[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 65 (Tuesday, May 23, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H3568-H3576]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE DATA MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT ACT
OF 2000
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass
the bill (H.R. 4489) to amend section 110 of the Illegal Immigration
Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, and for other
purposes.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 4489
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Immigration and
Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of
2000''.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 110 OF IIRIRA.
(a) In General.--Section 110 of the Illegal Immigration
Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C.
1221 note) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 110. INTEGRATED ENTRY AND EXIT DATA SYSTEM.
``(a) Requirement.--The Attorney General shall implement an
integrated entry and exit data system.
``(b) Integrated entry and exit data system defined.--For
purposes of this section, the term `integrated entry and exit
data system' means an electronic system that--
``(1) provides access to, and integrates, alien arrival and
departure data that are--
``(A) authorized or required to be created or collected
under law;
``(B) in an electronic format; and
``(C) in a data base of the Department of Justice or the
Department of State, including those created or used at ports
of entry and at consular offices;
``(2) uses available data described in paragraph (1) to
produce a report of arriving and departing aliens by country
of nationality, classification as an immigrant or
nonimmigrant, and date of arrival in, and departure from, the
United States;
``(3) matches an alien's available arrival data with the
alien's available departure data;
``(4) assists the Attorney General (and the Secretary of
State, to the extent necessary to carry out such Secretary's
obligations under immigration law) to identify, through on-
line searching procedures, lawfully admitted nonimmigrants
who may have remained in the United States beyond the period
authorized by the Attorney General; and
``(5) otherwise uses available alien arrival and departure
data described in paragraph (1) to permit the Attorney
General to make the reports required under subsection (e).
``(c) Construction.--
``(1) No additional authority to impose documentary or data
collection requirements.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to permit the Attorney General or the Secretary of
State to impose any new documentary or data collection
requirements on any person in order to satisfy the
requirements of this section, including--
``(A) requirements on any alien for whom the documentary
requirements in section 212(a)(7)(B) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(B)) have been waived by
the Attorney General and the Secretary of State under section
212(d)(4)(B) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B)); or
``(B) requirements that are inconsistent with the North
American Free Trade Agreement.
``(2) No reduction of authority.--Nothing in this section
shall be construed to reduce or curtail any authority of the
Attorney General or the Secretary of State under any other
provision of law.
``(d) Deadlines.--
``(1) Airports and seaports.--Not later than December 31,
2003, the Attorney General shall implement the integrated
entry and exit data system using available alien arrival and
departure data described in subsection (b)(1) pertaining to
aliens arriving in, or departing from, the United States at
an airport or seaport. Such implementation shall include
ensuring that such data, when collected or created by an
immigration officer at an airport or seaport, are entered
into the system and can be accessed by immigration officers
at other airports and seaports.
``(2) High-traffic land border ports of entry.--Not later
than December 31, 2004, the Attorney General shall implement
the integrated entry and exit data system using the data
described in paragraph (1) and available alien arrival and
departure data described in subsection (b)(1) pertaining to
aliens arriving in, or departing from, the United States at
the 50 land border ports of entry determined by the Attorney
General to serve the highest numbers of arriving and
departing aliens. Such implementation shall include ensuring
that such data, when collected or created by an immigration
officer at such a port of entry, are entered into the system
and can be accessed by immigration officers at airports,
seaports, and other such land border ports of entry.
``(3) Remaining data.--Not later than December 31, 2005,
the Attorney General shall fully implement the integrated
entry and exit data system using all data described in
subsection (b)(1). Such implementation shall include ensuring
that all such data are available to immigration officers at
all ports of entry into the United States.
``(e) Reports.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than December 31 of each year
following the commencement of implementation of the
integrated entry and exit data system, the Attorney General
shall use the system to prepare an annual report to the
Committees on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives
and of the Senate.
``(2) Information.--Each report shall include the following
information with respect to the preceding fiscal year, and an
analysis of that information:
``(A) The number of aliens for whom departure data was
collected during the reporting period, with an accounting by
country of nationality of the departing alien.
``(B) The number of departing aliens whose departure data
was successfully matched to the alien's arrival data, with an
accounting by the alien's country of nationality and by the
alien's classification as an immigrant or nonimmigrant.
``(C) The number of aliens who arrived pursuant to a
nonimmigrant visa, or as a visitor under the visa waiver
program under section 217 of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1187), for whom no matching departure data have
been obtained through the system or through other means as of
the end of the alien's authorized period of stay, with an
accounting by the alien's country of nationality and date of
arrival in the United States.
``(D) The number of lawfully admitted nonimmigrants
identified as having remained in the United States beyond the
period authorized by the Attorney General, with an accounting
by the alien's country of nationality.
``(f) Authority to Provide Access to System.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (d), the Attorney
General, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall
determine
[[Page H3569]]
which officers and employees of the Departments of Justice
and State may enter data into, and have access to the data
contained in, the integrated entry and exit data system.
``(2) Other law enforcement officials.--The Attorney
General, in the discretion of the Attorney General, may
permit other Federal, State, and local law enforcement
officials to have access to the data contained in the
integrated entry and exit data system for law enforcement
purposes.
``(g) Use of Task Force Recommendations.--The Attorney
General shall continuously update and improve the integrated
entry and exit data system as technology improves and using
the recommendations of the task force established under
section 3 of the Immigration and Naturalization Service Data
Management Improvement Act of 2000.
``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section such
sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 2001 through
2008.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents of the
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act
of 1996 is amended by amending the item relating to section
110 to read as follows:
``Sec. 110. Integrated entry and exit data system.''.
SEC. 3. TASK FORCE.
(a) Establishment.--Not later than 6 months after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of
Commerce, and the Secretary of the Treasury, shall establish
a task force to carry out the duties described in subsection
(c) (in this section referred to as the ``Task Force'').
(b) Membership.--
(1) Chairperson; appointment of members.--The Task Force
shall be composed of the Attorney General and 16 other
members appointed in accordance with paragraph (2). The
Attorney General shall be the chairperson and shall appoint
the other members.
(2) Appointment requirements.--In appointing the other
members of the Task Force, the Attorney General shall
include--
(A) representatives of Federal, State, and local agencies
with an interest in the duties of the Task Force, including
representatives of agencies with an interest in--
(i) immigration and naturalization;
(ii) travel and tourism;
(iii) transportation;
(iv) trade;
(v) law enforcement;
(vi) national security; or
(vii) the environment; and
(B) private sector representatives of affected industries
and groups.
(3) Terms.--Each member shall be appointed for the life of
the Task Force. Any vacancy shall be filled by the Attorney
General.
(4) Compensation.--
(A) In general.--Each member of the Task Force shall serve
without compensation, and members who are officers or
employees of the United States shall serve without
compensation in addition to that received for their services
as officers or employees of the United States.
(B) Travel expenses.--The members of the Task Force shall
be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies
under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States
Code, while away from their homes or regular places of
business in the performance of service for the Task Force.
(c) Duties.--The Task Force shall evaluate the following:
(1) How the Attorney General can efficiently and
effectively carry out section 110 of the Illegal Immigration
Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C.
1221 note), as amended by section 2 of this Act.
(2) How the United States can improve the flow of traffic
at airports, seaports, and land border ports of entry
through--
(A) enhancing systems for data collection and data sharing,
including the integrated entry and exit data system described
in section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1221 note), as
amended by section 2 of this Act, by better use of
technology, resources, and personnel;
(B) increasing cooperation between the public and private
sectors;
(C) increasing cooperation among Federal agencies and among
Federal and State agencies; and
(D) modifying information technology systems while taking
into account the different data systems, infrastructure, and
processing procedures of airports, seaports, and land border
ports of entry.
(3) The cost of implementing each of its recommendations.
(d) Staff and Support Services.--
(1) In general.--The Attorney General may, without regard
to the civil service laws and regulations, appoint and
terminate an executive director and such other additional
personnel as may be necessary to enable the Task Force to
perform its duties. The employment and termination of an
executive director shall be subject to confirmation by a
majority of the members of the Task Force.
(2) Compensation.--The executive director shall be
compensated at a rate not to exceed the rate payable for
level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of title
5, United States Code. The Attorney General may fix the
compensation of other personnel without regard to the
provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of
title 5, United States Code, relating to classification of
positions and General Schedule pay rates, except that the
rate of pay for such personnel may not exceed the rate
payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under section
5316 of such title.
(3) Detail of government employees.--Any Federal Government
employee, with the approval of the head of the appropriate
Federal agency, may be detailed to the Task Force without
reimbursement, and such detail shall be without interruption
or loss of civil service status, benefits, or privilege.
(4) Procurement of temporary and intermittent services.--
The Attorney General may procure temporary and intermittent
services for the Task Force under section 3109(b) of title 5,
United States Code, at rates for individuals not to exceed
the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay
prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under
section 5316 of such title.
(5) Administrative support services.--Upon the request of
the Attorney General, the Administrator of General Services
shall provide to the Task Force, on a reimbursable basis, the
administrative support services necessary for the Task Force
to carry out its responsibilities under this section.
(e) Hearings and Sessions.--The Task Force may, for the
purpose of carrying out this section, hold hearings, sit and
act at times and places, take testimony, and receive evidence
as the Task Force considers appropriate.
(f) Obtaining Official Data.--The Task Force may secure
directly from any department or agency of the United States
information necessary to enable it to carry out this section.
Upon request of the Attorney General, the head of that
department or agency shall furnish that information to the
Task Force.
(g) Reports.--
(1) Deadline.--Not later than December 31, 2002, and not
later than December 31 of each year thereafter in which the
Task Force is in existence, the Attorney General shall submit
a report to the Committees on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives and of the Senate containing the findings,
conclusions, and recommendations of the Task Force. Each
report shall also measure and evaluate how much progress the
Task Force has made, how much work remains, how long the
remaining work will take to complete, and the cost of
completing the remaining work.
(2) Delegation.--The Attorney General may delegate to the
Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, the
responsibility for preparing and transmitting any such
report.
(h) Legislative Recommendations.--
(1) In general.--The Attorney General shall make such
legislative recommendations as the Attorney General deems
appropriate--
(A) to implement the recommendations of the Task Force; and
(B) to obtain authorization for the appropriation of funds,
the expenditure of receipts, or the reprogramming of existing
funds to implement such recommendations.
(2) Delegation.--The Attorney General may delegate to the
Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, the
responsibility for preparing and transmitting any such
legislative recommendations.
(i) Termination.--The Task Force shall terminate on a date
designated by the Attorney General as the date on which the
work of the Task Force has been completed.
(j) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section such sums as may
be necessary for fiscal years 2001 through 2003.
SEC. 4. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING INTERNATIONAL BORDER
MANAGEMENT COOPERATION.
It is the sense of the Congress that the Attorney General,
in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of
Commerce, and the Secretary of the Treasury, should consult
with affected foreign governments to improve border
management cooperation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith).
General Leave
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks, and to include extraneous material on the bill under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4489 represents a bipartisan collaborative bill.
Many people deserve credit, including Senator Spencer Abraham and the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the gentleman from New York (Mr.
McHugh), the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), the gentleman
[[Page H3570]]
from New York (Mr. Quinn), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton),
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds) and the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
Also, I want to thank the Travel Industry of America, Americans for
Better Borders, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Trucking
Association, the Canadian/American Border Trade Alliance, the INS, the
Canadian Embassy, the Mexican Embassy, the Border Trade Alliance, and
the U.S. Caucus of Mayors for giving us their valuable input and
support.
Over a dozen meetings were held over several months' time with the
interested parties. The efforts of John Lampmann, chief of staff for
the 21st Congressional District, and Lora Ries, Counsel for the
Subcommittee on Immigration of the Committee on the Judiciary, were
crucial to obtaining the desired results.
H.R. 4489 focuses on an integrated entry and exit data system that
will be funded, developed, and implemented by 2005. This bill will
integrate all INS and State Department databases that support the entry
and exit of aliens at airports, seaports, and land border ports of
entry.
The database systems that the INS currently use are often independent
from each other. As a result, INS officers and inspectors and State
Department consular officers are unable to learn an alien's prior U.S.
travel activities from the INS and State Department consular offices.
Without this information, aliens can slip through the cracks, as we saw
in the case of Mr. Resendez, the recently convicted railroad killer.
This bill emphasizes that the INS needs to integrate its entry and
exit data system so that INS officers and inspectors and State
Department consular officers can access any entry and exit information
with respect to an alien before them.
Once the INS implements the entry exit data system, the Attorney
General is required to submit an annual fiscal year report to the
Committees on the Judiciary of the House and Senate. A task force will
be funded to examine specific ways to further the development of the
integrated entry and exit data system. The Attorney General is expected
to update and improve the integrated entry and exit data system as
technology improves and as recommendations of the task force are
received.
The task force will examine how technology can facilitate the flow of
people through ports of entry, whether by air, sea, or land. By using
the speed of technology and the Nation's immigration system, the bill
both speeds the flow of the traffic through ports of entry and
contributes to the development and usefulness of the integrated entry
and exit data system over time.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
H.R. 4489, the ``INS Data Management Improvement Act,'' is intended
to amend section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), to require the implementation of
an integrated entry and exit data system at airports, seaports, and
land border ports of entry at new, specified deadlines, and to
establish a task force to assist the Attorney General in implementing
section 110.
background
In 1996, the Congress overwhelmingly passed IIRIRA. Section 110 of
IIRIRA called for an automated entry-exit control system no later than
two years after the date of enactment of IIRIRA, which was September
30, 1996. Without defining the control system, section 110 required
that the system collect a record of departure for every alien departing
the United States and match the departure records with the record of
the alien's arrival into this country. The system also required that
the Attorney General be able to identify electronically lawfully
admitted nonimmigrants who remain in the United States beyond their
authorized period of stay.
In addition to the entry-exit control system, section 110 required
the Attorney General to submit to the congressional Judiciary
Committees annual reports on the system. The reports should include the
number of departure records collected; the number of departure records
successfully matched to records of the alien's prior arrival in the
United States; and the number of aliens who arrived as nonimmigrants or
under the Visa Waiver Program for whom no matching departure record has
been obtained as of the end of the alien's authorized period of stay.
Finally, section 110 required information regarding aliens who have
overstayed their visas to be integrated into data bases of the INS and
State Department, including those used at ports of entry and at
consular offices.
Subsequently, section 110 was amended to change the deadlines of the
automated entry and exit control system. The deadline for the system at
airports was changed to October 15, 1998, and the deadline for land
border ports of entry and seaports was changed to March 30, 2001.
With the March 30, 2001, deadline less than a year away and the INS
no closer to having a control system at land border ports of entry,
various Members of Congress and interest groups grew concerned. They
wanted to repeal section 110 out of fear that trade and tourism would
be hurt by new data collection requirements at the land border ports of
entry, causing delays at the border to grow.
This bill focuses on the task the INS faces in implementing an entry/
exit system. The idea is that it should be an electronic data base
system. With technology advancing so rapidly, technology will drive the
INS' ability to collect information on who are entering and exiting the
U.S. and who are overstaying their visas. As such, H.R. 4489 focuses on
the INS' ability to use technology to improve its current collection
database systems and to integrate its systems. The database systems
that the INS currently uses are often independent from each other. As a
result, INS officers and inspectors, and State Department consular
officer are often unable to learn an alien's prior travel activities in
another part of the United States or in another country. Without this
information, aliens can slip through the cracks, as in the case of Mr.
Resendez, the recently convicted ``railroad killer.'' Therefore, this
bill emphasizes that the INS needs to integrate its entry and exit data
system so that INS officers and inspectors and State Department
consular officers can assess any entry and exit information with
respect to an alien before them.
In addition, the bill creates a task force to study and recommend
methods to continuously improve and update the INS' database system as
technology advances. This infrastructure in support of the INS
integrated system development allows for private-public
recommendations, a major contribution of the bill.
the bill
H.R. 4489 requires the Attorney General to implement an integrated
entry and exit data system. The intent behind this system is that any
arrival and departure data that the INS and the State Department are
authorized or required to create or collect must now be entered
electronically into a database. In addition, the database must be
integrated and provide access to other ports of entry, internal
enforcement, and consular offices. As technology improves, so should
the data system improve.
The bill is different from the current section 110 of IIRIRA because
it now defines the entry/exit system. This system is to: (1) provide
access to and integrate alien arrival and departure data; (2) use this
data to produce a report of arriving and departing aliens by country of
nationality, classification as an immigrant or nonimmigrant, and date
of arrival in, and departure from the United States; (3) match an
alien's arrival data with the alien's departure data; (4) assist the
Attorney General and the Secretary of State to identify electronically
lawfully admitted nonimmigrants who overstayed their visas; and (5)
permits the Attorney General to make reports.
Nothing in this bill should be interpreted as requiring the Attorney
General or the Secretary of State to collect new types of documents or
data from aliens, particularly aliens who have had document
requirements waived under section 212(d)(4)(B) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act by the Attorney General and the Secretary of State
acting jointly on the basis of reciprocity with respect to foreign
contiguous territories or adjacent islands. However, this bill does not
affect the authority of the Attorney General or the Secretary of State
to create new documentary or data collection requirements in other
provisions of law.
The integrated entry and exist data system is to be implemented at
airports, seaports, and land border ports of entry. However, because
each type of port of entry has different infrastructure and processing
procedures, it does not make sense to have one uniform deadline for
implementation. Since section 110 was enacted in 1996, the INS is
already implementing such a system at airports and seaports. Thus,
implementation of the data system at airports and seaports is due by
December 31, 2003.
Land border ports of entry will require additional time to implement
the entry/exit data system. Also, traffic, infrastructure, and
resources used at all of the land border ports of entry vary greatly.
While some land ports receive heavy traffic and use a significant
amount of resources, other ports receive minimal traffic and have few
resources. Because the former group of land ports will require less
time and resources to implement the entry/exist data system that the
latter group, the former group has an earlier deadline. The 50 land
border ports of entry determined to serve
[[Page H3571]]
the highest numbers of arriving and departing aliens are to have the
system implemented by December 31, 2004. The entry/exit data system is
due at the remainder of the land border ports of entry by December 31,
2005. Implementing at the land ports of entry with the highest traffic
first is also an efficient method of gathering arrival and departure
information.
Once the INS implements the entry/exit data system at a defined group
of ports of entry, the Attorney General is required to submit an annual
fiscal year report to the Judiciary Committees of the House and Senate.
These reports will include and analyze the following information: (1)
The number of aliens for whom departure data was collected, including
country of nationality; (2) the number of departing aliens whose
departure data was successfully matched to the alien's arrival data,
including country of nationality and an alien's classification as an
immigrant or nonimmigrant; (3) the number of aliens who arrived with a
nonimmigrant visa or under the visa waiver program for whom no matching
departure date was obtained as of the end of the alien's authorized
stay, including the country of nationality and date of arrival in the
U.S.; and (4) the number of nonimmigrants identified as having
overstayed their visas, including the country of nationality.
The Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of State,
will determine which officers and employees of the Justice and State
Departments may enter data into and have access to the data contained
in the entry/exit data system. Likewise, the Attorney General has the
discretion to permit other federal, state, and local law enforcement
officials to have access to the data for law enforcement purposes.
The Attorney General is expected to continuously update and improve
the integrated entry and exit data system as technology improves and
using the recommendations of the task force.
H.R. 4489 requires the Attorney General, in consultation with other
involved Secretaries, to create a task force made up of government and
private sector representatives of agencies and industries interested in
port of entry issues. The primary duty of the task force is to evaluate
how the Attorney General can efficiently and effectively carry out
section 110. Advancing technology should drive such an evaluation. As
the INS uses advanced technology at ports of entry, the flow of traffic
at ports of entry will improve, thereby increasing trade and tourism, a
universal goal.
In this study, the task force is encouraged to examine how to
simplify the entry/exit documents currently collected by the INS and
State Department, without decreasing the quality of the information
obtained. For example, in reviewing how to improve the flow of traffic
at ports of entry, the task force should examine the current
documentary requirements for business people and tourists entering the
United States, including those entering from Mexico by air. After
completing such review, the task force may develop recommendations
concerning how these requirements can be streamlined to improve the
flow of persons between the United States and Mexico in accordance with
the substantial growth in goods and services trade that has occurred
since enactment of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
The Congressional Budget Office has indicated that this bill will not
cause direct spending.
Section-by-Section Analysis
sec. 2. amendment to section 110 of iirira
Section 2 amends section 110 of IIRIRA through the sections
that follow.
Section 110(a) requires the Attorney General to implement
an ``integrated entry and exit data system.'' Section 110(b)
defines ``integrated entry and exit data system'' as an
electronic system of alien arrival and departure data that is
integrated and provides access to INS ports of entry, the INS
interior inspection sites, interior offices, and State
Department consular offices. The arrival and departure data
used in the system is composed of that which is authorized or
required to be created or collected by law. The electronic
system uses the data to create a report of arriving and
departing aliens by country of nationality; classification as
an immigrant or nonimmigrant, and date of arrival in, and
departure from the United States. The system is also required
to match an alien's arrival data with the alien's available
departure data. It should assist the Attorney General and
the Secretary of State to identify, electronically,
lawfully admitted nonimmigrants who may have remained in
the United States beyond their authorized period. Finally,
the system should enable the Attorney General to create
the annual congressional reports required in section
110(e).
Section 110(c) explains that nothing in section 110 should
be interpreted as requiring the Attorney General or the
Secretary of State to collect new types of documents or data
from aliens, including those aliens who have had either or
both of the requirements of section 212(a)(7)(B)(i) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act waived by the Attorney
General and the Secretary of State acting jointly on the
basis of reciprocity with respect to nationals of foreign
contiguous territory or of adjacent islands and their
residents have a common nationality with such nationals. In
addition, section 110 does not permit the Attorney General or
the Secretary of State to require documents or data from
aliens that are inconsistent with the North American Free
Trade Agreement. While section 110 restricts the Attorney
General and the Secretary of State from imposing new
documentary or data collection requirements upon aliens,
section 110 does not reduce the authority of the Attorney
General or the Secretary of State from creating new
documentary or data collection requirements in any other
provision of law.
Section 110(d) imposes staggered deadlines upon the
Attorney General to implement the integrated entry and exit
data system at the different types of ports of entry. By
December 31, 2003, the Attorney General is to be using
available alien arrival and departure data described in
subsection (b)(1) with respect to aliens arriving in, or
departing from, the United States at an airport or seaport.
This implementation includes ensuring that the data collected
or created by an immigration officer at an airport or seaport
are entered into the system and is accessible by immigration
officers at other airports and seaports.
Section 110(d)(2) requires the Attorney General to
implement the integrated entry and exit data system using the
data already implemented at airports and seaports, combined
with available alien arrival and departure data described in
subsection(b)(1) pertaining to aliens arriving in, or
departing from, the United States at the 50 land border ports
of entry serving the highest numbers of arriving and
departing aliens. Such implementation is due no later than
December 31, 2004, and should ensure that when the data is
collected or created by an immigration officer at a port of
entry, is entered into the system and can be accessed by
immigration officers at airports, seaports, and other land
border ports of entry.
Section 110(d)(3) requires the Attorney General to fully
implement by December 31, 2005, the integrated entry and exit
data system, using all of the data described in subsection
(b)(1). This implementation should include ensuring that all
data are available to immigration officers at all ports of
entry into the United States.
Once the Attorney General begins implementing the
integrated entry and exist data system, section 110(e)
requires the Attorney General to submit an annual fiscal year
report to the Judiciary Committees on the House and Senate by
December 31. These reports will include and analyze the
following information: (1) the number of aliens for whom
departure data was collected during the reporting period,
including the departing alien's country of nationality; (2)
the number of departing aliens whose departure data was
successfully matched to the alien's arrival data, including
country of nationality and an alien's classification as an
immigrant; or non immigrant; (3) the number of aliens who
arrived with a nonimmigrant visa or under the visa waiver
program for whom no matching departure date was obtained as
of the end of the alien's authorized stay, including the
country of nationality and date of arrival in the U.S.; and
(4) the number of nonimmigrants identified as having
overstayed their visas, including the country of nationality.
Section 110(f) permits the Attorney General, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, to determine which
Justice and State Department officers and employees may enter
data into, and have access to the data contained in, the
integrated entry and exit data system. The Attorney General,
in his or her discretion, may also permit other Federal,
State, and local law enforcement officials to have access to
the data contained in the data system for law enforcement
purposes.
Sectiono 110(g) requires the Attorney General to
continuously update and improve the integrated entry and exit
data system as technology improves and using the
recommendations of the task force created in section 3 of
this bill.
Section 110(h) authorizes appropriations to carry out
section 110 such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years
2001 through 2008.
sec. 3. task force
Section 3(a) Establishment. Section 3(a) requires the
Attorney General to consult with the Secretary of State,
Secretary of Commerce, and Secretary of Treasury to establish
a task force no later than six months after the date of
enactment of this Act.
Section 3(b) Membership. Section 3(b) establishes that the
Attorney General will be the chairperson of the task force
and will appoint the other 16 members. In appointing the task
force members, the Attorney General shall include
representatives of federal, state, and local agencies with an
interest in the duties of the task force, including agencies
with an interest in immigration and naturalization; travel
and tourism; transportation; trade; law enforcement; national
security; or the environment. In addition, the Attorney
General must include private sector representatives of
affected industries and groups as members of the task
force. Each member of the task force will be appointed for
the life of the task force. Any vacancy should be filed by
the Attorney General. Members of the task force will not
be compensated for their service on the task force.
Section 3(c) Duties. Section 3(c) requires the task force
to evaluate the following: (1) how
[[Page H3572]]
the Attorney General can efficiently and effectively carry
out section 110 of HRIRA, as amended by this bill; (2) how
the U.S. can improve the flow of traffic at airports,
seaports, and land border ports of entry by better use of
technology, resources, and personnel; increasing cooperation
between the public and private sectors; increased cooperation
among federal and state agencies; and modifying information
technology; and (3) the cost of implementing each of its
recommendations.
Section 3(d) Staff and Support Services. Section 3(d)(1)
permits the Attorney General to appoint and terminate an
executive director and any other additional personnel
necessary to enable the task force to perform its duties. The
employment and termination of an executive director is
subject to confirmation by a majority of the task force
members.
Section 3(d)(2) establishes a compensation rate ceiling for
the executive director at level V of the Executive Schedule.
The Attorney General may fix the compensation of other
personnel, except the pay rate may not exceed level V of the
Executive Schedule.
Section 3(d)(3) permits any federal government employee,
with approval by the head of the appropriate federal agency,
to be detailed to the task force without reimbursement and
without interference or loss of civil service status,
benefits, or privilege.
Section 3(d)(4) allows the Attorney General to obtain
temporary and intermittent services for the task force at
compensation rates not to exceed level V of the Executive
Schedule.
Section 3(d)(5) requires the Administrator of General
Services to provide, at the Attorney General's request,
administrative support services necessary for the task force
to carry out its responsibilities.
Section 3(e) Hearings and Session. Section 3(e) permits the
task force to hold hearings, sit and act at times and places,
take testimony, and receive evidence as the task force deems
appropriate.
Section 3(f) Obtaining Official Data. Section 3(f) allows
the task force to directly secure from any United States
department or agency information necessary to perform its
duties. It also requires the head of the department or agency
to furnish the information to the task force upon the request
of the Attorney General.
Section 3(g) Reports. No later than December 31, 2002, and
no later than December 31 of each year thereafter in which
the task force is in existence, the Attorney General must
submit a report to the Judiciary Committees of both the House
of Representatives and the Senate containing the findings,
conclusions, and recommendations of the task force. Each
report will also measure and evaluate how much progress the
task force has made, how much work remains, how long the
remaining work will take to complete, and the cost of
completing the remaining work. In addition, the Attorney
General may delegate to the INS Commissioner the
responsibility of preparing and transmitting these reports.
Section 3(h) Legislative Recommendations. Section 3(h)
requires the Attorney General to make such legislative
recommendations as the Attorney General deems appropriate to
implement the task force's recommendations and to obtain
authorization for the appropriation of funds, the expenditure
of receipts, or the reprogramming of existing funds to
implement such recommendations. The Attorney General is
permitted to delegate to the INS Commissioner the
responsibility of preparing and transmitting any such
legislative recommendations.
Section 3(i) Termination. Section 3(i) terminates the task
force on a date designated by the Attorney General once the
task force work is completed.
Section 3(j) Authorization of Appropriations. Section 3(j)
authorizes appropriations such sums as may be necessary for
fiscal years through 2003.
sec. 4. sense of congress regarding international border management
cooperation
Section 4 states that the Attorney General, in consultation
with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Commerce, and
the Secretary of the Treasury, should consult with affected
foreign governments to improve border management cooperation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking everyone that has
worked on this measure. This is a very positive ending to what was
originally a very rancorous matter in our committee because H.R. 4489
would eliminate the entry-exit data collection system required by
section 110 of the immigration law for the U.S. and Canadian and
Mexican borders.
I have long opposed the section 110 entry and exit system because of
the adverse impact it would have on the people and businesses of
Michigan and other border States. Implementation of this section at
land ports of entry would cause massive traffic congestions along our
borders, bringing personal and business travel at many border points to
stands still. This would have a crippling effect on trades and tourism.
For example, at the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit, more than 30,000
crossings per day take place. As little as a fraction of a minute added
to the processing time of each of these vehicles would result in miles
and miles of snarled traffic on both sides of the border. Tourists
would be less likely to visit our border towns, and businesses,
particularly those dependent on just-in-time delivery, would suffer.
These prices are far too high to pay for a data collection system
that, sadly, is unlikely to achieve its primary objective, dealing more
effectively with persons who come to this country as visitors and
overstay their visas. Under section 110, the INS would know who these
individuals are but they would not know where they are. The information
would probably have very little enforcement value.
By contrast, H.R. 4489 would replace the entry-exit data collection
system with a system for making use of the vast quantity of information
we already gather on individuals entering and exiting this country. The
information would be entered into a database that would allow U.S.
immigration officials and consular officers based overseas to access
it. More importantly, it would not lead to new border delays.
Canada and the United States benefit from an outstanding relationship
between citizens and businesses. Last year, more than 13.4 million
Canadians came to the United States to do business, shop, visit our
restaurants and tourist sites. In my home State of Michigan alone, more
than 1.2 million Canadians visited for one night or more and added $216
million to the State's economy. H.R. 4489 will obviously help protect
that flow of business and tourism.
So my thanks, Mr. Speaker, to the chairman of the Subcommittee on
Immigration, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), and our friend, the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), and our ranking member on the
subcommittee, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). Their
leadership on this bipartisan legislation was important, and I too
would urge a ``yes'' vote.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Upton).
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, this bill is brought up under suspension of
the rules, and usually those measures are brought up when they are
noncontroversial. Until about a month or two ago this issue was very
controversial. In fact, a year ago there were probably some of us on
both sides of the aisle that were ready to do battle, with swords.
This has been a tough battle, and I want to particularly commend the
thoughtfulness and the hard work of my colleague, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Smith). There were a number of us that were able to get
together with the gentleman from Texas on both sides of the aisle. We
had a number of associations across the country as well, whether they
be the White House, whether they be the Governors Association, the
Chamber of Commerce, or Republicans and Democrats. The gentleman from
New York (Mr. LaFalce) and I headed up the charge, on our side. And I
had the privilege over the last couple of years, with others in this
body that are on the floor now, of participating jointly with our
Canadian counterparts, our colleagues from Canada.
This has been the number one issue the last number of years. Why is
that? In my home State of Michigan, we have more than a billion and a
half dollars of trade that literally goes across the bridge into Canada
every day. Every day. We have thousands of Americans and Canadians that
cross the border to work, whether it be at hospitals or other places.
And, sadly, under the old rules, I guess those that are still present
today until this legislation becomes law, under that section 110, had
it been allowed to come into play, it would have meant a delay for
days, perhaps, for people to go simply from one side of the border to
the other, whether it be for dinner, for a job, or whatever it might
be.
Thanks to the leadership of people on this floor today, particularly
my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), the gentleman
from New York (Mr. McHugh), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns),
[[Page H3573]]
and others, we were able to have a meeting of the minds. And in fact,
we have legislation now that, when it is passed this afternoon, and
thanks to the leadership of many in the Senate as well, instead of
coming to war over this issue, like we almost did last year, in essence
we are able to come shoulder to shoulder and do something for the
American good that will help both countries, and Mexico as well, but
our interest certainly has been Canada, for those of us from Michigan.
But we are going to resolve this issue by using our heads and our minds
and our words.
I just want to commend again my colleague from Texas for allowing us
to take this bill on a fairly rapid course through his subcommittee,
our leadership by getting it to the floor today, and, in essence,
getting away next year, instead of having that date come into play,
when literally our borders would be locked and sealed and folks would
be unable to cross the border for whatever purpose. In fact, this opens
the door in a meaningful way; and one that I think was certainly the
intent of the legislation that was passed.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), the ranking member on the Subcommittee on
Immigration and Claims.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers), and I thank the chairman of the subcommittee.
Who said that this could not be done; fixing section 110? I want to
thank the members of the Committee on the Judiciary, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the ranking member of the full committee, and
the chairman of the subcommittee for what I think is a very good
resolution, along with the many others who have worked on this
improvement of section 110.
Let me briefly just suggest that being an original cosponsor of H.R.
4489, I am glad now that it provides for continued input from
government, business, and border communities. Now, under this
legislation, the Attorney General would be required to create a task
force made up of public and private representatives to evaluate and
report on how the U.S. can improve the flow of traffic at airports,
seaports, and land ports of entry. The Attorney General must make
legislative recommendations to implement the findings of the task
force.
This bill would increase our security and use of technology, while
not increasing delay or congestion at U.S. ports of entry, therefore
bringing together the distinctive and disparate needs of our northern
border and our southern border.
Let me also say that this spreads a whole new light on the enormous
tragedy that Angel Resendez-Ramirez brought on this country, with
coming in on the southern border with very limited information and the
tragedy that occurred.
{time} 1330
If this was in place at that time, we would have had all of the data
that would have suggested that this was, in fact, a bad actor in
anyone's definition and, hopefully, at that time would have been able
to save lives.
Let us hope perspectively that we will now be able to save lives.
But, at the same time, I think it is important to note of a tragedy
that is occurring at the border that I hope that we will be able to
resolve perspectively, and that is the tragic killings of individuals
that is increasing by those who live along the border who are
frightened and fearful of those who do come across the border illegally
seeking a better opportunity.
We know that all of those individuals are not criminals. We have to
address that, and I hope that we will have an opportunity to address
that in a way that provides the safety of a community but, yet, does
not make those of us who live in this country predators and causing the
loss of life of individuals who certainly would do us no harm.
This legislation, however, brings into balance the necessity of
protecting the United States and, as well, balancing the business and
tourism issues and interests that we might have.
I ask my colleagues to support this legislation and help us move
further into solving other problems that we incur on a regular basis at
our respective borders.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to come to the floor today to
address an issue that has been controversial over the years as a result
of the 1996 Immigration law, and that is Section 110 of that law.
Section 110 of the '96 law currently requires the Immigration and
Naturalization Service to establish an automated entry and exit control
system at all airports, seaports and land border ports of entry by
March 30, 2001. The system is to collect a record of the departure for
every alien departing the U.S. and matching the records of departures
with the record of the alien's arrivals in the United States.
I am pleased to be an original co-sponsor of H.R. 4489, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act.
I want to commend Subcommittee Chairman Smith and his staff for working
with me and my staff to make the appropriate changes to Section 110 of
the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of
1996. These changes will encourage and expand trade, tourism and
commerce to the United States while at the same time achieving
important U.S. border law enforcement objectives.
H.R. 4489, a bill drafted through compromise, bipartisan and
bicameral negotiations, eliminates the Section 110 requirements for
implementing an entry and exit control system by March 30, 2001.
Instead, H.R. 4489 would create an ``integrated entry and exit data
system'' to enable INS to develop a computerized database of the
information currently required to be collected by law at U.S. ports of
entry.
H.R. 4489 sets out a plan for this system to be implemented in stages
so that the database would eventually be accessible at all airports,
seaports and land border ports, as well as U.S. consular offices. This
new system would not create new data collection authority to impose
documentary requirements. More importantly, this system would allow the
billions of dollars of U.S. trade and travel which streams through our
ports of entry to continue to flow uninterrupted.
Texas has one of the longest international borders of any U.S. state
that borders Canada or Mexico. With eleven ports of entry, Texas is the
largest U.S. state in exports to Mexico. Exports from Texas to Mexico
reached $41.4 billion in 1999. Many of these goods flowed through
Houston ports of entry. Nearly $6 billion of total merchandise flowed
to and from Mexico through Houston. The metropolitan area of
Houston alone exports well over $2.4 billion in goods to Mexico in
1998.
H.R. 4489 also protects the free flow of people through our ports.
Texas ranks 4th in the nation in overall visitor spending. Nearly 19
million visitors traveled to the Greater Houston area in 1997, and in
1996 visitors spent just under $5 billion, which resulted in 85,000
tourism-related jobs in the area.
H.R. 4489 provides for continued input from government, business and
border communities. Under this legislation, the Attorney General would
be required to create a task force made up of public and private
representatives to evaluate and report on how the U.S. can ``improve
the flow of traffic at airports, seaports, and land ports of entry.''
The Attorney General must make legislative recommendations to implement
the findings of the task force. This bill would increase our security
and use of technology while not increasing delay or congestion at U.S.
ports of entry.
I am also gratified that this new system will prevent fugitives like
Angel Resindez-Ramirez, the infamous railway killer from entering this
country undetected. This is very important.
Just a short list of the business and community organizations in
support of H.R. 4489 is impressive. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the
National Association of Manufacturers, the American Trucking
Associations, the Travel Industry Association of America, the American
Immigration Lawyers Association and our friends to the north and south,
Canada and Mexico support this legislation. I agree and urge my
colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Houghton).
(Mr. HOUGHTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. HOUGHTON. Mr. Speaker, I have just two points to make here. First
of all, I am from New York, and I guess we have a lot of New Yorkers
around here. But this is really important not only economically but in
terms of all the relations we have with Canada. So that is number one.
But number two, I have just been with my friend, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Upton), at a Canadian American delegation meeting. We
talked about many issues, free trade to the Americas, the issue of
trade with the European Union. We talked about agricultural issues, the
whole variety of things. As we left yesterday that delegation, they
said, do not forget
[[Page H3574]]
that the single most important issue is this sword of section 110
hanging over our heads.
So I just want to say to my colleagues, as I am sure others have said
far more eloquently, this is very important and I am enthusiastically
supportive of H.R. 4499.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), a distinguished colleague of
mine and the ranking member of another committee.
(Mr. LaFALCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. LaFALCE. Mr. Speaker, I give special thanks to my colleague, the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), for working so closely with me
over the past several years and especially to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Smith), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and
Claims. He has at all times been a scholar and a gentleman with respect
to this issue. I do not want to praise this bill too much because I am
afraid he might change his mind.
When the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) was up here, he said
that we are almost at sword's point over this issue, section 110. That
is true. But the biggest sword was the Damoclean sword that was hanging
over the heads of the border communities along both our northern and
southern borders since passage of the 1996 immigration law.
Our largest trading partner is Canada. Our second largest trading
partner is Mexico. It was my judgment that implementation of section
110, while not intended to do so, would have had the primary effect of
basically stopping commerce and virtually all forms of intercourse
amongst our nations. That was not intended, but I fear that would have
been the primary effect.
Today, by working together, we are removing that Damoclean sword. But
that is playing successful defensive football. We need to go beyond
that now after passage of this bill. We have to go on the offensive.
And what does that mean? That means that we have to improve things.
We need more personnel on both our northern and our southern borders
in order to expedite the flow of commerce and people. We need more
technology in order to expedite the flow of commerce and people. We
need infrastructure improvements with the Federal Government involved
to expedite the flow of people and commerce with respect to the
northern border and my communities of Buffalo and Niagara Falls and
Lewiston and surrounding areas so affected.
Prime Minister Chretien and President Clinton a few years ago agreed
upon what we call the Shared Border Accord. We call upon the President,
we call upon the Prime Minister to be more aggressive in pursuit and
implementation of that Shared Border Accord so that eventually we can
fulfill at least what I have as a vision, and that is not a border
where we have difficulties, but a border between our countries similar
to the border between the District of Columbia and Maryland and
Virginia, a border similar to the borders that exist in Europe with the
European Union, where we can have not simply interstate commerce, we
can have truly internation commerce, expeditious, free. This would be
the best thing we could ever do to the economies of our border regions.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from New York (Mr. McHugh).
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is, as we have heard, the product of literally
months and months of study and negotiations and also, as we have heard,
at times more than just a little patience. But the positive outcome has
been and is today that really the product before us represents a
balance, a very delicate balance, but I think a very important one,
between the critical objective of ensuring that our borders are secure
against all kinds of illegal activities regardless of their design,
with the inescapable reality that, in today's world, as we have heard
so many say here today, the free flow of tourism and trade and commerce
of all descriptions and people of good will, is not just something that
is positive; it is, frankly, something that is absolutely essential.
A lot of good folks, many of whom have spoken here directly, my
friend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton); the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers); my good colleagues, the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Quinn) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton); and, of
course, the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce); and so many others
have had the opportunity to come together on this.
But I certainly want to pay particular attention to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Smith), the subcommittee chairman. No Member anywhere
in this House on either side of the aisle has been a more valiant
fighter for our secure borders. But, at the same time, his sensitivity
and understanding in this issue has been exemplary. He took the time to
travel from his home to the 1,000 Islands in the border crossing there
at Alexandria Bay to help himself better understand the challenges and
the need that we have. Thanks to his leadership, we have this afternoon
what I think is a very fair, a very effective product that can take
another important step in technology aspects to making our borders even
more secure, while at the same time ensuring that that free flow of
tourism and trade continues in a way that enures to the benefit of
every citizen of this country.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to return our time. We have no further
speakers.
I want to thank the Judiciary staffers Perry Apelbaum, Noland Rappa-
port, and Leon Buck for the long, hard work they have put in in
negotiating with other Members and staffers to reach what I think is a
very useful accord.
I think that this will hold our committee in good stead. We have come
to a very good ending on this matter, and so I am very happy to have
played a small role in it.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4489, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Improvement Act. This
bipartisan legislation represents a good balance between the legitimate
need to prevent visitors from overstaying their visas and the need to
ensure efficient cross-border traffic. I do not oppose the goal of
establishing an entry-exit system to monitor visa overstays. What I do
oppose is establishing such a system with little disregard for its
impact on trade and tourism. In my home state of Arizona, the Section
110 system, as originally devised, simply will not work. At the same
time, it would have had a devastating impact on our economy. That is
why I worked very hard to ensure that Section 110 not be implemented
until it could be shown that it would not bring travel and tourism to a
virtual standstill.
I want to commend Chairman Smith for taking these concerns into
account in drafting today's compromise. H.R. 4489 amends Section 110 of
the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
by replacing the current requirement that by March 30, 2001, a record
of arrival and departure be collected for every alien at all ports of
entry with a requirement that INS develop an ``integrated entry and
exit data system'' that focuses on data that the INS already collects.
Using this data, the Attorney General will implement the integrated
entry and exit data system by December 31, 2003, at airports and
seaports and not later than December 31, 2004, at 50 land border ports
of entry. This is a careful compromise which helps balance our need to
monitor visa overstays with the need to preserve the smooth flow of
trade and tourism.
This bill is broadly supported by the Immigration and Naturalization
Service (INS), the American for Better Borders, the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce, the Travel Industry Association of America, the National
Association of Manufacturers, the American Council of International
Personnel, the American Trucking Association, the American Immigration
Lawyers Association, the Canadian/American Border Trade Alliance, the
Border Trade Alliance, the Canadian Embassy, and the Mexican Embassy. I
am pleased to be able to support this bill.
Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4489, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act
of 2000.
This measure is vital to tourism, trade and industry in Western New
York State; and I am pleased to join Chairman Smith in sponsoring this
legislation, and am grateful for all his hard work to ease border
congestion while ensuring safety and efficiency.
[[Page H3575]]
H.R. 4489 amends Section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, replacing the current requirement
that a record of arrival and departure be collected for every alien at
every point of entry.
Section 110 was an attempt to identify visa overstays in the U.S.
Neither Canadian nor U.S. citizens require visas. However, the
implementation of this part of the law had the potential to cause more
problems than it solved.
In 1998 alone, there were more than 76 million entries and exits to
the U.S. by Canadian citizens.
Some of the largest of those crossing points are along the New York-
Ontario border. In fact, Western New York is the largest port in the
state of New York.
More than $85 billion in goods and services moved back and forth
between Western New York and Southern Ontario in 1998 alone. And about
$140 million per day moves across its border crossings.
It was anticipated that stopping every vehicle entering and exiting
the U.S.--as Section 110 required--would have caused 30 hour crossing
delays at busy international border points. Business and industry in
Western New York hoping to grow from increased trade and commerce
simply could not afford those types of delays.
As NAFTA continues to encourage trade between the U.S., Canada and
Mexico, the growth in traffic across the U.S./Canada border is expected
to continue its 4%-7% annual growth rate over the next decade.
Commercial vehicles must cross the northern border quickly and
efficiently for U.S. companies to remain globally competitive and
attract new foreign investment.
Congress must correct the problems associated with Section 110 as
currently written to facilitate international commerce and promote
continuing economic development in New York State and across the
country. This legislation does that and, on behalf of Western New York
residents and businesses, I urge its adoption.
Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to see we have fixed the
Section 110 problem by removing the cumbersome requirements made under
the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of
1996. This is a very important issue to me, my constituents and all
Americans living on our nation's borders. I have always made it a
priority to see that no unnecessary burdens are placed on border
residents. The implementation of Section 110, as proposed in 1996 would
have crippled and severely restricted cross border trade, tourism and
the environment.
It should be highlighted that H.R. 4489 does not create any new
documentary requirements. We have amended section 110 to create an
integrated entry and exit database system. We have allowed our advanced
technology to direct our policy. The new system, once implemented, will
match an alien's arrival data with their departure data. It will also
produce a report of an alien's country of nationality and identify any
non-immigrant who may have overstayed their visas. The bill also
creates a task force to study and recommend methods to continuously
improve and update the INS' database system as technology advances.
This will ensure we are always current with the most efficient and
effective ways to safe and lawful border crossing.
The people living on our borders will benefit from this legislation,
as it will facilitate expedient, safe and lawful cross border trade and
tourism.
Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the
bipartisan agreement reached on Section 110 and presented to the House
as H.R. 4489. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill and
ask all of my colleagues to support this legislation. This compromise
legislation will achieve the enforcement goals of Section 110 without
punishing communities along the border.
H.R. 4489 eliminates the Section 110 requirements of implementing an
entry/exit control system by March 20, 2001 and instead requires the
INS to automate its ability to collect information on who is entering
and exiting the U.S. This is good news for communities like El Paso
that would have been devastated by the full implementation of Section
110. Our ports-of-entry, which are already stressed, would have become
parking lots. Business would have suffered and tourism would have
disappeared. Trade, which is so important to my district and others
along the border, would have suffered greatly.
I commend Chairman Smith for this efforts during these negotiations.
The goals of Section 110 are admirable. This bill allows us to make use
of the information that we already gather on people entering and
exiting this country. That is an important first step we must take
prior to adding additional requirements to an already overwhelmed
agency.
What this entire debate has shown us is that we must do a better job
of providing the INS and Customs with additional personnel to man the
ports-of-entry. We must make it a priority to staff the ports-of-entry
along the Southwest Border so that we can have all lanes open for
traffic. Additional personnel will allow us to better manage our
borders, enforce our laws, and facilitate the flow of commerce. This is
a good bill and I urge my colleagues to support this compromise.
Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, when Congress passed the immigration reform
bill in 1996, no one in this body thought they were voting for a bill
that would tie up our borders with Mexico and Canada.
But that's what could happen unless we pass this corrective
legislation today.
Section 110 of the 1996 immigration bill was interpreted as requiring
Canadian and Mexican citizens to obtain entry and exit documents when
traveling to the United States--even though the authors of the bill
acknowledged that was not its purpose.
For communities at the border, Section 110 of the immigration bill is
a disaster waiting to happen--clogged bridges, tunnels, and roads--
impacting commerce and tourism.
I know that at the Blue Water Bridge, at Port Huron in Michigan,
delays can already lead to hours waiting in line at our border with
Canada. But improvements are being made to relieve the congestion.
All the efforts that have been made to improve our borders will be
for naught if the visa requirement is implemented.
We don't need an onerous, unnecessary requirement that will further
congest our borders.
That's why we should pass this sensible compromise legislation today.
I'm pleased to join as a cosponsor of H.R. 4489, the Immigration and
Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of 2000.
Tourism, trade, and border communities will be devastated if Section
110 is not changed. This is our chance to make it right.
We can patrol our border effectively if we give the INS and Customs
Service the resources they need to do their jobs well.
Let's use the opportunity we have today to correct this major flaw.
Please join me in voting for H.R. 4489.
Mr. SWEENEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this consensus
legislation, H.R. 4489, the INS Data Management Improvement Act.
As a Representative of a region highly dependent upon economic ties
with Canada, I have long been concerned that the implementation of
Section 110 of the 1996 Immigration reform Act would adversely affect
commerce, trade, and tourism for the North Country region of New York.
I note that New York City and Montreal are the two largest
metropolitan areas on the Eastern Seabord. The 22nd Congressional
district of New York lies directly between them, providing tremendous
economic opportunities for our residents.
The compromise today allows for increased data collection and
monitoring at our borders without compromising the flow of goods and
tourists that are essential to the New York-Montreal trade corridor.
New York exported $10 billion in goods to Canada in 1998 and hosted
2.2 million Canadian visitors.
This exchange is already hampered today by the outdated facilities
and lack of resources and our border crossings in New York.
This agreement today ensures that this situation of gridlock at our
borders will not be worsened by the implementation of Section 110.
I thank the Subcommittee Chairman, Mr. Smith and the cosponsors for
their hard work on this legislation.
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4489, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act.
As you all know, we have been grasping for a solution to the Section
110 problem for several years now. And now, through months of hard work
and negotiations, I am pleased to lend my full support to this
bipartisan solution to this vexing problem.
This legislation will amend Section 110 of the 1996 Illegal
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act in two ways. First,
this bill will create a database to integrate and centralize the
information that is already collected about aliens entering and leaving
the United States. This solution will impose no new information
collection requirements.
Second, the bill establishes a task force that will issue findings
and recommendations on enhancing data collection. The task force will
also study and make recommendations on how to improve congestion at
border points and facilitate border crossings. This task force will be
made up of representatives of the public sector including agencies with
interests in trade, tourism, transportation, immigration, law
enforcement, national security and the environment. The task force will
also include private sector representatives from affected industries.
Section 110, as written in the 1996 Immigration Reform law, would
have had a devastating impact on the economies of border
[[Page H3576]]
communities. By requiring a record of every person entering and leaving
the US, border crossings would have been effectively shut down. The
lengthy delays that are already experienced at border crossings would
have been increased to a near stand still. This legislation today,
accomplishes the laudable goal for section 110, without effecting
border traffic. Tracking aliens in the United States is something we
need to facilitate. This bill will do that. I am thrilled that we have
come to this important compromise.
I would like to take a moment to thank Chairman Smith, for his
willingness to sit down and spend the hours and days that it took to
reach this solution. I would also like to thank Congressmen Upton,
LaFalce, McHugh, Houghton, Reynolds and all of the other members and
staff who spent so much time and effort to reach this compromise. I
urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise to join this bi-partisan effort to
improve the provisions of section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform
and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. This much needed revision of
section 110 seeks to ensure that the law enforcement objectives of the
1996 law are preserved without adversely impacting Michigan's strong
tourism and Trade industry. Mr. Speaker, to those of us who always
opposed the provisions of section 110 that would produce enormous
backups at our borders, this bill represents a much needed and long
awaited compromise. The people of the great State of Michigan, some of
whom cross the international border to Canada every day, are well
served by this revision. I look forward to finding further ways we can
improve our security and ensure the free flow of tourists and goods
through the state of Michigan.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, we had an additional speaker on the
way, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Quinn), and he has not yet
arrived. Without the presence of the gentleman, I will go on and say to
the Speaker, I have no requests for additional time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kuykendall). The question is on the
motion offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4489.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________