Billboards, Borders, and Billions: The Cost of Immigration — and the Power of the OOH Message

Billboards, Borders, and Billions: The Cost of Immigration — and the Power of the OOH Message

by Brent Baer, Publisher, OOH Today

Drivers in Bakersfield, California, have recently been greeted by a striking roadside message. Part of a 200-billboard national campaign, the ads claim that “ICE cruelty is costing taxpayers $28 billion.”

The campaign is intentionally provocative. But it raises two deeper questions:

1. What are the actual costs of immigration enforcement compared with the public spending associated with undocumented immigrants?
2. Do billboard companies have any responsibility to provide opposing viewpoints when they display political messages?

The Cost of Enforcement

Immigration enforcement in the United States is expensive.

Advocacy groups and federal budget analyses place Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)–related spending at roughly $28 billion annually, a figure that should concern policy makers and journalists about the scale of enforcement costs.

Supporters of strict enforcement argue these expenditures are the price of maintaining border security and the rule of law.

Critics argue that billions are being spent on enforcement while social services and humanitarian programs struggle for funding.

But enforcement costs are only one piece of a much larger financial picture.

The Cost of Public Benefits and Services

Estimates of public spending tied to undocumented immigrants vary widely depending on categories like education, healthcare, and welfare, highlighting the complexity that should intrigue policy makers and individuals interested in the debate.

National Estimates

Several organizations have attempted to quantify the fiscal impact:

• The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimates the net annual fiscal burden of illegal immigration at $150.7 billion.
• That estimate subtracts about $32 billion in taxes paid by undocumented immigrants from a gross annual cost of roughly $182 billion.

Other analyses focus on specific programs.

• The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) estimates that undocumented immigrant households receive about $42 billion annually in welfare and direct benefits from major government programs.
• A 2024 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analysis projected that participation in federal programs by the recent “surge population” — primarily undocumented migrants and their children — could add about $177 billion in mandatory federal spending between 2024 and 2034.

These figures are heavily debated in policy circles, but they illustrate the scale of the fiscal conversation.

Are billboard companies simply platforms for free speech, similar to newspapers that sell ad space?

The Billboard Free Speech Question

That brings us back to Bakersfield.

The ICE billboard campaign raises another important issue: the role of billboard companies in political speech.

Unlike television and radio broadcasters, outdoor advertising companies are generally not regulated under the same “fairness” standards , raising questions about their ethical responsibilities in providing balanced political messaging.

Billboards are generally considered private advertising space.

If an advertiser pays for a message — and it complies with company policies — the ad typically goes up.

That raises a difficult question: Are billboard companies simply platforms for free speech, similar to newspapers that sell ad space?

Or do billboard companies have a civic responsibility to consider providing editorial balance when highly political messages dominate public space, encouraging advertising professionals to reflect on their influence?

Television stations often present debates or opposing perspectives.

Billboards rarely do.

For now, the answer is simple — whoever buys the billboard controls the message.

— whoever buys the billboard controls the message.

A Debate Too Big for a Billboard

Immigration policy is one of the most complex issues in American politics.

The United States spends tens of billions annually on enforcement.

It also spends tens or hundreds of billions on services tied to undocumented immigrants, depending on how the numbers are calculated.

The roadside messages in Bakersfield reflect a deeper national tension.

Some Americans see immigration primarily as a financial burden and a law-enforcement issue.

Others see it as a humanitarian and economic issue tied to labor markets.

A billboard can capture attention in three seconds.

But the real debate — about immigration costs, enforcement priorities, and public responsibility — is far larger than any single statistic or roadside message can contain.