I respect the people's opinions who have been protecting the border for decades. They have clearly asked for additional infrastructure. The reason we don't have it is political, not budgetary or necessity.
These border patrol agents are no civil engineers nor are they experts in national security elements. They are patrolmen/trigger pullers. The actual experts have expressed that sensors, drones, towers and patrols are far more effective than a wall. A wall generates undeserved complacency and is far more expensive. Again, you don't ask a E-3 about mass troop movement strategy in the military.
I'm not talking about GL-5 grunts. I clearly said people who have decades of experience. Triple layer fence, walls, more agents, electronics are all infrastructure we need. A "wall" is a political term at this point. It isn't a mystery how to secure a border, it's just the political will. The "walls don't work" argument should be dead already.
Except the POTUS is asking for a massive wasteful tangible wall. The money would be better spent on technology such as mentioned above and would be far more cost effective. Our POTUS is doing this to throw red meat at his base. It has nothing to do with solving a problem. I'm sure you understand this also. And the "experts", the actual subject matter experts, have explicitly stated they would prefer the sensors, drones, towers and patrols over a physical wall which is exactly what the President is begging for because it was a campaign promise.
I see we can end this easily then. What you are saying isn't really true, it is just being called that. When the budget calls for billions the media just says "wall" as it is a political term. The CBP document includes $5.7 billion for towers, surveillance equipment and other technology; $1 billion over five years for road construction and maintenance; and $8.5 billion over seven years for 5,000 new Border Patrol agents, 2,500 border inspectors and other personnel, the U.S. official said. It's a strawman to say walls don't work, there is an actual plan for border security that is not being funded.
I'm quite confident that Trump won't sign any bill that at least doesn't provide 20+ billion dollars to the ACTUAL WALL. The dude is shouting the actual tangible wall in all his rallies and is doing a hard promise for it. He was so giddy when he went to Cali to see the prototype walls. He is in for the physical wall hard. You know this.
He only asked for 18 billion so I don't think you really are wading through the news here. The article has a good example of them calling everything a wall tho. "Secondary wall" is used to describe fencing. It's not a structure anyone would call a wall except the media, because wall is a great political term.
Dear lord... I'm reffering to what the Trump administration has explicitly wanted. Your math doesn't add up. That border fencing isn't even 1/30th of Trump's request. He wants a physical massive "beautiful wall" that might be "see thru". He has "inspected the prototypes" in Cali. He wants a tangible wall that will cost billions of dollars. If he requested JUST the drones, towers, sensors and additional border agents, essentially what Hillary Clinton wanted, then there wouldn't really be a debate, would there?
I just linked the actual CBP request and breakdown of what it buys. I don't understand the disconnect here. Do you disagree with what the articles detail was requested by CBP from congress?
According to CBP the physical barriers are required to give time for the electronics and agents you are fine with to do their job and it is all part of a comprehensive border security system.
So the temporary measure merits a request of more money than the more permanent solution? You are not making any sense here.
I'm not sure I said anything about temporary or permanent. The article claimed the request was 18 for barrier, 5.7 billion for towers, surveillance equipment and other technology; $1 billion over five years for road construction and maintenance; and $8.5 billion over seven years for 5,000 new Border Patrol agents.
The thing about drones, towers, sensors, and additional border agents......they can also be quietly reduced or even eliminated at some point in the future. A wall isn't going anywhere.
And I'm saying that the 18 billion(that number chances with Trump week to week, It's Trump) is wasteful spending.
Experts like Ronald Vitiello who have been protecting the border before you were born disagree with you and are fighting hard for funding a political will to increase the physical barrier in the most critical locations without the help of congress. “The truth is walls work, and the data show it and agents know it,” Vitiello said. HOST: OK. YOU HAVE 700 MILES OF FENCE. IT IS -- IS IT HELPFUL? GUEST: IT IS AND GIVES OUR AGENCY GOOD TIME TO RESPOND. IN AND OF ITSELF IT ISN'T AN END ALL BE ALL BUT IT GIVES US AN ADVANTAGE AS IT RELATES TO PATROLLING.
My face turned beet red when the immigration judge demanded I explain why a six-month old baby was being called to appear separately from his mother in a removal hearing. ... For now, government policy states that minors must appear in immigration court for their scheduled removal hearings. If the asylum case is denied, the minor ends up back in immigration court for an asylum hearing before an immigration judge. However, Attorney General Jeff Sessions has stripped immigration judges of the authority to administratively close cases, and gutted well-established asylum case law. So that makes any hope for asylum relief for these children nearly impossible. In the next few weeks, the government will present parents separated from their children with the ultimate Sophie's choice: be deported with their children to face the violence that they fled, or leave the children in the custody of the U.S. government. .. I imagine a traumatized 3-year-old being questioned on the record about why she fled her home country, and responding with cries for her mother or father. I imagine a plane full of children landing in the deportation facility in Guatemala City. These children are stranded, vulnerable and at grave risk for human trafficking. I became a lawyer because I believe in the rule of law and fundamental fairness, not to prosecute babies and send them traveling in planes alone. As our government cracks down on asylum-seeking families, we are witnessing mass violations of constitutional and international laws that uphold the right to family unity, the protection of asylum seekers from criminal prosecution, and the rights of children to live free from harm. As a former ICE attorney, I am laying down the prosecution sword and picking up the shield to defend those most vulnerable in our society. Our integrity as a democracy relies upon it.
