Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7707

Bill Overview

Title: The Spc. Bishop E. Evans Border Security Act

Description: This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to prohibit, with certain exceptions, individuals from entering the United States through a coastal or land port of entry or a Border Patrol station near a U.S. land border. This prohibition shall not apply to a (1) U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, (2) member of the U.S. Armed Forces or the spouse and children of a member, or (3) person from a foreign country with valid travel documents arriving at a designated port of entry. This prohibition shall be in place until February 1, 2025.

Sponsors: Rep. Kelly, Mike [R-PA-16]

Target Audience

Population: Migrants and refugees attempting to enter the U.S. through non-designated ports of entry

Estimated Size: 1000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Truck driver (El Paso, TX)

Age: 25 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I am worried about potential delays in cross-border logistics due to tighter security.
  • The policy might affect my routes and workloads, impacting how often I am home with family.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Nonprofit manager (Houston, TX)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy will increase the uncertainty for those we help, making our work harder.
  • We may see more families desperate for assistance as crossing becomes tougher.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Border Patrol Agent (Tucson, AZ)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Enhanced security ensures that we have more control over irregular crossings.
  • My workload might increase, contributing to stress though the policy aligns with my professional goals.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Elementary school teacher (San Diego, CA)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.5 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm deeply concerned about how stricter policies might impact my students' families and their mental health.
  • Students already facing trauma may see worsening conditions, affecting their education.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Shop owner (McAllen, TX)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This will likely reduce the number of families visiting my store, affecting my business.
  • I hope this is only temporary, as our economy relies on these communities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Immigration lawyer (Chicago, IL)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 1.5 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy complicates my clients' cases and increases legal challenges.
  • While it adds stress, the work feels even more critical, which is rewarding.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

High school student (Brownsville, TX)

Age: 18 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm scared my parents might not be able to move freely or visit relatives across the border.
  • The policy makes our situation feel more insecure and uncertain.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired (Detriot, MI)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe stronger border controls are necessary for national security, though this does not affect me personally.
  • I hope this policy is implemented smoothly without humanitarian issues.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Software engineer (New York, NY)

Age: 36 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't foresee this impacting my work or life directly.
  • I think policies should ensure border security but not harm communities or crucial workforces.

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 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Freelance journalist (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 30 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy may increase risk and hardship for the migrants I report on.
  • It complicates the narrative on human rights issues and puts more lives in jeopardy.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 2: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

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