President Donald Trump’s 700-mile border wall would cost just $1.8 billion annually for ten years, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The expected construction cost is only 1 cent for every $20 spent by the federal government.

The Journal‘s article said the Department of Homeland Security’s unreleased plan had been sent to a group of Senators:

In total, the administration details about $33 billion in desired new border security spending, including funding for technology, personnel and roads. The document refers to this as “critical physical border security requirements.”

The document, from the Customs and Border Protection agency at the Department of Homeland Security, envisions the border-wall project unfolding over 10 years. If carried out as described, by 2027, about 970 miles of the 2,000-mile southwest border would have some sort of fencing or wall separating the U.S. from Mexico …

The non-wall requests include $5.7 billion over five years for towers, surveillance equipment, unmanned aerial vehicles and other technology; $1 billion over five years for road construction and maintenance; and $8.5 billion over seven years for 5,000 new Border Patrol agents and other personnel.

The planned $18 billion over a decade in spending on the wall matches the $1.6 billion already approved for 2018 by the GOP-controlled House and Senate, amid protests from Democratic Party leaders.

The pending 2018 budget includes $1.6 billion to build 60 miles new barriers in Texas and to upgrade 14 miles older barriers in California.

The proposed cost $1.8 billion per year cost would consume less than one-2,088th of the 2018 federal budget, expected to be around $3,800 billion. In turn, the wall’s cost would be offset by a reduced northward flow of illegals and drugs, so cutting the federal government’s cost for welfare, unemployment and policing.

Democrats denounced the 1-cent-for-every-$20 construction plan:

Democrats sharply oppose the wall as because it is a symbol which distinguishes the United States from other countries, and also because it is a solid barrier hindering the northward flow of cheap workers, welfare-aided consumers and future government-dependent voters towards the Democratic-dominated cities along the coasts.

However, some GOP legislators also oppose the wall, saying it might hinder border trade.

Without continued pressure from Trump, Democrats are likely to block spending on the wall by offering to support other GOP priorities, such as more tax cuts for business groups. In fact, Congress has never fully funded actual construction of the 700-mile fence which it loudly approved in 2006.

Immigration reformers say the wall will be a useful aid for border officers. But they also argue that Americans would gain more from much cheaper legal reforms which penalize employers for hiring migrants and the Democratic-run “sanctuary cities” for aiding illegals, including the illegal who shot Kate Steinle in San Francisco.