At the start of this week the Texas Senate Committee for Border Security held two more hearings over Operation Lone Star (OLS). In these meetings the committee was looking at the nearly $3 billion price tag of the mission broken down by each funded Texas agency. In the three person committee’s investigation for “granularity” over the efficacy of the operation, unsurprisingly, several large topic issues arose including the sustainability of the program as well as the struggle over a state’s say on immigration.
Through Abbott’s OLS initiative the Texas government is able to circumvent some of the constitutional restrictions that prevent them from enforcing immigration law, which the federal government has the sole right to. The operation does so in two fold: through the deployment of 10,000 Texas National Guardsmen to the border, and through the mobilization of Texas State Troopers to crack down on illegal trespassing, a criminal offense, by migrants.
On Monday Director of the Department of Public Safety, Steven McCraw, once again spoke to the committee over the funding of DPS, which received the lion’s share of OLS’s funding. While for the most part the proceedings were cordial and technical, committee member Senator Hall used the opportunity to once again ask how McCraw would act if Texas were able to supersede the federal government and enforce immigration at its own will via an interstate coalition. McCraw, however, despite being a long time advocate for hard line immigration policy and constant critic of the Biden administration’s handling of the border, pushed back stating that it is not the Department of Public Safety’s job to enforce federal policy and he would rather not have his officers focused at the border. The small altercation highlights a growing debate in Texas politics that we have discussed in earlier articles over whether or not Texas could challenge judicial precedent and seek ways to independently enforce immigration policy.
Operation Lone Star, as Governor Abbott often touts, attempts to tackle immigration and organized crime at a state level that is unprecedented. However, there is no consensus over whether or not Texas officers should or are even constitutionally permitted to be involved in such a policy. What is of even greater concern is the operation’s effectiveness in reaching the governor’s desired goals in light of its significant costs. In an ongoing investigation done by the Texas Tribune, the Marshall Project and Propublica it was revealed that the statistics used to back the operation’s claim to success has been based on changing metrics that provide little clarity over any actual results from the mission. The investigation has shown that many of the arrests and drug seizures attributed to the operation show no connection to the border, that they may have occurred before the operation began or they do not demonstrate any clear indication of DPS’s involvement separate from other agencies. In terms of acting as a deterrence to illegal immigration there appears to be no effect as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) prepares for new waves of migration after the removal of Title 42 set for May.
The significant investment in OLS is getting eaten up not only by criminal arrests and court proceedings, but also by the personnel costs of stationing 10,000 Texas National Guard members at the border, a fact not lost on the Senate committee. At the start of Tuesday’s meeting the committee heard from the new Adjutant General of Texas Maj. Gen. Thomas Suelzer. In his testimony Suelzer acknowledged that the mission had a rough start riddled with low morale, poor housing, and late payments, but claims that there have been significant improvements. Suelzer also stated that the Texas Military Department (TMD) will need an additional $531 million to continue functioning through the year, a request met with significant skepticism. The TMD was originally allocated $412 million in OLS and was given an additional $448 million by Legislatures to survive through spring. They have already spent half of the $287 million designated for salaries and wages.
Sen Hinojosa, the only democrat on the committee, questioned the actual effect of the deployment and the logic behind some of the guardsmen’s placement “I think, quite frankly, you can do the same job, border security, with a lot less troops,” said Hinojosa. “I really don’t understand the number of having to use 10,000 National Guard troops for border security.” Hinojosa also questioned why some Guard members were being stationed at private ranches north of the border.
Committee Chair Birdwell made it clear that the current level of funding is not sustainable, especially with no clear indication of migration to the US slowing down anytime soon.“There is a continuing demand. … We basically got a city of Waco coming in every month into the state,” Birdwell said, referencing monthly border crossings. “So the challenge is how do you economize this but sustain it?”.
Operation Lone Star represents the state of Texas’s most prominent challenge to federal authority over immigration law. However, clearly, its practicality remains highly suspect with an ever growing price tag and no evidence of it deterring criminal activity or illegal crossings at the border. It appears to be yet another example of expensive, ineffective border policies that focus on criminalizing an already vulnerable population.