Amid a flurry of activity during his first week in office, President Trump has spent the past couple days initiating the process of delivering on one of his campaign’s cornerstones: a proposed wall along the United States’ southern border with Mexico.
Although Trump has attempted to quicken the process through executive action, there is a crucial condition tacked onto his wall-building plan that has always threatened to slow its progress: Trump’s demand that Mexico fund it.
Trump’s assertion that Mexico would bankroll the border wall has repeatedly been rebuffed by past presidents of that country, such as Vicente Fox and Felipe Calderon, as well as its current president, Enrique Pena Nieto. Pena Nieto went one step further on Thursday, canceling a planned U.S. visit and meeting with Trump scheduled for next week.
Despite the wall’s seemingly moving closer to reality, Mexico’s unwillingness to pay for it has prompted questions about possible contingency plans the Trump administration might draft as alternatives.
After Trump and Press Secretary Sean Spicer signaled support for a proposal from House Republicans to levy a 20 percent tax on imported goods from Mexico, White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and Spicer backtracked, suggesting the tax was merely “one idea” among a “buffet of options.”
The pushback, meanwhile, may come from constituencies typically more favorable to Trump, as David French, senior vice president for government relations at the National Retail Federation, told the New York Times. French predicted the costs of any taxes or tariffs would be passed onto consumers, and told the newspaper that the idea of an import tax was, “very counter to the way consumers are feeling at the moment.”
The administration’s messaging on the subject is a clear indication that they recognize a principal flaw in the plan’s conceit and its overall place in the broader populist approach embodied by Trump. While the president seeks to use federal power to both invigorate the American economy and erect a massive border wall, there are inherent challenges which could leave his base (and everyone else) footing the bill if he makes good on both pledges.
Forced to choose between the pocketbook issue of more expensive day-to-day goods and a curb on immigration, Trump’s voters may ironically end up telling him, “Mr. President, tear down this wall — we simply can’t afford it.”
Tamer Abouras (@iamtamerabouras) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is a writer and editor from Williamstown, N.J. Thinking of submitting an op-ed to the Washington Examiner? Be sure to read our guidelines on submissions.
