If there was one thing that was talked about the most during the latest presidential campaigns, it was Donald Trump and his his plans for a “great wall” on the border of Mexico and Texas. This idea gained a large amount of attention, bot negative and positive, and an overwhelming amount of support from the followers of the republican nominee at the time. It also acquired an overwhelming amount of hate and opposition, from both the mass public, and other politicians. Now, having won the election and becoming president, Trump is still adamant on his plans for the wall and has more power to make it reality. This could be detrimental to not only relations with Mexico, but to the environment, the wildlife, and the indigenous cultures that call this area home. This cannot happen, ruining the environment and cultures that surround the border, just to attempt to stop illegal immigration. One of the major flaws with the wall is simple to understand, it will not stop illegal immigration, just slow it down. In an article by USA today titled, “Trump’s border wall will be pointless and ineffective”, the author gives reasons as to why the wall would be, well, ineffective. The author says “At present, virtually all of the border between Mexico and California, Arizona and New Mexico has some kind of barrier, though some will only stop vehicles.” Although it may only stop vehicles in its present state, people are still crossing the border at will, and, if the people are desperate and determined enough, they will certainly find another way in even if a large wall is in their way. And with such a large project comes a large bill, but how would Trump and the U.S. government pay for this? The president announced that not only will he build the wall, but he will make mexico pay for it. Katie Reilly, author of “Trump Explains How He’d Get Mexico to Pay for a Border Wall”, tells how Trump plans to make Mexico pay for the wall, and gives details on how he will accomplish this. Reilly says in her article that “The Republican frontrunner said he would change a rule under the USA Patriot Act anti-terrorism law to limit remittances sent to Mexico, unless the country agreed to pay for the wall. The stream of money is seen as vital to Mexico’s economy. Some experts question whether Trump’s plan to cut it off is legally feasible” (31). Essentially holding Mexico by its throat until they give in and pay for the wall is a very sleazy way of getting things done, and their are even more things Trump would do to have the wall erected. Another of the many problems that would arise from the walls construction is the fact that Trump would be willing to make substantial budget cuts to important research and organizations. The article by Andrew Taylor titled “President Trump Wants $3 Billion for a Border Wall. Here’s What He’d Cut to Pay For It,” tells what budgets would be cut in order to fund the wall. Taylor says “The administration would eliminate $1.2 billion in National Institutes of Health research grants, a favorite of both parties. The community development block grant program, also popular, would be halved, amounting to a cut of $1.5 billion, and Trump would strip $500 million from a transportation project known as TIGER grants” (1). Taylor also states, “Other cuts include $434 million to immediately eliminate a program to encourage community service opportunities for senior citizens, eliminating $372 million in remaining funding for heating subsidies for the poor, and cutting $447 million in transit grants” (1). Millions upon millions, cutting close to billions, of dollars that were once going towards health care research, transportation grants, heating for the poor and homeless, would be cut to fund a wall that is not wanted or needed. And perhaps one of the biggest concerns with the wall is the damage it would do to the ecosystem near the border. With a number of species that can be found near the border, some being endangered or threatened, a wall would disrupt migration patterns and the habitats of many animals. The article “Border Walls are Ineffective and Damaging to Native Ecosystems.” by Micah Issitt, tells how the wall will damage the environment around the border and why it isn’t being investigated or reviewed for having that potential. In his article, Issitt states that “the steel fence and the construction effort will disrupt the habitats of numerous mammals, birds, reptiles, and plants. In addition, the physical barrier will hinder the movements of jaguars, pumas, pygmy owls, and a number of other threatened and common animals that live in the region” (3). He also talks about it’s “the security fence program has been exempted from, among other protective provisions, the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Clean Air Act.” due to it falling under the authority of DHS (Issitt).