# data[].attributes.body
Venezuela: The country that has lost three million people

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In Venezuela, the discussion about how long to stay, or where to flee and how to begin a new life, is never far from many people's minds. Every time I visit the country, there are fewer friends and contacts to catch up with.

An estimated 5,000 people pack up their lives and leave every day, eager to flee the economic collapse and humanitarian crisis which has beset the oil-rich nation.

More than 3m people have fled Venezuela in recent years. According to the UN, that number is expected to rise to more than 5m by the end of 2019,

The vast majority of Venezuelans travel to other parts of South America. More than a million Venezuelans have chosen neighbouring Colombia as their new home, with half a million more travelling through it on their way further south to Ecuador, Peru and the countries beyond.

The lucky ones, those with connections, family members already established and an education, have found work in other parts. But I've also met plenty of former professionals selling water or food on the streets of Peru and Colombia to make ends meet.

"We are talking about people who are leaving not because of a natural disaster, not because of a war," says Claudia Vargas Ribas, a migration expert at the Simón Bolívar University in Caracas.

New year, new challenges

The new year is widely expected to heap pressure on the Venezuelan government. On 10 January, Nicolás Maduro will be formally sworn in for another six years after being declared the winner in elections last May. These elections were largely boycotted by the opposition and were widely condemned by the US, the EU and most of Venezuela's neighbours.

President Maduro blames "imperialists" - the likes of the US and Europe - for waging "economic war" against Venezuela and imposing sanctions on many members of his government.

But his critics say it is economic mismanagement - first by his predecessor Hugo Chávez and now President Maduro himself - that has brought Venezuela to its knees.

"We are going to have critical days and weeks beginning in January," says David Smolanksy, an exiled opposition leader and now the head of the Working Group on Venezuelan migration for the Organisation of American States.

The leadership of the opposition-controlled National Assembly changes in early January and some believe this could be the cause of further tension.

"Maduro is going to want to project a show of strength," says Geoff Ramsey, the assistant director of the Venezuela Programme at the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA).

"I think that's going to create a new level of dissatisfaction and the few that don't have an escape plan will be activating them after Maduro officially takes his new term."

The region reacts

Venezuela's crisis will continue to affect all of South America.

"The countries in the region are developing countries, we can't forget that," says Claudia Vargas Ribas. "So receiving this quantity of people has made their internal affairs more complicated."

There have been efforts to co-ordinate the humanitarian response. There have been two meetings in Ecuador's capital Quito and a recognition that countries need to work together to solve the crisis. A third is scheduled for the first half of 2019.

"If you compare what Latin America has done with what Europe has done [with its migrants] - Europe which has better conditions and is more economically developed - the example that Latin America is showing is enormous," says sociologist Tomás Páez, who co-ordinates the Global Project of the Venezuelan Diaspora.

But with more and more Venezuelans arriving, could countries tighten their immigration rules?

"If they put brakes on it, what will grow is irregularity," says Mr Páez, adding that drug-trafficking, prostitution and illegal industries will grow.

More to be done

Some experts believe what's been promised so far is a drop in the bucket compared to what is needed.

"Regional governments are very interested in getting funding from the US and other donors" says Geoff Ramsey. "But they are much more apprehensive when it comes to providing mid- and long-term solutions to the crisis."

Earlier this month, 95 organisations, co-ordinated by the UN Refugee Agency - the UNHCR - and the International Organization for Migration, launched the so-called Regional Response Plan for Refugees and Migrants from Venezuela.

The idea is to help respond to needs of those Venezuelans who are migrating as well as call on the international community to help fund aid efforts.

Geoff Ramsey says it is a great start but promises on paper are not enough.

"A meaningful solution to Venezuela's displacement crisis will require Latin America to integrate these communities into their formal economies and job markets."

The region doesn't just need to respond to the crisis, it needs to keep up the pressure against Mr Maduro too, says David Smolanksy.

"You need the strong arm and the friendly hand," he says.

"The region needs to be firm against the dictatorship - as long as it continues, people are going to flee."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Venezuela's exodus is set to continue

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In Venezuela, the discussion about how long to stay, or where to flee and how to begin a new life, is never far from many people's minds. Every time I visit the country, there are fewer friends and contacts to catch up with.

# data[].attributes.body
Jair Bolsonaro: Brazil's firebrand leader dubbed the Trump of the Tropics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jair Bolsonaro was courting controversy long before he launched his successful bid for Brazil's presidency.

The far-right former army captain, for years a marginal figure, has insulted women and homosexuals. He has praised the country's former dictatorship and attacked political correctness.

His comments deeply divided voters and, while some expressed a dislike for him, others felt he was the outsider needed to tackle rampant crime and rough up the establishment.

This desire for change helped propel him to a big victory in his country's presidential election in October, in which he won 55.2% of the vote to see him take office on 1 January 2019.

'Excessive ambition'

The 63-year-old graduated from the Agulhas Negras Military Academy in Rio de Janerio in 1977 and served as a paratrooper.

An assessment conducted during his years in the military reportedly said he showed "signs of excessive ambition to be financially and economically successful".

But his military career did not pass without controversy.

In 1986, while still an army captain, he was arrested after signing an article complaining about low salaries received by the military.

When he was first elected to Congress four years later he continued to defend the interests of the armed forces, which were his main electoral base at the time.

Few imagined at that time that he could become a serious contender but his outspoken rhetoric has appealed to many who blame the left for Brazil's problems.

Mr Bolsonaro has portrayed himself as the defender of a Brazil of decades past, suggesting that the country should return to the hardline tactics of the 1964-1985 military dictatorship.

He has praised this era, in which thousands of people were imprisoned and tortured, as a "glorious period".

"I am in favour of torture - you know that," he said during a television appearance in 1999. "And the people are in favour of it, too."

Law and order

During his seven terms in Congress, in which he largely remained a fringe political figure, his priorities evolved beyond the military.

He has focused on the broader issues of public safety and law and order, which made him popular with many voters in crime-wracked Brazil.

In 2017, he controversially said that "a policeman who doesn't kill isn't a policeman".

On the campaign trail he reinforced his position as a hardliner who aimed to restore safety to the streets.

"Safety is our priority! It is urgent!" he wrote on Twitter.

"People need jobs, they want education, but it's no use if they continue to be robbed on the way to their jobs; it's no use if drug trafficking remains at the doors of schools."

On this issue, he has pledged to reduce crime and increase security by relaxing the country's gun laws.

Just days before taking office, he tweeted about plans to ensure that any citizen without a criminal record would be permitted to possess a firearm, and said he would work to "fight the Marxist trash" he claimed was being taught in schools.

'Trump of the Tropics'

Some media have nicknamed him the "Trump of the Tropics", comparing his anti-establishment populist style and social media presence to that of the US leader.

Mr Bolsonaro campaigned as a nationalist and among the comparisons with the US president include his promise to move Brazil's embassy in Israel to Jerusalem as he looks to strengthen ties with the country.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was in Brasilia for Mr Bolsonaro's inauguration, said just hours ahead of the ceremony that Brazil's president-elect had told him that the move was a matter of "when, not if".

A provocative figure

One of the candidates who ran against him in the first round of the presidential elections, Ciro Gomes, went as far as dubbing Mr Bolsonaro a "little tropical wannabe Hitler".

His statements on issues ranging from abortion to race, and from migration to homosexuality, have proved provocative and garnered much attention.

"I'd prefer [to see] a son of mine to die in an accident than [to be] a homosexual," he told Playboy in a 2011 interview.

In 2016, he provoked outrage by remarking that a fellow lawmaker was not worth raping because he thought she was "very ugly" and not his "type".

He has also described having a female child as a "weakness", and said that he would not employ women equally because "[they] get more labour rights than men".

Mr Bolsonaro has dismissed the criticism of these comments as "political correctness".

"Political correctness is a thing of leftist radicals," he said in an interview with daily newspaper Correio Braziliense. "I am one of the most attacked persons."

New supporters

On 6 September 2018, Mr Bolsonaro was stabbed at a campaign rally in the south-east state of Minas Gerais.

He had already been doing well in the opinion polls but the intense media attention which followed was new even for him.

Even though he was confined to a hospital bed following the attack, unable to return to the campaign trail, he kept rising in the polls and continued to attract new supporters.

Many in the business sector liked his strong backing of free-market economics. Some young people were attracted to his plain speaking and his social media presence. Evangelicals, who account for one in every four voters, liked his conservative outlook.

All of these groups will now be hoping he can deliver on his campaign promises and lead Brazil in a new direction.
Additional reporting by BBC Monitoring.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Who is Brazil's new leader Jair Bolsonaro?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Jair Bolsonaro was courting controversy long before he launched his successful bid for Brazil's presidency. The far-right former army captain, for years a marginal figure, has insulted women and homosexuals. He has praised the country's former dictatorship and attacked political correctness.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Brazil is South America's most influential country, a rising economic power and one of the world's biggest democracies.

Over the past few years it has made major strides in its efforts to raise millions out of poverty, although the gap between rich and poor remains wide.

The exploitation of the Amazon rainforest, much of which is in Brazil, has been a major international worry, since the wilderness is a vital regulator of the climate.

A former Portuguese colony, Brazil has a highly diverse population, including indigenous Americans and the descendants of African slaves and European settlers.

FACTS

LEADER
President: Michel Temer
Michel Temer was sworn in as president in August 2016 after senators voted to remove Dilma Rousseff from office over financial irregularities.

His inauguration brought to an end the 13-year rule of Ms Rousseff's left-wing Workers' Party.

A veteran of the centrist Brazilian Democratic Movement Party (PMDB), Mr Temer will serve out the rest of Ms Rousseff's term to the end of 2018.

Once political allies, Mr Temer served as vice-president in Ms Rousseff's government for over five years before playing a key role in impeachment proceedings against her. He acted as interim president during her trial.

In his first televised cabinet meeting following his inauguration, Mr Temer pledged to bring back "political stability" to the recession-stricken country.

"My only interest is in handing over to my successor a country that is reconciled, pacified and growing economically," he said.

Descriptions of his public persona have ranged from "a good negotiator" to "conspirator", and Mr Temer has himself been implicated in corruption scandals. The former law professor is married, and has five children with three women.

MEDIA

South America's biggest media market is home to thousands of radio stations and hundreds of TV channels. TV has long been the most influential medium.

Media ownership is highly concentrated. Domestic conglomerates such as Globo, Brazil's most-successful broadcaster, dominate the market and run TV and radio networks, newspapers and pay-TV operations.

The constitution guarantees a free press and there is vigorous debate in the media on social and political issues.

TIMELINE

1500 - Portuguese land in the area and claim it for the Portuguese crown.

1822 - The son of the Portuguese king declares independence from Portugal and crowns himself Pedro I, emperor of Brazil.

1888 - Slavery is abolished. A year later, Brazil's monarchy is overthrown and a federal republic is established; in subsequent decades, government is dominated by European coffee plantation owners.

1930 - Nationalist and anti-communist Getulio Vargas comes to power in a coup; his 15-year authoritarian rule pursues state-led industrialisation and improvements in social welfare.

1945 - Vargas toppled by a coup that restores democratic rule and ushers in the second Brazilian Republic.

1960 - The capital is moved from Rio de Janeiro to the new purpose-built city of Brasilia.

1964 - Left-wing President Joao Goulart is ousted in a coup that commences two decades of military rule; the regime stifles freedom of speech and tortures opponents while pursuing economic development.

1985 - Return of civilian government.

2002 - Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, popularly known as Lula, wins elections to become Brazil's first left-wing president for more than 40 years.

2016 - Lula's ally and successor Dilma Rousseff - is removed as president after an impeachment trial finds her guilty of financial irregularities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Brazil is South America's most influential country, a rising economic power and one of the world's biggest democracies. Over the past few years it has made major strides in its efforts to raise millions out of poverty, although the gap between rich and poor remains wide.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
North American Free Trade Agreement | NAFTANow.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into effect, creating one of the world's largest free trade zones and laying the foundations for strong economic growth and rising prosperity for Canada, the United States, and Mexico. Since then, NAFTA has demonstrated how free trade increases wealth and competitiveness, delivering real benefits to families, farmers, workers, manufacturers, and consumers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Wall Documentary. 673 likes · 7 talking about this. In 2006, US congress approved construction of a 700 mile fence on the border...they didn't plan for human nature.

# data[].attributes.headline
'The Wall' shows reality of U.S.-Mexico border amid immigration debate

# data[].attributes.subject
'The Wall' shows reality of U.S.-Mexico border amid immigration debate

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
CLOSE

President Donald Trump's call to build a wall along the southern border has sparked an intense debate over immigration and American identity.

To better understand what the wall would mean, a team of USA TODAY Network journalists traveled along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border and produced an 80-minute film "The Wall," which will be shown 7:30 pm Saturday and 12 noon Sunday as part of the Freep Film Festival.

The film is a collaboration between the Free Press team behind "12th and Clairmount," the Arizona Republic and the USA Today Network. Brian Kaufman, executive video producer at the Detroit Free Press, was the director of the movie, which involved 82 journalists. Kaufman spoke about the movie with the Free Press. Here's what he said:

QUESTION: What is The Wall about?
ANSWER: The Wall is a documentary film, but it's also a solid piece of journalism, and those two things don't always align. The film takes a broad look at all 2,000 miles of border and dissects issues along the way. Experts inform us. Journalists guide us. Characters emerge throughout. In addition, the film is chocked full of stunning aerial cinematography from a crew that flew the border's entire length, which became the backbone of the film.

Q: What was it like working on The Wall?
A: The Wall was different than any other feature documentary I've worked on because it involved so many journalists from so many different newspapers across the country. That broad range of expertise was essential for a topic this broad and made my job as a writer and editor much easier.

Buy Photo

Brian Kaufman, Detroit Free Press Executive Video Producer (Photo: Elaine Cromie, Detroit Free Press)
Q: What did you learn from the experience of working on the movie?
A: The border is a big place, some 2,000 miles, but that number doesn't do justice. If it hadn't been for the aerial flight of the entire border, I still may not be able to comprehend its vastness. While I wasn't on the flight, I looked at every piece of footage from it and built the structure of the film around that east-west journey.
Read more:
Q: What do you remember about your visit to the border area?
A: I filmed a rancher whose land abuts the border. His stories of the past, before illegal immigration and drug smuggling became major issues, could have been stories from any small town anywhere. Neighbors on both sides of the border, often friends or business acquaintances, crossed freely. In many respects, those mutual cross-border relationships still exist. And while it's obviously not possible to cross freely back and forth, those living in border regions often don't express the same vitriolic opinions that have come to define our national conversation on border issues.
Q: Any thoughts about the current political debate over the wall?
A: I was terrified the entire time we were working on this film that President Trump would make some sudden and unexpected move that might derail the whole production, force us to change course, or negate the film's impact. That never happened. And whatever might happen in the future - wall or no wall - the film serves as a journalistic examination of border issues that are relevant to any lawmaker, citizen or otherwise hoping to understand an extremely diverse and complex stretch of land and people.
Contact Niraj Warikoo: nwarikoo@freepress.com or 313-223-4792. Follow him on Twitter @nwarikoo I f you go: The Wall will be shown at 7:30 p.m. Sat., April 14, at the Detroit Film Theatre at the DIA, and at 12 noon Sunday, April 15, at the Welcome Center at Wayne State University on the corner of Woodward and Warren avenues.
Detroit Free Press Reporter Niraj Warikoo and Editorial Page Editor Brian Dickerson will moderate panels with journalists who worked on the film after the screenings.

For more information and tickets, visit freepfilmfestival.com/the-wall

For more on The Wall project: https://www.usatoday.com/border-wall/

Read or Share this story: https://on.freep.com/2GZVyzS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'The Wall' shows reality of U.S.-Mexico border amid immigration debate

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CLOSE President Donald Trump's call to build a wall along the southern border has sparked an intense debate over immigration and American identity. To better understand what the wall would mean, a team of USA TODAY Network journalists traveled along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border and produced an 80-minute film "The Wall," which will be shown 7:30 pm Saturday and 12 noon Sunday as part of the Freep Film Festival.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The remaining members of the much-discussed caravan of Central American migrants arrived in Tijuana, Mexico, last weekend to seek asylum in the United States. The event, and President Trump's reaction to it, set off a new round of debate on the management and security of the U.S.-Mexico border. In part, it's a serious conversation about how to respond to migration trends, including fewer economic migrants from Mexico and more asylum seekers from Central America. But it is also laced with political rhetoric that is not always firmly grounded in the truth. Here are five prevalent myths about border crossings.

Myth No. 1

out of control.
Trump has worked with border-state governors to deploy National Guard troops to the region, adding literal boots on the ground to the other military metaphors used to describe the situation: Attorney General Jeff Sessions, during a visit to El Paso, declared the border "ground zero," a "beachhead against the cartels," echoing retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey's 2011 "strategic military assessment," which described conditions along the border as " tantamount to living in a war zone ." The White House calls the border porous, saying that "with our current laws and resources, we cannot stop illegal aliens from crossing," and polls show that most Americans think the border is not secure.

Such language suggests high levels of violence in U.S. border communities, but FBI statistics I have analyzed for a forthcoming report for the Mexico Institute show that from 2011 to 2015, all but one of the 23 U.S. counties along the border had violent-crime rates lower than the national average for similar counties, a finding that echoes previous analyses.

In some ways, the border is porous - more than 300,000 people were apprehended last year for crossing into the country illegally. But what does it mean to have a secure border? The number of Border Patrol agents has increased more than fourfold since the early 1990s, and that 300,000 figure is the lowest recorded since 1971, meaning that the border is as secure as it has been in nearly five decades. Without a nationally agreed-upon way of measuring border security, we are stuck in a political debate as much about semantics as substance.

Myth No. 2

the opioid epidemic.
Trump offers a border wall as a solution to the skyrocketing number of opioid-related deaths around the country. "Ninety percent of the heroin in America comes from our southern border, where eventually the Democrats will agree with us and build the wall to keep the damn drugs out," he said in a speech in New Hampshire in March. Others, including the Border Patrol union, agree that a wall would help stem the flow of drugs. Hector Garza, a border agent, told Fox News recently that "we definitely need a physical barrier that's going to save American lives."

But the top causes of opioid-related deaths in 2016 were, in order, synthetic opioids like fentanyl, prescription opioids and heroin. A large proportion of fentanyl is shipped by mail or express carrier directly from China. Some is also trafficked through Mexico, but usually in vehicles through official crossings rather than in remote areas where a wall might complicate smugglers' plans. Prescription opioids are produced and shipped through legal means. Finally, although heroin trafficking has evolved over the past decade to enter the United States mainly through Mexico, that drug, too, is primarily moved in vehicles through official crossings. Security improvements at ports of entry and cooperation with Mexican officials may contribute to a comprehensive anti-opioid strategy, but a border wall would not.

Myth No. 3

Border enforcement does not curtail illegal crossings.

For decades, growing border security spending failed to reverse the rising tide of unauthorized immigration. A 2006 Council on Foreign Relations report summed up the research at the time, answering the question: "Does increased investment in border enforcement reduce illegal immigration?" with a succinct, "Not really." Researchers like anthropologist Jason De León noted that instead of stopping migrants, tighter security had a " balloon effect - you grab one area and the flow goes to another area."

Enforcement does push migrants to cross in more remote and dangerous areas. But U.S. border officials have become increasingly effective in detaining those seeking to cross the border illicitly, as demonstrated by economists Bryan Roberts and John Whitley. And surveys show that Mexican migrants apprehended and returned to Mexico have become much less likely to attempt to reenter the United States, with the share saying they'd try again falling from 95 percent in 2005 to 49 percent in 2015, according to a Migration Policy Institute report. Economic and demographic shifts during that period account for some of the change, but so does enforcement, in particular the fact that migrants apprehended at the border are now much less likely to be simply dropped off on the other side and more likely to face formal deportation proceedings.

Myth No. 4

Terrorist groups are exploiting a porous border.

In 2015, reports emerged claiming that the Islamic State had established a camp outside Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, just across the border from El Paso. The previous year, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R), whose congressional district includes San Diego, claimed that " at least 10 ISIS fighters have been caught coming across the Mexican border in Texas."

Both of these assertions were quickly debunked. There has never been a successful terrorist attack on the United States involving the crossing of the U.S.-Mexico border. Instead, as the State Department has reported, Mexico has cooperated closely with the United States on counterterrorism issues, and there is "no credible information that any member of a terrorist group has traveled through Mexico to gain access to the United States." An analysis of travel in the planning and execution of terrorist attacks by Kathleen Smarick and Gary LaFree of the University of Maryland shows that most travel is through airports and seaports rather than across U.S. land borders. All of this means that large flows of migrants over the southern border do not necessarily generate significant terrorism risks.

Myth No. 5

Mexico's border laws are strong, and ours are weak.

A new myth has emerged from the recent drama around the caravan of Central American migrants seeking asylum at the San Ysidro port of entry in San Diego. In April, Trump tweeted, "Our Border Laws are very weak while those of Mexico & Canada are very strong." He followed that tweet with another the next day, saying, "The Caravan is largely broken up thanks to the strong immigration laws of Mexico." And it's true that Mexico has become an important partner of the United States in managing Central American migration; it gives a growing number of refugee visas and deports large numbers of migrants before they arrive at the U.S. border.

Trump's statements, however, miss the mark on several counts. Mexico passed a major overhaul of its immigration code in 2011, seeking to limit the discretionary nature of enforcement, which had served as a tool of corruption, and to strengthen the protection of migrants' human rights. It was a pro-migrant reform, and, implementation aside, Mexico's immigration laws are far from hawkish.

As for U.S. immigration laws being weak, that is hard to square with an immigration and border security system that detains and removes hundreds of thousands of people from the country each year. The Trump administration cites flaws that allow unaccompanied minors and some asylum seekers to be placed with family members or paroled, sometimes for years, while their cases are processed. But rather than a weak legal framework, the United States has an under-resourced asylum and immigration court system. Asylum applications have more than quadrupled over the past decade, causing a backlog of more than 300,000 cases.

Five myths is a weekly feature challenging everything you think you know. You can check out previous myths, read more from Outlook or follow our updates on Facebook and Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Perspective | Five myths about the U.S.-Mexico border

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The remaining members of the much-discussed caravan of Central American migrants arrived in Tijuana, Mexico, last weekend to seek asylum in the United States. The event, and President Trump's reaction to it, set off a new round of debate on the management and security of the U.S.-Mexico border.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is the Mexico-US border fence justified?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Voice your opinion. Argue whether you think the Mexico-US border fence is justified or not. See what other people are saying about this.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
d.r.e.a.m.ers? We'reoing morph into it. It will happen at some point in the future. What does that mean? Over a period of 10 to 12 years. If they do great job. It's a nice thing to have the incentive of after a period of year being able to become a citizen. How much do Yu need for your wall, Mr. President? $20 billion? I'm going to build it way underbudget. We're putting down $25 billion for the wall. If you don't have a wall, you don't have DACA. That was president trump with reporters on Wednesday. There with ar estimate are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants. Their future, along with others 40e7ing to come to the U.S., again caught up in the battle over immigration. Most pressing, the fate of the d.r.e.a.m.ers. Those brought here illegally as children. In 2012, president Obama gave them legal status under DACA. President trump undid that last fall. Putting the fate of 690,000 active recipients in the hands of congress. It's the issue that shut down the government last week. Congress giving themselves until February 8th 0 negotiate a new deal. Or face another shutdown. We took off this week on a journey that took us to all four states that line the southern border. For a closer look at the view from the ground. Sunrise over the pacific. San Diego. It's where the 1900-mile-long u.s./mexico border begins. It's where we begin. A journey to see just what this immigration debate looks like. For those who see it up close. Who live it every day. Starting right here on the pacific ocean. This is not only where the border with Mexico begins, California is also the place where there are more dreamers than any place in the country. More than a quarter of all DACA recipients live here. Including this woman. She's called San Diego home since she arrived here 30 years ago at the age of 4. My mom had heard of the American dream. And she wanted us to experience that. She knew my dreams would bpt fulfilled in the -- the place where we were. Because her dreams aren't weren't fulfilled. Reporter: But Dulce's dreams have come true. After applying to DACA, she went to college and then on the law school. My family has been here 30 years. Paying taxes. Contributing with our labor. We have created businesses. We're job creators. Reporter: As long as you have lived here, there are people who would saying look, others came here legally. I understand that we -- we broke the law. By being here. And I feel there should be a way for us to become lawful immigrants. To become citizens some day. Reporter: Polls show that the vast majority of Americans support DACA recipients remaining in the country. Including trump supporter Debbie gold Hagen. You live ten miles from the border, probably. Do you think d.r.e.a.m.ers should be able to stay? Well, as far as I'm concerned, let 'em stay. Reporter: A third of the country supports building the wall between the U.S. And Mexico. I think it would stop a lot of them there coming over. I mean, I'm sorry, they need to come over here to take care of their families. I understand that. Some come over, they earn mare money, they're sending it there. They're not spending it here. Aren't we supposed to be taking care of us first? Reporter: Just outside San Diego, prototypes for the wall were constructed last fall. Some solid. Some see-three. As we head east through the vast desert, the enormity of the task to build a wall is stunningly obvious. We're just across the border now from Mexico. Still in California. Just passed miles and miles and miles of these very rocky hillsides. And the desert scrub you see over there. It's no wonder that building a wall would cost billions and billions of dollars. Barriers already stretch for nearly 700 miles along the border. Like this fencing in el centro, California. Even though the number of border's rehengss has fallen under president trump, the wall, even mobile observation towers, still offer little discouragement in the face of desperation for some. Mexico is just to my left. The border patrol is up and down these roads every day. They say they find people crossing over every day. Down the road in calexico, a town of 40,000. The border fence runs just steps from a main drag. Luis came here when he was about 10. Illegally overstaying his Visa. His wife is American. So he now has a green card. Do you think we should let others in? Um, I think there should be more control of who fetes into the country. And how they get into the country. Because -- we do need low-skill workers to do the jobs that most Americans don't want to do. Reporter: As dusk begins to fall, we watch a train wind its way near the board as we make our way to Tucson, Arizona, to meet up with more d.r.e.a.m.ers. A blazing flash of color signals the end of the day. And with it, word of the white house announcement of a framework on immigration. President trump proposing a $25 billion trust for the wall. And additional security. For the d.r.e.a.m.ers, a 10 to 12-year path to citizenship that would include some 1.8 million people who arrived here illegally as children. It would end so-called "Family migration." Only spouses or minor children would be included. Not parents. I'm trying to get my masters afterwards. Reporter: Both of these people heard the news as well. They were both brought to the U.S. Illegally as children. What is your reaction to what we heard from the white house? I would love to be able to be a citizen. But, I think for me, and for what we see in our own community is that it would be a lot more important to be able to keep our families together. Reporter: And this would not. Your parents would remain illegal. The possibility that they could be sent back? Children grow up not knowing if they're parents will make it home ro frork. We have members of our community being detained every day. Reporter: As for the wall, she thinks it will go the way of the the Berlin wall. We can build a wall. It won't stop people from coming. The majority of people coming to U.S. Is to get a better life. Reporter: But that wall is the number one priority for Dr. Kelly ward. Who wants to build the wall? Reporter: She's running for the Republican senate nomination in Arizona this year. And while she's a big booster of the president, she breaks with him on legalizing the d.r.e.a.m.ers before the wall is complete. The white house is proposing at the they expand the population eligible for citizenship. Not just those d.r.e.a.m.ers who are registered. But moving to 1.8. Those who are eligible. Do you agree with that? Is that fair? Well, I think we shouldn't be having those discussions until we fund and build the wall we get rid of the chip migration. We end the diversity lottery. We defund the sanctuary cities. And we implement verify. Any of the debate just drives more illegal immigration to occur while everything is in limbo. That's not what we want. Reporter: So you are deeply disappointed in what president trump did? I'm disappointed in the white house's proposal. Because I want -- I want to stand firm on what the American citizens were sold on the campaign trail. Reporter: The next morning, my team and I were back on the road. Traving next door to new Mexico. Making our way down to the Santa Teresa border patrol station. Here in New Mexico, where there are already miles and miles of barriers and fences, there are still more than 75,000 undocumented immigrants. We met up with Republican congressman Steve Pearce. He's running for governor this year. And stumped for trump in 2016. But thinks building a wall is a waste of money. You do not believe in a big $25 billion, $35 billion wall. No, no. Money could be spent for so many things. Our agents out here are completely unprotected. They're doing a very dangerous job. Everyone wants to secure the border. But let's be thoughtful about it. Let's don't just throw money at it. Reporter: Congressman Pearce would prefer more resources dwekted towards staffing and technology to secure the board border the. It's not just people crossing. It's drug activity that a wall can't prevent. Even with a structure, they're coming over with ultra lights. They're not manned. They row mote a drug package. 300 pounds, drops here with a gps locater. Someone comes and picks it up. You get a $35 billion wall and you defeat it with an ultralight. People looking for a better life coming here, I'm very sympathetic for that. I know what it's like looking for hope and opportunity. I grew up dirt poor. But let's do it the right way. Reporter: 1500 miles from where our journey started in dag, d.r.e.a.m.ers were out in weekend alongside environmental groups, protesting the proposed wall. They are holding us hostage by a border wall, preventing us from being and living with our families and members of our dmupts. Reporter: Texas democratic congressman Gonzalez voted to end the shutdown this past week. Well, it's pretty shameful that we're playing pawns with young children's lives. Reporter: But he remains hopeful that a solution for the d.r.e.a.m.ers will be found. I'm optimistic we'll find a resolution and that we get to a finality on the issue. And get it done and put it to rest and move on with the people's business. Reporter: All along the border, we traveled, the desire to get something done is clear on all sides. But whether Washington can get beyond the political divide to reach a final deal may be the biggest barrier of all.

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Video: Martha Raddatz travels to the U.S.-Mexico border to gauge the impact of the immigration debate in Congress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
d.r.e.a.m.ers? We'reoing morph into it. It will happen at some point in the future. What does that mean? Over a period of 10 to 12 years. If they do great job. It's a nice thing to have the incentive of after a period of year being able to become a citizen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Severely neglected" children detained in what have been called squalid conditions, as well as deaths on the US-Mexico border, have brought the treatment of migrants into focus in the US.

Lawyers who visited a border patrol facility in Clint, Texas, have described overcrowded cells, with children locked up without adult supervision or sufficient access to food or showers.

The border authority has said it is trying to provide the "best care possible", but that it "urgently" needs additional funding to help the children, some of whom entered the US independently, and some of whom have been separated from their families.

But why this is happening, and why now? Here, we have looked at three key pieces of context that will help you understand the fuller picture.

1) Growing migrant numbers

The numbers of people from Latin America seeking protection in the US and being held at the border are rising.

There is not one specific reason why people are leaving Central America and Mexico for the US. But there are a few that are cited regularly.

"We leave our countries under threat. We leave behind our home, our relatives, our friends."

"Many people think we left because we are criminals," Ms Flores told the BBC at the time. "We're not criminals - we're people living in fear in our countries. All we want is a place where our children can run free - where they're not afraid to go out to the shops."

Rights groups cite the influence of armed gangs who act with impunity - as well as the targeting of women and LGBTI people - as key factors for the high homicide rates.

Among the most prevalent groups is MS-13, a brutal street gang that started in the US but is now thought to have at least 60,000 members in Central America.

The gang is said to recruit at-risk and poor teenagers and demand they commit murder as an initiation rite, often using a machete. In El Salvador, MS-13 controls entire neighbourhoods.

Over the past few years, there has been a significant increase in the number of people travelling to the US because they fear persecution by gangs like MS-13.

While persecution is not the only reason people from Central America migrate to the US - economic volatility, natural disasters and the desire to join family members have also been cited by aid groups - there is evidence it is a growing factor, and a credible one.

People seeking asylum in the US can request a "credible fear" interview if returning home would put their life at risk. An asylum officer then tries to establish if their request is based on a fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political beliefs or membership of a particular group, including a gang.

Far from striking down credible fear applications, the Trump administration is granting them at an unprecedented rate. But Mr Trump has been keen to raise the threshold for what counts as "credible fear".

"We hear repeatedly from people requesting refugee protection, including from a growing number of children, that they are fleeing forced recruitment into armed criminal gangs and death threats," a UN statement said.

As the number of people requesting credible fear interviews has increased, so too has the number of people being detained at the US border.

Reason two: Escaping poverty

But 68% also said they were moving for better labour opportunities, and 12% for education opportunities.

Countries in Central America are among the poorest in the world while the US is one of the richest, with the world's largest economy (by GDP):

President Trump has repeatedly condemned economic migrants, saying two months after he launched his candidacy that "they're taking our manufacturing jobs, they're taking our money." However, many studies say that immigration produces net gains for the US economy.

Those entering the US for a better quality of life are not considered refugees.

However, US and international law currently says that people can seek asylum if they fear persecution at home on the basis of their race, political opinion, nationality, religion or because they belong to a particular social group.

Five more things to read

There's another factor to bear in mind too: climate change. With economies that are heavily reliant on agriculture, Central American countries are particularly vulnerable to changes in temperature and the weather.

A number of recent reports - including a series by the New Yorker magazine - have acknowledged the role climate change is already playing in driving people from Central America. But one World Bank report last year said the number of people displaced because of climate change in Latin America could rise to 2.1 million by 2050.

To understand the zero-tolerance policy on immigration, it helps to understand who is behind it.

When Donald Trump announced his candidacy for the White House on 16 June, 2015, he set the tone for how he would later approach the presidency.

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best," he said. "They're sending people that have lots of problems... They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

And so, in early 2018, Mr Trump announced a "zero tolerance" policy to prosecute all adults who try to cross the US-Mexico border illegally, including those who planned to seek asylum in the US.

Mr Trump often cites the dangers of MS-13, which sprung up among Salvadorean immigrants in 1980s Los Angeles and has since spread to at least 46 states. Mr Trump has called them "animals" and threatened to rid the US of their influence.

However, the same poll found that his approach was less popular with Americans overall - with 44% of adults saying his approach made them more likely to oppose him, compared with 31% who were supportive.

Mr Miller, one of the president's few original aides to keep their job, was the person who put together the ban on immigrants from majority-Muslim countries announced soon after Mr Trump came to office.

The New York Times reported that in April 2018, when it became clear that the number of people being held at the border was growing significantly, Mr Miller pushed for a harder line on immigration.

His position in 2019 is even more secure than a year earlier when the border crackdown began, thanks partly to the departure of immigration officials who supported less restrictive policies.

Is it legal to separate families and detain children in poor conditions? This question goes to the centre of the debate on immigration and is not as easy to answer as you may think.

So why are some families still being separated?

There is also significant debate about the conditions under which people are being kept. This too is because of a lack of clarity in the law.

A 1997 court decision, known as the Flores Settlement Agreement, sets a standard which the US government must follow when it comes to treating migrant children.

But the Department of Justice has sought to amend the agreement to allow it to hold children for longer, and has disputed interpretations of the 1997 court decision - most notably, when a government lawyer argued in June 2018 that the order does not specify that detained children be given showers, soap or toothbrushes.

As long as children continue to be separated from their families, the legal challenges from both sides are likely to continue.

But aside from the loopholes and the legal disputes, plain old bureaucracy also appears to be a problem.

Unaccompanied children are by law supposed to be detained for only up to 72 hours. But several reports say many are being kept in detention centres - often in squalid conditions - for much longer, as government agencies struggle to process the vast number of people being held at the border.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Migrant children in the US: The bigger picture explained

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Severely neglected" children detained in what have been called squalid conditions, as well as deaths on the US-Mexico border, have brought the treatment of migrants into focus in the US. Lawyers who visited a border patrol facility in Clint, Texas, have described overcrowded cells, with children locked up without adult supervision or sufficient access to food or showers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Trump wants to end the three-party talks to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, aiming instead to deal separately with Canada and Mexico to restructure the trade accord, a senior adviser said Tuesday.

Trump does not intend to withdraw from NAFTA, National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow said on "Fox & Friends." But after more than one year of multilateral discussions, he feels the current approach hasn't been fruitful and a new one is needed, Kudlow said.

"His preference now - and he asked me to convey this - is to actually negotiate with Mexico and Canada separately," Kudlow said. "He prefers bilateral negotiations."

It wasn't immediately clear how such an arrangement would work. The United States, Mexico and Canada agreed to NAFTA in the 1990s, and all three countries have worked to renegotiate the deal since Trump became president. Changes would have to be agreed to by all sides.

But officials from the three countries have been unable to find consensus on several critical issues, leading to angry finger-pointing between Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in recent days. Trump has accused Canada of ripping off the United States through unfair trade practices, and Canadian officials have said Trump is using inaccurate information to attack a U.S. ally.

"When you have to compromise with a whole bunch of countries, you get the worst of the deals," Kudlow said. "Why not get the best? ... Canada is a whole lot different from Mexico."

Trump is trying to use the threat of tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, as well as other goods, to force numerous countries to agree to trade concessions. He's in standoffs with Mexico, Canada, China, Japan and members of the European Union, a collection of countries that includes many of the world's largest economies and the largest U.S. trading partners. The talks all appear to be moving slowly or stalling, leading to angst on Capitol Hill and among business leaders.

Kudlow said he briefed a senior Canadian official on Trump's new idea Monday and was still waiting for a response. Trump and Kudlow are traveling to Quebec later this week for a meeting of leaders from seven of the world's leading economies, and several of those officials have expressed frustration at Trump for his protectionist approach to trade.

"NAFTA has kind of dragged on," Kudlow said of the negotiations. "The president is not going to leave NAFTA. He is not going to withdraw from NAFTA. He's just going to try a different approach."

A Canadian government official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss diplomatic relations, said there has long been one-on-one talks as part of the NAFTA negotiations, but noted that the trade pact is a three-country agreement and any resolution would require all three countries to sign on together.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trump aims to split up NAFTA negotiations, deal with Canada and Mexico separately

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Trump wants to end the three-party talks to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, aiming instead to deal separately with Canada and Mexico to restructure the trade accord, a senior adviser said Tuesday. Trump does not intend to withdraw from NAFTA, National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow said on "Fox & Friends."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
OK, we're all upset about Donald Trump's tariffs on steel and aluminum and his threat to target auto sector products with more tariffs.

But we need to be careful how we, as consumers, direct our anger.

Case in point is the idea of boycotting Canadian stores that sell products connected with Trump and his family. That list would include The Hudson Bay Company and Winners, among others.

REALITY CHECK: No, Canadians aren't 'smuggling' shoes across the border due to 'massive' tariffs

The problem with that idea is that if retail sales decline in those stores, the first victims would be the employees of those stores. Those employees are members of our community, and it would be foolish to make them collateral damage in our war against Trump's tariff tirade.

The more sensible tactic would be simply, don't buy Trump products when you shop at those stores - product which, by the way, most of us are already avoiding. Retail sales of Trump men's and women's fashion are so bad that most lines have been discontinued.

READ MORE: Buy Canadian? Some considering boycott amid tariffs imposed by Donald Trump

Besides, if you're in a boycotting frame of mind, you could have a much more effective impact if you stopped buying products like orange juice, or Tennessee whisky and tried to buy Canadian whenever possible.

Nobody wins in a trade war and the longer it drags on, the worse it will be for both economies.

That's why we need to be strategic in our response and not unwittingly harm the Canadian jobs we're trying to protect.

Bill Kelly is the host of Bill Kelly Show on Global News Radio 900 CHML.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bill Kelly: Be careful where you direct your tariff anger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
OK, we're all upset about Donald Trump's tariffs on steel and aluminum and his threat to target auto sector products with more tariffs. But we need to be careful how we, as consumers, direct our anger. Case in point is the idea of boycotting Canadian stores that sell products connected with Trump and his family.

# data[].attributes.body
ID of an American states

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Maquiladora women - spots from the film MAQUILAPOLIS.mp4