THE WALL
Does Trump’s proposed border wall have a chance of being built? Our exclusive investigation shows the dramatic disruption and staggering costs.
A USA TODAY NETWORK examination of the PHOENIX 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexican border reveals the challenges and consequences of President Trump’s border wall plan in unprecedented detail.
Texas, which accounts for more than half the border, has almost no fencing and hundreds of miles of open border at a stretch. A network investigation of public records found that walling the border in this wide-open area could require disrupting or seizing nearly 5,000 parcels of property.
In Texas, any wall would have to be built some distance from the border, because the line itself runs down the middle of the Rio Grande. To gauge the possible impact, the USA TODAY Network used the state’s open-records law to obtain digital property maps from all 13 Texas counties with border frontage. (A 14th county touches
the Defense Department and the Department of Veterans Affairs. The wall funding was tacked on to the bill at the last minute, and the legislation passed the House with the support of only five Democrats. Five Republicans voted against it.
The Senate has not taken up the measure, and Congress passed a temporary spending bill to keep the government running for the next few months. That puts off until December a battle over the wall and other Trump spending priorities.
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., indicated last week that they had struck a deal with Trump to move legislation that would offer safe harbor for undocumented immigrants brought to the USA as children and that the bill would not include funding for Trump’s wall.
Trump suggested the next day
“We need a border security strategy that includes the infrastructure, technology, equipment and personnel necessary to secure our borders.”
Sen. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind.
that there was no deal and insisted on funding for the wall, though he acknowledged it may come later. “If the Democrats aren’t going to approve it, then we’re not going to do what they want,” Trump said. “The wall will happen.”
In the USA TODAY Network survey, three Republicans — Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona and Reps. Steve Pearce of New Mexico and Will Hurd of Texas — said they oppose the $1.6 billion expenditure to begin building the wall.
“I voted against including border wall funding into the recent appropriations package because I favor a border security solution based on improved technology and manpower,” Hurd said. “I’ve made it clear time and time again that building a physical wall from sea to shining sea is the most expensive and least effective way to secure the border.”
Pearce seconded this approach. “I fully support securing the border — it is imperative for the safety and security of New Mexico and our nation,” he said. “The solution must utilize modern technology and update the strategy our nation uses to patrol the border.”
The majority of congressional Republicans refused to take a stance on the wall funding. Most declined to participate in the survey or refused to respond to queries. Many others offered general positions about the importance of securing the border and requiring employers to verify the immigration status of their workers.
“I agree with the president that secure borders are a vital part of our national security,” said Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan. Though Jordan did not specifically endorse the House-passed proposal, he did say, “For the good of our country, Congress should include border wall funding in government funding legislation this fall.”
Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., provided a statement: “Our country’s immigration system today is fundamentally broken. Our borders are not secure, and our immigration laws are being broken by employers trying to skirt the rules and those who seek to come here illegally.”
There were 220 Republican lawmakers who did not answer the question. Democrats were easier to get on the record. Of the 240 Democrats in Congress, 133 answered the survey, and nearly every one was a decisive “no.” For Democrats, Trump’s wall — one of the defining themes of his campaign — is an overly simplistic answer to the complex problem of immigration, as well as an insult to Mexico and Latino Americans.
Sen. Joe Donnelly of Indiana, one of the most endangered Democrats up for re-election in 2018, offered the most nuanced answer about funding the wall.
“We need a border security strategy that includes the infrastructure, technology, equipment and personnel necessary to secure our borders,” Donnelly said. “We also need to require employers to use the E-Verify system to ensure that they hire only legal workers. I supported each of these concepts in the Senatepassed comprehensive, bipartisan immigration reform several years ago.”
Most of his Democratic colleagues were far less tempered.
“A wall is nothing more than an illusion — a false promise — of security,” Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy said. “Instead of this boondoggle, which Democrats as well as many Republicans and independents oppose, we should be considering real solutions.”