Jordan Harris

Opinion contributor

The two minutes hate scene from George Orwell’s "1984" has become oversaturated in recent years, used often with some validity to describe the faithful elation or unyielding hatred audiences feel toward the current occupant of the White House. There is another application that provides the scene some usefulness despite its depreciation, though.

When President Donald Trump sat down with the New York Times editorial board before he had secured the Republican nomination in 2016, he admitted about his rallies: “You know, if it gets a little boring, if I see people starting to sort of, maybe thinking about leaving, I can sort of tell the audience, I just say, ‘We will build the wall!’ and they go nuts.”

In the two minutes hate scene, Oceania party members scream acrimoniously at images of Emmanuel Goldstein, the party’s rebel enemy and, at least initially, it seems only the protagonist Winston Smith can see that the whole exercise is intentionally crafted and empty. Even so, Winston always found himself screaming too. It was “not that one was obliged to act a part,” he says, “but that it was impossible to avoid joining in.”

Read this:Kentucky women, minorities must continue fight for leadership roles

Trump’s 2016 comment about his rallies made it seem like he was in a similar position, understanding that it was a ploy, an entertainment tactic and not a serious policy proposal. Yet, here he is, seemingly joining in. America needs improved border security, but a border wall is a terrible waste of money, a point that everyone from the president on down should be able to recognize.

First, illegal immigration might provide great material for political grandstanding, but it isn’t a serious problem. The Pew Research Center keeps great immigration data that sometimes goes overlooked in our national discussion. There are believed to be 10.7 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States as of 2016, it finds. That number has declined even as the U.S. economy has improved, down more than 13 percent since 2007.

Most of that drop has actually been in immigrants from Mexico. Between 2007 and 2016, the number of undocumented Mexican immigrants in the United States declined by 1.5 million individuals. In fact, the number of Mexicans apprehended at the border has declined from 1.6 million individuals in 2000 to just 130,000 in 2017. Apprehension of non-Mexican migrants at the Southwest border pales in comparison but is likewise down from its peak.

Since 2009, Mexican immigrants have consistently left the United States at higher annual rates than have come to it, but even if that wasn’t the case, a border wall wouldn’t make much of a difference. Nearly twice as many people entered the U.S. legally and overstayed their visa than entered the country illegally.

Illegal immigration might not be a major issue, but drug addiction is. More than 200 people a day die from drug overdoses in the United States, with many using drugs that entered the U.S. through Mexico. But, a border wall won’t do much to fix that problem either.

Opinion:Avalanche of news makes it tough to keep up with President Trump

More than 80 percent of hard-drug seizures between 2012 and 2016 occurred at legal ports of entry, a problem that would not be benefited from a wall. Some come through underground tunnels. Since 1990, U.S. law enforcement officials have discovered more than 220 such tunnels at the U.S.-Mexico border, some as deep as 70 feet below ground. A wall, which the Department of Homeland Security projects to go 6 feet below ground, will do nothing to disrupt tunnel networks. It will do nothing to stop drones, which are increasingly being used to move illicit drugs, nor will it stop small boats that move north through the Pacific Ocean and land in California. It will do nothing to impact drugs shipped through the mail, which has increasingly become a delivery mechanism, a problem Congress took important steps to address through bipartisan legislation just a few months ago.

The standoff between the president and congressional Democrats does provide an opening to improve border security. A report this summer from the Government Accountability Office found that the U.S. Custom and Border Protection was still 1,100 officers short at ports of entry. The Department of Homeland Security has identified that more than $5 billion in construction and renovation needs at those same ports. Border Patrol has requested upgraded surveillance and communications equipment. Funds could even be used to provide additional incentives for Border Patrol agents, an agency that has historically struggled with attrition.

Any or all of these things will do more than building a border wall and will have a much greater impact than empty chants.

See also:Republicans, Democrats must deal with their populist-driven monsters

Jordan Harris is the executive director of Pegasus Institute, a public-policy think tank based in Louisville. His views as a columnist are his own and do not necessarily reflect the positions of the institute.