A Case Study in the Outsourcing of U.S. Border Control

[HCM]

Something that has always bothered me about these type of issues is that people want to attack the supply-side of the issue, rather than the demand-side. For example, we have a war on drugs instead of a war on drug users. Prohibition created a new class of criminal. Narcotics users have created an even worse class. And that class works with the people who assist (for a fee, of course) people crossing into the USA. As long as there is a demand for anything illegal, enterprising individuals will find a way to profit from that demand. Booze, drugs, US residency, etc. are all the same: in demand. And when the demand exists, money can be made and people defend their income streams. Part of the immigration flows from Mexico exist because prospective immigrants, legal or otherwise, believe life is/will be better in the USA. As long as that is the case, the USA will be dealing with people trying to get here. And, in some ways, that is a good thing as not too many people want to emigrate to crummy places to live. So we do not want to attack the demand-side by making the USA a cesspool. Thus, we need to address demand in other ways.

My thought is that as long as make it difficult for good people to get here legally, we will have issues. And the USA does make it very hard for people who do the right thing and apply for visas to come here. I am absolutely amazed at how long and how expensive it is to legally immigrate to the USA. If we want to be able to select immigrants, the system for processing them needs to improve, both in selection methodology and speed of processing. Why spend years and tons of money on applications and visa visits when all you need to do is cross the border illegally?

Expecting other countries to help us is a bit naive. Why should Mexico house "asylum seekers"? How does it benefit Mexico? How does it lower the demand to get to the USA? It just makes the supply-side more valuable and attractive.

As for the wall, I see it as having some value but not being a panacea. Every wall was breached, even the Berlin Wall, which had the opposite goal. And the East Germans had no issues using techniques (mines and gunfire to spying and torture) to keep people in East Germany that the USA will never abide. The demand for freedom was so high that people risked their lives to cross into West Berlin. Same thing except that the USA is West Berlin. So the wall itself will never be enough; we need to provide a way for good people to come to the USA so that we can better focus on those bad people who still will try. It will never be 100%, but it can be better.

If Mexico were to detain and deport 3rd country nationals as I discussed earlier, I would expect us to fund it. Conversely, it would also behoove Mexico to to stay on the good side of its neighbor and number one trading partner.

As for the enforcement of the 1996 Immigration Act’s “remain in Mexico” provisions pending adjudication of asylum claims, no one expects Mexico to “House” them - the migrants are on their own and honestly the Mexicans share plenty of blame for them being there. First though it is widely ignored, under both US and international law those seeking asylum are supposed to apply for asylum in the first safe third country. So someone fearing persecution in Guatemala is supposed to apply for asylum in Mexico not skip through 1, 2, 3, 4, countries until they get to the one they want. Mexico aggravates this by giving 3rd country nationals 20 day transit visas if they say they intend to go on to the US. if you dump your trash in my yard why wouldn’t I dump it right back ?

Example- a Honduran family enters Mexico illegally, is apprehended and Mexico gives them. transit visa letting them cross Mexico legally as long as they leave in 20 days. They then go to the border. They then either cross the border illegally and surrender to the border patrol, or what is less well known but very common, they walk up to a U.S. port of entry with no documents as say they want asylum. They way things have been done, even though congress tried to stop it in 1996, is they are processed, temporarily detained and then “paroled” into the U.S. for “public benefit” the “benefit” being them attending the their immigration hearings. Talk about a self licking ice cream cone.

A stranger knocks on your door and asks if they can live in your house because of a a tale of woe. Do they wait outside while you check their story or do you let them move in and check later ? you then find out that the neighbor who has been dumping their trash in your yard refused to let them stay in their house but instead told them to come to yours.

[wsr]

IgnoreUser(wsr) /NoSarc

Oh no, whatever will I do? LOL
A wall still works better than no wall... sticking your fingers in your ears doesn’t change that

[HCM]

A wall works way better than no wall/ nor Sarc

A wall has some effect but not nearly enough. Three reasons it is not that simple:

1) There is an opportunity cost to building a wall. In other words what other, more effective, border security measures could be implemented for $5 billion ?

2) As discussed a wall is an obstacle, not a barrier, meaning it channels and disrupts those trying to cross illegally but it does not stop them. It just makes it easier to catch them. That brings us back to the issue we have now, the logistics of ensuring there are consequences to crossing illegally or filing frivolous asylum claims. That is the number one issue right now and a wall does nothing to address it. In fact, it makes things worse by denying resources to address the logistics of consequences. Once again, amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.

3) An effective wall takes years to build. We have a border security crisis that needs to be addressed NOW. not 5 years from now. As I stated earlier the wall sections being built right now were funded under the Obama administration.

[HCM]

Unsurprising as this a clearly authorized by statute.


U.S. court temporarily allows Trump admin to resume returning asylum-seekers to Mexico


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...asylum-n993991

A federal appeals court in California took action Friday that would temporarily allow the Trump administration to return asylum seekers to Mexico.

The decision is in response to the Trump administration's emergency motion filing from Thursday asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco to stop a nationwide injunction that would bar the government from continuing its policy of forcing migrants to wait in Mexico as their asylum cases play out.

[wsr]

A wall has some effect but not nearly enough. Three reasons it is not that simple:

1) There is an opportunity cost to building a wall. In other words what other, more effective, border security measures could be implemented for $5 billion ?

2) As discussed a wall is an obstacle, not a barrier, meaning it channels and disrupts those trying to cross illegally but it does not stop them. It just makes it easier to catch them. That brings us back to the issue we have now, the logistics of ensuring there are consequences to crossing illegally or filing frivolous asylum claims. That is the number one issue right now and a wall does nothing to address it. In fact, it makes things worse by denying resources to address the logistics of consequences. Once again, amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.

3) An effective wall takes years to build. We have a border security crisis that needs to be addressed NOW. not 5 years from now. As I stated earlier the wall sections being built right now were funded under the Obama administration.

I agree, I’m not trying to say a wall is the answer but it is a big part of the answer.
In my mind a wall is not the most effective thing we could do but it is the most effective strategy we will get, politicians will never implement the kind of changes that would be really effective (they don’t want to solve problems they just want to appear to be trying ) and if they do the next congress will just defund it

[wsr]

I’m pretty sure I already covered this:

Message received, sorry

[Borderland]

A wall has some effect but not nearly enough. Three reasons it is not that simple:

1) There is an opportunity cost to building a wall. In other words what other, more effective, border security measures could be implemented for $5 billion ?

2) As discussed a wall is an obstacle, not a barrier, meaning it channels and disrupts those trying to cross illegally but it does not stop them. It just makes it easier to catch them. That brings us back to the issue we have now, the logistics of ensuring there are consequences to crossing illegally or filing frivolous asylum claims. That is the number one issue right now and a wall does nothing to address it. In fact, it makes things worse by denying resources to address the logistics of consequences. Once again, amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.

3) An effective wall takes years to build. We have a border security crisis that needs to be addressed NOW. not 5 years from now. As I stated earlier the wall sections being built right now were funded under the Obama administration.

People who want to run out and start building major structures generally have no engineering or construction experience. Most of the large projects I worked on were in the planning/design phase for years before the actual construction started. There's environmental permits, court challenges (which we are seeing now) property acquisition, engineering of structures, roads and drainage, on and on. 5 years is not a long time in the construction business and is fairly normal for projects of this size. I'm thinking if it were fast tracked maybe 3 years but a lot of things would be broken in the process and a lot of law suits with enormous costs to the fed in the end. You just don't build a road and a wall across someones property without paying for the damage. You first have to purchase the ROW or pay about triple the cost in damages.

I know how this works because I was in the road and bridge building business for 30 years. Courts don't look kindly at gov't agencies that don't play by their own rules. This would be a federal project and the feds have more rules than anyone when it comes to building anything.

[Spartan1980]

A wall has some effect but not nearly enough.

A wall will go an awful long way. The other things are still required but will be much more effective with a wall in place.

Source:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...isan-politics/

[HCM]

A wall will go an awful long way. The other things are still required but will be much more effective with a wall in place.

Source:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...isan-politics/

Figures lie and liars figure. The writers in national review are as partisan and willing to twist the truth as those on the left claiming walls are “racist.”

build a wall in one sector and you channel traffic somewhere else - Nogales numbers go down- Douglas numbers go up.

Also those “pre” figures are mostly Mexicans getting caught multiple times and trying again. A very different situation than what is going on now.

Speaking of Mexican migration, it has been declining for about a decade. The bulk of the current problems are from Central America.

[TGS]

build a wall in one sector and you channel traffic somewhere else - Nogales numbers go down- Douglas numbers go up.

That's exactly what I was thinking. In addition, those are places where a wall makes sense.

Even if we took for granted that the walls featured in that graphic created an overall reduction of EWIs as implied instead of funneling traffic elsewhere, that doesn't mean the wall would be effective in another area as you've pointed out repeatedly, apparently to deaf ears.

Out of par staffing of 15 agents, a buddy of mine was the only agent to show up to shift the other day to patrol a 1500sqmi focus area (the entire AOR being even bigger). Their FOB which had 20-24 agents at it 24/7/365 (in addition to the regular beat) when he was hired 10+ years ago is now routinely shuttered with no one staffing it.

Wall won't do shit in that area. There aren't even agents to provide security to the guys building the walls, they'll have to fly them in from elsewhere or use contract security guards.