Joe Biden’s nominee to be the next U.S. Ambassador to Jordan, Yael Lempert, has tacitly endorsed the effectiveness of border walls. During a recent Senate hearing, her admission punctured the prevailing narrative from the Democrats and the Biden Administration, who have persistently shunned the concept of a physical barrier at the U.S.-Mexico border.
The focus of the hearing was the allocation of $150 million for border security in Jordan, part of the fiscal year 2023 omnibus package. Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-TN), in a pointed exchange with Lempert, underscored the aim of this expenditure: to maintain physical security and prevent illegal immigration into Jordan. The implicit comparison was not lost on those following the issue closely.
The response from Lempert appeared to contradict the administration’s stance. Acknowledging that the funds provide physical security, curtail drug smuggling, and address threats from Jordan’s neighbor, Syria, she said, “Obviously, the conflict there continues, and it’s a dangerous neighborhood.”
Our slimy government is protecting other countries' borders all over the world WHILE OPENING OURS WIDLY TO ANYONE WHO WANTS TO INVADE US. Every one of those who vote for this needs to be fired and charged with treason. https://t.co/pfMUBA66mM
— CovfefeTruth (@1RedTulie) May 14, 2023
Hagerty continued, asking if this physical border security was effective. Lempert confirmed it, underscoring a truth that conservatives have argued for years: border walls work.
Hagerty, seizing on this concession, pointed out the paradox. “I just think it’s an important lesson for us to learn, as Americans, that we’re spending United States taxpayer dollars to support border security in a country that we’re trying to build stronger relations with,” he argued. He highlighted the absence of a similar commitment in the President’s budget for our border security.
The border security issue has been highly divisive, particularly given the Biden administration’s reversal of former President Trump’s immigration policies. Biden had pledged in his 2020 campaign that “not another foot of wall” would be constructed under his watch. Yet, the surge of illegal migrants into the U.S. since Biden took office and the rising drug overdose deaths, mainly from fentanyl smuggled across the U.S. southern border, have raised critical questions about the administration’s handling of the issue.
When Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy questioned this apparent contradiction last year, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre quickly denied that the administration was finishing Trump’s wall. Instead, she painted the construction as a cleanup of the “mess” left by the prior administration. Yet, despite the denial, the question remains: If border walls are a “mess” and an “ineffective use of taxpayer dollars,” as the Biden White House claims, why are they effective in Jordan and worthy of U.S. taxpayer support?
Lempert’s admission and the glaring inconsistencies in the Biden administration’s policies are a stark reminder that border security is not a one-size-fits-all issue. As the crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border persists, it’s high time we revisit the effectiveness of physical barriers and consider their value in safeguarding national security.
