Bill Overview
Title: Border Czar Accountability Act of 2022
Description: This bill prohibits any Cabinet member appointed by the President to lead efforts related to immigration or securing the U.S.-Mexico border from expending any federal funds if that Cabinet member fails to meet certain reporting requirements. The bill also requires that Cabinet member to visit the U.S.-Mexico border at least once every 60 days. Within 30 days of this bill's enactment, the Cabinet member must report to Congress and the President on policy changes that went into effect between January 20, 2021, and this bill's enactment date, including the (1) effect of such policy changes on law enforcement and Department of Homeland Security personnel, and (2) difference in funds expended in FY2021 compared to FY2020 to address the issue of non-U.S. nationals ( aliens in federal law) unlawfully present in the United States. If the report is not submitted, the Cabinet member may not obligate or expend any federal funds until the report has been delivered. After each visit to the U.S.-Mexico border required by this bill, the Cabinet member must report to the President and Congress on (1) issues observed or informed of during the visit, and (2) suggestions for improving the security and situation at the border.
Sponsors: Rep. Jackson, Ronny [R-TX-13]
Target Audience
Population: People living in the United States and those attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border
Estimated Size: 100000000
- The bill focuses on Cabinet members appointed to oversee immigration or border security, specifically impacting their funding if reporting requirements aren't met.
- Reports cover policy changes affecting law enforcement and Homeland Security personnel. These groups will be directly impacted as their operational capabilities might change based on the reports.
- Fiscal changes between FY2020 and FY2021 focusing on non-U.S. nationals will affect U.S. budget allocation, impacting how immigration policies are executed.
- Non-U.S. nationals present unlawfully in the U.S. may face indirect impacts due to resulting changes in immigration enforcement policies.
- The public, especially those in border regions, may experience changes in safety or immigration enforcement policies based on accountability measures placed on Cabinet members.
Reasoning
- The policy predominantly affects Cabinet members responsible for immigration. Its impact on the general population will mostly be indirect, resulting from changes in immigration enforcement and funding allocations.
- Law enforcement and Homeland Security personnel are crucially affected as their operations might be constrained or adjusted based on required reports.
- Residents near the U.S.-Mexico border might feel more directly impacted through changes in safety and immigration enforcement visible in their communities.
- While the policy targets procedural accountability, its effects may translate to broader immigration policy execution, influencing approximately 11 million unauthorized immigrants.
- The fiscal implications are essential, as funding changes can affect various immigration-related operations differently based on compliance with the bill's requirements.
Simulated Interviews
Local Business Owner (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about the safety in our community. If this policy can make border management more accountable, it might help.
- My business relies on both local and cross-border commerce. I hope this policy won't disrupt that.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Border Patrol Agent (Dallas, Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Accountability is crucial, but constant reports can bog down operations.
- We're stretched thin as it is—these visits need to translate into clear strategies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired School Teacher (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe in responsible governance, but we must be careful not to harm immigrants unnecessarily.
- Policy changes need to balance security with compassion.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
IT Specialist (El Paso, Texas)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's important we manage border security effectively, but frequent report mandates could be distracting.
- I commute frequently—changes in border policy can affect my family visits.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Non-Profit Worker (San Diego, California)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Greater accountability might improve trust, but our community fears increased enforcement.
- There's a real concern about how this may change family dynamics if borders become stricter.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy can address gaps in immigration governance, potentially leading to improved security measures.
- It might ensure that strategic reforms are data-driven.
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 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (New York, New York)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Ensuring efficient operations at the border is vital for commerce, which this policy might affect positively.
- I worry about potential delays in trade if policy changes aren't managed well.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Legal Aid for Immigrants (Tucson, Arizona)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased oversight could prevent some policy excesses, but the threat of withheld funds worries me.
- I'm hopeful for more transparency but cautious about potential negative impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Logistics Manager (Houston, Texas)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's vital for our operations that policies do not introduce more red tape or delays.
- This focus on accountability may advocate for more efficient procedures.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Emergency Room Nurse (San Antonio, Texas)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy needs to consider humanitarian needs alongside the push for accountability.
- We see the consequences of harsh policies firsthand; this makes me anxious.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $5000000)
Year 2: $1800000 (Low: $900000, High: $4500000)
Year 3: $1700000 (Low: $850000, High: $4200000)
Year 5: $1600000 (Low: $800000, High: $4000000)
Year 10: $1500000 (Low: $750000, High: $3750000)
Year 100: $1500000 (Low: $750000, High: $3750000)
Key Considerations
- This legislation emphasizes accountability and oversight over border security and immigration policies, which could lead to more efficient resource allocation.
- The costs and savings associated with the bill depend significantly on the practical effectiveness of the accountability measures in improving policy outcomes.
- Potential disruptions or efficiency gains are closely tied to the enactment quality of reporting and accountability conditions.