thick, would cost approximately $25 million/mile to construct
based on current concrete costs, land buyouts, labor, and other
related costs. Shorten the wall to 750 miles at $25 million/mile,
and the estimate drops to somewhere around $18.75 billion. If
President Trump can fulfill his campaign promise of negotiating
costs to their lowest and achieve a total cost of $15 billion for a
1,000-mile wall, the bill would become approximately $15 million/
mile. Under the preceding scenario of $15 million/mile, a 750-mile
wall could be built for approximately $11.25 billion.
Bernstein bases their model on the effective design that Israel
used for its concrete wall on the West Bank. This is a reasonable
comparison because the objective is largely the same, and much
of the US border fence will be in sandy, desert terrain as well – land
that requires a strong and deep foundation due to shifting dunes.
Based on the inefficient system the federal government uses
to contract for building services, a $25 billion price tag is likely
the most realistic. However, President Trump has stated that he
believes his administration can keep the costs to the lower end of
the prevailing estimates, between $15 and $25 billion.
After initial construction, especially if high-tech monitoring devices
are installed, there will be annual maintenance costs. These
next-generation devices are already being tested and used along
the southern border. Annual total maintenance costs have varied
greatly since the Secure Fence Act was passed. They range from
a low of $115 million in FY 2006, to a high of $1.2 billion in FY 2008
before eventually stabilizing at around $400 million in FY 2012.
Nailing down a specific, static cost for maintaining a well- secured
border is hard to estimate. It can reasonably be assumed that
annual maintenance will cost considerably more than it has in the
past. Maintenance of an effective border barrier is likely to cost as
much, or more, than the FY 2006 high of $1.2 billion. However, a
well-maintained border barrier is likely to reduce some of the high
costs associated with interior immigration enforcement.
Another possibility, should cost, environmental concerns and
technical difficulties become a major concern, would be to
construct more double-layered wired fence in low-traffic areas
instead of a concrete wall. Combined with hi-tech monitoring
equipment such as ground sensors and aerial monitoring, this
approach could yield success comparable to that experienced
by other nations, such as Israel, that have built similar barriers in
lightly populated deserts. Assuming that the construction costs
for double-layered fencing are considerably less than those for a
concrete wall, and taking into account that much of the border with
Mexico is in remote areas where wire fencing might be effective,
the savings could be substantial. President Trump, the Department
of Homeland Security, and Congress will have to conduct a careful
cost- benefit analysis to determine which construction method is
appropriate for each sector of the US-Mexico border.
Regardless of which approach is taken, securing the southern
border is a sound fiscal investment. The overall construction and
annual maintenance costs pale when compared to the $116 billion
the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimates
illegal immigration costs American taxpayers. (Not to mention,
the FY 2020 federal budget, which is $4.746 trillion.) In fact, if the
project only results in a 5 percent reduction in the annual cost of
illegal immigration to American taxpayers, and construction and
maintenance costs reach the most expensive estimates, it will pay
for itself after only six years.
THE STATUS OF THE BORDER WALL: 2017-PRESENT
Since assuming office in January 2017, progress on the
President’s signature campaign issue has been limited,
much to the chagrin of President Trump’s supporters and the
President himself. Given that Republicans controlled not only the
presidency, but both houses of Congress, the GOP should have
focused on securing border wall funding.
Unfortunately, the opportunity was missed. With Democrats
staunchly opposed to the wall, a small, but influential group of
Republicans joined in opposing any appropriating of funds or
forward movement on construction of a wall along the southern
border. As a result, the issue of appropriating the necessary
funds for the border wall was essentially slow walked for almost
two years.
UNITED STATE BORDER PATROL chief Rodney
Scott gives President Donald Trump a tour of
a section of the border wall, Tuesday, June 23,
2020, in San Luis, Ariz. AP Photo/Evan Vucci.
The TRUMP RALLY Publication 169