Bill Overview
Title: A bill to require the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection to establish procedures for conducting maintenance projects at ports of entry at which the Office of Field Operations conducts certain enforcement and facilitation activities.
Description: This bill directs U.S. Customs Border and Protection (CBP) to establish procedures for performing repairs and maintenance projects below a certain cost threshold at federally owned ports of entry where certain activities are conducted, such as entry inspections and activities to prevent the entry of illicit drugs, agricultural pests, and contraband. CBP may perform such repair and maintenance projects in accordance with the procedures established under this bill.
Sponsors: Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK]
Target Audience
Population: People interacting with United States ports of entry
Estimated Size: 150000000
- The bill is focused on U.S. Customs and Border Protection operations, specifically at federally owned ports of entry.
- Ports of entry are crucial locations where people and goods enter the United States, impacting trade, travel, and security.
- The bill aims to streamline maintenance procedures, which could improve efficiency and safety at these ports.
- Individuals who work at these ports, including CBP officers, will be directly affected by changes in maintenance procedures.
- Travelers and businesses that use these ports of entry for legitimate crossing will likely benefit from improved facilities.
- The bill addresses facilities that inspect goods and individuals, implicating both U.S. and international citizens in activities at the border.
Reasoning
- The policy will primarily impact individuals working at or passing through federally owned ports of entry, including travelers, CBP officers, and employees of nearby businesses.
- Streamlined maintenance processes can lead to improved working conditions for CBP staff and better experiences for travelers due to reduced wait times and increased efficiency.
- The direct impact on general U.S. citizens outside of border regions is minimal; thus, the commonness of highly impacted individuals is relatively low compared to the entire U.S. population.
- The policy's budget constraints suggest that modest improvements can be expected initially, with more significant developments over a longer period if the policy remains effective.
- Business operators who rely on cross-border trade might see indirect benefits if smoother maintenance results in faster processing times at ports.
Simulated Interviews
CBP Officer (San Diego, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will help improve our working conditions by ensuring necessary repairs are conducted promptly.
- With better-maintained facilities, our efficiency in inspections could increase, reducing the workload stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Truck Driver (El Paso, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If maintenance is handled better, it might reduce the time I spend waiting at the border.
- Although I am optimistic, I know it depends on how the policy is executed over time.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Tucson, AZ)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Easier maintenance might streamline border processes, potentially benefiting my courier business.
- The long-term outcomes really depend on sustained funding and implementation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Customs Broker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 36 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Maintenance improvements could ease the process of clearing goods through customs, enhancing my workflow.
- I hope that the changes are noticeable; minor upgrades can affect my business noticeably over time.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired (New York, NY)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I mainly hope this policy will reduce the time I spend in customs when returning from international trips.
- With reduced wait times, my stress levels when traveling could decrease significantly.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Lawyer (Laredo, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think maintenance might improve the efficiency and safety at the borders, aiding my clients' experiences.
- However, significant changes need to be ensured through consistent policy efforts.
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 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Software Engineer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this policy will directly impact my day-to-day life, as I rarely cross any ports personally.
- However, improvements might indirectly benefit logistics for international tech shipments.
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 |
Import/Export Business Owner (Houston, TX)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Streamlined operations at ports due to better maintenance could really help my business productivity.
- Hope to see reduced delays in processing shipments moving forward.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Agricultural Inspector (Nogales, AZ)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Upgraded facilities might enhance our inspection processes, critical for regulatory compliance.
- Easier maintenance could also improve the working conditions for field personnel like myself.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Freelance Journalist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Even if not directly affecting me, improved facilities might lead to better stories and less chaos during crossings.
- Important for my work to have better clarity on border developments.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Key Considerations
- The effectiveness of the new procedures and their ability to be implemented smoothly and consistently across the different ports of entry.
- Potential unintended consequences if the procedures are not flexible enough to accommodate unique challenges at various ports.
- The degree to which improved maintenance processes translate to savings and better operational outcomes.