IN YOUR VIEW | Politics or Purpose? Should Texas take on responsibility of building a wall along border?

Building a wall on the border between the U.S. and Mexico was the centerpiece of former President Donald Trump's immigration policy.

It was popular with his supporters, but only about 450 miles of the wall was built.

Now Texas is taking up the challenge.

On Wednesday, Gov. Greg Abbott announced the state will build the wall and earmarked $250 million - reportedly from the Department of Criminal Justice budget - to get started.

Abbott said the wall will be built on state and "donated" land and will be partly funded by donations.

The governor says a wall is necessary because President Joe Biden and his administration has "abandoned its responsibility to apply federal law to secure the border and enforce the immigration laws." He says Biden's "open border" policy has seriously impacted the health and safety of Texans.

Critics say this is a political stunt by an ambitious Abbott, charging he wants to gain favor with former President Trump's loyalists. They also say the cost of building a wall would be astronomical and that it will likely never be completed.

We want to know what you think. Will Texas realistically be able to finance and build a border wall? Should the state be doing so? Or is this just a politically-motivated pipe dream?

Send your response (50 words maximum) to [email protected] by Wednesday, June 30. You can also mail your response to the Texarkana Gazette Friday Poll, at P.O. Box 621, Texarkana, TX 75504 or drop it off at our office, 101 E. Broad St, Texarkana, Ark. Be sure to include your name, address and phone number. We will print as many responses as we can in next Friday's paper.

Question of the Week: History or Purpose?

Last week's question was about the Texarkana Historic District Commission refusing to let Beech Street First Baptist Church demolish a historic home that the church owns. Does the city have a legitimate interest in bypassing the church's property rights to preserve this structure? Or should the church be able to do as it wishes with its property

It needs to be emphasized. Beech Street Church is one of the only churches that has invested millions in historic downtown buildings. Most others have moved north to build new buildings. Thank you Beech Street Church for keeping our heritage alive. - D.P., Texarkana, Arkansas

From facebook.com/texarkanagazette

It's a historical building. They could sell to someone else to preserve it and use the oodles of money they don't pay in taxes to buy a new lot to build on.

I'm all for preserving history when possible but according to the rules for homes on the NATIONAL registry, you may do with the property as you wish, within the framework of local laws or ordinances. You are not required to maintain the property in any specific way; you may demolish the property without federal permission. So, it seems the denial for permits to demolish is a local issue. Is the board willing to give the church the money to restore it? They are overstepping in my opinion.

The commission purchases it and preserves it OR they get out of the way and let the church demolish it

I don't see a point to pointless preservation. There are plenty of spots on the historic downtown strip that have caught fire and instead of blocking progress they need to get out of the way. If no one was interested before hand why stop some progress. I don't want more abandon building only getting attention once they have caught fire or collapsed. A proactive approach is more reasonable than reactive in this instance

The property was sold to the church. Period! The church has exclusive rights to it and said property. If the other, now interested parties, have an issue it's too late! There are countless buildings in TXK that meet the "Historic Title," yet nobody cares! Put up or shout up. The church bought the property with plans to actually use the property. The city has done nothing since it was built in 1903.

This is a sad situation. It would have been an easier fix had the choice to preserve had been done before all the doors, windows, etc., had been sold. I don't live in Texarkana, but hate to see beautiful buildings done away with. This building is just a shell of what it once was and could never be redone unless those who have what once was in the house returned those things.

The commission needs to buy it or let the church tear it down. The building is no longer able to fulfill its intended purpose so tear it down or move it

If the commission has the $$$ to do the deed buy it or step back. Do they know how much it would take to repair or are they just "thinking" saving it would be much nicer. In any case I would like to know their thinking and why they reached this conclusion. Is there a way to find out?

The historic commission most defiantly should have come in beforehand and since the church acquired it. If someone could post the mission of the historic commission of Texarkana on here that would be helpful. There are many historic sites in Texarkana and now that it's mentioned what are they doing and what are the plans for many of these sites? Especially when someone acquires a property? It is time to demolish this structure. No the city does not have a legitimate reason to preserve this structure at this point. Let's move forward. Let's make Texarkana aesthetically pleasing and pretty again!

Texarkana has had some of the most beautiful displays of architecture in this country. Instead of banding together to preserve these great buildings, homes have sat empty and in disrepair until someone bought it. Real estate investors usually want to be able to make use of the property. Well the commission needs to decide on a homes worth before someone buys it. You either want to preserve history for the greater good and do something with these homes and buildings or you going to have to let the owners decide.

I'm 100% for preserving historical sites. But this building has sat in it's decrepit condition for decades!! Ignored by the so called Historical Commission. Then it was allowed to be stripped out, leaving just an empty husk of it's former glory. And NOW they care? That ship has sailed. It would cost easily 300,000.+ dollars (and I think I'm estimating on the low side) to restore it. Perhaps the Historical Commission should make a PUBLIC list of the sites they feel are worthy of being preserved and fight THOSE battles. This isn't one of them.

Pay the property taxes but don't spend a dime on up keep. Get it condemned and then they will force you to deconstruct it.

Unless they plan to purchase it and restore it themselves they shouldn't have a say. The church owns it and should do as they see fit.

I remember years ago Wadley hospital was going to cut an old oak to build the cancer center, and people started the save the tree! Well in the middle of the night someone poisoned the tree ending the discussion! A money pit cost more than its worth, just bring in the bull dozers and more on ha!

Upcoming Events