Poll Results

YES: 77% | NO: 23%

This topic remains one of the most widely debated issues in American politics. The question of how best to manage the U.S.–Mexico border touches on immigration, national security, public safety, humanitarian concerns, and federal spending priorities. While previous administrations have taken varying approaches to border control, the physical border wall has become one of the most visible — and polarizing — symbols in that debate.

Overview of the Issue:

The U.S.–Mexico border stretches nearly 2,000 miles across four states and a variety of terrains. In recent years, large numbers of migrants — including families, unaccompanied minors, and asylum seekers — have arrived at the southern border, often overwhelming existing systems.

Proponents of completing the wall argue that physical barriers are necessary to reduce illegal entry and protect both U.S. citizens and migrants. Opponents counter that walls are an outdated solution to a complex issue, and that a more humane, comprehensive approach is needed.

Arguments in Favor of Finishing the Border Wall:

• Border Security & National Sovereignty:
  Advocates believe a completed wall helps enforce U.S. immigration laws and reasserts the government’s commitment to controlling its borders. They argue that every nation has a right — and responsibility — to know who is entering and to ensure lawful entry.
• Reduction in Illegal Activity:
  Law enforcement officials have reported that areas with physical barriers see fewer instances of illegal crossings, drug trafficking, and human smuggling. A wall, supporters argue, helps deter criminal organizations and reduces strain on border patrol agents.
• Support from Border Officials:
  Many in the field — including U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel — have called for strategic use of barriers in conjunction with surveillance and patrols. They describe the wall as a “force multiplier” that improves safety and efficiency.
• Cost Over Time:
  Though the wall has a high upfront cost, supporters claim it pays for itself by reducing the burden on social services, detention facilities, and immigration courts over the long term.

Arguments Against Building or Finishing the Wall:

• Effectiveness in Question:
  Critics say that walls alone cannot stop illegal immigration, particularly when many entrants arrive legally and overstay visas. Others point out that smugglers often use tunnels, ladders, or alternative routes, reducing the wall’s value as a deterrent.
• Humanitarian Concerns:
  Opponents argue that walls can push desperate migrants into more dangerous crossing areas, increasing the risk of injury or death. They also warn that strict physical barriers may overlook legitimate asylum claims.
• Financial Cost:
  The total cost of completing and maintaining the wall is substantial. Critics contend that taxpayer funds would be better spent on modernizing ports of entry, hiring more personnel, and addressing root causes of migration in other countries.
• Environmental & Property Impacts:
  Constructing the wall has led to concerns about damage to natural habitats, disruption of wildlife migration patterns, and the federal seizure of private land from U.S. citizens living near the border.

Conclusion:

While opinions on the issue vary widely, the results of this poll show that a significant majority of participants believe the U.S. should move forward immediately with finishing the border wall. To many, it represents a firm stance on national security, law and order, and immigration control.

Thank you to everyone who participated in this survey. We value your input and look forward to sharing more polls and discussions on important issues facing the country today.