Forgive long post. Those who have read my comments on what Trump, his Democrat opponents, and the media call The Wall know I have generally stayed away from outright opposition. There are some aspects of our southern border security issues that I wanted to revisit in more detail. So here goes.
Trump made a big mistake in continuing to call what he wanted a Wall. It never was and he finally started to define more clearly what he wanted as the shutdown blew up in his face. It left the impression of a solid barrier of the entire 1965 or so miles of our southern border. The Democrats and the Media accepted his statements without much effort to define what was actually proposed by Trump.
Some background first. We already have barriers - the correct term for a variety of physical blocks - along about 645 miles of the southern border. Most of it is along the California and Arizona borders. In one case I remember after 9/11 the Bush Administration suspended all legal restraints and filled up a large gully with dirt and topped it with a fence. The justification was a stated national emergency said to be caused by drug traffickers and terrorists using the gully. Congress did not try to stop it.
What Trump has proposed is about 240 miles or so of barriers of various types, mostly in New Mexico and Texas. Thanks to input from border security agents, all of the proposed barriers would have openings in order to see what is happening on the other side. This also includes high tech installations ranging from state of the art motion detectors and infrared cameras to drones. However, ranchers in both states as a group are less than enthused about having a big federal intrusion onto their land.
Lacking in the Trump proposal and also what Ive seen from Democrats is a strong commitment to badly needed overdue improvements at our legal border crossing stations. These would cost way more than any of the proposed barriers.
What this means to me is a basis for compromise. Even now, his allies in Congress have switched the term from Wall to Barriers, as has Trump himself. Even now, protection for Dreamers is coming in some form. A lot of this could have been avoided if campaign rhetoric had been replaced by actual easily understood statements defining what Trump wanted. Democrats and the media also need to get their statements accurate and easily understood. Democrats also need a reminder of past support or acquiescence for existing barriers. Many in the media need an increasingly rare form of investigative journalism on southern border security not driven by an agenda.
There will be a compromise deal. My two cents.
Trump made a big mistake in continuing to call what he wanted a Wall. It never was and he finally started to define more clearly what he wanted as the shutdown blew up in his face. It left the impression of a solid barrier of the entire 1965 or so miles of our southern border. The Democrats and the Media accepted his statements without much effort to define what was actually proposed by Trump.
Some background first. We already have barriers - the correct term for a variety of physical blocks - along about 645 miles of the southern border. Most of it is along the California and Arizona borders. In one case I remember after 9/11 the Bush Administration suspended all legal restraints and filled up a large gully with dirt and topped it with a fence. The justification was a stated national emergency said to be caused by drug traffickers and terrorists using the gully. Congress did not try to stop it.
What Trump has proposed is about 240 miles or so of barriers of various types, mostly in New Mexico and Texas. Thanks to input from border security agents, all of the proposed barriers would have openings in order to see what is happening on the other side. This also includes high tech installations ranging from state of the art motion detectors and infrared cameras to drones. However, ranchers in both states as a group are less than enthused about having a big federal intrusion onto their land.
Lacking in the Trump proposal and also what Ive seen from Democrats is a strong commitment to badly needed overdue improvements at our legal border crossing stations. These would cost way more than any of the proposed barriers.
What this means to me is a basis for compromise. Even now, his allies in Congress have switched the term from Wall to Barriers, as has Trump himself. Even now, protection for Dreamers is coming in some form. A lot of this could have been avoided if campaign rhetoric had been replaced by actual easily understood statements defining what Trump wanted. Democrats and the media also need to get their statements accurate and easily understood. Democrats also need a reminder of past support or acquiescence for existing barriers. Many in the media need an increasingly rare form of investigative journalism on southern border security not driven by an agenda.
There will be a compromise deal. My two cents.
