Bottlenecks Raise Doubt on Border Checkpoint Value

Twice in the last few weeks, I’ve tooled north on Interstate 5 from San Diego with one thought in mind: Is that infernal checkpoint at San Onofre going to be operational?

The first trip was on a Sunday night. What better way to highlight a 90-mile drive home than to come to a complete stop on the freeway at 10 o’clock and begin an inch-by-inch trek for 10 minutes or more in a line of traffic? All so a law enforcement officer can take one look at me and wave me through.

Cool night, slow burn.

We Americans have grown accustomed to giving up some freedom of movement for the larger good, but, somehow, running my luggage through the X-ray machine at the airport to prevent terrorism seems worth the trouble. Parking on the freeway at 10 at night to stop illegal immigrants 60 miles from the U.S.-Mexican border is a whole other matter.

The U.S. Border Patrol will give you statistics to suggest it’s worthwhile, but even the agency admits that the numbers don’t tell the whole story. The statistics show that 30,000 illegal immigrants were stopped at the San Onofre checkpoint in 1994, another 20,000 last year and more than 12,000 so far this year. Agents also claim to have confiscated large amounts of illegal drugs at the checkpoint.

And yet, why do I have the sense that most people probably would opt for removing the checkpoint altogether?

We Americans are impatient, by nature. The inconvenience of the traffic delays isn’t worth the expense of staffing the checkpoint, not to mention the unavoidable ill feelings that must result from some fruitless searches.

Those concerns aside, local officials are worried about another aspect of the checkpoints--the infrequent yet still risky matter of high-speed freeway chases resulting from illegal immigrants who flee authorities.

The Border Patrol is sensitive to that and has said it doesn’t automatically chase fleeing people. But it can’t afford to say it won’t chase them, because that would render their whole operation moot. What it says, in essence, is that chases are conducted according to policies that take into account risk to other people.

Border Patrol spokesman Mark Moody concedes the public’s concern over the point and says chases are terminated if the public is endangered. “You basically get down to the point, is a carload of 10 illegal aliens going to do more damage or have potential to do more damage than chasing a vehicle through a downtown urban street or the freeway,” and possibly injuring an officer or a member of the public, Moody says.

From that, you could conclude that the Border Patrol--much like the public--would say the risk isn’t worth it.

Which then makes you wonder about the overall value of the island checkpoint.

Because his city is 2 1/2 miles north of the checkpoint, San Clemente Mayor Steve Apodaca has given this more thought than most. He’s seen just such a chase within the city limits this year. He was so aghast at its potential for danger, he says, that “I called the police dispatcher and said what the heck is going on?”

South County is not exactly a hotbed of support for illegal immigration, but Apodaca says residents aren’t fans of the checkpoint chases either. “When you ask people if they’d be opposed to police chasing an armed robber and kidnapper through San Clemente, the majority would say, ‘We need to apprehend those kinds of people.’ But if you asked the same person if they think it’s a valid use of resources to have illegals chased, most probably would say no.”

Still, Apodaca is willing to see what happens over the next 18 months when two new lanes are added at the checkpoint. He concedes that the checkpoint serves a purpose in stopping contraband or illegal immigrants and that a more efficient operation there could soften his concerns. But he remains outspokenly opposed to high-speed chases near his city.

Apodaca, who works for an international insurance brokerage firm, says his business has taken him around the world. “I have never encountered another country that chooses to defend the integrity of its borders from 60 miles away,” he says. “It just doesn’t make any sense.”

He favors throwing all the available money into border control. The Border Patrol, essentially, concedes that it doesn’t stop all illegals at the border and uses the San Onofre checkpoint and another one in Temecula on Interstate 15 as a second line of attack.

The average citizen probably doesn’t give the issue much thought until he or she hits the checkpoint on a Sunday night. Then, if they’re like me, their interest in catching illegal immigration drops to zero.

If nothing else, my recent forays turned up someone who benefits from the checkpoints. On my second trip from San Diego last weekend, I decided to forgo a Sunday night return, specifically to avoid the delay. That meant another night’s lodging and meal money in San Diego before driving in to work Monday morning.

The checkpoint was operational, but the delay represented nothing more than braking long enough for the agent to wave me through.

I thanked him. As did, I suspect, the San Diego merchants’ association.

Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. Readers may reach Parsons by writing to him at The Times Orange County Edition, 1375 Sunflower Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92626, or calling (714) 966-7821.