President Trump’s desire to build a wall on the border with Mexico was front and center this week, but there’s another huge project hundreds of miles to the north that his administration is pushing, against California leaders’ will: adding nearly two stories in height to the Shasta Dam. State law prohibits the 602-foot structure from getting any taller. Yet Central Valley farmers are eager for more water to grow their crops, and if constructed, the project promises a big payoff for water interests with close ties to the administration. Senior GOP members of Congress are looking to give it a boost as part of a spending bill next week. Will it result in another battle between the state and the federal government?

This Turbulence Is Not at 30,000 Feet

After flying to Southern California and St. Louis, Trump has landed back at the White House. There, rumors are swirling about the fates of (take a breath) Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions, national security advisor H.R. McMaster, Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin, Chief of Staff John F. Kelly and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson. Seem chaotic? The president’s supporters tend to “see this as Trump asserting himself,” as one puts it. Meanwhile, Trump and the GOP have another concern, out of this week’s special election in Pennsylvania: Is it a sign the tax cut won’t give a boost to Republicans in the midterm election?

More Politics

— A little more than a week after Gary Cohn quit, Larry Kudlow has been named as Trump’s chief economic advisor. He is, similar to Cohn, a staunch free-trader with experience on Wall Street.

— The FBI office that handles employee discipline has recommended firing former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, even though Justice Department officials are still reviewing the matter.

— The Stormy Daniels swirl of trouble for Trump: How bad is it?

‘Now This Is Our Job’

In Washington, D.C., they sat silently with their backs to the White House. In Los Angeles, they shouted from megaphones and recited poems. In Parkland, Fla., they staged two walkouts and gathered on a football field for a group hug. All over the U.S., teenagers held 17-minute protests to honor the victims of last month’s shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and call for an end to gun violence. “Students are tired of waiting for their parents to do something about it,” said Deshowe Johnson, a 15-year-old sophomore at Hamilton High School on L.A.’s Westside. “Now this is our job.”

Nothin’ but a 5G Thang

Remember when the big concern with wireless technology was “Can you hear me now?” These days, it’s an integral part of our lives, and with the advent of 5G, the fifth-generation mobile network, it will play an even bigger role by linking up self-driving cars, internet-connected homes and more. That’s a big reason why the Trump administration blockedSingapore-based Broadcom’s hostile takeover attempt of Qualcomm, the San Diego maker of 5G chips that will go into any internet-accessible device.

An ‘Artists’ Museum’ or an Artists’ Lament?

The Museum of Contemporary Art in downtown L.A. has had a tumultuous history, but it’s always prided itself on being founded by artists. Now some are calling into question its identity as an “artists’ museum” after the firing of Helen Molesworth, MOCA’s highly respected chief curator. She was a key figure in guiding the museum’s artistic vision.

At least 1,300 miles long, 40 feet high, and containing 19 million tons of concrete. Donald Trump’s much heralded wall along the Mexican border would be a massive undertaking.

Just how massive the cost would be is harder to determine.

Trump signed an order Wednesday to start the planning process to build the wall, declaring, “We’re in the middle of a crisis on our southern border.” There are already about 650 miles of fencing along the border, mostly in more populated areas. Presumably, most of that will stay in place.

That leaves about 1,300 miles of the border completely open, although much of that border is along the Rio Grande River.

The existing fence is mostly 18 feet high. But in others there are only low barriers that would stop vehicles, but provide little impediment to people.

The taller portions of the fence cost an average of $3.9 million per mile, according to the Government Accountability Office.

But that’s just a fence, not a wall. And the fencing is mostly located in more populated areas, where construction is easier.

Building a wall in isolated areas will be more expensive. In some cases, the U.S. would first need to build roads and other infrastructure built just to reach the border area. The terrain itself could be rugged, even mountainous.

The wall would probably be made out of precast concrete panels, which are often used on sound walls to block out traffic noise along the side of the nation’s highways. It’s also how most of the 30-foot tall Israeli-West Bank barrier was constructed.

As far as cost goes,Trump has cited a $10 billion estimate that was given to him during the campaign by the National Precast Concrete Association. That comes to about $7.4 million per mile.

“We’re pretty confident in that figure,” said Ty Gable, president of the industry trade group. “But there are a lot of variables. It depends on factors like terrain, how level the land is, whether you can get a crane in there.”

By comparison it only costs about $3 million to build a mile of a typical two-lane road. So for $10 billion you could build a road roughly from Seattle to Miami.

But other estimates suggest there are enough uncertainties to drive the cost up to $15 billion, and possibly as much as $25 billion, according to a report from Bernstein Research, which tracks materials costs.

It’s also important to note that none of these estimates includes the cost of acquiring the land where the wall will be built, which could also be considerable.

Bernstein estimates that it will take at least one to two years to plan the project and buy the land, while the construction itself would be completed in two years.

Gable said that the one thing that’s certain about building a wall: It won’t do much to generate jobs.

The construction might only require hundreds of workers — a couple thousand if the project is sped up. But it wouldn’t generate tens of thousands of jobs, he said.

“It’s not the Hoover Dam,” Gable said. “We’re more automated now than we’ve ever been.”

Trump has vowed to get Mexico to pay for the wall. But Mexican government officials have denied that will happen.

The wall isn’t the only thing Trump is doing to toughen border and immigration enforcement. He wants to construct more detention facilities near the Mexican border.

Trump also wants to hire an additional 5,000 workers for the Customs and Border Patrol Agency, which had an annual budget of more than $13 billion last year.

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which arrests and deports undocumented immigrants, had a budget of $6.2 billion.

It’s not clear how much it would cost to hire, train and pay additional staff. But Trump cannot authorize any budget increases unilaterally. For that, he’ll need the approval of Congress.

Nobody knows much about the Mexican border wall — but 300 companies have already said they’d like to help build it.

Businesses will be asked to submit their proposals to design and build prototype wall structures near the United States border with Mexico starting next week, according to the Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection agency.

Hundreds of companies have already indicated their interest in the project to the agency, which expects to award the initial contracts in April.

They range from large construction firms to small fence companies and security firms. Dozens of the interested companies say in their paperwork that they are owned by Hispanics.

But even these companies know almost nothing about the plans they’ll bid on.

“There’s really nothing to say at this point. It’s all very speculative. Once we get the details, we’ll examine whether it’s something we’d move on.” said Terry Willis of Caddell Construction, which does major government construction projects around the world, including U.S. embassies and prisons.

Not every company is a serious bidder. One outfit called #ArtThatWall was submitted by a woman named Sarah Zapolsky, who said she just wants to introduce the idea that the wall should not be ugly.

“If America has to have a wall, shouldn’t it be beautiful?” she said. “Does it have to be an eyesore, or can it be something marvelous? They’re just asking for ideas, so why not just throw out the idea and encourage all my artist friends to do the same.”

Trump signed an executive order his first week in office which put plans for the wall in motion, although Congress approval for spending will be needed before actual construction of the wall can begin.

Trump has said that the entire wall will cost $10 billion, citing an estimate that he received during the campaign from the National Precast Concrete Association. But other estimates have put the cost at as much as $25 billion, according to a report from Bernstein Research, which tracks materials costs.

The Superbowl has came and gone and it appears that a good number of the $5 Million dollar Superbowl ads had a Political message. One of the most noticeable ads was the construction company 84 Lumber’s pro immigration ad. The ad shows a mother and her daughter struggling as they travel to the border. The ad was so controversial that edits had to be made to cut out parts showing an huge wall with a large door opening. You can see the entire ad here.

Budweiser also had one of the most politically motivated ads titled “Born the Hard Way”. The ad follows one of the co-founder Adolphus Busch as he journeys from Germany to St. Louis, Missouri where he meets his partner Eberhard Anheuser and drinks some beer.

While Budweiser insists that the ad has nothing to do with today’s political controversy and is just a universal store that is relevant today. In fact the ad was made before the election however due to the timing and events anyone who saw the ad pretty much thinks the same thing “Politically Motivated”! It even goes as far as some of the Right-wings calling for a Budweiser boycott.

Mexico won’t willingly write the check for Donald Trump’s wall. So the president is hunting for a way to make Mexico pay.

That search isn’t going well.

Last week, press secretary Sean Spicer floated one idea: the destination-based cash flow tax. The DBCFT taxes imports and exempts exports. We import about $50 billion more from Mexico each year than we export. So the DBCFT could raise substantial revenue from trade with Mexico. Maybe Trump could earmark that money to pay for the wall?

Such earmarking sounds superficially plausible. But it has fundamental budget and logic flaws.

The budget problem is that Congress has other plans for that money. The DBCFT is the centerpiece of the House proposal for tax reform. House leaders insist reform will be revenue neutral. Any new money from the DBCFT will offset money lost from cutting business taxes. That leaves nothing for Trump’s wall.

Broader point: You can’t pay for anything with revenue-neutral tax reform (or, for that matter, with revenue-losing “tax relief”).

Trump may be more concerned with messaging than with these budget niceties. So he could still try to rhetorically link the DBCFT to paying for the wall.

But that leads to the logic problem. We run trade deficits with many countries. If the DBCFT makes Mexico pay for the wall, what does it make China pay for? Germany? Japan? Vietnam? And what about countries like Hong Kong, where America has a trade surplus? Are we paying them for something? And what happens when the wall has been paid for? Does Mexico become exempt from the DBCFT? Or does it start paying for something else?

These questions have no sensible answers. The DBCFT treats Mexico like every other nation, so it can’t make Mexico pay for the wall.

Some observers initially thought Spicer was suggesting a new tariff on Mexican imports. Most economists rightly hate that idea and fear it could spark retaliation against American products. And it seems clear that Spicer really meant the DBCFT. But let’s give that interpretation some credit. A tariff, unlike the DBCFT, could raise new revenue specifically from trade with Mexico.

But a tariff still faces a fundamental economics problem. A tariff doesn’t work like Las Vegas. Just because it targets Mexican products doesn’t mean the tax stays there. Instead, businesses will raise prices, passing some tax on to American customers. Consumers would pay more for cars, TVs, and avocados. Businesses would pay more for auto parts, trucks, and telecommunications equipment. Some burdens would decline over time as businesses shift to suppliers outside Mexico. But some shift of the burden to Americans is inevitable. A tariff would thus make American consumers and businesses, not just Mexicans, pay for Trump’s wall. And that’s without any retaliation.

If President Trump wants to target Mexico alone, he needs another strategy. Neither the DBCFT nor a tariff can make Mexico pay for the wall.

Sen. John McCain said Friday that Mexico paying for President Donald Trump’s oft-promised border wall is “not a viable option.”

When CNN’s Manu Raju asked the Arizona Republican whether it is a “viable option” for Mexico to pay for a border wall, McCain responded simply, “No.”

Asked why he said that, McCain offered, “Because it’s not a viable option.”

Trump continues to insist that Mexico will pay for his proposed border wall, despite the fact that Mexican leaders have made clear that they have no intention of doing so. McCain, one of Trump’s most vocal Republican critics in Congress, said Friday that he does not agree with the president on this front, either.

In the interview, McCain also voiced broader skepticism of the proposal, which critics — both conservative and liberal — have argued would be extraordinarily expensive but do little to solve problems along the border.

“If you only build a wall … without using technology, individuals, drones, observation, et cetera, you’re not going to secure the border,” McCain said.

CNN also asked McCain if taxpayers would be left to foot the bill for the wall if it’s built. He said in response: “Taxpayers are paying a lot of money right now. One of the biggest problems we have is the enforcement of existing law.”

Washington (CNN) President Donald Trump on Wednesday started to reshape US immigration enforcement policies via executive action, taking his first steps toward fulfilling some of the most contentious pledges that defined his campaign — building a border wall and speeding the deportation of undocumented immigrants.

Trump signed two executive orders directing the construction of a wall on the US-Mexico border, boosting border patrol forces and increasing the number of immigration enforcement officers who carry out deportations. The orders also call for stripping sanctuary cities of federal grant funding and announced sweeping new criteria that could make many more undocumented immigrants priorities for deportation.

“Beginning today, the United States of America gets back control of its borders,” Trump told employees of the Department of Homeland Security at the department’s headquarters in Washington.

But while Trump directed the “immediate construction of a physical wall on the southern border,” the executive orders do not cover the cost of the wall. Trump has repeatedly promised that Mexico will reimburse US taxpayers for the construction costs, a suggestion Mexican officials have rejected out of hand.

The president’s moves sent alarm bells ringing in immigrant activist circles, where questions had continued to swirl about whether Trump would truly implement many of the hard-line immigration policies he articulated during his campaign.

Trump also indicated he does not need Congress to pass new legislation to implement the border control and immigration reform agenda he outlined during his campaign for president, saying he would “work within the existing system and framework.”

“We do not need new laws,” Trump said soon after signing the two executive orders.

The executive orders Trump signed Wednesday call for boosting the ranks of Border Patrol forces by an additional 5,000 agents as well as for 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to carry out deportations. The orders noted that the increases were subject to Congress’s appropriation of sufficient funds.

Building the wall

Construction of the wall could begin in months, but planning for the massive project is “starting immediately,” Trump said Wednesday in an interview with ABC News.

Trump confirmed his plans to build the wall with federal funds and then seek reimbursement from Mexico, an idea Mexico has rejected. But negotiations, he said, would begin “relatively soon.”

“I’m telling you there will be a payment. It will be in a form, perhaps a complicated form,” Trump said.

Trump also for the first time appeared to articulate on Wednesday the argument he might make to Mexican officials as he looks to compel them to pay for the wall.

Trump stressed Wednesday that the wall would “help Mexico” by deterring illegal immigration from countries farther South through Mexico.

“We are going to stabilize on both sides of the border and we also understand that a strong and healthy economy in Mexico is very good for the United States,” Trump said.

Trump erases doubt about commitment to hardline policies

Trump’s actions leave little doubt about whether his immigration policies as president would differ from his campaign rhetoric.

There remained little question, for example, about whether Trump would push to increase deportations of undocumented immigrants. His increases in the number of border patrol and immigration officers — adding 10,000 immigration officers to an ICE workforce of just 20,000 — raised the specter of Trump’s campaign promise of mass deportations.

Explore Trump’s progress on key campaign promises

One of Trump’s executive actions was expected to call for tripling “enforcement and removal operations/agents” of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which is charged with arresting and deporting undocumented immigrants living in the US. The order also calls for a 5,000-person increase in Customs and Border Protection personnel.

Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, called Trump’s actions Wednesday “extremist, ineffective and expensive” and accused the President of using lies about immigrants to drive US policy.

“Trump is taking a wrecking ball to our immigration system. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that chaos and destruction will be the outcome,” Hincapié said, adding that her organization has already drafted legal papers to challenge Trump’s moves.

And Greisa Martinez, advocacy director at the United We Dream Network, argued that Trump’s moves “lay the groundwork for mass deportation.”

Trump’s executive orders on Wednesday did not address those of his predecessor, former President Barack Obama, which safeguard undocumented immigrants who came to the US as children or who are parents of lawful US residents from deportation. Trump during his campaign signaled he would repeal those orders.