11

The US president today tweeted

we must continue to BUILD THE WALL!

Am I right in thinking that "continue" means building has occurred since he took office?

How much actual new wall has been erected?

5

6 months after I asked this question, the BBC report

In the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, Mr Trump promised to build a wall along the border's entire 2,000-mile length.

He later clarified that it would only cover half of that - with nature, such as mountains and rivers, helping to take care of the rest.

But, since Mr Trump entered the White House, although some of the already existing barriers have been replaced, no construction on any extension to the wall has yet been started.

Overall, Congress has so far approved $1.7bn in funding for 124 miles of new and replacement barrier since Mr Trump entered the White House.

Just over 40 miles of replacement barriers have been built or begun. Construction is expected to start on 61 more miles of replacement barrier in 2019. This equates to new sections of about 15% of existing structures.

The first construction on any extension to the existing structures - what could be termed new barrier - will start in February in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas.

The twin projects will cover a total of 14 miles - one barrier stretching six miles and the other eight miles.

(my emphasis)

0

Construction has definitely started. Here is one example:

A 14-mile section of President Trump’s border wall is under construction in San Diego, at a cost of $147 million. The money comes from the omnibus spending bill that Trump signed in March. The legislation included a $1.6 billion down payment on the “great, great” wall that – Trump promised throughout his presidential campaign – would stretch across the nation’s southern border. The San Diego wall will reach up to 30 feet high, topped with a sheer vertical “anti-climbing plate” that offers no hand- or footholds for illicit border crossers.

Apparently, more land would be seized in other areas according to this:

The federal government is moving to seize private land in a section of southern Texas to make room for President Donald Trump's border wall.The land seizures would take place in the Rio Grande Valley, The Texas Tribune reported on Thursday. About $1.6 billion in funding for about 65 miles of fencing was already appropriated in a spending bill Trump signed in March, but it allows only for fencing similar to what is already in place at parts of the border. Rep. Henry Cuellar, the Democrat who represents Texas' border-straddling 28th Congressional District, reportedly attended a briefing in which federal authorities announced the land seizures. "They said they got the money, they got the authority, and they're going to move on trying to acquire the land," Cuellar told The Texas Tribune.

What remains to be seen is if the new construction will be merely a fence, or if it will be a real wall made of concrete.

  • 12
    There's a lot of charged language included in this answer (e.g. obstructionists, the claim Dems are "defending illegal immigration"). Can you provide some cites for the claim that Democrats are defending illegal immigration in particular? Also, when you note that obstructionists want to make it into a fence, isn't it the GOP senate who argued it should be a fence? And Trump's DHS secretary? Can you provide some cites for the claims the Democratic obstruction is causing the downgrading from the wall to a fence? – Eremi Jun 25 '18 at 18:32
  • 5
    @Eremi Dude, if you don't know that Democrats support illegal immigrants and oppose wall then you must be living under the rock :) I'm not going to put links about trivial things like Sun is rising in the east . I however do agree that part of GOP establishment also doesn't want wall to be built, and they are trying to "reach compromise" with Democrats to reduce it to fence. But that is another question. – rs.29 Jun 26 '18 at 5:14
  • 9
    In my part of the world, at this time of year, the sun rises in the northeast, not the east. Links are good to have even when you think what you say is obvious to all. – Geobits Jun 26 '18 at 10:00
  • 10
    @rs.29 There is a huge difference between the Democratic platform and "defending illegal immigration". I can not find any major Democratic politician arguing that we need more illegal immigrants--most argue about practicality of deporting millions of people as well as humanitarian claims. Furthermore, my point on the "fence" is that there are numerous Republicans making that claim--pinning it on the Democrats alone is a mark of a partisan answer. – Eremi Jun 26 '18 at 14:17
  • 10
    @user_42 This is off-topic, but ok. Sanctuary cities are cities where the local police do their jobs instead of being forced to spend all of their resources hunting people down over their immigration documents. If you commit crimes, the police arrest you. If you dont, you can safely report crimes to the police without being deported. Hunting down people who arent causing harm is inefficient. It actually provides more cover for actual criminals because you cause people to be unable to report crimes. Much in the same way that prohibition creates unregulated shadow economies full of crime. – Tal Jun 26 '18 at 15:55

You must log in to answer this question.

protected by JJ for Transparency and Monica Feb 10 at 20:42

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .