In October 2015, we reported:

Donald Trump made international headlines when he stated that America needs to build a fence along the entire US-Mexico border to stop the flood of illegal aliens. The liberal media crucified Trump for his comment and tried to make him out to be a Hispanic hating bigot. Democrats were ready with their hammers to nail him to a cross for his statements. Sadly, a number of the other Republican candidates were ready to help hoist him onto the cross so the Democrats could finish the job…

Liberals often argue that a border fence costs too much and is ineffective in stopping the flow of illegals. They point out how many of them use ladders to go over, tunnels to go under or cut their way through existing fencing. There have even been occasions where illegals have rammed vehicles through the fence to gain entry into the US.

Our response to them is to point to the border fence in Yuma, Arizona. In 2005, Border Patrol agents stationed in Yuma made an average of 800 arrests of illegals per day. They averaged around 2,700 vehicle penetrations of the border in the Yuma area alone, many of them were loaded with drugs and driven at high speeds to push their way through the flimsy fence.

In 2006, President Bush promised to fix the illegal problem in Yuma and elsewhere. Congress passed the Secure Fence Act that allocated funds for the construction of a more secure fence and or vehicle barriers. Construction took 3 years but now the Yuma border is probably the most secure stretch of border with Mexico.

Today, the Border Patrol in Yuma, which has triple the manpower it had in 2005, arrested 15 illegals a day and the number of vehicle penetrations so far this year is only 27.

Border Patrol Agent Richard Withers commented about the Yuma fence, saying:

“It works. This is the most secure area of the border. It is pretty hard for a guy to cross here. But they try.”

So how do they do it?

The first fence encountered is a 20-foot-high steel fence. If they manage to scale that, illegals will have to cross a 75-yard-wide no man’s land that is monitored by cameras and sensors. Border Patrol agents also patrol the no man’s land in SUVs on a regular basis. If they make it across no man’s land, they will encounter a tightly woven steel fence that is also monitored. If they manage to breach the second fence, they find themselves faced with a cyclone fence topped with barbed wire. Click here to see tour of Yuma border fence.

Anthony Porvaznik, Yuma Sector Chief commented about how successful the Yuma border security is these days:

“It was the Wild West out here.”

“We essentially apprehend 92 percent of all entries through the Yuma sector. That is 126 miles of border, which includes 12 miles of these sand dunes. On a scale of 1 to 10 we are a 9.”

“Unless you give them a reason not to come back, they will. When we started Operation Streamline, fewer deportees tried to cross. It was simple. They didn’t want to go to jail. Our first-time offenders went to jail for 15 days. We took them out of their smuggling cycle.”

This week, Ronald Colburn, former Border Patrol Deputy Chief, and David Aguilar, former Acting Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, appeared before Senate Homeland Security Committee about conditions along the United States – Mexico border. Colburn was the Chief of the Yuma Border Patrol Sector and testified to the Senate committee about how successful the Yuma fence has been. Speaking to the committee, Colburn stated:

“Yuma became the ‘proof of concept’ that America can protect and control its border when the proper mix of resources are placed almost instantaneously. By 2008, Yuma Sector arrests of illicit border crossers and traffickers had dwindled from over 138,000 to 8,363.”

Speaking about the environmental issues being raised against the border wall, Aguilar told the committee:

“The noted issues will have to be taken into consideration, but it is important to note that there is nothing more destructive to environmentally sensitive land and communities than the uncontrolled illegal flow of people, vehicles, smugglers, and criminal organizations. The placement of fences and deterrent infrastructure in previously uncontrolled parts of the border have actually allowed for the rejuvenation of areas that had previously been devastated due to heavy illegal pedestrian and vehicular traffic.”

In spite of the testimony, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) said she wants to see the border secured but still seems opposed to the border wall, now blaming it on a cost estimated to be around $70 billion.

No one in Washington seems to realize that the border wall/fence could be built with little to no additional cost to US taxpayers for the labor. The US military has a number of construction units that travel anywhere, building military and air bases, as well as infrastructure for cities that’s been destroyed during war. Since they are already drawing their military pay, why not give them the task of building the rest of the border wall/fencing, similar to the proven successful section found in Yuma. Any construction outfit will tell you that labor is the often the biggest single cost to most projects, so putting our already paid military construction units on the job should not cost taxpayers anything more. That should cut billions off of the $70 billion price tag being Bantered around Washington.

Chances are if we did build the wall and cut off much of the flow of illegal aliens and drugs that the epidemic of heroin overdoses would also be drastically reduced, as will crimes associated with the drugs and those by illegal aliens. The American people will see a marked improvement to life, fewer crime and more jobs. It’s definitely a win-win situation.