Senator Eliot Shapleigh - El Paso, Texas

BROWNSVILLE — A small but significant chunk of the economic stimulus bill will be spent on the nation’s borders, including $720 million to upgrade land ports, $160 million for Customs and Border Protection inspection systems and radios, and $100 million for expedited development of border barrier technology.

There’s another $10 million to prevent gunrunning to Mexico, and a few pots of money for those willing to compete for grants to supply equipment to fight drug trafficking or produce uniforms, tarps, or steel construction material for the “Buy American” clause.

All told, at least $1.7 billion of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 will go to border infrastructure and security. It’s a minute amount of the $787 billion package, distributed among various federal agencies and targeted primarily for construction and procurement.

More funds may benefit border trade from state or local allocations, such as if the Texas Department of Transportation builds U.S. 281 overpasses or if Hidalgo County builds a route to ease traffic from its newest border bridge.

Those who fought for the port money say America can’t afford slowdowns in commerce that affect 7.1 million jobs along the U.S. and Canadian border. Decades-old ports are falling short in meeting the evolving mandates of national security, they say, including the requirement for a passport or similar document at land ports that’s becoming official in June.

Amid a nose-diving economy that’s hemorrhaging jobs, shuttering big-box electronics stores and making household thrift the national mantra, a staggering amount of trade is being held up at borders, industry leaders say.

Panelists at the Texas Trade Logistics Forum at South Padre Island this week included leaders of shipping services specializing in Mexico, logistics planners for large companies like Ryder Systems Inc. and H-E-B supermarkets, and engineers planning ambitious alternatives to trucking routes running to and from the Mexican border.

Their theme wasn’t dwindling trade but backed-up trade due to bottlenecks at border crossings caused by aging infrastructure. So when it comes to economic stimulus funds targeting the border, the sentiment was that every bit will help.

“The border is always screaming out for resources,” said Edwin Einstein, a San Antonio attorney who specializes in international trade. “I would say we have plenty of shovel-ready opportunities along the U.S.-Mexico border.” Asked how money for buildings and radios will create jobs and stimulate the national economy, U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, said it was important to focus on the big picture.

“Let’s start up with $787 billion,” he said. “You can have a huge bill and take one or two items and say ‘Should they be in there?’ or ‘Should they be part of the appropriations bill?’..... We voted up and down on it. ..... I look at the big picture, to create jobs.”

It’s up the federal agencies to submit plans for their money, but members of the Border Trade Alliance, which lobbied hard for land-port upgrades, has its wish list.

According to federal statistics in a report compiled by the Phoenix-based Alliance, cross-border U.S.-Mexico trade was at a record $797 billion in 2007 but was straining and beginning to slow because of economic uncertainty and increasing border delays.

The California Department of Transportation and San Diego Association of Governments reported an “output loss” for 2007 of $5.35 billion and 55,675 jobs for California alone. A joint study with Mexican transportation officials in 2004 estimated the infrastructure shortfall for current trade at $10.5 billion.

Port-specific needs range from a $400,000 backup to a flickering generator at the Hidalgo port of entry to $167 million to reconfigure the Nogales-Mariposa port in Arizona. All but the most remote ports need more lanes, personnel, and inspection equipment.

“Inland ports were in many cases designed decades ago and most were not intended to handle the new security operations,” BTA spokesman Matthew Howe said. “The last new port was completed in Laredo in 2000, and even it has infrastructure needs to handle the new security.

“There will be job creation in construction, but the greater impact is economic activity. If you’re able to reduce the time it takes for Mexican citizens or U.S. citizens to cross the border, you’re going to increase commerce. Conversely, on the trade side, by being able to accommodate a more efficient flow of legitimate trade, you’re supporting the just-in-time movement.” State Sen. Elliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, said the border will benefit not only from the infrastructure investments but also by spending on new schools, highways and on health care.

“Green” projects such as solar panels on schools will open new markets, as materials such as the panels become more accessible and companies emerge to install them, he said. “We see the new jobs in new bridges, new factories, new manufacturing that will come from increased mobility,” he said. “The border is a very valuable place provided we have necessary infrastructure.”

Private vendors who specialize in niches like cyber security may find some business opportunities in the bill, said John Pescatore, a vice president and research fellow with Gartner Research, an information technology and advisory company.

“In general, security companies tend to weather downturns pretty well,” he said. Naysayers to the package, including the 200 economists who signed a Cato Institute letter opposing the measure, say some projects may merit spending but the massive package will throw the economy even deeper into the hole.

“Everybody’s pet project seems to be put in there,” said Robert Collinge, an economist with the University of Texas at San Antonio. “Just the notion that government spending by itself by throwing money at this, that, and the other thing is going to help, I just don’t see it. I think the market would do a lot better job of recovering if the government just go out of the way.”