Our view: Look who's paying for the wall. Hint: It's not Mexico

From his very first speech as a candidate, Donald Trump promised to build a great wall along the southern border and “have Mexico pay for that wall.” He repeated the pledge at countless campaign rallies.

Apparently, the president has an expansive view of Mexico. An ambulatory care center at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina is, in his view, part of Mexico. So is an engineering center at the U. S. Military Academy in West Point, New York. And so are a cyber- ops facility in Virginia, a fire station in South Carolina and the central heating facility at an Air Force Base in Fairbanks, Alaska.

These are among 127 military construction projects whose $ 3.6 billion in funding will be raided to help pay for Trump’s wall. All of them were deemed important and worthy of congressional appropriations, approved by both chambers of Congress and signed into law by the president. And then Trump took their money away.

Time was when a maneuver like this would have outraged Republicans.

Now, however, the whole thing induces, at best, a shrug. The money can be replaced next year, GOP lawmakers say. Perhaps. But that would mean diverting funds from somewhere else. And Trump could pull his same stunt again.

What is happening here is wrong on many levels. For starters, most of these military projects are vital. They are not costly new weapons systems but rather the types of things that military people rely on to train, learn, get medical care and more.

You’d think that a reliable source of heat would be a priority for an Alaska base 200 miles from the Arctic Circle. Same for replacing a 60- year- old fire station in South Carolina that the Pentagon recently called a safety hazard.

Then, too, is the issue of what we could expect from Trump’s wall.

In the decade before his presidency, physical barriers along the southern border were increased. Much of what lacks barriers has a much more effective deterrent: hostile desert and rugged terrain.

At the same time, the nature of illegal immigration has shifted. Border crossings by Mexicans have dropped, replaced in part by an upsurge in Central American migrants who tend to show up at walled ports of entry.

The most troubling aspects of the diversion relate to congressional powers and the Constitution. Tuesday was Constitution Day, and Article 1, Section 9 says: “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.”

You might think that Congress as an institution would defend its prerogatives. Alas, no. Earlier this year, most Republicans in the House and Senate sided with Trump and voted away their powers over the purse. A second vote is likely soon. Don’t expect a different outcome.

Taking military construction funds to finance a project that Mexico was supposed to pay for is an abuse of power and an insult to America’s service members.

MATT YORK/ AP Wall construction in Yuma, Arizona.