TheWeekInCongress.com
Week Ending December 16, 2005
H.R.4437 To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to strengthen enforcement of the immigration laws, to enhance border security, and for other purposes.
BRIEF
Concerned with the public perception that US borders, particularly the southern border, are porous to the extent that terrorist could accompany the million of illegal aliens passing over the border yearly, the bill aims towards a rigid stance on controlling the border and US immigration policy as well. A primary provision would make being in the US illegally a felony crime.
The Agency in Charge
The Director of Homeland Security (DHS) is directed to take appropriate actions to develop a border strategy to include operational control of all US land and maritime borders.
The Steps to be Taken
To do so would it would be necessary for the DHS to speed up technology development and implementation that will gather biometric identity information such as retinal recognition and fingerprint reading. US ports would get radiation portal monitors to screen inbound vehicles and containers for nuclear and radiological materials.
Personnel at entry points would be increased along with canine patrols. At least one border patrol unit would be installed in the US Virgin Islands.
Smugglers could be charged with aggravated felony and may face mandatory minimum sentences and increased forfeiture of assets. Using a firearm while smuggling increases penalties. Penalties would be increased for those in the business of creating marriages to US citizens that aim to provide US citizenship for the alien spouse.
Department of Defense Involvement
The Secretary of Defense is directed to develop a plan to increase surveillance equipment along borders and to assess border security vulnerabilities and lapses in information sharing. A Border Security Advisory Board would be created as would ‘centers for excellence for border security’ at a university.
The bill authorizes grants to help accomplish the goals. The Office of Air and Marine Operations to prevent entry of terrorists and other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics and other contraband. And customs patrols on Indian land would be increased.
New Laws and Penalties:
Property owners who have sustained damage due to illegal aliens crossing their land would be reimbursed.
It would become mandatory to detain illegal aliens and permit release only if they are not a security risk and the alien provides a bond.
If the US orders a country to remove its’ nationals from the US and that country does not comply, other nationals from that country would be denied access to the US.
Deportation and Denial of Entry and Citizenship:
If an illegal alien is caught within 100 miles of the border and within 14 days of entering the country illegally the law would provide for expedited removal. An alien deportable due to terrorism can not legally argue and stall removal. An alien convicted of an aggravated felony, unlawful procurement of citizenship, domestic violence, stalking or child abuse may not be admitted to the US and can not become a naturalized citizen. Aggravated felony conviction also prohibits a refugee or asylum status from being awarded. Also inadmissible are aliens who have been deported due to criminal street gang participation or are reasonably considered to be a gang member trying to further gang-related crimes. Such gang members must be detained subject to removal and are ineligible for asylum and protection against deportation. Aliens deported and reentering the US would face the same order of deportation that first deported them. No new deportation orders would be necessary. Non-immigrant applicants would have to waive any right to review or appeal of inadmissibility or contest removal other than asylum. An alien applying for withholding of removal would have to establish that his or her life or freedom would be threatened in the country of return, and that race, religion, nationality, or political or social group would be a central factor in such threat.
An alien not complying with removal instructions can face mandatory sentencing and aliens can be deported for three or more drunk driving convictions and social security number and identification fraud.
US Employers:
Employers would be required to verify the immigration status of previously hired individuals and could face criminal penalties fro non-compliance. The bill provides a voluntary employer verification system within two years for previously hired individuals and a mandatory system within three year of enacting the bill for employees not verified under such system who are working at federal, state or local government buildings, military bases, nuclear energy sites, weapons sites, airports, or critical infrastructure sites. Mandatory employer verification six years after enactment of this Act for all employees not previously verified under such system would apply.
The Role of Local Law Enforcement:
Local law enforcement is authorized (and would be financially reimbursed) to enforce immigration laws and to transfer illegal aliens to federal custody.
Amendments
Amendment activity included one that would require US border patrol uniforms, now made in Mexico, to be made in the US so to avoid them being illegally gotten and used as a decoy for criminals crossing the border.
The bill was opened to further amendments that would prohibit some immigration funds to states or localities that provide a 'sanctuary' for aliens, reduce the maximum sentence for being illegally in the US to a 6 months sentence and elimination of the US visa lottery. Local governments could not require businesses to set up day labor hiring sites and businesses could face up to $40,000 in fines for repeatedly hiring illegal immigrants. An exception would be made for first time, good faith mistake. An attempt to raise the limit to $50,000 was voted down. Other amendments would deport an illegal alien if arrested for drunk driving and would make the Oath of Renunciation and Allegiance taken by new US citizens be made into Federal law so that it could not be changed other than by Congress.
Sponsor: Representative James F. Sensenbrenner, Jr. (R-WI-5th)
Vote: Passed House 239 to 182 (RC 661) A Motion to Recommit the bill failed 198 to 221 (RC 660) December 16, 2005.
Cost to the taxpayers: “CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 4437 would cost about $1.9 billion over the 2006-2010 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. Such costs would continue and grow significantly after 2010 as additional requirements of the bill would be implemented. Enacting the bill could affect direct spending and revenues, but we estimate that any such effects would not be significant.”
## All Rights Reserved. © 2005 TheWeekInCongress.com No reproduction or distribution without written permission from TheWeekInCongress.com.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
29. Sponsor: Rep. Edward R. Royse (R-CA-40th)
An amendment numbered 20 printed in House Report 109-350 to state that no immigration benefit may be granted until, at a minimum, an FBI fingerprint check has been submitted and the results show that the alien does not have a criminal or immigration history that would render him or her ineligible for the benefit have been to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Passed House by voice vote December 16, 2005.
.
28. Sponsor: Rep. Jim Ryun (R-KS-2nd)
An amendment numbered 19 printed in House Report 109-350 to establish the Oath of Renunciation and Allegiance as Federal law so that it cannot be changed without an act of Congress. Also requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, in cooperation with the Secretary of State, to notify a foreign embassy of which a new citizen was a citizen or subject that the citizen has: (1) renounced allegiance to that foreign country; and (2) sworn allegiance to the United States. Passed House by voice vote December 16, 2005.
27. Sponsor: Rep. John Sullivan (R-OK-1st)
An amendment numbered 18 printed in House Report 109-350 to require all non-citizens who enter or exit the country to be processed through the automated entry-exit control system Congress mandated in 1996. Failed 163 to 251 (RC 659) December 16, 2005.
26. Sponsor: Rep. Jeb Bradley (R-NH-1st)
An amendment numbered 17 printed in House Report 109-350 to require the Department of Homeland Security to provide a report both one and two years after implementation of the Employment Eligibility Verification System to Congress. Reports would contain information relating to problems reported by businesses during implementation as well as progress made up to the report's date. Report would contain information relating to the most efficient use of the system by small businesses. Passed House by voice vote December 16, 2005.
25. Sponsor: Rep. Charles A Gonzalez (D-TX-20th)
An amendment numbered 16 printed in House Report 109-350 to increase the fines on businesses for knowingly hiring unauthorized aliens to $50,000. Proceeds would be shared with state and local government and are restricted for use to help cover the costs associated with providing services to undocumented immigrants. Failed to pass House 87 to 332 December 16, 2005 (RC 658)
24. Sponsor: Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland (R-GA-8th)
An amendment numbered 15 printed in House Report 109-350 to set caps on the monetary penalties set forth in Title VII of the bill for hiring or employing unauthorized aliens of $7,500 for first time offenses, $15,000 for second offenses, and $40,000 for all subsequent offenses; Provides an exemption from penalty for initial good faith violations; and provides a safe harbor for contractors if their subcontractor employees an unauthorized alien (provided the contractor did not know the employee was an unauthorized alien). Passed House 247 to 170 December 16, 2005 (RC 657)
23. Sponsor: Rep. John B. Shadegg (R-AZ-3rd).
An amendment numbered 14 printed in House Report 109-350 to add human trafficking and human smuggling to the list of predicate acts under the federal money laundering statute. Passed House by voice vote December 16, 2005.
22. Sponsor: Rep. John B. Shadegg (R-AZ-3rd)
An amendment numbered 13 printed in House Report 109-350 to increase penalties for document fraud and for crimes of violence and drug trafficking offenses committed by illegal aliens. Passed House by voice vote December 16, 2005.
21. Sponsor: Rep. Sue W. Myrick (R-NC-9th)
An amendment numbered 12 printed in House Report 109-350 to provide for removal of unauthorized aliens upon conviction of drunk driving. Passed House by voice vote December 16, 2005.
20. Sponsor: Jerrold Nadler (D-NY-8th)
An amendment numbered 11 printed in House Report 109-350 to strike section 407, "expedited removal," which grants power to low-level immigration officers to remove individuals without review and without a hearing. Withdrawn December 16, 2005
19. Sponsor: Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO-6th)
An amendment numbered 10 printed in House Report 109-350 to prohibit the Attorney General from allocating funds under the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program to any state or local government which maintains a "sanctuary policy" in violation of federal law (8 USC 1373). Also requires the Attorney General to report annually to Congress on which state and local governments maintain "sanctuary policies". Withdrawn December 16, 2005.
18. Sponsor: Rep Nadia Velazquez (D-NY-12th)
An amendment numbered 8 printed in House Report 109-350 to require the U.S.Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to reduce the immigration application processing backlog to 6 months within a period of 1 year; to authorize the Director of USCIS to implement innovative pilot initiatives to eliminate the backlog and prevent further backlog from recurring and encourages initiatives such as increasing or transferring personnel to areas with the greatest backlog, streamlining regulations and paperwork filing processes, upgrading information technology, and increasing the number of immigration service centers. Passed House by voice vote December 16, 2005.
17. Sponsor: Rep James Sensenbrenner (R-WI-5th)
An amendment numbered 7 printed in House Report 109-350 to reduce the maximum sentence for illegal entry and illegal presence to six months. Roll Call vote delayed December 16, 2005. Failed to pass House 164 to 257 December 16, 2005 (RC 655).
16. Sponsor: Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL-6th)
An amendment numbered 6 printed in House Report 109-350 to prohibit Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Attorney General, and all courts from granting any kind of legal immigration status (i.e. "benefits") to an alien until the relevant databases of criminal records and terrorist watch lists are checked. Passed House 420 to 0, December 16, 2005. (RC 654)
15. Sponsor: Rep. Tom Price )R-GA-6th)
An amendment numbered 5 printed in House Report 109-350 to establish a hard deadline to achieve operational control over the entire international land and maritime borders of the United States. Passed House by voice vote December 16, 2005.
14. Sponsor: Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI-5th)
An amendment numbered 4 printed in House Report 109-350 to prohibit localities from requiring businesses to set up day labor sites as a condition for conducting or expanding a business; require the Attorney General to report on the status of criminal alien prosecutions, including prosecutions of smugglers; authorizes ICE's current Forensic Document Laboratory, sets mandatory minimums for repeated marriage fraud, removes reference to aggravated felonies and substitutes language referring to length of sentence, for sentencing enhancements for aliens who enter illegally after convictions.
Clarifies that the Board of Immigration Appeals' decisions on motions to reopen are discretionary decisions that are not subject to judicial review. Updates the law that criminalizes passport and immigration fraud by increasing penalties to facilitate effective enforcement. Also penalizes fraud againstaliens applying for immigration benefits. Amends the law that provides for detention of criminal defendants to make the defendants' immigration status an express consideration in determining whether the defendant should be released on bond. Extends the statute of limitations for all immigration-violations. Passed House by voice vote December 16, 2005.
13. Sponsor: Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ-5th)
An amendment numbered 3 printed in House Report 109-350 to increase the number of employment-based visas available through a reduction in other non-employment-based immigration categories. Amendment Withdrawn December 16, 2005.
12. Sponsor: Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA-51st)
An amendment numbered 2 printed in House Report 109-350 to make technical changes to the current statue governing the distribution of fraudulent documents. Passed by voice vote December 16, 2005.
11. Sponsor : Rep. Robert Goodlatte (R-VA-6th)
An amendment numbered 1 printed in House Report 109-350 to eliminate the visa lottery program. Passed House 273 to 148 December 16, 2005 (RC 653)
9. Sponsor: Representative Michael N. Castle (R-DE-at large)
7. Sponsor: Representative Campbell (R-CA)
6. Sponsor: Representative Phil Gingrey (R-GA-11th)
4. Sponsor: Representative Rick Renzi (R-AZ-1st)
2. Sponsor: Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX-1st)
1. Sponsor: Representative John R. Carter (R-TX-31st)
The number of resident illegal aliens in the United States is estimated to be about 11 million, 1
[Footnote] and approximately 500,000 illegal aliens enter the country unlawfully each year. 2
[Footnote] The United States has experienced a drastic increase in crime committed by illegal aliens, particularly by illegal aliens that are members of criminal gangs. These criminal alien gangs are becoming increasingly prevalent throughout the country. 3
[Footnote] This disturbing trend is evidenced by the growing number of Federal inmates who are non-citizens, which is rapidly approaching 25 percent of the prison population. 4
[Footnote]
[Footnote 1: See Steven Camarota, Immigrants at Mid-Decade: A Snapshot of America's Foreign-Born Population in 2005, 2005 Center for Immigration Studies 23 (nearly 11 million in March 2005); Jeffrey Passel, Estimates of the Size and Characteristics of the Undocumented Population, 2005 Pew Hispanic Center 1 (10.3 million in March 2004, estimate of nearly 11 million in March 2005).]
[Footnote 2: See Immigrants at Mid-Decade at 4 (the total resident illegal alien population increased by about 2.5 to 2.7 million between March 2000 and March 2005; new illegal alien arrivals comprised 3.6 to 3.8 million persons).]
[Footnote 3: See, e.g., Immigration and the Alien Gang Epidemic: Problems and Solutions: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Immigration, Border Security and Claims of the House Comm. on the Judiciary, 109th Cong. (2005); Heather MacDonald, The Immigrant Gang Plague, the City Journal, Summer 2004; Heather MacDonald, The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave, The City Journal, Winter 2004.]
[Footnote 4: See Paige Harrison and Jennifer Karberg, Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2003, Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin at 5 (May 2004)(23.5 percent of all Federal inmates were noncitizens as of June 30, 2003).]
Despite the enactment of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, 5
[Footnote] which made it unlawful for an employer to knowingly employ illegal aliens and established an employment eligibility verification system for new hires, illegal aliens comprise a significant portion of the employed population. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants employed in various industries include: 17 percent of workers in building cleaning and maintenance occupations; 14 percent of private household workers; 13 percent of accommodation industry workers; 13 percent of food manufacturing industry workers; 12 percent of the workers in construction and extractive occupations (and 10 percent of workers in the construction industry); 11 percent of workers in food preparation and serving occupations (and 10 percent of workers in the food service industry); 8 percent of workers in production occupations (and 6 percent of workers in the manufacturing industry); and 4.3 percent of workers in the overall workforce. 6
[Footnote]
[Footnote 5: Pub. L. No. 99-603.]
[Footnote 6: See Jeffrey Passel, Unauthorized Migrants: Numbers and Characteristics, 2005 Pew Hispanic Center 27, 29 (2004 figures).]
The presence of large numbers of illegal aliens in the United States demonstrates that America's immigration laws are not being effectively enforced. A contributing factor to this lack of enforcement has been deficient resources. Congress responded to this inadequacy by including provisions in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 7
[Footnote] that authorized over a 5-year period an additional 10,000 Border Patrol agents, an increase of 40,000 immigration detention beds, and an additional 4,000 immigration investigators. Another factor that has contributed to the large number of illegal aliens within the United States is a lack of strong enforcement priorities by current and past administrations. 8
[Footnote] In addition, the incoherent organizational structure of immigration enforcement offices within the Department of Homeland Security has played a role in the lack of enforcement. 9
[Footnote] Despite the great strides over the last decade that resulted from the enactment of legislation such as the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, 10
[Footnote] and the REAL ID Act of 2005, 11
[Footnote] significant changes to current immigration law are necessary to restore accountability for those who violate immigration laws, ensure the prevention of future illegal immigration, and to combat the rising prevalence of criminal behavior by illegal aliens. The `Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005' contains measures that address these important concerns.
[Footnote 7: Pub. L. No. 108-458.]
[Footnote 8: Enforcement of `employer sanctions,' while always spotty, declined in the latter years of the Clinton Administration after a 1999 interior enforcement strategy delegated it to the lowest rung of priority. Enforcement has since plummeted still further. The total hours worked by investigators on employer sanctions cases fell from almost 714,000 in 1997 to 135,000 in 2004, a drop of 81 percent. The number of notices of intent to fine employers for violations fell from 1461 in 1992 to 3 in 2004, a drop of 99 percent. The number of arrests of illegal alien employees fell from 17,552 in 1997 to 445 in 2003, a drop of 97 percent. See Lack of Worksite Enforcement and Employer Sanctions: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Immigration, Border Security and Claims of the House Comm. on the Judiciary, 109th Cong. (2005).]
[Footnote 9: In the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Congress created a Bureau of Border Security that was to carry out the five immigration enforcement functions--the Border Patrol, detention and removal, intelligence, investigations, and inspections at ports-of-entry--and not suffer from the INS's mission overload. See sections 441 and 442 of Pub. Law. No. 107-296. When the Department of Homeland Security was created, however, immigration functions were split into border-related functions to be carried out by the Bureau of Customs and Border Protections and interior-related functions to be carried out by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In addition, each of these two agencies was also burdened with carrying out customs law enforcement and other responsibilities. The result has been devastating for immigration enforcement. Most leadership positions, both in Washington and in local offices, were given to legacy Customs Bureau officials, and, not surprisingly, immigration enforcement has been relegated to the lowest rung of priority and has been deprived of requisite resources and organizational unity. Dedicated and experienced immigration enforcement professionals have left in droves. See New `Dual Missions' of the Immigration Enforcement Agencies: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Immigration, Border Security and Claims of the House Comm. on the Judiciary, 109th Cong. (2005).]
[Footnote 10: Division C of title III of Pub. L. No. 104-208.]
[Footnote 11: Division B of Pub. L. No. 109-13.]
For this estimate, CBO assumes that the bill will be enacted near the start of calendar year 2006 and that the amounts necessary to implement the bill will be appropriated for each year. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 4437 would cost about $1.9 billion over the 2006-2010 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary funds. Enacting the bill also could affect direct spending and revenues, but we estimate that any such effects would not be significant.
Spending Subject to Appropriation
We assume that the necessary amounts will be appropriated by the start of each fiscal year after 2006, that supplemental appropriations will be provided early in calendar year 2006 for initial program needs, and that spending will follow the historical spending patterns for these or similar activities.
Employment Eligibility Verification System. H.R. 4437 would direct DHS, within two years of the bill's enactment, to extend and expand a system to verify the eligibility of persons for employment in the United States. CBO estimates that this would cost about $405 million over the 2006-2010 period, including $185 million for DHS, $200 million for SSA, and $20 million for other Federal agencies.
Requirements of H.R. 4437. DHS and SSA currently operate an employment eligibility verification system known as the basic pilot. This system is available to employers nationwide, but its use is voluntary and is restricted to checking the status of new hires. All inquiries to that system are handled through the Internet, and the pilot program expires in late 2008. H.R. 4437 would require DHS to set up a toll-free telephone line or other toll-free electronic media to respond within three working days to inquiries from employers seeking verification of employment eligibility and would require the department to maintain records of all inquiries and responses.
The bill would require all employers to use the new system for newly hired employees upon its establishment. Within three years of the bill's enactment (in 2009), Federal, State, and local governments, as well as certain other private employers, would have to use the system to check the eligibility of all of their employees (i.e., both new hires and the existing workforce). Within six years of enactment (in 2012), all other employers would have to do so for all of their workforces.
Number of Inquiries Expected. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), new hires at nonfarm establishments average about 4.6 million each month, or about 50 million to 55 million at an annual rate. (That does not mean that 50 million people change jobs every year because some people change jobs several times in a year. Nevertheless, each new hire would--after mid-2008--go through the employment verification system proposed in H.R. 4437.) The annual volume of new hires will equal about 55 million to 60 million in 2008 through 2015, CBO assumes. Employees of Federal, State, and local governments and certain other sectors--chiefly, nongovernment employees who work at Government installations, airports, nuclear power facilities, and `critical infrastructure' facilities--would become subject to verification in 2009; CBO estimates that would be about 25 million people. Finally, all other employees would become subject to verification under the bill in 2012, six years after enactment. CBO estimates that about 120 million employees would need to have their eligibility to work in the U.S. verified by 2012, although many of those people would have been newly hired after 2008 and would thus represent repeat cases. Those figures represent lower-bound estimates of the total volume of verifications because the BLS data on which they are based omit agricultural employment.
Costs to DHS. Under the bill, DHS would have primary responsibility for establishing and maintaining the system. Based on information from DHS, CBO estimates that it would cost the department about $100 million over the 2006-2008 period for upgrades to the basic pilot system to handle the huge increase in inquiries that would result from H.R. 4437. This one-time cost would include enhancements of software, hardware, databases, and other technological components of the new employment eligibility system.
In addition, DHS would have to hire personnel to respond to inquiries within three working days (as required by the bill), staff the toll-free telephone line, and maintain records of the inquiries and responses. Based on information from DHS, CBO expects that staff would be hired during 2008 and costs would reach $35 million annually, beginning in fiscal year 2009. Under the bill, the agency's cost to process employment verification inquiries would increase substantially after 2010 when all private employers would be required to check the eligibility of their entire workforce by 2012.
Costs to SSA. The SSA's responsibilities under the bill would include providing DHS with continued, secure access to its database of Social Security numbers and handling phone inquiries, personal visits, and requests for replacement cards from people seeking to clear a `nonverified' response to their current or prospective employer. Based on information from the agency, CBO estimates SSA's costs at $9 million in 2006, about $200 million over the 2006-2010 period, and about $640 million over the 2006-2015 period. Under the bill, the agency's cost to process employment verification inquiries would increase substantially after 2010 when all private employers would be required to check the eligibility of their entire workforce by 2012.
Costs to Other Federal Agencies. Finally, Federal agencies themselves would be among the employers required to verify the legal status of their workforce in 2009, three years after the bill's enactment. There are slightly over 4 million Federal Government employees, including military personnel on active duty. CBO assumes that it would cost agencies an average of $4 per employee to comply with the verification requirement. (The requirement would apply even if agencies had previously performed a security clearance or other exhaustive check.) That cost, incurred by agencies' personnel offices, consists of assembling the data for initial submission and following up the relatively few, but labor-intensive, cases that the automated system would initially fail to match. CBO estimates that Federal agencies would spend approximately $18 million in 2009 to submit their employees' basic data to the DHS system and to reconcile the new cases that would be returned as `nonverifiable.' The Federal Government would also spend an estimated $1 million annually to verify its new hires through the automated system.
Payments to Counties Along Southern U.S. Border. H.R. 4437 would direct DHS to reimburse counties within 25 miles of the southern U.S. border for the costs of detaining, housing, and transporting illegal aliens. The bill would authorize funding of up to $100 million annually for such reimbursements. Based on the costs reported by these counties in recent years for the detention and housing of illegal aliens, CBO estimates that implementing this provision would cost $100 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2010.
Federal Prison System. H.R. 4437 would establish mandatory minimum prison sentences for a wide range of offenses involving illegal entry into the United States. The U.S. Sentencing Commission analyzed the bill's impact on the Federal prison population. Based on this analysis, CBO estimates that the longer sentences required under the bill would increase the prison population by about 7,000 person-years over the 2006-2010 period. According to the Bureau of Prisons, for an increase in the Federal prison population of this magnitude, it would spend about $24,000 a year (at 2005 prices) to house each additional prisoner. CBO estimates that the cost to support those additional prisoners would total $170 million over the 2006-2010 period.
In addition, according to the Bureau of Prisons, construction of a new prison would be required when the annual increase in the prison population exceeds 1,150. Based on the anticipated increase in the cumulative prison population over the 2006-2010 period, we estimate that this annual threshold would be exceeded in 2008 and 2010. Thus, CBO expects two new prisons would need to be built to accommodate the additional prisoners resulting from enactment of H.R. 4437. We estimate that each facility would cost $115 million, construction would begin in 2008, and some spending would occur after 2010.
Additional Port-of-Entry Inspectors and Canine Detection Teams. H.R. 4437 would direct DHS to increase the number of port-of-entry inspectors by 250 in each of fiscal years 2007 through 2010. Currently, there are about 19,000 inspectors, so this would represent an increase of just over 1 percent annually. In addition, for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011, the bill would require DHS to increase the number of canine detection teams by at least 25 percent over the number of such positions for the preceding year. (Currently, there are a total of 647 canine detection teams, each consisting of one officer and one dog.)
Based on information from DHS, CBO estimates that it costs about $100,000 a year to hire an additional inspector and $130,000 a year for each new canine detection team, including salaries, benefits, training, and support costs. Assuming that each annual cohort required by the bill would be hired over the course of a year, we estimate that implementing this provision would cost $400 million over the 2007-2010 period, with spending split evenly between the inspectors and the canine detection teams.
Radiation Portal Monitors at Ports of Entry. H.R. 4437 would direct DHS, within one year of the bill's enactment, to deploy radiation portal monitors at U.S. ports of entry selected by the agency to facilitate the screening of inbound cargo for concealed nuclear and radiological material. Based on information from DHS, we expect that the agency would implement the bill by deploying such monitors at all U.S. ports.
According to DHS, there are 613 radiation portal monitors currently deployed at 110 points of entry in 85 U.S. ports, leaving a total of 270 points of entry that lack these devices. Because the unmonitored ports generally experience lesser volumes of inbound cargo, CBO assumes that remaining points of entry would need, on average, four monitors. The radiation portal monitors that are currently used cost $280,000 each, but a more effective device is now available at a cost of $470,000 per unit.
Assuming that the roughly 1,000 additional monitors required to implement H.R. 4437 would include approximately equal numbers of monitors of each type ($280,000 and $470,000 models), the costs to deploy the monitors at the remaining ports would be about $400 million. However, because $125 million has already been appropriated for fiscal year 2006 for monitors, we estimate that implementing H.R. 4437 would cost about $280 million over the 2006-2007 period.
In addition, we expect that there would be some maintenance and replacement costs for those monitors in subsequent years. CBO estimates that such costs would probably be no more than 10 percent of the initial cost of the new monitors, or about $20 million annually.
Office of Air and Marine Operations. H.R. 4437 would establish an Office of Air and Marine Operations within DHS that would be headed by an Assistant Secretary who would report directly to the Secretary of Homeland Security. We expect that this office would consist of about 1,200 personnel currently in the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection who direct and carry out aviation and marine operations.
As a new agency within DHS, the Office of Air and Marine Operations would need its own human resources, legal, finance, technical support, and other administrative offices. Based on the number of support personnel at other Federal agencies that employ between 1,000 and 2,000 persons, CBO estimates that it would cost about $16 million annually for these functions, beginning in fiscal year 2007. This estimated annual cost represents about 10 percent of current spending for the transferred personnel and assumes that some existing administrative staff would be transferred to the new office. In addition, we estimate that there would be one-time costs of about $4 million to relocate personnel and carry out other activities necessary to establish a new agency within DHS.
Additional Funding for Inspector General. H.R. 4437 would authorize the appropriation of sums necessary to increase funding above the current level for the DHS Office of the Inspector General (IG) by 5 percent for fiscal year 2007, 6 percent for 2008, and 7 percent for 2009. For fiscal year 2006, $83 million was appropriated for the IG. We estimate that implementing this provision for increases in IG funding would cost $4 million in 2007, $5 million in 2008, and $6 million in 2009.
Other Programs. H.R. 4437 would direct DHS to establish a university-based Center of Excellence for Border Security. Based on spending for similar university programs already established by DHS, we estimate that implementing this provision would require funding of about $5 million annually, beginning in fiscal year 2007.
In addition, the bill would require DHS and the Government Accountability Office to prepare various reports relating to improving border security. The bill would also direct SSA to study possible enhancements to Social Security cards, such as making them of durable plastic and adding a machine-readable identification strip and a digital photograph of the holder. (An earlier SSA study, published in 1997, estimated total costs of $5 billion to $10 billion, depending on the features chosen, for replacing the 277 million cards then in circulation.) CBO estimates that the costs to prepare these reports would total about $2 million.
Border Patrol in Virgin Islands. H.R. 4312 would direct DHS, by September 30, 2006, to establish at least one border patrol unit for the U.S. Virgin Islands. However, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2006 (Public Law 109-90) already directs DHS to determine whether or not a border patrol unit in the Virgin Islands is necessary and, if deemed necessary, to establish such a unit by March 1, 2006. CBO cannot predict whether this unit will be established under Public Law 109-90. Based on information from DHS, however, CBO expects that a unit in the Virgin Islands would probably cost no more than $1 million annually.
Direct Spending and Receipts
H.R. 4437 would establish new and increased civil and criminal penalties for various crimes involving illegal immigration. Thus, the Federal Government might collect additional fines if the bill is enacted. Collections of civil fines are recorded in the budget as revenues. Criminal fines are recorded as revenues, then deposited in the Crime Victims Fund and later spent. CBO expects that any additional revenues and direct spending would not be significant.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, perhaps because I am going to make some harsh comments, I want to state at the outset that I have great respect for the Chairman's intelligence and his fairness in conducting this Committee. This is one of the most polarized Committees on the House of Representatives. We have many, many ideological differences, and while I feel--and will explain why I feel--so strongly about what is going on here today, I wanted to put it in the context of those comments.
The majority's decision to bring forth, as our Ranking Member said, on the week before we are about to leave, the Border and Immigration Enforcement Act of 2005, to my way of thinking can only be attributed to one of three things: stupidity, political panic, or venality.
I want to say that a--before--I will elaborate on why I feel that way, but I want to give some views about where I think most Democrats are coming from on this issue.
We believe illegal immigration is wrong. We think we have a national crisis respecting illegal immigration, and we think we should do whatever we can do to effectively stop it.
We think that a fundamental attribute of national sovereignty is substantial control of who comes into this country and how they come in and that the consequences of that lack of control--and we do have to a great extent a lack of control--causes incredibly serious problems: massive disruptions and impacts on public services, health care, education, law enforcement, humanitarian tragedies of tremendous proportions, exploitation of people, unsafe working conditions, disregard of labor laws; and particularly, as we know since 9/11, it becomes a vehicle by which terrorists and gang members and drug pushers can penetrate our country, threaten our security, and threaten our well-being.
Democrats support expending the resources and making the changes necessary to try and fix this problem. Democrats are willing to push and support tough border enforcement. At least a number of Democrats--I am one of them--are willing to support a meaningful verification system to correct the fundamental flaw of the 1986 bill so that employers are required to determine whether or not the people applying for jobs with them are authorized to work in the United States and that that corrects a big part of this problem.
But we also know that just doing those two things alone will do nothing; and that is where I get to the point that putting this proposal before us in the form it is in now--not so much because of the provisions that are in this bill, although a number of them I would suggest changes--but because of what is not in this bill demonstrates a reckless foolishness or some kind of political panic that is motivating the majority to act, notwithstanding the fact that what they are proposing will not solve their problem, or a certain kind of venality in a political context.
The stupidity of this bill is that everyone knows this won't work. The Chairman himself, I have read four separate times in the last week, says without a guest worker program--we need to have a guest worker program, but that won't come in this bill. The President of the United States, George Bush, on a number of occasions has said the only approach to dealing with this issue is on a comprehensive basis.
We have 11 million people in this country here illegally. Without dealing with that fact, we are not going to solve the problem no matter how loud we shout about how tough we are. Senators Cornyn and Kyl and McCain on the Republican side of the aisle in the Senate recognize--they have different ways of approaching it, but recognize the need for a comprehensive approach. There are people on this Committee who I have talked to who know that without dealing with the issue of the 11 million undocumented----
Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. BERMAN. I would ask unanimous consent for 2 additional minutes.
Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection.
Mr. BERMAN. There are people on the other aisle of this Committee that know full well that this bill, one, will never pass the U.S. Senate; and secondly, if it were to become law, would never deal with the problem unless we deal with the problem of the people in this country now on illegal status, unauthorized status, and deal with the issue of future worker and worker needs for American businesses.
So for those reasons this is a foolish approach.
So then I come to the conclusion perhaps, since surely the majority would not do something that cannot work intentionally, they must have a different motivation. And perhaps it is the fear of being Dreierized or Campbellized that certain kinds of demagogues on talk radio and the very understandable anger of the American people about our failure to fix this problem make them want to go for the quick-fix, easy solution that is no solution, and that this is fear at a time of plunging polls and scandals and demonstrations of executive incompetence and politicization of the disaster relief process. This becomes an issue to try and get a hold of in order to position oneself for the next elections.
Or maybe there is venality here. Maybe this is Ross Barnett of the 21st century. We are going to out-set whoever runs against us by demagoguing this issue. And these are harsh comments, but I can only understand what is happening here in the context of these ideas because you know, you know----
Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman's time has once again expired.
Mr. BERMAN. My last sentence is, this isn't about--we can have an interesting and philosophical debate about birthright, citizenship or what kind of enforcement--interior enforcement to have, or specific measures; but the notion it's not what is in this bill, that means this bill is destined not to solve the problem, and for that reason, I don't believe that this Committee should pass this bill out of here.
## All Rights Reserved. © 2005 TheWeekInCongress.com.
No reproduction or distribution without written permission from TheWeekInCongress.com.