Donald Trump’s plan to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border did not come from security analysts following years of study or through evidence that a wall would reduce illegal immigration. Amazingly, for something so central to the current U.S. president, the wall came about as a “mnemonic device” thought up by a pair of political consultants to remind Donald Trump to talk about illegal immigration.
In 2014, Trump’s plan to run for president moved into high gear. His political confidant was consultant Roger Stone. “Inside Trump’s circle, the power of illegal immigration to manipulate popular sentiment was readily apparent, and his advisers brainstormed methods for keeping their attention-addled boss on message,” writes Joshua Green, author of Devil’s Bargain: Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, and the Nationalist Uprising. “They needed a trick, a mnemonic device. In the summer of 2014, they found one that clicked.”
Joshua Green had good access to Trump insiders, including Sam Nunberg, who worked with Stone. “Roger Stone and I came up with the idea of ‘the Wall,’ and we talked to Steve [Bannon] about it,” according to Nunberg. “It was to make sure he [Trump] talked about immigration.”
The concept of the Wall did not click right away with the candidate. “Initially, Trump seemed indifferent to the idea,” writes Green. “But in January 2015, he tried it out at the Iowa Freedom Summit, a presidential cattle call put on by David Bossie’s group, Citizens United. ‘One of his pledges was, ‘I will build a Wall,’ and the place just went nuts,’ said Nunberg. Warming to the concept, Trump waited a beat and then added a flourish that brought down the house. ‘Nobody,’ he said, ‘builds like Trump.’”
Roger Stone and Sam Nunberg are political consultants. Neither man has claimed expertise in immigration policy, particularly the complex issue of deterring individuals from attempting to enter the United States illegally. While Stone and Nunberg have their supporters, both have also experienced their share of controversies, including Stone admitting in December 2018, as part of a legal settlement, to “spreading lies” on the Alex Jones InfoWars program.
It should seem strange to base U.S. immigration policy on an idea Roger Stone and Sam Nunberg thought up without any analysis as to whether it represented good policy for the United States. Yet that is what happened – and wall supporters are either unaware or by now have forgotten the reason the wall was proposed in the first place.
Before the end of 2018, Donald Trump rallied enough House Republicans to support $5 billion in funding to help build a wall. That action (and others) resulted in a partial government shutdown. After the shutdown began, Trump tweeted that building a wall is the only effective way to stop illegal immigration into the United States.
In a December 2018 editorial, the Wall Street Journal pointed out building a wall is not the best way to reduce illegal immigration and it represents a questionable use of taxpayer money. “The best solution, as ever, is to reduce the incentive for people to come illegally by creating more ways to work legally in America,” the editorial noted. “Most migrants come to work, and at the current moment there are plenty of unfilled jobs for them. A guest-worker program would let migrants move back and forth legally, ebbing and flowing based on employer needs, while reducing the ability of gangs and smuggler ‘coyotes’ to exploit vulnerable migrants.”
Research from the National Foundation for American Policy supports this view. A large increase in the legal admission of farm workers during the 1950s under the Bracero Program dramatically reduced illegal entry to America. Based on apprehensions at the border, illegal entry to the United States fell by 95% between 1953 and 1959, as farm workers entered legally in larger numbers. As many analysts have pointed out, a wall does not prevent Central Americans from applying for asylum at lawful ports of entry.
Illegal entry by individuals from Mexico has plummeted by more than 90% since FY 2000, according to Border Patrol apprehensions data. Changed demographics and improved economic conditions mean large-scale illegal migration by Mexicans to the U.S. – the original public justification for building a wall – is over. The flow of Central Americans seeking work or asylum is a recent phenomenon driven by poor economic conditions and violence in their home countries that a wall does little to address.
The idea for building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border came from political consultants seeking a way to keep Donald Trump’s mind focused on illegal immigration. A reasonable observer might ask if that is a good reason for a wall to be the basis of U.S. immigration policy.
Note: You can read an article with analysis of the latest border data here.
