[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 149 (Tuesday, November 27, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H6432-H6434]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MANDATORY OPERATIONAL CONTROL REPORTING AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES ACT OF
2012
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (H.R. 6025) to provide for annual reports on the status
of operational control of the international land and maritime borders
of the United States and unlawful entries, and for other purposes, as
amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 6025
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 ``Mandatory Operational
Control Reporting and Performance Measures Act of 2012''.
SEC. 2. ANNUAL REPORTS ON OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF
INTERNATIONAL LAND AND MARITIME BORDERS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate, as part of the Department
of Homeland Security's Annual Performance Report, an annual
report on the number of miles of the international land and
maritime
[[Page H6433]]
border between the United States and Canada and the United
States and Mexico that are under operational control of the
Department, cumulatively and by sector.
(b) Estimates of Unlawful Entries.--Each report under
subsection (a) shall include the estimated number of unlawful
entries between ports of entry along the international land
and maritime borders of the United States during the period
covered by the report, determined using all available sources
of data.
(c) Independent Evaluation.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security shall make available to the Government
Accountability Office the data and methodology used to
compile the statistics used in preparing each report under
subsection (a), to ensure the suitability and statistical
validity of such data and methodology.
(d) Terminology and Methodology.--Except as provided in
subsection (e), for purposes of consistent usage of
terminology and methodology in the annual reports required
under subsection (a), the Secretary of Homeland Security
shall use the methodology used to measure such operational
control in accordance with the Department's Annual
Performance Reports for each of fiscal years 2008 through
2010.
(e) Alternate Terminology and Methodology.--The Secretary
of Homeland Security shall use the terminology and
methodology described in subsection (d) until such time as an
alternate terminology and methodology is--
(1) required by an Act of Congress; or
(2) certified as suitable and statistically valid by a
Department of Energy National Laboratory with prior expertise
in border security.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
Michigan (Mrs. Miller) and the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr.
Thompson) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Michigan.
General Leave
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend
their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as
I might consume.
Among the enumerated powers of the Constitution, providing for the
common defense is, in my mind, the most important responsibility of
this Congress. A key part of the common defense is ensuring that we
secure our Nation's borders, and in the coming months, determining how
to measure progress along the thousands of miles--north, south, and
coastal--will be absolutely crucial.
H.R. 6025, the Mandatory Operational Control Reporting and
Performance Measures Act of 2012, requires that the Department of
Homeland Security resume reporting miles of the border under
operational control and provide an estimate of the number of unlawful
entries between ports of entry.
For years, we relied on operational control as a proxy for border
security. It really became sort of the de facto term of art that
indicated how much or how little of the border the Border Patrol could
effectively control. But at last count, only 44 percent of the
southwest border was under operational control, and less than 2 percent
of the northern border was adequately secured.
I'm not quite sure how we can go from having less than half of the
border under operational control to get to the current thinking that
the border is more secure than ever, as the Secretary of Homeland
Security has said, without having a legitimate way to measure border
security.
In 2010, the Department of Homeland Security stopped reporting the
number of miles of border under operational control with the promise of
a new, more holistic measure of border security called the Border
Condition Index. Nearly 3 years later, we're still waiting for the
introduction of that measure without any idea if it will ever be used.
It's time for the Department to provide a suitable measure that
adequately captures the security situation on the border, whether that
is the Border Condition Index or something else. Until then, the
Department should resume reporting miles under operational control.
To ensure that the numbers DHS gives us are sound, this bill, Mr.
Speaker, requires that the Department give the Government
Accountability Office access to the operational control numbers for
third-party verification.
I fully understand that the leadership of the Department believes
operational control, as it is currently configured, is not the right
measure to describe security at the border. So I think we are all
really open to new, more robust standards if it supplements operational
control and better describes the level of security at our borders. But
we can't just take this administration's word for it that the border is
more secure than ever without some agreed upon standard.
To that point, I'm not sure that we should automatically assume that
any new measure stacks up against operational control. With an issue
this important, we can't just change the rules if we don't like the
results.
Under this bill, the use of anything other than operational control
to describe the security along the border must be vetted by a national
laboratory with prior expertise in border security. Validation by a
third party to ensure it accurately measures security along the border
boils down to this: trust, but verify.
In testimony, the Government Accountability Office has been clear
that the use of apprehensions of aliens at or near the border as a
proxy for border security is, at best, incomplete. It tells us that we
are catching lots of people, but it doesn't answer the most important
question: How effective are we at keeping the drug cartels, human
traffickers, and others from crossing our borders at will?
H.R. 6025 asks the Department to address this issue with an estimate
of the number of unlawful entries between ports of entry so that the
American people can put the apprehension numbers in the proper context
and can stack apprehensions against the number of people who
successfully cross the border illegally.
{time} 1640
Mr. Speaker, the men and women of the U.S. Border Patrol and the U.S.
Customs and Border Protection have a very difficult job, and I
certainly want to thank them, as I'm sure we all do, for the very hard
work that they do in some very demanding conditions to keep secure our
Nation.
How we determine or measure what a secure border looks like has been
the subject of a lot of debate, but the fact remains that the Congress
and the American people should have a verifiable way to determine if we
are making progress along the border.
I ask my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R.
6025, the Mandatory Operational Control Reporting and Performance
Measures Act of 2012, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The bill before the House today would require the Secretary of
Homeland Security to report annually to the relevant congressional
committee on the number of miles of our international land and maritime
borders that are under operational control and, number two, the
estimated number of unlawful entries between ports of entry along our
international land and maritime borders.
The Department of Homeland Security already tracks much of this data,
and I have no objections to it being provided to Congress in our effort
to better secure our borders.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I thought I had another
speaker, but I do not see him here. If the gentleman from Mississippi
has no further speakers, I am prepared to close.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. I have no further speakers.
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I would just ask my colleagues
to support this legislation that moves us toward a more full
understanding of the security situation along the border.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, as I have no further
speakers, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6025, a bill to
require the Department of Homeland Security to resume reporting
operational control as a measure of border security.
[[Page H6434]]
I thank the gentlelady from Michigan and her staff for working with
me on this bill and for bringing it to the floor today.
As part of the 2004 Border Strategy, the Border Patrol has been
reporting miles of the border under operational or effective control
and included it in its annual performance reporting.
However, as of fiscal year 2010, the metric has no longer been
reported, with the Department instead relying on reporting
apprehensions which tell only a part of what's happening at the border
and planning for the yet to be rolled out ``Border Condition Index.''
In fact, the Department's recently released 2012-2016 Border Strategy
makes no reference to operational control or any other readily
reportable metrics to evaluate border security.
Far be it from me to ascribe a motive to the situation the
Administration has created regarding the border security metrics they
are or are not employing, but it certainly looks like they would simply
prefer to ignore data that doesn't support their ``border is safer than
ever'' narrative.
Sadly, for those living in border communities, there is some daylight
between that narrative and reality and for that reason I urged the
Department to resume using operational control during this year's
appropriations process.
In speaking with Arizonans making their living on the border, I
continue to hear story after story of break-ins, run-ins with armed
groups crossing the border, and other dangerous situations.
In recent days much has been made about apparent momentum that is
building towards Congress finding solutions to the problems created by
our broken immigration system.
I have said it before and I'll say it again: there is little hope of
the American public--particularly in border communities--trusting the
Federal Government to deal with the many pressing immigration issues if
we cannot get it right when it comes to border security.
There is simply no tackling immigration reform without achieving
operational control of our southern border, and the Federal Government
can't achieve operational control if they can't define it.
This legislation is simple; it would direct the Department to resume
reporting operational control exactly as they had been previously.
If Congress and the Administration are in indeed serious about
getting about the business of addressing the issue of border security,
the successful passage of this common-sense and noncontroversial bill
is the least we can do
I urge adoption of H.R. 6025.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 6025, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________