Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/4209

Bill Overview

Title: DHS Illicit Cross-Border Tunnel Defense Act

Description: This bill authorizes for FY2023 and FY2024 U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) activities to identify and remediate illicit cross-border tunnels. CBP shall also develop and report to Congress a strategic plan to guide and improve such operations.

Sponsors: Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11]

Target Audience

Population: People living near cross-border areas prone to illicit tunnel activities

Estimated Size: 1500000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Small business owner (Nogales, Arizona)

Age: 37 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think it's crucial to deal with these smuggling tunnels; they bring crime to our city.
  • The increased CBP presence may help deter these activities and make the area safer, which could even help my business.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Teacher (El Paso, Texas)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Border security is important but I hope this doesn't lead to too much disruption in our daily lives.
  • If the increased activities make our area safer, it might be worth a little inconvenience.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Border security consultant (San Diego, California)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This act is likely a step in the right direction for addressing border security challenges.
  • The long-term benefits would be substantial if these tunnels can be effectively stopped.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Retired (McAllen, Texas)

Age: 66 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm concerned about the increased security presence affecting our community feel.
  • However, I understand the necessity if it indeed lowers crime.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Social worker (Yuma, Arizona)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While securing borders is important, I hope there's consideration for humanitarian perspectives.
  • I worry about how increased enforcement could affect immigrant communities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Community organizer (Brownsville, Texas)

Age: 32 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might increase safety, but I hope it doesn't escalate tensions.
  • Balancing security with community well-being is crucial.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Farmer (Las Cruces, New Mexico)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I welcome any actions that will secure the border and protect my property.
  • Hopefully, this will lead to less intrusion and theft on my land.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 8 4
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 7 4

Border patrol officer (Laredo, Texas)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This initiative should help us better fulfill our duties and address security gaps.
  • It may improve job satisfaction if it leads to tangible results in our work.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 9 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

College student (Chula Vista, California)

Age: 23 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Interesting initiative that could provide good case studies for my research.
  • Curious to see if these measures will be effectively implemented and evaluated.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Healthcare worker (Douglas, Arizona)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Reducing trafficking through tunnel detection could lead to meaningful improvements in public health and safety.
  • I hope the increased CBP activity respects and collaborates with local communities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $80000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $100000000)

Year 2: $80000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $100000000)

Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations