Roast our link chain (e.g., the link from this happening to that happening is too weak; add a card that says "X"), to strengthen our case with multiple cards for each thing and overall more concise writing.

We Negate the resolution: The United States federal government should substantially expand its surveillance infrastructure along its southern border. 

CON Case

To start, expansion is happening in a CON world. EFF found last year that “CBP [is] planning another massive expansion of surveillance towers at the U.S.-Mexico border… CBP intends to begin upgrading 135 existing towers… while installing 307 new towers along the Southern border” / “The … dataset has grown to 471 towers” since last year—a 153% annual increase.

Thus, “Substantially” means a complete overhaul of current expansion efforts to radically change surveillance strategy on the southern border.

Sole Contention: Increased Surveillance harms ties with Mexico 

First, let’s look at the status quo.

The USMCA has created positive US-Mexico relations and economic benefits. According to Brookings ‘23, “In 2022, trade within North America exceeded $1.5 trillion… Mexico [is] the top US trading partner, with trade volumes 44% higher than with China, supporting 9.5 million jobs across North America.”

According to The US State Department, “Mexico was the US’s top goods trading partner in 2023 with two-way trade at $807 billion, surpassing China. Exports to Mexico rose from $42 billion before NAFTA to $322 billion. The US holds the largest FDI in Mexico, totaling $144.5 billion in 2023.”

Now, let’s look at the impacts of increased surveillance.

First, on diplomacy:

Increased border surveillance contradicts USMCA goals and hurts diplomatic ties. The Washington Post writes in 2017 that “Mexico has always been … sensitive about engaging with the US on migration issues”. The Cato Institute states it “harms mexican relations”, citing how Trump’s wall proposal led to heated exchanges with Nieto and canceled meetings. Wola ‘20 also adds that It “sends a hostile message., and was a key reason Nieto didn’t attend bilateral meetings in his final two years.”

The US-Cuba incident shows how reduced diplomacy leads to bad outcomes. According to CFR ‘22, “Economic and diplomatic isolation toward Cuba… Obama noted it failed to advance US interests,” ruining their economy and leading to over 50 years of economic isolation and missed trade opportunities.

Expanded security measures signal distrust and contradict the spirit of partnership in USMCA.

ABC News ‘13 writes Mexico's Secretary of Foreign Affairsread a statement to reporters Tuesday afternoon in which he criticized a U.S. bill that would …double the number of Border Patrol agents.

"We are convinced that fences do not unite [both nations]," Meade said. "The enlargement of this is not congruent with plans to create a modern and secure border, and to develop the region." 

We have things we can shut down, too," said Meyer (A Mexican historian), who suggested that in retaliation, the Mexican government could make it harder for U.S companies to invest in the country, or cancel laws that enable U.S. citizens to buy property in Mexico. Meyer said that they could "send a signal" to the U.S. government about Mexico's displeasure. . 


Now, on Economics:

Trade frictions and delays from increased security and diplomatic misalignment cost millions. 

Temca ‘14 writes that trade delays on the southern border cost:
Nuevo Laredo: $3.6 million daily
Tijuana: $1.8 million daily
Juarez $1.5 million daily
Sani Sidro $254,900 daily
Nogales, Sonora $240,000 daily


Now, what does a PRO world look like?

We now know that cooperation is crucial for efficient trade, supply chain integration, and economic stability. If we don’t cooperate, Mexico’s economy will go into freefall, destroying the lives of the poor in the country. Let’s look at what that world looks like.

FPH ‘22 writes that “During the 2008 period, the poverty rate in Mexico increased to 43.9%. In the aftermath of the 1995 peso crisis, extreme poverty grew from 21% in 1994 to 37% in 1996, undoing a decade of poverty reduction efforts.”√

Economic damage like this would also severely impact jobs and incomes for the poor:

They continue that during the peso crisis, “unemployment … doubled to 7.4%, wages fell by 35% in 1995 alone, and over one million people lost their jobs. Mexico's GDP declined by 6.2%, overall household incomes plummeted by 30%, and average household consumption declined by 15%”, destroying the retail market.

High inflation during these times disproportionately harms the poor:

During this time, prices increased by 35%. More recently, inflation has been highly detrimental to the poor, as the inflation rate experienced by them has been higher than the national average since 2008, according to the LatAm Economic Review.

Economic decline leads to increased migration, causing a vicious cycle.

MIT ‘21 writes that “Economics is a key factor of immigration because people often migrate to countries with better economic opportunities... This is why many immigrants choose to move to countries with stronger economies.” Mexico’s economic state pushes people to come to the US.

The Wilson Center ‘13 says that “One of the main factors that... drove the increase in Mexican migration to the United States during the 1990s is related to the consequences of the Mexican recession and currency devaluation of 1995”. Mexican citizens migrate because of their country’s economic climate.

Intercept ‘23 writes that “the border’s high-tech surveillance infrastructure funnels people into ever-deadlier corridors. / The surveillance matrix along southern Arizona’s border — including towers and ground sensors — forced migrants to use more dangerous routes in the desert, exposing them to greater risk of dehydration and heat exposure”. More surveillance means more border crossings over deadlier routes to avoid said surveillance. 


It is for these reasons that we are proud to negate.





Case Evidence

EFF ‘23-’24
Dave Mass, Electronic Frontier Foundation,  March 20, 2023, CBP Is Expanding Its Surveillance Tower Program at the U.S.-Mexico Border–And We're Mapping It | Electronic Frontier Foundation 

Update: As of June 5, 2024, the map and dataset has grown to 471 towers. We have also added the locations of Tethered Aerostat Radar Systems (TARS) and Tactical Aerostat Systems (TAS).

Compiled using public records, satellite imagery, road trips, and even exploration in virtual reality, EFF's data serves as a living snapshot of the so-called "virtual wall," from the California coast to the lower tip of Texas. We've also included roughly 50 locations CBP has proposed for its next round of towers, as well as automated license plate readers (ALPRs) placed at Border Patrol checkpoints

Now CBP (and its sub-division, U.S. Border Patrol) is planning yet another massive expansion of surveillance towers at the U.S.-Mexico border. Referred to as the  "Integrated Surveillance Tower" (IST) or "Consolidated Tower and Surveillance Equipment" (CTSE) program, CBP intends to bring the RVSS and IFT systems under one program and, over the next decade, begin upgrading 135 existing towers with new capabilities, technologies and sensors, while also installing 307 new towers along the Southern border. CBP has indicated these towers would help fill in surveillance gaps caused by the planned conclusion of its tactical aerostat program.

Brookings ‘23
Meltzer, Joshua, et al. “USMCA at 3: Reflecting on Impact and Charting the Future.” Brookings, 19 July 2023, www.brookings.edu/articles/usmca-at-3-reflecting-on-impact-and-charting-the-future/

In 2022, the total value of trade within North America exceeded $1.5 trillion, equivalent to nearly $3 million per minute and the result of double-digit growth in trade over the past two years. This impressive growth in trade over the past two years has made Mexico and Canada the top trading partners of the United States, with trade volumes 44% higher than U.S. goods trade with China. Combined, the three countries now account for almost a third of global GDP, and intra-regional goods trade alone supports 9.5 million jobs across North America (Brookings USMCA Tracker).

Washington Post ‘17
“Analysis | Trump’s Border Wall Ignores a Long History of U.S. Cooperation with Mexico. That’s a Problem.” Washington Post, Trump’s border wall ignores a long history of U.S. cooperation with Mexico. That’s a problem.

Developing a U.S.-Mexican border control partnership has been a long and tenuous process. Given our shared history and the power imbalance between the countries, Mexico has always been cautious about protecting its sovereignty and is sensitive about engaging with the United States on migration issues.

Cato ‘17
Bier, David. “Why the Wall Won’t Work.” Cato Institute, 10 Apr. 2017, “Why the Wall Won’t Work.” Cato Institute.

After 9/11, border hawks launched another push for fences, with little success. Most immigration enforcement funds were going to a surge in border agents. But President George W. Bush's push for comprehensive immigration reform, which would have legalized the unauthorized immigrants in the United States, gave the hawks their opportunity. In 2006, Congress approved the Secure Fence Act mandating nearly 700 miles of fencing on the border.

The president signed on to the bill hoping to placate the secure-the-border-first crowd and obtain the humane immigration changes that he wanted. This sales job enabled it to pass with bipartisan support from the likes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The immigration reform never materialized, but fence construction was nearly complete by 2009, and there are now 617 total miles of physical barriers, 36 miles of which have two layers.

Yet the hawks were not placated. They complained that there was no second layer in most places. They stewed that half the fence was just "vehicle barriers"—concrete posts that provide obstacles for drivers but not pedestrians. Moreover, the 317 miles of real pedestrian fences dramatically vary in height and quality. The Border Patrol uses half a dozen types of fencing materials—wire mesh, landing mats, chain-link, bollard, aesthetic, and sheet piling—just to control on-foot crossings. These barriers are mainly a combination of steel posts and bars supplemented in places with wire, ranging in height from 6 to 18 feet.

…

Donald Trump has insisted from the start of his campaign that Mexico will pay for the wall. When he presented a proposal to Congress to fund the wall's construction in January, he continued to insist that Mexico would repay the United States. For his part, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto has said that he would refuse to pay for any portion of the wall, and the back-and-forth became so heated in January that he canceled a meeting with Trump.

The U.S. president has remained vague about how this reimbursement will happen without Mexico's cooperation, and his total lack of understanding of basic economic concepts may be contributing to his erroneous belief. "The wall is a fraction of the kind of money…that Mexico takes in from the United States," he told CNN in April 2016. "You're talking about a trade deficit with Mexico of $58 billion." In other words, he seems to be saying that if the Mexican government does not give him the $31 billion or more that it will take to build the wall, Trump will tax America's business with Mexico. White House Spokesman Sean Spicer intimated something similar in January 2017.

…

Trump has been adamant that his wall will be built "ahead of schedule." For that to happen, he'll need to avoid the various legal issues that plagued earlier efforts. Entities other than the federal government—states, Indian tribes, private individuals—control over two-thirds of borderland property. Private parties own the vast majority of the border in Texas, and for this reason, roughly 70 percent of the existing border fence is located in California, Arizona, and New Mexico. Almost all of it is on federally controlled land.

The Bush administration bullied property owners, threatening to sue them if they did not "voluntarily" hand over the rights to their land. It offered no compensation for doing so. Thinking that they had no recourse, some people signed off, but others refused. The government then attempted to use eminent domain, a procedure Trump has long defended, to seize their property, but the lawsuits imposed serious delays—seven years in one case.

In 2009, the Homeland Security inspector general concluded that the Border Patrol had "achieved [its] progress primarily in areas where environmental and real estate issues did not cause significant delay." One intransigent resident had owned his property since before the "Roosevelt easement," which gives the federal government a 60-foot right of way along the border. He fought the administration, so the fence had until recently a 1.2-mile gap on his land. Border residents fought more than a third of all land transfers, in fact. Because the Constitution promises just compensation for takings, Trump can do little to speed this process.


Wola ‘20
Isacson, Adam. “400 Miles of Harm: There Is Nothing to Celebrate about Border Wall Construction.” WOLA, 29 Oct. 2020, 400 Miles of Harm: There is Nothing to Celebrate about Border Wall Construction.


The damage includes harm to relations with neighbors to the south. WOLA noted in 2018, “The border wall sends a hostile message to allies in Latin America. The wall would carry a steep diplomatic cost, particularly in U.S. relations with Mexico. It would detract from international cooperation needed to fight against drug trafficking, terrorism, and other issues.” It did and continues to do so. Tensions around the border wall were a principal reason why Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto paid no visits to Washington for bilateral meetings during his final two years in office. As long as it stands, Trump’s wall sends a message that the United States would rather wall off Latin America than work with the region to face multilateral challenges; that the United States believes Latin America is inferior. 


Chivvis ‘23
“The U.S.-Mexico Relationship Is About More Than Migration”. U.S. domestic politics threatens cooperation on other key issues, such as fentanyl and supply-chain diversification.” December 14, 2023 The U.S.-Mexico Relationship Is About More Than Migration
‌
Earlier this year, Mexico became America’s largest trading partner, surpassing China. Bilateral trade during the first four months of 2023 represented over 15 percent of all the goods exported and imported by the United States. In addition to growing trade, Mexico is a site for American companies to invest, for global firms to move production, as part of a growing trend toward nearshoring. And Mexico’s economy minister said that some 400 companies were interested in relocating facilities from Asia to Mexico.

ABC News ‘13
News, ABC. “Mexico Slams U.S. Border Buildup Plan.” ABC News, 26 June 2013, abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/News/mexico-slams-us-immigration-reform-bills-proposed-border/story?id=19495974

Mexico's Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Jose Meade, read a statement to reporters Tuesday afternoon in which he criticized a U.S. bill that would add 700 miles of border fencing and double the number of Border Patrol agents.

"We are convinced that fences do not unite [both nations]," Meade said. "The enlargement of this wall is not congruent with plans to create a modern and secure border, and to develop the region." 

We have things we can shut down, too," said Meyer (A Mexican historian), who suggested that in retaliation, the Mexican government could make it harder for U.S companies to invest in the country, or cancel laws that enable U.S. citizens to buy property in Mexico. Meyer said that they could "send a signal" to the U.S. government about Mexico's displeasure with the border fence. 

“The United States wants commerce with Mexico, they want [laws that allow U.S.] investment, but they don't want the unavoidable part of this relationship between unequal countries: The [Mexican] workers.”

CFR ‘22
CFR.org Editors. “U.S.-Cuba Relations.” Council on Foreign Relations, 3 June 2022, U.S.-Cuba Relations

US State Department 24, 
U.S. Relations With Mexico, September 16 2024 U.S. Relations With Mexico - United States Department of State.


Mexico was the United States’ top goods trading partner in 2023 with total two-way goods trade at $807 billion, surpassing China. In comparison, U.S. goods trade with Canada totaled $782 billion, while trade with China totaled $576 billion. Our countries rely on closely integrated supply chains to power our economies and strengthen our global competitiveness. U.S. exports supported an estimated 1.1 million jobs in 2019 (latest data available).

U.S. merchandise exports to Mexico increased from $42 billion in 1993 (the year before NAFTA’s entry into force) to $322 billion in 2023. In 2023, Mexico remained the second-largest source of foreign crude oil to the United States, as well as the top destination for U.S. petroleum product exports and U.S. natural gas. Other major U.S. exports to Mexico include motor vehicle parts, semiconductors and other electronic components, basic chemicals, and computer equipment. U.S. Department of Commerce data shows that the United States holds the largest stock of foreign direct investment (FDI) in Mexico, with a total of $144.5 billion in 2023 (latest year available). Mexican FDI in the United States stood at $38.3 billion in 2023, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA).

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) entered into force on July 1, 2020. The USMCA supports mutually beneficial trade leading to freer markets, fairer trade, and robust economic growth in North America. The agreement generates job opportunities, supports agricultural trade, incentivizes new investments in vital manufacturing industries, prohibits imports produced with forced labor, and includes important obligations regarding worker protections, the environment, and intellectual property rights protections.


Repository ‘09

Mexico

The Mexican economy shrank by 6.7% in 2009, owing to across-the-board weakness in aggregate demand caused by the global recession. The economic slump led to a reduction in the wage bill and credit, which, in turn, triggered a fall in consumption.

Brookings 20,

Tariffs hurt Americans,
In general, then, Trump’s tariffs have helped some workers and hurt others. Nothing is particularly surprising about this; trade policy almost always has important distributive effects, and any change in trade policy is a choice to benefit some groups at the expense of others. Yet, overall, when economists have attempted to add up the net effect of Trump’s tariffs on jobs, any gains in importing-competing sectors appear to have been more than offset by losses in industries that use imported inputs and face retaliation on their foreign exports. And even those jobs that have been created have come at great cost: studies suggest American consumers paid about $817,000 in higher prices attributable to the tariffs for every job created in the washing machine industry and $900,000 in the steel industry. While policy interventions to support manufacturing jobs may be warranted, there are cheaper ways to do so.

Brookings ‘22
“Mexico’s Priorities for USMCA in 2022.” Brookings, www.brookings.edu/articles/mexicos-priorities-for-uscma-in-2022/

The new USMCA enables Mexico to deepen its productive integration in North America and to benefit from the opportunities it offers to promote trade and investment, which are essential to our economic growth, job creation and above all, to help us reduce long-term regional and income inequalities.

Mexico belongs to North America, and its economy has become intertwined with the United States and Canada’s economy as we trade and produce together for our regional market and the world.  Today, the U.S. and Canada are Mexico’s first and fifth largest trading partner, respectively, while the U.S. is the number one foreign investor and Canada ranks third. Likewise, in 2021, Mexico has been the U.S.’ number one trading partner and Canada´s third. These numbers reflect that our nations have built an integrated production platform in a diverse number of industries including automobiles, electronics, household appliances, medical devices, machinery, and equipment, among others, as well as in agriculture, which allows the three to complement each other and ensure food security in the region.

Temca ‘14
“Border Delays Create Negative Economic Impacts.” Tecma, 21 May 2014, www.tecma.com/border-delays-create-negative-economic-impacts

Nelson Balido, the vice president of Secure Origins, Inc., points to information that indicates that border delays and crossing wait times are the source significant estimated economic losses at a number of U.S. – Mexico commercial crossing points:
Laredo – Nuevo Laredo: $USD 3.6 million
San Diego – Tijuana: $USD 1.8 million
El Paso – Ciudad Juarez $USD 1.5 million
Otay Mesa – San Ysidro $USD 254,900
Nogales – Nogales, Sonora $USD 240,000
Temporal border delays in shipping are the root of the economic losses ennumerated above. Balido uses the term “bottleneck” to describes what happens at the U.S.-Mexico border commercial ports of entry. In concrete terms, it takes a bit under five hours for goods to pass from Tijuana to San Diego, and can take up to three hours to make the crossing from the Mexican border cities of Nogales, Ciudad Juarez and Nuevo Laredo to make it into the commerce of the United States. Border delays cause carriers to burn costly fuel, limit their ability to use their capital resources efficiently and, at times, cause costly interruption to production lines and distribution activities.

Regional Science ‘20
Basboga, Kadir. “The Role of Open Borders and Cross-Border Cooperation in Regional Growth across Europe.” Regional Studies, Regional Science, vol. 7, no. 1, 1 Jan. 2020, pp. 532–549, https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2020.1842800.

‌FPH ‘22
Shuying, Gou, and Liu Xuedong. “Evaluation of Mexican poverty reduction policies under the COVID-19 pandemic impacts.” Frontiers in public health vol. 10 978991. 11 Oct. 2022, doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.978991

LatAm Economic Review ‘18
Iniguez-Montiel, A.J., Kurosaki, T. Growth, inequality and poverty dynamics in Mexico. Lat Am Econ Rev 27, 12 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40503-018-0058-9

MIT ‘21

Dizikes, Peter. “Report: Economics Drives Migration from Central America to the U.S.” MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 23 Nov. 2021, news.mit.edu/2021/central-america-migration-economics-1123.

Wilson Center ‘13
Chiquiar, Daniel, and Alejandrina Salcedo. THE REGIONAL MIGRATION STUDY GROUP Mexican Migration to the United StateS Underlying EconoMic FactorS and PoSSible ScenarioS for FUtUre FlowS.
‌
Intercept ‘23

Sam Biddle, Ryan Devereaux, March 20, 2023, Mapping Project Reveals Locations of U.S. Border Surveillance Towers," Intercept, https://theintercept.com/2023/03/20/border-surveillance-map/

Humanitarian and migrant rights groups have argued that the border’s high-tech surveillance infrastructure funnels people into ever-deadlier corridors. The suite of technologies has also come under fire from critics, who say that the electronic perimeter raises significant privacy and civil liberty concerns. While there is little research on the intersection between border surveillance and migrant deaths, a 2019 peer-reviewed study by researchers from the University of Arizona and Earlham College found that the surveillance matrix along southern Arizona’s border — including towers and ground sensors — forced migrants to use more dangerous routes in the desert, exposing them to greater risk of dehydration and heat exposure.