Trump's wall is a huge waste of money: Our view
The Editorial Board, USA TODAYPublished 6:30 p.m. ET Jan. 26, 2017 |Updated 7:16 p.m. ET Jan. 26, 2017
Cracking down on visa overstays and on employers would be more cost-effective.
(Photo: Guillermo Arias, AFP/Getty Images)
783CONNECTTWEET1LINKEDIN234COMMENTEMAILMORE
Since 2005, the federal government has added hundreds of miles of walls and fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border. It hasdoubled the size of the Border Patrolby hiringmore than 10,000 agents. And it has ramped up spending so rapidly that it is plagued with duplicative programs.
So whenPresident Trumpsays he is moving ahead with amassive border wall, it has all the hallmarks of a multibillion dollar boondoggle. And his insistence that Mexico be forced to pay for his costly campaign pledge threatens to rupture relations with an important ally and trading partner.
Physical barriers certainly have a significant place in border security. But any major expansion of the existing barriersshould be done in the context of cost-benefit analysis.By any reasonable accounting, the surge of spending on border enforcement has already reached a point of diminishing return.
The federal government nowspends more policing immigrationthan it does on all other law enforcement activities —combined.More, that is, than on drug trafficking, gangs, counterfeiting, identity theft, financial fraud, would-be assassins, routine interstate crime, illegal arms sales, computer hacking, corporate malfeasance, government corruption and the domestic part of the war on terror.
Mostof California, Arizona and New Mexico already have some kind of barrier. Texas is another matter, thanks to the difficulties of building along the snaking, flood-prone Rio Grande River, and the fact that much of the border land is in private hands.
Since 2007, the estimated number of undocumented immigrantshasdropped from 12.2millionto slightly more than 11 million, thanks to some combination of increased enforcement, declining birth rates and rising economies, particularly Mexico's.
This isn’t to say illegal immigration has stopped outright. But it is being offset by people returning to their home countries. What’s more, an estimated 35% to 50% of the inflow is people who come in legally andoverstay their visas, peoplewho are not impacted by walls or other border control efforts.
Taking all this into account, Trump'swall would be a colossal waste of money. His idea of forcing Mexico to pay for it has already led to cancellation of next week's scheduled meeting between Trumpand Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto. Slapping a 20% tax on imports from Mexico, which a Trump spokesmanfloated Thursday as a way to recoup the construction costs, would set off a mutually destructive trade war andeffectively makeU.S. consumers pick up the tab.
Cracking down on visa overstays and on employers who hireillegal workers woulddo far more to improve immigration enforcement than spending an additional$12 billion or more onsteel and concrete.
USA TODAY's editorial opinions are decided by itsEditorial Board, separate from the news staff. Most editorials are coupled with an opposing view — a unique USA TODAY feature.
To read more editorials, go to theOpinion front pageor sign up for thedaily Opinion email newsletter.To respond to this editorial, submit a comment to.
Better barriers are worth the cost: Opposing view
Dan Stein6:57 p.m. ET Jan. 26, 2017
Border and interior enforcement strategy will restore our footing as a nation that enforces laws
(Photo: Nicholas Kamm, AFP/Getty Images)
23025CONNECTTWEETLINKEDIN32COMMENTEMAILMORE
On Wednesday,President Trumpordered completion of border security measures that were promised by Congress in 2006 but never fulfilled. The centerpiece of the president’s order is secure barriers (a wall, perhaps) along the areas of the border required to achieve operational security. It also includes upgrades in electronic monitoring of the border and an additional 5,000 border agents. All of these things are badly needed to gain control of the border, and would help both Mexico and the U.S. eliminate cartel operations.
Who will pay is now under debate. Regardless of who pays, it is a great deal for taxpayers. U.S. taxpayers now absorb recurring costs in excess of $100 billion a year to provide basic services to illegal aliens and their children. Even at the high end of the one-time cost estimate for constructing a wall, in the $15 billion and $25 billion range, the structures are cheap at twice the price.
While border security infrastructure is important to stemming the flow of illegal immigration and protecting national security, it is just one component of an overall strategy. Equally important, we must give people reasons not to cross our borders illegally in the first place.
President Trump has also taken the first steps toward ending the magnets that draw large numbers of illegal aliens to this country, while adding deterrence through the end of “catch and release” folly. On Wednesday, he put sanctuary jurisdictions with non-cooperation policies on notice: Maintain those policies and forfeit billions of federal dollars. Trump will insist Congress send a bill that mandates the use of E-Verify by all employers, thereby finally — after years of waiting — addressing the lure of jobs in this country.
Our relationship with Mexico is important, even vital. But it must be based on a mutuality of respect for our borders and our laws.
This integrated border and interior enforcement strategy will restore our national footing as a nation that will enforce its laws and protect the public interest.
Dan Stein is president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a non-profit group that favors more restrictive immigration policies.