presidential Permit for a bridge crossing. The study will probably offer several alternatives and they may or may not include the neighborhood in question. You don't know until you do the study. Sounds like someone got the residents all bothered about something that won't be known for a year or more. The best solution right now is to support Congressman Reyes' efforts to get the government to fully staff all bridges. That might make a huge difference.

[Mike No. 2]

Interesting thought in Observer's post: "im just wondering how much money has been wasted on studies at the city in the last 4 years? dont you ?"

Since DK doesn't think much of Norma Chavez, a person who took time to be at that Riverside HS meeting, possibly she might be a good person to ask for a state audit of all these studies? Is EP getting value for its study money, or are we getting a nice justification of what decision makers desire?

[gary]

We don't need another bridge... we need more lanes open.

The new and improved downtown bridge now has 11 gates. I spent well over an hour on the bridge (on the bridge - not backed up into Juarez) this evening, 9-10:30pm, approx and watched ICE close 3 lanes leaving only 3 open. The wait time website still claims that 6 are open tonight. The BWT website is unreliable and still claims that 6 lanes are open tonight.

If they can't fund daily operations & open gates then there's no point spending more capital.

Note the 3 green lights in the photo below.
http://i41.tinypic.com/2s0mnit.jpg

[Mike No. 2]

Thanks Gary for your post:
"The new and improved downtown bridge now has 11 gates. I spent well over an hour on the bridge (on the bridge - not backed up into Juarez) this evening, 9-10:30pm, approx and watched ICE close 3 lanes leaving only 3 open. The wait time website still claims that 6 are open tonight. The BWT website is unreliable and still claims that 6 lanes are open tonight."

Think the city and its friends in the news media are really "bull shitting" us on this bridge issue. But guess that is to be expected when the media elects to be the PR agents for the city.

[TB]

I agree with gary. I spent an hour and a half in 100 degree heat on the "new and improved" downtown bridge yesterday. One third of the booths were staffed. This is a disgrace.

[mektx]

ICE employees are union members. They get their breaks regardless of traffic. Again, support Reyes' effort to fully staff the bridges - regardless of whether a study shows the need for additional bridge(s).

[observer]

does mektx sound like dave's mom or dad ? or maybe someone working at csa. lets look.

m=mechanical
e=engineering
k=karlswhatever
tx for texas.

just a thought.

possibly dave posting under this name also re-affirming his belief in a study.

[David K]

Observer,

??? We are not mechanical engineers.

I do not know who the person is, but if you read carefully I think the study is a waste. No bridge. No study. End of issue.

learn to read.

[somethink2say in El Paso, TX]

David--some fears are based on speculative plans as provided by MPO and the idea they keep pushing at us that traffic to and from Yarbrough will not be affected, when, in fact, all procedures about this proposed bridge feature Yarbrough and only Yarbrough in the specific details of those MPO studies. Why such a limited scope for this proposed bridge, besdies the obvious road already built in Juarez?

This is what I base my own personal fears on, as many of MPO's plans have already come to fruition.

http://www.elpasompo.org/InternationalBridges/tabid/109/Default.aspx

Specifically:
"Evaluation of Ports of Entry (POE) for the International Border in the El Paso MPO Study Area"

-- please download the above presentation and proceed to tell me why my fears are unfounded.

All MPO speculative maps will show bold green markings upon areas of proposed road changes or expansion. The bold green line marked from Juarez International Airport to El Paso International Airport via Yarbrough/Global Reach on page 7 of this evaluation is the straw that broke this camel's back.

The renderings for bridge traffic via this proposed port of entry are also depicted in this powerpoint presentation. Each one shows the bridge traffic originating from Yarbrough, and a massive queing station in the vicinity of Shawver Park. The one proposal rendered to force all northbound traffic onto Border Highway provides limited access to traffic going northward through the lower valley (Yarbrough), or East on Border Highway. That scenario will never fly, and Steve Ortega's continued posturing over this detail is silly.

MPO told us where to look, and this is what I got for my efforts.

Your comment:
"There is zero basis for anyone's fears."
has no basis in fact.

[David K]

somethink2say,

You obviously do not understand what the MPO is, what it does and what its cute little drawings actually mean.

None of that can happen without the City studying and approving it. It's easter bunny shit for kids who have an over-active immagination.

Those drawings and plans have been around for years -YEARS. Why no outrage before? the week before? The month before? The four times it's been presented to council before? No outrage ever until that day.

I'm sorry you don't understand the process. Their drawings have about as much weight as the RMA... oh wait... aren't they the MPO? what about the WHO?

If you believe that the MPO has the authority to build an international bridge - I'll buy you a freaking unicorn.

Wake up and figure out what you're talking about before you talk about it.

You have zero reason to worry until the city gets the results of a study. No way in hell they will get the money to build this thing without a bunch of data to back this thing up and I can tell you they won't get past the state on this issue. No more border crossings for El Paso is what you'll hear. No less the federal government who can't afford to staff another bridge...

Again, figure out what you are talking about before saying anything.

[somethink2say in El Paso, TX]

David, I admit I am late to this freaking party. I have no excuse for that, and would never attempt to create one. You seem to think I have no reason to mistrust the word of any of our politicos. I've had my head in the sand long enough. Maybe I got some mud in my eyes. Who cares?

I don't believe the MPO has power to build an international bridge. I believe they form and create concensus on how to proceed with getting projects from the inkling of an idea to creating and or realizing perception of need, and to fostering completion of viable projects. They can and will do plenty of good for this city.

I don't care how old those files are (2007), the maps currently in use for this study are also outdated. These items are all the public has to go on.

I'm a reactionary, just like the guy who writes this blog. Stop trying to be SuperDave. It's very unbecoming.

Hmmm....I'd like to suggest you take a long hard look at yourself and take your own advice: "Again, figure out what you are talking about before saying anything."

Please. You appear to be a bit too full of yourself. But you do have interesting perspectives, and I can admit that I appreciate that. Go figger.