An expensive speed bump. Building a wall along the entirety of our southern border would be a painfully poor investment of taxpayer money. There’s the simple reality that “where there’s a will there’s a way,” and entrepreneurial souls will figure out ways to go under, over, around, or through the wall. It would slow people down, but does that justify the cost? While a wall, by definition, sounds like a substantial barrier, it is very reasonable, from a taxpayer standpoint, to question how effective a border wall would actually be.
Speaking of cost… Cost estimates have varied widely: from $8 billion to $67 billion, as summarized by the Washington Office of Latin America (WOLA). But no question we’re talking about billions of dollars here. That is a large sum of money that would either increase our deficit accordingly and/or displace funding from other programs, assuming there would be no tax increase to cover the cost. As for the proposal that Mexico will pay for the wall, there is no established pathway as to how that would come to pass, considering Mexico is clearly not on board with this idea.
A hostile symbol. I thought Pope Francis’ call “not to create walls, but to build bridges” was very wise. Mexico is our neighbor after all. Much better in the long run to work on developing cooperative ways to stop illegal border crossings than to spend billions of dollars constructing a physical barrier between us.
Diminishing need? Data presented by WOLA shows that the number of undocumented migrants apprehended at the border is at a 45-year low. And in 2016, half the undocumented migrants were families from Central America fleeing violence. Are we building a wall to keep them out? Granted, these statistics could change (in either direction) in the future, but the question remains whether we can justify the cost of a comprehensive wall right now given what we know about current immigration trends.
Where is the need? Unfortunately, illegal drug seizures at the border have not decreased (except for marijuana), according to WOLA. However, most illegal drugs pass through legal ports of entry. Therefore, building hundreds of miles of wall in remote border areas would not be a cost-effective way to substantially decrease the transport of illegal drugs. To address this problem, we should instead channel our funding towards improved screening at legal ports of entry.
No more castles. We all want to be safe, and I agree that we should enforce our existing laws as they pertain to border crossings. So I support the necessary funding to continuously evaluate our border security and to effectively address problems. But I agree with Texas county judge Eddie Trevino, Jr.’s assessment that building a wall along the entire border would be a “14th century solution to address a 21st century problem.” Let’s not build a fortress when modern-day technology, strategically implemented, would be so much more effective, both physically and symbolically.
Leave a Reply