Bill Overview
Title: Non-Intrusive Inspection Expansion Act
Description: This bill requires the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to increase its use of nonintrusive inspection systems for passenger and commercial vehicles at land ports of entry.
Sponsors: Sen. Peters, Gary C. [D-MI]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals crossing land ports of entry
Estimated Size: 25000000
- The bill impacts individuals crossing the U.S. border at land ports of entry.
- The legislation affects both commercial vehicle drivers and passengers traveling by car.
- The non-intrusive inspection technology is used worldwide at various international borders, which expands the global relevance of the law.
Reasoning
- The primary population affected will be individuals crossing U.S. land borders, both casual travelers and commercial drivers.
- There will be varying degrees of impact depending on frequency and necessity of travel across borders.
- Individuals living near borders or those who have businesses involving frequent border crossings will be more affected.
- Commercial vehicle drivers may have different experiences compared to passenger travelers due to nature of inspections.
- Budget constraints limit the rollout of technology, potentially prioritizing high-traffic ports or those with high-security concerns first.
- Wellbeing impact can vary based on perceived personal inconvenience, wait times, and business impacts for commercial drivers.
Simulated Interviews
Commercial Truck Driver (El Paso, Texas)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am hoping the inspections won't cause too many delays; it's already a hassle crossing the border.
- If these systems make things smoother and faster, I'm all for it, but I'm skeptical given past experiences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Daily Commuter (Detroit, Michigan)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If the technology decreases wait times it could significantly improve my commute.
- I'm always concerned about any additional scrutiny or questions during border crossings.
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 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Small Business Owner (Buffalo, New York)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased inspection typically means more time wasted for my drivers.
- If they can really streamline the process, it might actually help my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Student (San Diego, California)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Traveling is already stressful, and I don't want this to add more time to my trips home.
- But if it speeds up crossing, that's great.
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 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired (Bellingham, Washington)
Age: 67 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope it speeds things up. I often have long waits which is inconvenient.
- Security doesn't concern me as much as timeliness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Crossfit Coach (Laredo, Texas)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Waiting is a pain but if it makes crossing faster, I'm all for it.
- Hope it’s not more of the same with no real improvement.
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 | 8 | 6 |
Homemaker (Nogales, Arizona)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried this will disrupt my routine shopping trips.
- If they improve the experience, it could be worth any short-term hassle.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Tech Consultant (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I travel occasionally, so immediate impact on me is minimal.
- But if it makes travel easier, that would be a positive overall.
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 |
Teacher (San Antonio, Texas)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Security is always a concern, but I don't want longer wait times.
- If it helps with safety and efficiency, that's welcome.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired Military (Tucson, Arizona)
Age: 61 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These inspections could unnecessarily delay important work.
- But if implemented smoothly, it could offer reassurance on safety.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $125000000, High: $175000000)
Year 2: $120000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $140000000)
Year 3: $90000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $110000000)
Year 5: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Key Considerations
- The integration of non-intrusive technologies must align with current security protocols and privacy concerns.
- Border staff will require training to operate and manage new inspection systems efficiently.
- Faster inspections might support compliance with international trade agreements, especially if border delays are a current bottleneck.