Bill Overview
Title: Maritime Border Security Technology Improvement Act
Description: This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to periodically report to Congress a needs analysis for operational and border security technology along the maritime borders of the United States.
Sponsors: Resident Commissioner González-Colón, Jenniffer [R-PR-At Large]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals living near or working in US maritime borders
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill impacts agencies involved in border security, particularly those focused on maritime areas.
- Residents living near maritime borders might be affected by changes in security operations.
- Businesses involved in maritime trade or shipping may see changes or delays due to updated security measures.
- The general public who rely on secure borders for national security are indirectly affected by improvements or changes in technology and processes.
Reasoning
- Spreading the impact across people who live near maritime borders helps us see the varied responses.
- Individuals in maritime commerce might see improved conditions or increased scrutiny which affects their workflows.
- Those in mainland areas might experience indirect benefits through perceived national security improvements but with little tangible impact.
- The policy has budget constraints that suggest the impact will be larger in key maritime areas, such as major ports and coastal locales.
Simulated Interviews
Port Manager (Miami, Florida)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could streamline operations by upgrading tech, but only if resources are well allocated.
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 | 8 | 6 |
Marine Biologist (San Diego, California)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about the environmental impact of increased tech in these sensitive areas.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Customs Officer (Galveston, Texas)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any improvement in tech can make our jobs more efficient and safer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Retired (New Orleans, Louisiana)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- National security is important but I hope it doesn't become invasive to our everyday lives.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Logistics Coordinator (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This might complicate shipping logistics, especially if new regulations are not clear.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As long as it doesn't delay my shipments, the policy should be fine.
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 | 7 | 6 |
Fisherman (Mobile, Alabama)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might restrict our fishing areas, impacting my livelihood.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Coastal Engineer (Houston, Texas)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Efficient use of technology should help balance security and environmental concerns.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Tour Guide (Honolulu, Hawaii)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- New policies need to ensure tourism isn't harmed by potential delays or restrictions.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Coast Guard Member (Jacksonville, Florida)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will ensure we stay ahead with the necessary tech to secure our borders effectively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $15500000 (Low: $10500000, High: $20500000)
Year 3: $16000000 (Low: $11000000, High: $21000000)
Year 5: $17000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $22000000)
Year 10: $19000000 (Low: $14000000, High: $24000000)
Year 100: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Key Considerations
- Effectiveness of the technology upgrades in improving maritime security.
- Costs associated with maintaining and updating security technology over time.
- Potential impact on maritime trade and shipping industries.
- Impact on job creation within the security technology and analysis sectors.