The Conservative Argument AGAINST Trump’s Border Wall

by with 5 Comments FeaturedPolitics

One of the biggest stories of 2019… 

There is no political topic that captures the imagination of today’s voter like Trump’s proposed border wall.  This issue encapsulates national security, humanitarian, economic concerns, and it exploits the hyperpolarization of the rank and file members of both political parties. This issue is THE reason for the longest government shutdown in US history, and at the time of this writing, there is no compromise in sight. In this political stalemate, the only way to move the needle is to look deeper into the issue to see what the actual issue is, and if the taken positions are consistent with the fundamental principles of their ideology and party affiliation. As a lifelong Republican with an engineering background, after crunching the numbers and taking into perspective the number of diversions from bedrock conservative ideals, this border wall and the process it includes is the antithesis of sound conservative policy. The proposed wall is not fiscally responsible, infringes on private property rights through eminent domain, and does not significantly improve national security.

Using my professional background, and my background in engineering costs, I identified these significant expenses: 1. Property value of acquired land… 2. Legal fees for obtaining land through eminent domain… 3. Material costs for a 25 ft steel wall… 4. 2 ft foundation… 5. Labor costs… 6. Permitting fees… 7… Installation of service road for construction, maintenance, and transportation of border patrol vehicles and equipment… 8. Engineering fees, and… 9. Miscellaneous fees and expenses. While there are other expenses like water rights for farmers along the Rio Grande River, and potential litigation issues from a treaty with Mexico regarding these water rights, I am keeping my focus on these items because the process time and costs are significant.

  1. Property Values: Most land along the border is private property. I will assume 75% of the land is private property, a cost of $3,000 per acre (value is likely higher, but once land is condemned for seizure, the value drops significantly), and a 150 ft-wide right-of-way to hold the wall, service road, and any other facilities. Roadway right-of-way varies on size of the road. Typically, it is in the 60-80’ range (300+ for interstates and major highways), but since there will be utility and drainage installations in this right-of-way in lieu of additional easements, I am combining it into one. Total Cost = $75 billion. Total Time to Acquire = 12-18 months to notify property owner & 3-10 years to resolve through federal courts.
  2. Legal fees: This is roughly a third of the total property value based on other federal eminent domain cases. Total Cost = $25 billion. Time to Resolve = 3-10 years.
  3. Material Costs for 25 ft steel wall: Trump has signaled he is willing to compromise from concrete to steel. Assuming the wall height is 25 feet and a unit cost of $7/SF, the Total Cost = $2 billion. Time to Build = 125 miles/year or 14 years.
  4. Foundation Costs for a 2 ft foundation: Assuming a foundation height of 2 ft (typical for a structure of this height) and a unit cost of $10/SF, the Total Cost = $170 million. 
  5. Labor Costs: Labor costs tend to be 40-60% of total expense when combined with materials. Total Cost = $2 billion. 
  6. Permitting Fees: Permitting expenses tend to be 2-3% of total construction costs, depending on location. Permit fees within city limits could be significantly higher because fees are likely based on the total value of the property’s or structure’s value, but for this exercise, we will keep it to materials and labor costs. Total Cost = $100 million. 
  7. Service Road Installation: Service roadways will need to be installed to transport contractors and materials to install the wall. These roadways will be used by maintenance crews as well as transportation means for border patrol agents on duty. Typical costs for 2 lane roads is $3 million per mile. Total cost = $5 billion.
  8. Engineering Fees: typical 2.5-3% of total costs, including property acquisitions. Total cost = $3 billion. 
  9. Miscellaneous fees: On most engineering cost estimates, there is a 10% contingency item that covers additional engineering fees, change order requests, and any other expenses that are anticipated, but the final cost is not known. Total Cost = $10 billion.

When you include a 10% contingency fee to account for miscellaneous or unforeseen expenses, which is custom in most engineering cost estimates, the total cost for this wall, assuming a best-case scenario, is in the $120-125 billion range with a likely completion date in 2029. Trump’s request for $5.7 billion is a small down payment on a costly construction project.

The most expensive part of this endeavor will be the seizure of privately-owned lands through eminent domain. Will Hurd, a former CIA security officer and Congressman of the district with the longest stretch of border in the country, stated there are approximately 1,000 private property owners with land along the border in Texas alone. These properties have been owned by families for multiple generations that will be forcibly taken from them by the federal government at a rate the government arbitrarily sets against their wishes. Historically, eminent domain, particularly the excessive use of it, has been a galvanizing issue for Conservatives. Taking one’s property against their will, particularly after the 2005 Kelo vs City of New London Supreme Court Case, prompted state legislatures in red states to pass legislation to reign in or outright prohibit the use of eminent domain in all or rare cases. The number of potential court cases that will occur could effectively shut down federal courts in District 5 (Texas), 9 (Arizona and California) and 10 (New Mexico).

The central argument made for the wall is the impact it will have on national security. This structure is supposed to make significant reductions in the number of illegal immigrants in our country. This week, the Center for Migration Studies released a study analyzing the numbers reported by the federal government and found that 62% of illegal immigrants are people who came here legally and overstayed their temporary or student visas. This has been the trend for the past seven years. Most illegal crossings occur at busy checkpoints or ports, not in isolated locations because there are not means of transportation available. Cartels have perfected the art of smuggling through these checkpoints and have made them a focus of their operations. They have also built numerous tunnels under the border that a wall would not impede. This means the people our national security departments are most concerned about will not be impacted by this wall. Creating the illusion of security is not the same as actual security.

This wall requires supporters to embrace a fiscally irresponsible purchase and revoke their bedrock defense of private property rights for a physical structure that has negligible benefit for national security. Wall supporters might have other, some might say sinister, reasons for supporting this issue, but it is not a conservative one.

This article was originally published on 22 January 2019.

Similar Read: The Delicate Art of Compromise

 

Mexico, Tariffs, and Accountability

by with No Comment FeaturedPolitics

Stop me if you heard this before: “POTUS makes a short notice international policy demand that is difficult to achieve and obtain measures of effectiveness or performance.”

As the deadline approaches, he claims a deal is reached and gets “credit for a political win.” Fast forward a few days and we learn the claimed deal was actually achieved months prior.

That’s where we are following the “new migrant policy deal” with Mexico. Our POTUS has claimed an achievement but the chances you’ve heard this is an old deal packaged as new are based on your political leanings only. In a day and time the initial story matters more than truth, it is now more important than ever that media (left, center and right) do the job they signed up for and push back whether it benefits their bias or not.

Take for instance the state of Michigan where a woman (Cathy Garnaat) attending a town hall by Republican Representative Justin Amash. For the first time, she heard there actually was negative information on Trump in the Mueller Report. Had she not been an Amash supporter, to this day (Deontay Wilder voice) she would not know this.

We exist in a bubble now more than ever. Funny in the Information Age, you can isolate yourself from information, but that is where we are. We are in a time where disinformation is standard practice and both parties as well as the media aids an administration that knows as long as they put their spin out first, the facts no longer matter.

My takeaway from the “new deal” with Mexico and the telling signs around it; this is how you sit and watch a system collapse when accountability and truth no longer matters. 

Similar Read: Newspeak

Jeff Sessions And The Religious Right Are Ruining Christianity

by with No Comment Featured

Christians need to shame those who use their faith to justify actions and policies that are anything but Christ-like.

Remember the movie “Saving Private Ryan?” For those who haven’t seen it, not sure if that person even exists, but if you haven’t seen it here’s the gist. Captain Miller, played by Tom Hanks, and his platoon are assigned to find a soldier whose three other brothers have died in combat before he possibly faces the same fate.

The soldier, Private Ryan, is just another soldier; however, Army leadership found it purposeful to save the Ryan household another loss to their family, thus the mission to find Private Ryan and bring him home.  

During the mission, several of Captain Miller’s troops, including Captain Miller, die attempting to save Private Ryan; yet the mission of rescuing Private Ryan is fulfilled and he safely returns home. 

Related: Alabama Republicans, Politics Over Everything…

The movie came to mind when I saw yet another ridiculous religious reference by a political official. This time it was Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Side note, speaking of Hollywood movies, if there was ever the perfect man who had both the look and voice of the Jim Crow segregationist, it would be Jeff Sessions. 

Sessions stated the Bible justified immigration enforcement to purposely separate families in the effort of enforcement because “it’s the law of the land.” Which is true. The law of the land includes immigration protocols. The Bible does state to obey the law of the land. But… is that the Christian way? To intentionally separate families for violation of a nonviolent crime? Would he use the good Christian book if the immigration issue was focused against… say… Polish immigrants versus immigrants from Mexico and Latin America?

However, Sessions isn’t the real problem. It’s his fellow Christian worshipers who stay silent when the “Christian Right” continually use the Christian faith as a launching pad for their political policies.

To the non-affiliated type, the “Christian Right” has become nothing but a harbinger for bigotry, xenophobia, and homophobic views and policies. This type of practice has gone on for too long and now more than ever Christians need to go on a mission and save their faith.

The “Christian Right” has become so ridiculous that white evangelicals voted to the tune of 95 percent for Trump. Trump: a lifelong party going, illicit drug using, several wives having, amongst other things self, was voted for based on religious beliefs. Huh????

So what gives? 

Simply put, the “Christian Right” use religion as makeup to cover their true bigotry filled desires. And only rightfully minded Christians have the makeup removing kits to wipe it away. Yes, I know most of the “Christian Right” are southern White people, but it doesn’t matter. If you practice the Christian faith, what’s supposed to supersede any demographic box is wanting to be Christ-like. Therefore, that includes ensuring your faith is not being misused.

Lastly, in “Saving Private Ryan,” Captain Miller calmed his troops questioning the purpose of their mission for the expense of their own possible death; for he stated if bringing Ryan home is a way to get them all home, then so be it. Other Christians not on board with the hypocrisy of the “Christian Right” might fear backlash or know they too have their own faults. However, justifying these actions by stating it’s the “biblical thing to do” creates a mark on the Christian faith that’s becoming harder and harder to erase.

After listening to such justification and watching it play out, refusing to speak up is even worse. 

Subscribe for free to receive similar content.  

Transgender in the Military – A Case in Political Hijackings by Democrats and Republicans

by with 2 Comments FeaturedPolitics

Trump’s reversal on the DoD’s direction on transgender service members was indeed surprising. The path seemed well on its way, and in many ways seemed initially unlikely to turn around – despite having been rushed and having some real practical considerations.

The reason the Obama administration acknowledged transgender service members last, and why it was not fully implemented during his administration, was because of the complexity of the medical services required. Gay military members had been serving quietly for quite some time – that change was made quickly with not much more than a shrug from the services.  Opening all career fields to women took at least some changes – including selling service members on the idea that standards for combat forces would not change, we were just doubling the potential candidate pool (which if done without quotas should in all cases lead to more competitive standards in all areas, not less).  Three brave and talented female soldiers subsequently graduated from the US Army’s Ranger School, and West Point’s most recent branch night included a number of new female infantry officers.

Medical treatment for transgender service-members is more complex for the services. Sex reassignment is an expensive, risky, time-consuming major surgery. It requires a litany of interviews and psychological reviews to ensure the individual has thought through the process and that the surgery is responsible and beneficial, and once done, it has a long recovery period and requires lifetime hormone therapy. If a person (even with a good prognosis) looked likely at the outset to need such a large medical procedure of another kind, the candidate would under long-standing policy be medically ineligible for service, and for good reason: Military service members retire after 20 years and then collect benefits for a lifetime. That’s an expensive investment- especially if 2 years may make them non-deployable for surgery at a minimum, and for years after they continue with guaranteed medical needs and lifetime complications (and sanitary requirements) that may be difficult to ensure in the filthy, harsh business of war in dark places. For this reason, it was slow-walked (although made to progress at least in lip service) and was rushed to implementation only when it became clear that HRC would not be the next president.

However, the DoD does quite a few un-economic things, and many argued that the social benefits outweigh the cost of complications for a very small number of service members. As they would say: if we can deal with $500 toilet seats, we can deal with this, and as a social venture, proving that a transgender person can make it in the service should prove they can make it in the world as well. Also, the DoD had set a path under the Obama administration and that should carry a lot of momentum. Career choices (like joining or leaving the military) are ones with long-dated consequences to service members’ lives. So is one’s commitment to a sex change operation (obviously). People expect to make those decisions based on stable policies over time. So while the initial policy direction was rushed and perhaps ill-considered, it’s reversal seems also rushed and ill-considered.

Until you look at the underlying reasons for both: Barack Obama rushed the decision because he had made a commitment to advance a LGBTA agenda, and had reached a point where he had to set course or let it go. While the DoD had briefed him on the special medical considerations, risks, costs, and was messaging hard to wait for more study, it was clear that study would not continue under Trump as it would have under HRC. The resulting action felt like “DoD- this is more important than military readiness, and even though we aren’t ready to implement, I have political commitments – so you need to figure it out.” That’s an annoying reason to rush implementation. Likewise, the reversal seems also to be less about readiness and more about convincing the Tea Party wing of the GOP (which tends to overlap heavily with the religious right) that they should approve of Trump’s infrastructure budget (most notably a wall across the Mexican border that apparently will eventually be reimbursed by Mexico). Granting Senate Tea Partiers a Pyrrhic victory of savings from a few people (as well as the rejection of a social issue) seemed to be an easy administrative fix for a President getting ready to present a budget case this fall that looks harder to pass than even an Obamacare repeal… and the services (and recruits and service members) are simply horses for trading.

So now we are in a place where any decision is a bad decision. It could have made sense to say that transgender service members (unless they would definitively say they did not require and would not request a sex change operation during their service) were not in the best interest of the services – just as cancer survivors or others with extensive medical needs are not. On the other hand, one administration just told service members to raise their hands for help if they wanted it; the next seems willing to cut those hands off. That’s a horrible precedent and seems like a betrayal to people that have asked to defend us while we sleep.

We all as individuals need to do better in judging our elected officials and get beyond the sound bites. Getting your way is only better if it results in better outcomes. These last few years have divided us greatly in our views on the direction of the country. Debate is good. Progress is good. Making the world a better place is good. But we would all do well to remember that change takes planning, and ideology takes thoughtful implementation, and throughout its entire life cycle and repeal, this issue saw none of that from either side, and the losers were all of us.

Want to read similar content from the Left, Center, Right? SUBSCRIBE for only $2/month.

Venezuela: A Nation Divided And Why It Matters, Pt. II

by with No Comment International

(Part I includes reasons 1 and 2)

Here are reasons 3 – 5 why the crisis in Venezuela matters to not just you, but to everyone else in the world.

III. It could turn Venezuelans to hate America in the region

  • Dictators in Latin America love to find sentiment to rage against the United States. From Fidel Castro’s passionate denunciations of the American “imperialists” to Venezuelans late president Hugo Chavez, who spoke out against George W. Bush at the UN in 2006.
  • So it’s no surprise that Maduro is using the same rhetoric to stoke up flames of anti-American sentiment throughout the region.
  • Latin Americans are cautious and sensitive to what some consider “imperialist” policies coming from Washington, making it very easy for leaders like Maduro to build up dissent for the United States.
  • With this being said, it is important for the U.S. to play an active role in Latin America so that it can combat the negative remarks and false images that dictators are trying to create.

 

IV. It has created unimaginable suffering

  • Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” There is a fundamental human reason why we should care and pay attention to what is currently taking place in Venezuela. Venezuelans are going through unimaginable suffering, and it’s unfathomable to many of us.
  • High inflation, especially soaring food prices means that many people are not just skipping meals, but are not eating all together. According to a national survey conducted by three of the country’s major universities, the percentage of malnourished Venezuelans is increasing.
  • Some have jokingly dubbed this the “Maduro diet” who has said that doing without “makes you tough.” WTF?
  • There have also been shortages on basic goods such as toilet paper and medical supplies. Venezuela can’t pay to import goods because its government is desperately strapped for cash after years of foolish spending. The sight of people sifting through trash to find food is unfortunately a common sight.

 

V. This could ultimately hurt us in our pocketbook.

  • This crisis in Caracas could hit American citizens where it hurts the most: The gas pump.
  • The US is the main buyer of Venezuelan oil, so there’s a very intimate relationship between both governments, in that regard at least.
  • If President Trump decided to actually follow through on his threat to place heavy sanctions on Venezuelan oil, or bar shipments to the U.S., Venezuela would be crippled because at this point that is their only source of income. Its humanitarian crisis would worsen. But surprisingly, the sanctions would hurt us as well, because Venezuela is third in oil exports to the U.S., right behind Saudi Arabia and Canada.
  • Sanctions would force the U.S. to buy oil elsewhere, which means that it would inadvertently force you and I to shell out more money when we decide to visit our local BP or Mobil gas station.

So pay attention, this is bigger than our media is leading you to believe. This crisis in Venezuela can definitely get out of control, if it already hasn’t.

Venezuela: A Nation Divided And Why It Matters, Pt. I

by with No Comment International

As of this year, you have probably seen the news reports: The Vice specials, and AJ+’s coverage of the protests in the streets, the long lines at the stores. But you probably have not paid enough attention to the actual chaos gripping Venezuela.

How are the events taking place in a socialist nation of 30 million people, thousands of miles away, relevant to you in the U.S.?

Here are 5 reasons why the crisis in Venezuela matters to not just you, but to everyone else in the world.

I. It’s creating thousands of new refugees

  • The lack of food and medicine, soaring inflation, political instability, and violence are all key ingredients of creating refugees. This has and is currently taking place in Venezuela, and has forced tens of thousands of its citizens to flee. These same refugees are now the top asylum seekers in the U.S., ahead of citizens from countries like El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, and China. This is, in fact, the first time that Venezuelans have topped the list.
  • As of now, more than 21,600 Venezuelans have sought asylum so far in 2017. That number has increased by as much as four times since 2015 when 5,605 Venezuelans applied for asylum.
  • What makes this all the more challenging is that with the current American political climate, a wave of new asylum-seekers would not be welcomed with open arms.
  • There is currently a rise in xenophobia in the U.S., and a flood of Venezuelans from across the social strata into our country creates an opportunity for U.S. politicians to use them as pawns for their political agendas.

 

II. It’s an attack on democracy – which is disconcerting

  • Observers of this conflict have noted that what is currently going on politically in Venezuela over the last few years is an attack on the people’s ability to choose how they wish to be governed, which is also an attack on their presumed liberties.
  • President Nicolas Maduro filled the Venezuelan Supreme court with his supporters so that he would be able to block any impeachment attempts after the country’s opposition leaders won a majority of seats in the National Assembly in 2015.
  • To make matters worse, the Maduro-backed Supreme court then briefly tried to deconstruct the National Assembly and grab hold of its legislative powers, which only ignited a wave of violent protests that have continued almost every day since March 2017. As many as 100 people have been killed since then.
  • Last week the country held an election that was highly controversial to create a new lawmaking body, named the Constituent Assembly. The 545-seat legislative body, packed with Maduro’s supporters, would finally have the power to rewrite the country’s 1999 constitution and promptly take control of all branches of Venezuela’s government under Maduro.
  • With what is currently taking place in our own country, this should make ALL Americans sit up and pay attention. Having a leader try and bend the will of the government to suit his needs is something we all have become quite accustomed to in the U.S.

 

Part II includes reasons 3 – 5.