Bill Overview
Title: Solving the Border Crisis Act
Description: This bill addresses immigration and border security issues. For example, the bill (1) requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to resume all activities related to the construction of a border wall system along the U.S.-Mexico border that were planned or underway prior to January 20, 2021; (2) imposes limits on ending the policy commonly known as Title 42, a policy that authorizes DHS to suspend the entry of certain non-U.S. nationals or imports on public health grounds; and (3) requires DHS to ensure certain staffing levels for various agencies involved with immigration enforcement.
Sponsors: Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals potentially affected by U.S. immigration and border security policies
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill primarily affects individuals who are attempting to migrate to the United States through the U.S.-Mexico border, including those seeking asylum or entry for other purposes.
- The construction of a border wall might deter or redirect numerous individuals attempting to cross the border, impacting their journey or decision to cross.
- Restrictions on ending Title 42 could affect a significant number of immigrants who could be denied entry on public health grounds.
- Increased staffing for immigration enforcement may lead to more rigorous and frequent enforcement actions, impacting immigrants, particularly those in undocumented situations or pending in the legal process.
Reasoning
- The primary effect of this policy will be on individuals attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border, as a border wall and continued enforcement of Title 42 could deter or prevent entry for many.
- Those living near the border might experience an impact due to increased construction activity and a potentially heightened security presence, which could alter their day-to-day lives.
- Department of Homeland Security employees and other related government workers might face workload changes, increased job security, or stress due to the increased focus on border security.
- Indirect effects might be seen nationwide as changes in immigration patterns could alter economic and social dynamics.
- I included a few people whose wellbeing would change minimally since not everyone is directly affected by border security issues, rough examples are a tech worker in New York or a retiree in Ohio.
- Given budget constraints, the policy's immediate effects on wellbeing are primarily localized to border areas or immigration-affected communities.
Simulated Interviews
Border Patrol Agent (El Paso, Texas)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could lead to more resources and job security for my role.
- It feels like a return to stronger enforcement days, which has its ups and downs depending on management of resources and community relations.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Immigration Lawyer (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The continuation of Title 42 and other restrictions will make it more challenging to assist my clients.
- I expect my workload to increase as clients need more legal support to overcome new barriers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Software Developer (New York, New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see this policy affecting my day-to-day life.
- I am more concerned about broader social and economic policies.
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 |
Retired Teacher (Tucson, Arizona)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The wall construction might cause some noise and disruption due to increased construction traffic.
- I feel safer with more security but also worried about how my community is changing.
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 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Construction Worker (San Diego, California)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The border wall means more job opportunities in the construction sector for someone like me.
- It's a steady source of income, although socially it might be contentious.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
NGO Worker (McAllen, Texas)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our work will become more difficult as policy barriers increase.
- The resource strain is going to be significant, and many refugees may not find the support they need.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Retired Engineer (Columbus, Ohio)
Age: 67 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm interested in border policies due to national security concerns, but it doesn't affect me personally day-to-day.
- I think it's important to manage migration effectively, but I'm unsure about wall construction costs.
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 |
Restaurant Owner (Brownsville, Texas)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on both local and tourist business; the policy might reduce cross-border traffic impacting my revenue.
- Security appears to be tight, but it's having mixed effects on my business environment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
University Student (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy affects my field so I find it relevant though not directly impactful at this stage of my life.
- It's a learning opportunity in understanding real-world legal applications.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Freight Truck Driver (New Orleans, Louisiana)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Tighter border controls can lead to delays in transporting goods, affecting my income.
- From a logistics standpoint, any disruption in border crossing timelines can be costly.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $4000000000 (Low: $3000000000, High: $5000000000)
Year 2: $4200000000 (Low: $3200000000, High: $5200000000)
Year 3: $4400000000 (Low: $3400000000, High: $5400000000)
Year 5: $4800000000 (Low: $3800000000, High: $5800000000)
Year 10: $5600000000 (Low: $4600000000, High: $6600000000)
Year 100: $7000000000 (Low: $6000000000, High: $8000000000)
Key Considerations
- Estimates for the border wall construction based on past projects show variability due to unforeseen costs and delays.
- The policy could face legal challenges that might delay implementation, impacting expenditures and savings.
- The actual impact on illegal immigration and enforcement effectiveness is uncertain, depending on several external factors.
- Public health considerations regarding Title 42 could change with evolving health data, affecting the strategy's viability.