Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s recently announced border wall proposal received a cool reception from Big Bend politicians.

In response to the Biden administration’s moratorium on border wall construction in the U.S., on June 16 Abbott said Texas would construct its own wall, starting by hiring a program manager and providing $250 million in state funds as a “down payment.”

Abbott didn’t specify how long the wall would be, where it would be constructed, or the total project cost.

From the federal level right down to the local level, most Big Bend politicians thought a physical border would be ineffective, and instead preferred what they called a “virtual wall” based on available technology.

Texas Senator, Dist. 19, Roland Gutierrez (D-San Antonio) called a physical wall “a 12th century solution to a 21st century problem.” He pointed out that even in areas with physical border walls, migrants continued to cross freely.

“It’s a waste of tax dollars,” said Gutierrez. “Abbott’s commitment of $250 million would be about five linear miles.”

He acknowledged the humanitarian crisis on the border needed to be solved by the federal government, saying, “We need more technology on the border to stem the tide. Give Ronny Dodson the technology he needs out there, and he’ll do a great job for Brewster County as he has been with the small resources he’s been given by the state and federal government.”

Gutierrez also said the huge expense of a physical wall could be better spent on the state’s inadequate energy delivery infrastructure.

U.S. Rep., Dist. 23, Tony Gonzales (R-San Antonio) said Abbott’s announcement was a response to “complete inaction” from the Biden Administration to the border crisis.

“Texas has set aside more than a billion dollars do the job of our federal government,” he said. “Apprehensions at the border are at a 20-year high, fentanyl smuggling is through the roof, and human trafficking is out of control. It’s clear that, while our families and communities suffer, we can no longer depend on the White House for help.”

Texas Rep. Dist. 74, Eddie Morales (D-Uvalde) supported securing the border, but said there were better means than a physical wall.

Said Morales, “I understand the purpose of the wall is to create an offense that qualifies the immigrant to go to a state jail. However, this will fill up our jails and cost too much state money that should be going toward our state education system or infrastructure needs.”

He said border communities couldn’t sustain the current flow of people entering illegally, but pointed out it was not the state’s burden to bear alone.

“We need the federal government to step in and invest in securing the border, and pass comprehensive immigration reform at the federal level,” he said.

Both Brewster County Judge Eleazar Cano and Sheriff Ronny Dodson supported a virtual rather than a physical wall, and both were concerned that regional tourism might suffer if a brick-and-mortar wall were constructed.

Cano noted the area’s geography as a barrier to a physical wall, and thought it would make little short-term difference considering how long it would take to build.

“It would be a waste of taxpayer money,” said Cano. “From aesthetics and the tourism industry we cater to, a wall between us and Mexico puts up a barrier that will turn some people off. If it’s a virtual wall, you don’t see anything, but it’s there.”

Dodson agreed, saying, “I support technology, a virtual wall, and the manpower to support it. And we give up so much property on the other side. Are we going to give Mexico our river? Tourism is our life blood here.