I'm no fan of the CBP but this seems like a flimsy objection. There's no reason to believe why their staffing levels will grow linearly with population. They're tasked with protecting the border, so we'd expect their staffing levels to grow linearly with the amount of border that needs protecting. If there's more stuff coming in (eg. aliexpress shipments from china), or more border crossings (legal or otherwise), we'd expect their numbers to grow faster relative to population.
There are not "more border crossings" today, there are fewer. The Border Patrol is massive and bloated but the peak border interdiction rates of the 80s and 90s remain the records.
"In fiscal year 2022, federal officials along the southern border stopped migrants over 2.3 million times, a record high."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jan-6-arrests-new-accusations-s...
Could you please provide evidence that population growth adjusted this number to under a record high? Until then I am going to actual believe the real numbers and not how you feel.
less than uh, 2010 maybe. there were less than a million mexican nationals in the US in 1970. there has been an unprecedented explosion in migration from latam in the last three decades, to the point that latinos are on track to become the largest ethnic group in the US.
Portland may not feel close to the sea, but it is.
Have the geographic borders changed in the last 25 years?
> If there's more stuff coming in (eg. aliexpress shipments from china), or more border crossings (legal or otherwise), we'd expect their numbers to grow faster relative to population.
Regardless, it doesn't justify the extensive CBP expansion outside of mailrooms.
How is it mission creep? Isn't inspecting inbound packages (ie. "customs") literally part of "Customs and Border Protection"?
>Regardless, it doesn't justify the extensive CBP expansion outside of mailrooms.
There are many other plausible reasons for expanding CBP outside of mailrooms, eg. war on drugs, illegal immigration, terrorists, etc.