Wednesday, September 27th 2017 (WASHINGTON) – On Tuesday, U.S. Customs and Border Control (CBP) announced that six companies began construction of eight prototypes to fulfill Donald Trump’s campaign pledge to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.
http://cbsaustin.com/news/
In the months since taking office, Trump has outlined a number of possible criteria for securing the border including a “see-through” wall, a “big, beautiful wall,” and even a wall with solar panels. But according to homeland security officials and lawmakers, the government will likely award more than one contract, and intends to construct more than one style of barrier along the border.
After a months-long process of reviewing engineering proposals from companies across the country, CBP settled on eight design finalists, four concrete walls and four made of “other materials.”
The companies chosen to construct the prototypes have remained quiet about their proposals. None of them responded to media requests by the time this report was published. But a fenced-in worksite has been set up in San Diego County just miles from the Mexican border and crews are on their way.
Curious onlookers will be disappointed, KEYE TV reported. The construction site is protected by thousands of feet chain link fencing and the road to the location has been blocked off to keep protesters at bay.
According to the Associated Press, Roy Villarreal, acting chief of the Border Patrol’s San Diego sector said the prototype contest “may not result in a singular winner.” The final project “may be a combination of designs being implemented.”
On Capitol Hill, lawmakers also confirmed that the final “border wall” will be an aggregate of design concepts, rather than a long and winding structure.
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) is among the group of lawmakers on the Homeland Security Committee who have been anxiously awaiting details on the wall from the Trump administration.
One area where DHS has been “very, very clear,” Lankford said, is in telling Congress “it is not going to be one wall.”
“It’s not going to be the same all the way across the 1,400 miles that remain without any kind of fencing,” Lankford explained. “For some places [they’re looking at] technology, some places are wall, some places concrete, some places just traditional fencing.”
On other parts of the border there will be no fencing at all, he said, because Border Patrol can attain security just by using technology.
“So this is not one giant concrete wall or metal wall.”
WINNER, WINNER
In the next 30 days, the prototypes will be completed at which time another contractor will evaluate the models.
Donald Trump has said he will personally select the winning design.
During a campaign rally in Huntsville, Alabama last week, Trump told the audience that once the wall concepts are complete, “I’m going to go out and look at them personally and pick the right one.”
At that rally Trump further insisted that the wall “has to be see-through,” otherwise an individual on the other side could be hit in the head with “a hundred pounds of drugs.” The president added, “Believe it or not, this is the kind of stuff that happens.”
While the president’s description evokes the image of a great glass wall — a nightmare for birds — the requirement for a wall with “a see-through component/capability” that “facilitates situational awareness” was actually one of the requirements outlined by DHS in the original call for proposals.
Back in March, the Department of Homeland Security issued two requests for proposals, one for concrete border walls, and one for “other” border wall prototypes.
Both types of designs had core requirements that the wall be “physically imposing in height,” standing between 18 and 30 feet tall, impossible to climb, tunnel-proof up to six feet below ground, and the northern side of the wall facing the United States must be “aesthetically pleasing.”
By late October, as the prototypes are being assessed, the Trump administration expects to complete its strategy for securing the southern border, which includes the wall, infrastructure and technology, acting Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Elaine Duke told members of the U.S. Senate on Wednesday.
At that time, lawmakers who have been pressing DHS for specifics on border security and the wall expect a lot of their questions will be answered, including the big question, how much is it going to cost?
PAYING FOR THE WALL
The Department of Homeland Security has been beating back lawmakers who have been pressing the agency for months to reveal how much Donald Trump’s border wall is going to cost.
Even before the leaked transcripts of Trump’s call with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto showed the president backing off his demand that Mexico pay for the wall, it was clear to nearly everyone on Capitol Hill that the U.S. taxpayers would be footing the bill.
Months ago, reports showed a DHS estimate for the wall costing $21.6 billion and completed over the 3.5 years. However, members of Congress have quoted estimates showing the border wall could cost upwards of $20 million per mile. If that were applied to the non-border fence areas, construction costs alone would skyrocket above $30 billion.
That figure is causing serious heartburn on Capitol Hill. Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) pressed acting DHS Secretary Duke on Wednesday for an “unbiased political opinion” on securing the border, arguing that upwards of $20 million per mile for a wall “is a lot of dough.”
Sen. Lankford compared the administration’s cost estimates to the $3.5 million per-mile cost for border fencing just a decade ago when the 2006 Secure Fence Act was passed.
“Before we release funds, both in this committee [Homeland Security] and the Appropriations Committee … we have got to be able to know what are you designing, where is it going, and what are the long-term costs, not just the single year costs,” he said.
Until the administration settles on a design, there is no way for Congress or the agencies to know the actual cost of the project.
That is why the Senate, in particular, is pushing back, Lankford said. “We’re supportive of securing the border, but we’ve got to know actually what [the administration is] asking for.”
The House of Representatives has already passed legislation that would authorize $1.6 billion as a down payment on construction of the border wall and repair work on existing fencing. That provision is not likely to pass in the Senate.
PLUS LEGAL COSTS
In addition to construction costs, a number of lawmakers have raised the issue of eminent domain.
Approximately two-thirds of the land along the 2,000-mile long southern U.S. border is privately owned or state-owned.
Ranking Democrat on the Senate Homeland Security Committee, Claire McCaskill has estimated the cost of seizing that land to build the wall will be in the billions.
According to Customs and Border Patrol, the cost to acquire the land to build the existing 650 miles of fencing along the southern border cost $78 million. That included 400 land acquisitions and 330 condemnation lawsuits in South Texas alone.
The cost of acquiring the territory and extrapolations of per-mile fencing costs were combined in a report by the Democrats on the Homeland Security Committee resulting in an estimated total cost of $66.9 billion.
In addition to being expensive, government land seizure is also incredibly controversial. At a committee hearing a few months back, McCaskill noted that in some rural communities, if the words “eminent domain” are even mentioned, “you better run, because somebody is going to have their shotgun out.”
The Trump administration has said it has suited up a team of lawyers to prepare for the lawsuits.
Another challenge facing the Trump administration is legality. Last month the state of California filed a lawsuit claiming the wall violates federal environmental standards and is an unconstitutional violation of states rights.
It is unclear how far the lawsuit will go, but it could certainly be another barrier for President Trump to jump over in order to fulfill his promise of building a wall.
