Great Wall of America? A Bad Idea.

Great Wall of America? A Bad Idea.

It is widely known that the United States is a country of immigrants. The country's indigenous population constitutes a tiny miniscule of its population, while the rest came mostly from Europe, Latin America, and other parts of the world. Nevertheless, immigration to the United States has always been a divisive and controversial issue. In the nineteenth century, nativist feelings among the WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants) made the East Coast a very inhospitable place for Catholic Irish immigrants, while the legislators in the West Coast targeted immigrants and migrants from the Far East, singling out the Chinese in the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 ("Chinese Exclusion Act"). Today, cross-border movement of people through the southern border of the United States has become a hotly debated issue for ordinary folks, legislators, anti-terrorist law enforcement agencies, Congressmen and Congresswomen as well as Presidential candidates. Criticizing the current state of border control as some form of "open border anarchy," many conservative politicians -- in collaboration with numerous so-called "liberals" -- argue that the border with Mexico should be sealed with a wall. Dubbed "The Great Wall of America," the proposed wall, however, is a bad idea as it is a costly project that will not stop illegal immigration; it endangers the safety of migrants and the ecosystem of the surrounding areas, and is against American ideals.

The wall which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) started building in 2006 would stretch along the 2,000-mile border between the United States and Mexico. The plan was to build a 700-mile long fence equipped with sensors, radar, towers, intense lights, and other high-tech surveillance equipment. The projected cost of the fence was estimated to be $1,000,000 a mile, but by the time it was cancelled by the Obama Administration in January 14, 2011, the construction of the fence for just 53 miles turned out to be "$1b border fence boondoggle." As one journalist noted," the stubborn technical challenges of spotting immigrants, smugglers and drug traffickers across rugged, open desert depleted momentum and support in Congress for the program," while a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee complained that the "DHS spent a billion dollars on a failed project which did little to protect our border with Mexico" (Powell). Not only did the project fail to protect the border, but sealing the border will not stop desperate people searching for better opportunities. The Berlin Wall built at the height of the Cold War and guarded with live ammunition failed to prevent 5,000 East Germans from moving to West Germany, whereas in the areas with Mexico border where fence had already been built journalists observed grandmotherly women and pre-teenage children smuggling goods across the border (Drehle). In short, "The Great Wall of America" is too costly and is ineffective.

The wall is also problematic because it makes the lives of migrants miserable, forcing them to risk their health and even life to do the business their livelihood depends on. Proponents of the border fence ignore the fact that the migration of workers from Mexico to the United States is driven by a variety of circumstances, including the signing of NAFTA (which flooded Mexico with cheap, government-subsidized American corn, driving over a million Mexicans out of business) and the direct attempts by American meat companies to lure undocumented Mexican workers to the United States (Kenner et al.). Supporters of the wall see these workers, trapped in unfortunate economic developments, as "criminals" and propose border control that endangers their safety. But humans are not the only ones who are put in danger by the wall. As widely reported, the DHS waived environmental rules, circumventing "a series of laws, from the Endangered Species Act to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, outraging environmentalists" ("Environmental Rules Waived for Border Fence"). As environmentalists noted, the border would place various ecosystems in the area at risk, isolating border animals into smaller groups and thus affecting their genetic diversity ("U.S. Border Fence 'an Eco-danger'").

Most importantly, closing the U.S.-Mexico border with a wall is against American ideals. The United States was established with ideals of freedom and liberty. The country has been built at the back of immigrants. It is the pursuit of the American Dream cherished by most Americans that attracts immigrants from Mexico and other Hispanic countries. American belief in the ideal of liberty for people of all races, ethnicities, cultures, and religions is what made the country great in the first place. Despite consistent opposition to immigration throughout history by nativists, there have always been laws that allowed free movement of people. Once cherished as an integral part of the Constitution, the Fourteenth Amendment is now being debated by proponents of the wall, saying that those born in the American territory should not automatically qualify for citizenship. As Richard Rodriguez argues, America is not being threatened by an unsealed border with Mexico but by a threat "from within." He rightly warns that "the wall that is supposed to proscribe the beginning of America" may become "the place where America ends" (Rodriguez).