My commentary on the Shutdown Showdown attracted some reader comments:
Good points. Keep in mind Pelosi is second in line to the presidency. Could this be posturing to establish the legitimacy of her leadership qualifications and style?
I doubt it. I think Pelosi excels as Speaker of the House, and she knows it. Some politicians simply have blind ambition to reach the highest political office, but some are more interested in making substantial contributions, rather than sit in the big chair and discover you ain’t God after all. My reader continues:
My inclination is to give 45 his $5.7 billion for border security but attach so many codices that he would be hamstrung on using any of it to fund a wall. The mere logistics of wall along the entire southern border would involve years, perhaps decades, to complete. The design, engineering, land acquisition, bidding, material sourcing, contract letting, and other considerations will extend far beyond 2020 when, I hope to god, 45 will have faded to obscurity or find himself a resident of some federal gray-bar hotel.
Yeah, no snapping the fingers and having it done.
Another reader:
He never said he was going to build a solid wall the entire length of the border as I recall. There are facts to prove the wall where it is in place has reduced illegals from coming over the border.
I think, at least in his early days, he sort of implied a wall from ocean to ocean, but I also think it started out as a symbolic remark that was more meant to attract undecided voters than be an actual, tangible promise. Once it became clear that the wall was a touchstone for his supporters, I seem to remember him admitting that certain natural features would function just fine as obstacles on their own.
All that said, the totality of his remarks concerning the wall come out to be a big, fat zero. The midterm caravan that was just about to breach our borders and invade us, but ended up peacefully at a port of entry; the criminal gangs flooding in over the border; the flood of drugs coming over the border will be stopped by a wall; illegal immigrants have higher crime rates; illegal immigrants take jobs away from Americans; and that the wall will stop illegal immigrants in their tracks. The rest have proven lies; is the last as well?
There’s no denying that smugglers do smuggle people over the border. But most come through ports of entry in rigs; those who don’t come through those ports are running significant safety risks, ranging from rape by the smugglers, to death from human or environmental factors. But will a wall somehow stop them? Will the immense cost of a wall, which Trump initially estimated at $25B and those with actual expertise estimate at closer to $50B, really be worth it? Or should we continue to use border agents and invest in these nations to help them stabilize their economies and do whatever else is necessary to make those countries worth staying in? This graph is slightly out of date but I think helps aid thought on the matter, and is from Pew Research:
The illegal immigration rate for Mexicans has dropped quite a lot since 2000, if we’re willing to take arrests by the Border Patrol as a reasonable proxy for illegal immigration in general, without Trump’s wall, but due to Obama policies. Does this drop invalidate the need for a wall? I think it does. As I’ve stated elsewhere, I think the entire wall idea is short-sighted and a very bad investment.
