President Donald Trump is adamant about building a barrier along the southern border of the United States. His “big, beautiful wall” of cement has changed to a barrier of slatted steel, but his intent is the same. The President is listening to the Border Patrol agents who say that they want a barrier that they see what is happening on both sides. It seems like a reasonable request, and the President agrees with it.
It is difficult for me to understand how the Democrats could approve funding a barrier in 2006 and refuse to fund one in 2019. Besides the question of what happened to the funds approved by President George W. Bush in 2006, Americans are demanding an answer to the Democrat opposition. So far, we have been told that a wall is “immoral” and “ineffective” by politicians that have walls around their personal properties.
James Carafano posted an article at The Daily Signal claiming that things have changed at the border since the Secure Fence Act of 2006 was passed by Congress. He says that the focus has changed from an attempt to “catch illegal border crossers” and deport them to so-called “families” and refugees seeking asylum.
Carafano says that building fences in areas that had a lot of traffic helped to “deter or slow crossings” and assisted Border Patrol agents to “catch the illegal immigrants within 100 miles of the border.” “The fencing was both an effective deterrent and a helpful enforcement tool, increasing the likelihood of expedited removal. As a result, illegal crossings declined.”
But the threat to the border has evolved. Those crossing the border with children and claim to be related as well as those who claim refugee status are not put in expedited removal. Both have become popular tactics to “beat” the system.
The only way to prevent abuse of the asylum process is to keep would-be immigrants on the other side of the border until 1) they submit formal asylum claims at official points of entry and 2) those claims have been evaluated.
Making that happen requires more and improved walls. Indeed, Trump’s wall policy reflects the advice of government’s border security professionals.
I appreciate Carafano’s explanation about the change in threats at the border. His explanation clearly shows why Trump is so insistent about building a barrier. The fact that illegal aliens are bringing diseases, crime, and drugs with them should be enough to convince liberals to build the wall, but they still oppose a barrier.
Carafano states the obvious in that any “similar request from any other president would be considered unremarkable.” The liberals are more against Trump than they are against a barrier, but the effect on the nation is the same. Carafano’s article has some good arguments against all reasons given for the barrier being unneeded and ineffective.
There are people who claim that there is no problem at the border because more immigrants enter the country legally and never leave. Carafano agrees that there are many people who overstay their visas. However, the people who came on visas were “screened for security, public safety, health, criminal, and public charge risks,” while those who cross the border “illegally haven’t been screened at all – making them a potentially higher-risk population.” Carafano says that both of them are problems, and “good policy must address both.”
Carafano says that another “weak argument” is that “drugs and other bad stuff are mostly smuggled through the ports of entry.” He admits that the argument has truth in it, but “smuggling also occurs elsewhere along the border. Again, good policy must address both dangers.” He also says that better border security would “channel more smuggling attempts to ports of entry” which are better “equipped to screen for bad things.”
Carafano claims that “the weakest argument against border walls is that they create a humanitarian crisis.” He explains that the current situation means that legitimate refugee claims are delayed because the system is overwhelmed. The loophole allowing “families” to enter is bringing more children to the border and not always by a family member. He calls this “an epidemic of child endangerment.”
Still other people argue that the illegal immigrant problem can be handled in different ways than building a barrier. Carafano agrees that they are right. The administration should take steps to “crack down on illegal immigration – from closing catch-and-release loopholes in the wall, to working with Latin American countries to stem the causes of illegal migration and combat criminal cartels.” He says that Trump’s proposed package “complements these efforts. It is not one or the other.”
Trump believes that there is a national security problem on the border and fully intends to build a barrier there. He opened the border to give Democrats an opportunity to make good on their promise to work on border security, but he does not hold out much hope of them doing so. He said that there is a “good chance” that he will declare a State of Emergency. Breitbart News says, “Declaring a national emergency would allow the president to shift funding to secure the border without Congress, although it would likely be challenged in court.”
Nancy Pelosi has proven that she is a liar and more interested in the possible votes of illegal immigrants than in security for Americans. Why Democrats continue to support a fake like her is more than I can understand. I fully support building a barrier on the southern border in order to control better who enters our nation.
Post a Comment