We'd hoped the subject of Shared Border Management was going to be brought up sooner, rather than later, with the new administration in place, and it looks like Congressional members Louise Slaughter and John McHugh have jumped to the call. The fact that now Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was a proponent of Shared Border Management could be a huge plus.
So much hangs in the balance with border management. Not only is there an issue about ease of crossing, but we have the added issues of the perils of a neighborhood and its assets, including architecture and community health. Add to that the integrity of an Olmsted Park and a region's economic well being, and we have an issue that sorely needs addressing now.
This, it seems, is the perfect time to apprise President Obama of the years-old dilemma we face and look for resolution that will benefit our region. For too long, we've relied on the Canadian government to manage what we are so invested in and have so much to gain or lose by. For our region at least, Obama's reaction may be the answer to the prophecy that this is a new kind of administration that understands better what it means to be a hard-working community looking for vibrancy through joint governmental fairness and diplomacy.
The letter is as follows and explains quite succinctly what we've been up against in relationship to the borders that need to rely, first and foremost, on a bridge of governance.
Dear President Obama:
As you prepare for your February 19, 2009 trip to Canada, we
would like to make you aware of a pressing US-Canada border issue that has an
immediate and direct effect on our districts. In 2005, the US and
Canadian governments agreed in principle to what is called Shared Border
Management, which would enhance security and trade facilitation while
minimizing adverse effects on border communities. In 2007, after months
of negotiations, Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff announced that
he was unilaterally withdrawing from these negotiations. We believe,
however, that this initiative remains the best solution for joint security on
the Northern Border and respectfully urge you and Secretary Napolitano to
reengage the Canadian government in negotiations on this important issue.
Canada and the United States have the largest bilateral trade
relationship in the world. Key pillars in this relationship are the Peace
Bridge in Buffalo, NY - which serves as the second busiest passenger vehicle
crossing and third busiest commercial crossing on our shared border - and the
Thousand Island Bridge in Alexandria Bay, NY. The Peace Bridge carries
$20 billion of trade annually between the United States and Canada. Yet
congestion related to infrastructure constraints and customs processes has been
a serious problem since the mid 1990s, and has worsened since September 11,
2001. The economic ramifications of congestion and new customs rules
cannot be overstated; the Ontario Chamber of Commerce estimates that border
delays are costing the US and Canadian economies over CDN $13.6 billion
annually.
In December 2001, in order to address the emerging security and
traffic issues arising from 9/11, Canada and the United States agreed to the
Smart Border Declaration. The Declaration's aim is to enhance the
security of the US-Canada border, while facilitating the flow of low-risk
people and goods. Under that Declaration, the two governments agreed on
December 17, 2004 to issue a framework to put land pre-clearance in place at
the Peace Bridge. The pre-clearance pilot, called Shared Border
Management (SBM), would involve the relocation of all United States primary and
secondary border operations for both commercial and passenger traffic from
Buffalo, NY to Fort Erie, Canada. A reciprocal relationship would take
place in Alexandria Bay, the 10th busiest crossing along our
Northern Border.
At the time that Secretary Chertoff cut off talks on SBM, we
were told that the two countries' negotiations came down to one issue: biometrics.
DHS wanted the right to collect biometric fingerprints on travelers who decide,
at the last minute, not to enter into the United States. Canada believed
that this would be deemed unconstitutional under their Charter. Despite
our urgings, along with those of then-Senator Hillary R. Clinton and many of
our colleagues in the Northern Border Caucus, to reengage in discussions, the
talks remain dead.
In order to better understand the issues that caused DHS to
abandon SBM, we requested that the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
conduct an investigation to determine 1) what negotiations were conducted by
the DHS regarding the shared border management pilot project, and 2) what
issues led to the termination of shared border management negotiations.
The subsequent report, released on September 8, 2008, identified five issues
that arose during negotiations: arrest authority, the right of withdrawal,
finger printing, information sharing between and within both governments' law
enforcement, and specific issues in the Canadian Charter. The report is
enclosed for your review.
We believe these issues are surmountable and, along with
then-Senator Clinton, continued to push for reengaging in SBM negotiations
throughout the 110th Congress. In fact, in meetings on the
Peace Bridge expansion project over the past year, several federal officials
from the Federal Highway Administration and Customs and Border Protection
conceded that implementing SBM would eliminate significant risk factors for the
Peace Bridge Expansion Project as well as facilitating border security.
This issue is critical to protecting our shared national
security interests, while facilitating trade and commerce across the border and
limiting adverse effects on local communities. We respectfully ask that
you reengage with the Canadian Government on these SBM negotiations and are
willing to discuss this issue in more depth at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Louise M. Slaughter
John M. McHugh
Member of Congress
Member of Congress
Image: Olivia Cala Buscarino
Great letter. I hope it happens.