Bill Overview
Title: Make Border Security a Priority Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to, for FY2022 and FY2023, expend on enhancing security along the U.S.-Mexico border an amount that is equal to the amount appropriated to the Department of Defense for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative for that fiscal year. The bill also authorizes the President to liquidate property seized from sanctioned Russian individuals and entities. The resulting funds shall be available without further appropriation to DHS for physical infrastructure and equipment to enhance security along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Sponsors: Sen. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA]
Target Audience
Population: People living in or near the U.S.-Mexico border and those involved in border security and migration
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill's focus is on enhancing security along the U.S.-Mexico border, which directly involves U.S. border security personnel and federal employees involved in homeland security.
- Residents living along the U.S.-Mexico border, especially in border states like Texas, California, Arizona, and New Mexico, are likely to be impacted by increased border security measures.
- Migrants and asylum seekers attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border will be directly impacted by changes in border security.
- Sanctioned Russian individuals and entities will be indirectly impacted due to the authorization to liquidate seized property to fund border security.
- The flow and security of goods crossing the U.S.-Mexico border could see changes, affecting businesses and workers involved in cross-border trade.
Reasoning
- One significant group affected are residents along the U.S.-Mexico border, who may experience enhanced security measures, potentially leading to increased safety but also potential disruptions to daily life and infrastructure.
- Federal employees and those directly involved in border security might have improved resources, leading to increased job satisfaction and effectiveness, but also possibly increased workload.
- Migrants and asylum seekers will be directly affected by security enhancements, potentially facing increased difficulty in crossing the border, affecting their wellbeing.
- Businesses involved in cross-border trade might experience changes in compliance costs or delays, which could affect their economic wellbeing.
- Given these factors, the policy’s impact varies widely based on geographic location and how directly individuals are involved in border security or cross-border activities.
Simulated Interviews
Local Business Owner (El Paso, Texas)
Age: 44 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I understand the need for security, but I worry about potential disruptions to cross-border trade impacting my business.
- I hope the increased security measures will make my community safer.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
DHS Border Agent (San Diego, California)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Additional funding will greatly support our mission and enhance our capability at the border.
- I believe these resources are necessary to effectively manage border security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Community Health Worker (Tucson, Arizona)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Enhanced border enforcement makes my community feel less welcoming.
- These measures might increase the stress and hardship faced by migrant families I work with.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 5 |
Logistics Manager for a Trade Company (Brownsville, Texas)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Cross-border trade is essential for my company.
- I'm concerned about potential delays and increased costs due to heightened security.
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 |
Retired (Nogales, Arizona)
Age: 68 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen the border change many times over the years.
- Increased security can make things safer but also disrupt the community spirit we cherish.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Undocumented Immigrant (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Tighter security means more difficulty for families like mine to stay together or finding safety.
- This could make it more dangerous to cross or stay in the country.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 4 |
High School Teacher (Laredo, Texas)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased border security has been a contentious topic in my classes.
- I worry about the message it sends to my students and community.
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 |
IT Specialist (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Living further from the border, I see this mainly as a political issue.
- My everyday life isn’t likely to change much with this policy.
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 |
Border Security Consultant (Yuma, Arizona)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Additional funding could be well spent if managed properly.
- I believe enhancing security is essential but needs careful implementation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Freight Driver (Dallas, Texas)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My job depends on crossing the border with ease.
- I fear that increased security might delay my shipments.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $6500000000 (Low: $6500000000, High: $6500000000)
Year 2: $6500000000 (Low: $6500000000, High: $6500000000)
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
- The actual financial impact heavily depends on the valuation of seized Russian assets and their subsequent liquidation.
- Should cross-border trade be affected by enhanced security measures, negative economic repercussions might exist, but these are hard to quantify.
- The long-term sustainability of such expenditures without additional revenue streams could pose fiscal challenges.