[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 157 (Sunday, November 9, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2275-E2276]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    SECTION 110 OF 1996 IMMIGRATION REFORM NEEDS THOUGHTFUL GO-SLOW 
                       APPROACH TO PREVENT CHAOS

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. JOHN J. LaFALCE

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                       Saturday, November 8, 1997

  Mr. LaFALCE. Mr. Speaker, on September 16, 1997, I introduced 
legislation to amend section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and 
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 by exempting Canadian nationals 
who are not otherwise required by law to possess a visa, passport, or 
border-crossing identification card. This bill, H.R. 2481, now has 41 
cosponsors who recognize the urgency of correcting the flaws in section 
110.
  Section 110 of the 1996 Reform Act mandates that an automated entry-
exit system be established that would allow INS officers to match the 
entrance date with exit dates of legally admitted aliens. Congress 
included this section at the last minute during the House-Senate 
conference of the bill with the intent of solving the problem of 
overstaying visa holders--aliens who enter the United States legally 
but overstay their allotted time. Because the U.S. does not have a 
departure management system to track who leaves the United States, a 
new entry-exit system was thought to be the vehicle to solve the 
problem.
  In the rush to complete the bill before the end of the fiscal year on 
September 30, conferees did not have time to give this provision the 
scrutiny it deserves. As a result, Congress missed the realities of our 
northern border with Canada. Historically, Canadian citizens have not 
been required to show documentation, other than proof of citizenship, 
when entering the United States. The same courtesy is granted to United 
States citizens entering Canada.
  Any attempt to install a documentation system at the northern border 
will bring intolerable chaos and congestion to a system already 
strained. Last year, more than 116 million people entered the United 
States by land from Canada. Of these, more than 76 million were 
Canadian nationals or United States permanent residents. More than $1 
billion in goods and services trade crossed our border daily adding to 
the enormous traffic flow. To implement section 110 as it now stands 
would not only impede the flow of people and goods, it would counter 
the purpose of the United States-Canada Accord on Our Shared Border to 
ease and facilitate the increased crossings of people and goods between 
the United States and Canada.
  As I have said before, I have a particular interest in the problem of 
delays and congestion at our northern-border crossings. My district, 
which includes Buffalo and Niagara Falls, has more crossings than any 
other district along the border. In a relatively small area, we boast 
four highway bridges and two railroad bridges. I know from personal 
experience the problems that delays and congestion can cause at these 
crossings.
  Moreover, it is important to recognize the sense of borderless 
community that those living on the United States and Canadian sides of 
the border experience on a daily basis. Friends, family, and business 
associates travel easily, indeed seamlessly, across the invisible 
border to shop, enjoy theater and restaurants, athletic events, and 
other recreational opportunities. Hampering this camaraderie of 
community because of the need to resolve border problems that are not 
an issue at the northern border would be folly.
  When I introduced H.R. 2481, my intent was not only to correct a 
flaw, but to initiate debate on the issue, to get the ball rolling, if 
you will, toward resolving a critical problem. This objective has been 
achieved. The response and enthusiastic support for this effort tells 
me unmistakably that this is a serious problem that must be fixed.
  Today, I am introducing a bill that addresses the issue more broadly. 
The Border Improvement and Immigration Act of 1977 not only seeks to 
correct the problem at the northern border created by section 110, but 
it also takes a comprehensive but go-slow approach to analyzing the 
problem and determining the best solutions.
  First, the bill would allow an entry-exit system to be implemented 
only at airports. It specifically exempts from section 110: any alien 
entering at land borders; any alien lawfully admitted as a U.S. 
permanent resident, or greencard holder; any alien for whom 
documentation requirements have been waived under the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, primarily Canadians.
  Second, the bill requires the Attorney General to submit a report to 
Congress in 2 years on the feasibility of developing and implementing 
an automated entry-exit control system as prescribed in section 110, 
including arrivals and departures at land borders. The study must 
assess the cost and feasibility of various means of operating such an 
entry-exit system, including various means for developing a system and 
the use of pilot projects if appropriate. The report also would include 
how departure data would be collected if the system were limited to 
airports and a person arriving at an airport departed via land border.
  Of particular note is the inclusion of possible bilateral agreements 
with Canada and Mexico to share entry and exist systems as a means to 
achieve the objectives of section 110. The proposal, which I have 
raised with the Canadian Ambassador and the Commissioner of the INS, 
would allow the United States to use, for example, Canada's entry data 
as our exit data; while Canada would similarly use United States entry 
data as its exit data. I believe this is an important cooperative 
effort that could be studied and possibly pursued under the umbrella of 
the United States-Canada Shared Border Accord.
  Third, the bill will increase the number of INS border inspectors in 
each of 3 fiscal

[[Page E2276]]

years, 1998-2000, by not less than 300 full-time persons each year. Not 
less than one-half of these new INS inspectors shall be assigned to the 
northern border. Similarly, Customs inspectors shall also be increased 
at the land borders by not less than 150 full-time persons in each of 3 
fiscal years, 1998-2000, and not less than one-half of the Customs 
inspectors in each year shall be assigned to the northern border.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe my new bill more comprehensively addresses the 
problematic issues that currently are found in section 110. It is 
critical that section 110 as it currently stands be amended in order to 
avoid unnecessary chaos at both the northern and southern land borders. 
An automated entry-exist system is not one to be implemented without 
careful consideration of the many issues involved. The Border 
Improvement and Immigration Act of 1997 provides the basis for making a 
decision on whether to go forward with such a system.

                          ____________________