Regarding the recent letter, "Trump's wall is not too expensive," at $5 billion dollars, the writer indicates that the wall is such a small portion of the annual federal budget, that it is well worth it. Is it well worth it to spend $5 billion on a wall that the U.S. taxpayers were told they would not have to pay for? We all heard, on countless occasions, candidate Trump and then President Trump indicate that Mexico would pay for the wall. That has not happened. However, as a taxpayer looking at the recent tax bill which greatly benefited the most wealthy and added to our ever-increasing federal deficit by reducing tax revenue from those MOST able to pay it, why do we want to add to the federal debt by building something with debatable security benefits?

In addition, let's put some context on what a big deal $5 billion really is, in fact, to the federal budget. Head Start, for example, funds over 265 Head Start Centers to administer programs that benefit tens of thousands of pre-school children every year. That program costs around $8 billion - to fund over 265 centers. Job Corps, a program that provides education and training to dropouts between the ages of 16 to 24 at 125 centers around the country receives $1.7 billion. And, at far less, the entire federal government's budget for all of the arts and humanities is $741 million, or far less than even $1 billion. Imagine what we could do with an additional $5 billion in funding for pre-school education, or career technical training programs, or the arts and the humanities.

$5 billion IS too much to pay for a wall that has debatable benefits, especially when we were told it would not cost us a dime.