[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 175 (Tuesday, December 6, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H7215-H7220]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CROSS-BORDER TRADE ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2016
Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 875) to provide for alternative financing arrangements for
the provision of certain services and the construction and maintenance
of infrastructure at land border ports of entry, and for other
purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 875
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 ``Cross-Border Trade
Enhancement Act of 2016''.
SEC. 2. PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS.
(a) In General.--Title IV of the Homeland Security Act of
2002 (6 U.S.C. 202 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``Subtitle G--U.S. Customs and Border Protection Public Private
Partnerships
``SEC. 481. FEE AGREEMENTS FOR CERTAIN SERVICES AT PORTS OF
ENTRY.
``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 13031(e) of the
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19
U.S.C. 58c(e)) and section 451 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1451), the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, upon the request of any entity, may enter into a
fee agreement with such entity under which--
``(1) U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall provide
services described in subsection (b) at a United States port
of entry or any other facility at which U.S. Customs and
Border Protection provides or will provide such services;
``(2) such entity shall remit to U.S. Customs and Border
Protection a fee imposed under subsection (h) in an amount
equal to the full costs that are incurred or will be incurred
in providing such services; and
``(3) if space is provided by such entity, each facility at
which U.S. Customs and Border Protection services are
performed shall be maintained and equipped by such entity,
without cost to the Federal Government, in accordance with
U.S. Customs and Border Protection specifications.
``(b) Services Described.--The services described in this
subsection are any activities of any employee or Office of
Field Operations contractor of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (except employees of the U.S. Border Patrol, as
established under section 411(e)) pertaining to, or in
support of, customs, agricultural processing, border
security, or immigration inspection-related matters at a port
of entry or any other facility at which U.S. Customs and
Border Protection provides or will provide services.
``(c) Modification of Prior Agreements.--The Commissioner
of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, at the request of an
entity who has previously entered into an agreement with U.S.
Customs and Border Protection for the reimbursement of fees
in effect on the date of enactment of this section, may
modify such agreement to implement any provisions of this
section.
``(d) Limitations.--
``(1) Impacts of services.--The Commissioner of U.S.
Customs and Border Protection--
``(A) may enter into fee agreements under this section only
for services that--
``(i) will increase or enhance the operational capacity of
U.S. Customs and Border Protection based on available
staffing and workload; and
``(ii) will not shift the cost of services funded in any
appropriations Act, or provided from any account in the
Treasury of the United States derived by the collection of
fees, to entities under this Act; and
``(B) may not enter into a fee agreement under this section
if such agreement would unduly and permanently impact
services funded in any appropriations Act, or provided from
any account in the Treasury of the United States, derived by
the collection of fees.
``(2) Number.--There shall be no limit to the number of fee
agreements that the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection may enter into under this section.
[[Page H7216]]
``(e) Air Ports of Entry.--
``(1) Fee agreement.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, a fee agreement for U.S. Customs and Border
Protection services at an air port of entry may only provide
for the payment of overtime costs of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection officers and salaries and expenses of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection employees to support U.S. Customs and
Border Protection officers in performing services described
in subsection (b).
``(2) Small airports.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), U.S.
Customs and Border Protection may receive reimbursement in
addition to overtime costs if the fee agreement is for
services at an air port of entry that has fewer than 100,000
arriving international passengers annually.
``(3) Covered services.--In addition to costs described in
paragraph (1), a fee agreement for U.S. Customs and Border
Protection services at an air port of entry referred to in
paragraph (2) may provide for the reimbursement of--
``(A) salaries and expenses of not more than 5 full-time
equivalent U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officers beyond
the number of such officers assigned to the port of entry on
the date on which the fee agreement was signed;
``(B) salaries and expenses of employees of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection, other than the officers referred to in
subparagraph (A), to support U.S. Customs and Border
Protection officers in performing law enforcement functions;
and
``(C) other costs incurred by U.S. Customs and Border
Protection relating to services described in subparagraph
(B), such as temporary placement or permanent relocation of
employees, including incentive pay for relocation, as
appropriate.
``(f) Port of Entry Size.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection shall ensure that each fee agreement
proposal is given equal consideration regardless of the size
of the port of entry.
``(g) Denied Application.--
``(1) In general.--If the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection denies a proposal for a fee agreement under
this section, the Commissioner shall provide the entity
submitting such proposal with the reason for the denial
unless--
``(A) the reason for the denial is law enforcement
sensitive; or
``(B) withholding the reason for the denial is in the
national security interests of the United States.
``(2) Judicial review.--Decisions of the Commissioner of
U.S. Customs and Border Protection under paragraph (1) are in
the discretion of the Commissioner and are not subject to
judicial review.
``(h) Fee.--
``(1) In general.--The amount of the fee to be charged
under an agreement authorized under subsection (a) shall be
paid by each entity requesting U.S. Customs and Border
Protection services, and shall be for the full cost of
providing such services, including the salaries and expenses
of employees and contractors of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, to provide such services and other costs incurred
by U.S. Customs and Border Protection relating to such
services, such as temporary placement or permanent relocation
of such employees and contractors.
``(2) Timing.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection may require that the fee referred to in paragraph
(1) be paid by each entity that has entered into a fee
agreement under subsection (a) with U.S. Customs and Border
Protection in advance of the performance of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection services.
``(3) Oversight of fees.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection shall develop a process to oversee the
services for which fees are charged pursuant to an agreement
under subsection (a), including--
``(A) a determination and report on the full costs of
providing such services, and a process for increasing such
fees, as necessary;
``(B) the establishment of a periodic remittance schedule
to replenish appropriations, accounts, or funds, as
necessary; and
``(C) the identification of costs paid by such fees.
``(i) Deposit of Funds.--
``(1) Account.--Funds collected pursuant to any agreement
entered into pursuant to subsection (a)--
``(A) shall be deposited as offsetting collections;
``(B) shall remain available until expended without fiscal
year limitation; and
``(C) shall be credited to the applicable appropriation,
account, or fund for the amount paid out of such
appropriation, account, or fund for any expenses incurred or
to be incurred by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in
providing U.S. Customs and Border Protection services under
any such agreement and any other costs incurred or to be
incurred by U.S. Customs and Border Protection relating to
such services.
``(2) Return of unused funds.--The Commissioner of U.S.
Customs and Border Protection shall return any unused funds
collected and deposited into the account described in
paragraph (1) if a fee agreement entered into pursuant to
subsection (a) is terminated for any reason or the terms of
such fee agreement change by mutual agreement to cause a
reduction of U.S. Customs and Border Protections services. No
interest shall be owed upon the return of any such unused
funds.
``(j) Termination.--
``(1) In general.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection shall terminate the services provided
pursuant to a fee agreement entered into under subsection (a)
with an entity that, after receiving notice from the
Commissioner that a fee under subsection (h) is due, fails to
pay such fee in a timely manner. If such services are
terminated, all costs incurred by U.S. Customs and Border
Protection that have not been paid shall become immediately
due and payable. Interest on unpaid fees shall accrue based
on the rate and amount established under sections 6621 and
6622 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
``(2) Penalty.--Any entity that, after notice and demand
for payment of any fee under subsection (h), fails to pay
such fee in a timely manner shall be liable for a penalty or
liquidated damage equal to two times the amount of such fee.
Any such amount collected under this paragraph shall be
deposited into the appropriate account specified under
subsection (i) and shall be available as described in such
subsection.
``(3) Termination by the entity.--Any entity who has
previously entered into an agreement with U.S. Customs and
Border Protection for the reimbursement of fees in effect on
the date of enactment of this section, or under the
provisions of this section, may request that such agreement
be amended to provide for termination upon advance notice,
length, and terms that are negotiated between such entity and
U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
``(k) Annual Report.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection shall--
``(1) submit an annual report identifying the activities
undertaken and the agreements entered into pursuant to this
section to--
``(A) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;
``(B) the Committee on Finance of the Senate;
``(C) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate;
``(D) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate;
``(E) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives;
``(F) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives;
``(G) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives; and
``(H) the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of
Representatives; and
``(2) not later than 15 days before entering into a fee
agreement, notify the members of Congress that represent the
State or Congressional District in which the affected port of
entry or facility is located of such agreement.
``(l) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section may be
construed as imposing on U.S. Customs and Border Protection
any responsibilities, duties, or authorities relating to real
property.
``SEC. 482. PORT OF ENTRY DONATION AUTHORITY.
``(a) Personal Property Donation Authority.--
``(1) In general.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, in consultation with the Administrator of
General Services, may enter into an agreement with any entity
to accept a donation of personal property, money, or
nonpersonal services for the uses described in paragraph (3)
only with respect to the following locations at which U.S.
Customs and Border Protection performs or will be performing
inspection services:
``(A) A new or existing sea or air port of entry.
``(B) An existing Federal Government-owned land port of
entry.
``(C) A new Federal Government-owned land port of entry
if--
``(i) the fair market value of the donation is $50,000,000
or less; and
``(ii) the fair market value, including any personal and
real property donations in total, of such port of entry when
completed, is $50,000,000 or less.
``(2) Limitation on monetary donations.--Any monetary
donation accepted pursuant to this subsection may not be used
to pay the salaries of U.S. Customs and Border Protection
employees performing inspection services.
``(3) Uses.--Donations accepted pursuant to this subsection
may be used for activities of the Office of Field Operations
set forth in subparagraphs (A) through (F) of section
411(g)(3), which are related to a new or existing sea or air
port of entry or a new or existing Federal Government-owned
land port of entry described in paragraph (1), including
expenses related to--
``(A) furniture, fixtures, equipment, or technology,
including the installation or deployment of such items; and
``(B) the operation and maintenance of such furniture,
fixtures, equipment, or technology.
``(b) Real Property Donation Authority.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (3), the
Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and the
Administrator of the General Services Administration, as
applicable, may enter into an agreement with any entity to
accept a donation of real property or money for uses
described in paragraph (2) only with respect to the following
locations at which U.S. Customs and Border Protection
performs or will be performing inspection services:
[[Page H7217]]
``(A) A new or existing sea or air port of entry.
``(B) An existing Federal Government-owned land port of
entry.
``(C) A new Federal Government-owned land port of entry
if--
``(i) the fair market value of the donation is $50,000,000
or less; and
``(ii) the fair market value, including any personal and
real property donations in total, of such port of entry when
completed, is $50,000,000 or less.
``(2) Use.--Donations accepted pursuant to this subsection
may be used for activities of the Office of Field Operations
set forth in section 411(g), which are related to the
construction, alteration, operation, or maintenance of a new
or existing sea or air port of entry or a new or existing a
Federal Government-owned land port of entry described in
paragraph (1), including expenses related to--
``(A) land acquisition, design, construction, repair, or
alteration; and
``(B) operation and maintenance of such port of entry
facility.
``(3) Limitation on real property donations.--A donation of
real property under this subsection at an existing land port
of entry owned by the General Services Administration may
only be accepted by the Administrator of General Services.
``(4) Sunset.--
``(A) In general.--The authority to enter into an agreement
under this subsection shall terminate on the date that is
four years after the date of the enactment of this section.
``(B) Rule of construction.--The termination date referred
to in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to carrying out the
terms of an agreement under this subsection if such agreement
is entered into before such termination date.
``(c) General Provisions.--
``(1) Duration.--An agreement entered into under subsection
(a) or (b) (and, in the case of such subsection (b), in
accordance with paragraph (4) of such subsection) may last as
long as required to meet the terms of such agreement.
``(2) Criteria.--In carrying out an agreement entered into
under subsection (a) or (b), the Commissioner of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection, in consultation with the Administrator
of General Services, shall establish criteria regarding--
``(A) the selection and evaluation of donors;
``(B) the identification of roles and responsibilities
between U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the General
Services Administration, and donors;
``(C) the identification, allocation, and management of
explicit and implicit risks of partnering between the Federal
Government and donors;
``(D) decision-making and dispute resolution processes; and
``(E) processes for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and
the General Services Administration, as applicable, to
terminate agreements if selected donors are not meeting the
terms of any such agreement, including the security standards
established by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
``(3) Evaluation procedures.--
``(A) In general.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, in consultation with the Administrator of
General Services, as applicable, shall--
``(i) establish criteria for evaluating a proposal to enter
into an agreement under subsection (a) or (b); and
``(ii) make such criteria publicly available.
``(B) Considerations.--Criteria established pursuant to
subparagraph (A) shall consider--
``(i) the impact of a proposal referred to in such
subparagraph on the land, sea, or air port of entry at issue
and other ports of entry or similar facilities or other
infrastructure near the location of the proposed donation;
``(ii) such proposal's potential to increase trade and
travel efficiency through added capacity;
``(iii) such proposal's potential to enhance the security
of the port of entry at issue;
``(iv) the impact of the proposal on reducing wait times at
that port of entry or facility and other ports of entry on
the same border;
``(v) for a donation under subsection (b)--
``(I) whether such donation satisfies the requirements of
such proposal, or whether additional real property would be
required; and
``(II) how such donation was acquired, including if eminent
domain was used;
``(vi) the funding available to complete the intended use
of such donation;
``(vii) the costs of maintaining and operating such
donation;
``(viii) the impact of such proposal on U.S. Customs and
Border Protection staffing requirements; and
``(ix) other factors that the Commissioner or Administrator
determines to be relevant.
``(C) Determination and notification.--
``(i) Incomplete proposals.--
``(I) In general.--Not later than 60 days after receiving
the proposals for a donation agreement from an entity, the
Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall
notify such entity as to whether such proposal is complete or
incomplete.
``(II) Resubmission.--If the Commissioner of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection determines that a proposal is
incomplete, the Commissioner shall--
``(aa) notify the appropriate entity and provide such
entity with a description of all information or material that
is needed to complete review of the proposal; and
``(bb) allow the entity to resubmit the proposal with
additional information and material described in item (aa) to
complete the proposal.
``(ii) Complete proposals.--Not later than 180 days after
receiving a completed proposal to enter into an agreement
under subsection (a) or (b), the Commissioner of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection, with the concurrence of the
Administrator of General Services, as applicable, shall--
``(I) determine whether to approve or deny such proposal;
and
``(II) notify the entity that submitted such proposal of
such determination.
``(4) Supplemental funding.--Except as required under
section 3307 of title 40, United States Code, real property
donations to the Administrator of General Services made
pursuant to subsection (a) and (b) at a GSA-owned land port
of entry may be used in addition to any other funding for
such purpose, including appropriated funds, property, or
services.
``(5) Return of donations.--The Commissioner of U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, or the Administrator of
General Services, as applicable, may return any donation made
pursuant to subsection (a) or (b). No interest shall be owed
to the donor with respect to any donation provided under such
subsections that is returned pursuant to this subsection.
``(6) Prohibition on certain funding.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subsections (a)
and (b) regarding the acceptance of donations, the
Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the
Administrator of General Services, as applicable, may not,
with respect to an agreement entered into under either of
such subsections, obligate or expend amounts in excess of
amounts that have been appropriated pursuant to any
appropriations Act for purposes specified in either of such
subsections or otherwise made available for any of such
purposes.
``(B) Certification requirement.--Before accepting any
donations pursuant to an agreement under subsection (a) or
(b), the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection
shall certify to the congressional committees set forth in
paragraph (7) that the donation will not be used for the
construction of a detention facility or a border fence or
wall.
``(7) Annual reports.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, in collaboration with the Administrator of
General Services, as applicable, shall submit an annual
report identifying the activities undertaken and agreements
entered into pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) to--
``(A) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;
``(B) the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the
Senate;
``(C) the Committee on Finance of the Senate;
``(D) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate;
``(E) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate;
``(F) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives;
``(G) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives;
``(H) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives;
``(I) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of
the House of Representatives; and
``(J) the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of
Representatives.
``(d) GAO Report.--The Comptroller General of the United
States shall submit an annual report to the congressional
committees referred to in subsection (c)(7) that evaluates--
``(1) fee agreements entered into pursuant to section 481;
``(2) donation agreements entered into pursuant to
subsections (a) and (b); and
``(3) the fees and donations received by U.S. Customs and
Border Protection pursuant to such agreements.
``(e) Judicial Review.--Decisions of the Commissioner of
U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Administrator of
the General Services Administration under this section
regarding the acceptance of real or personal property are in
the discretion of the Commissioner and the Administrator and
are not subject to judicial review.
``(f) Rule of Construction.--Except as otherwise provided
in this section, nothing in this section may be construed as
affecting in any manner the responsibilities, duties, or
authorities of U.S. Customs and Border Protection or the
General Services Administration.
``SEC. 483. CURRENT AND PROPOSED AGREEMENTS.
``Nothing in this subtitle or in section 4 of the Cross-
Border Trade Enhancement Act of 2016 may be construed as
affecting--
``(1) any agreement entered into pursuant to section 560 of
division D of the Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-6) or section 559 of
title V of division F of the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2014 (6 U.S.C. 211 note; Public Law 113-76), as in existence
on the day before the date of the enactment of this subtitle,
and any such agreement shall continue to have full force and
effect on and after such date; or
[[Page H7218]]
``(2) a proposal accepted for consideration by U.S. Customs
and Border Protection pursuant to such section 559, as in
existence on the day before such date of enactment.
``SEC. 484. DEFINITIONS.
``In this subtitle:
``(1) Donor.--The term `donor' means any entity that is
proposing to make a donation under this Act.
``(2) Entity.--The term `entity' means any--
``(A) person;
``(B) partnership, corporation, trust, estate, cooperative,
association, or any other organized group of persons;
``(C) Federal, State or local government (including any
subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof); or
``(D) any other private or governmental entity.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section
1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 is amended by
adding at the end of the list of items relating to title IV
the following:
``Subtitle G--U.S. Customs and Border Protection Public Private
Partnerships
``Sec. 481. Fee agreements for certain services at ports of entry.
``Sec. 482. Port of entry donation authority.
``Sec. 483. Current and proposed agreements.
``Sec. 484. Definitions.''.
SEC. 3. MODIFICATION OF EXISTING REPORTS TO CONGRESS.
Section 907(b) of the Trade Facilitation and Trade
Enforcement Act of 2015 (Public Law 114-125) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; or''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) the program for entering into reimbursable fee
agreements with U.S. Customs and Border Protection
established under section 481 of the Homeland Security Act of
2002.''.
SEC. 4. REPEALS.
(a) Contract Authority.--Section 560 of division D of the
Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013
(Public Law 113-6) is repealed.
(b) Partnership Pilot Program.--Section 559 of division F
of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (6 U.S.C. 211
note; Public Law 113-76) is repealed.
SEC. 5. WAIVER OF POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION REQUIREMENT FOR
CERTAIN LAW ENFORCEMENT APPLICANTS.
Section 3 of the Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2010 (Public
Law 111-376; 6 U.S.C. 221) is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``The Secretary'' and inserting the following:
``(a) In General.--The Secretary'';
(2) in subsection (a)(1), as redesignated, by inserting
``(except as provided in subsection (b))'' after ``Border
Protection''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Waiver.--The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection may waive the polygraph examination requirement
under subsection (a)(1) for any applicant who--
``(1) is deemed suitable for employment;
``(2) holds a current, active Top Secret/Sensitive
Compartmented Information Clearance;
``(3) has a current Single Scope Background Investigation;
``(4) was not granted any waivers to obtain his or her
clearance; and
``(5) is a veteran (as defined in section 2108 of title 5,
United States Code).''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Boustany) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana.
General Leave
Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 875, currently under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Louisiana?
There was no objection.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
After my remarks, I will include in the Record an exchange of letters
between the chairmen of the two committees.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 875, the Cross-Border Trade Enhancement Act of
2016, is a commonsense, broadly supported, bipartisan bill that will
provide a mechanism for increased trade enforcement while also
enhancing the facilitation of legitimate trade and travel. I am pleased
to note that the other body passed an identical bill by unanimous
consent just last week, signaling widespread support. Through this
legislation, we continue to demonstrate our commitment to providing the
necessary tools to maintain American economic competitiveness while
preventing the entry of illicit goods into the United States.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection is the Federal law enforcement
agency responsible for facilitating international travel and trade at
our Nation's ports of entry as well as for detecting and interdicting
counterfeit, unsafe, and fraudulently entered goods. Last year, the CBP
processed more than 382 million passengers at the Nation's 328 land,
sea, and air ports of entry and over $2.4 trillion worth of goods. The
CBP estimates that inbound trade and traffic will continue to grow.
In 2013 and 2014, Congress created 5-year pilot programs authorizing
the CBP to enter into reimbursable agreements with public and private
entities as a way to meet the escalating demands of increased trade and
traffic at the ports of entry. These agreements with private and public
sector entities allow for additional inspectional services beyond what
the CBP would have normally allocated at ports of entry. They provide
additional resources to increase enforcement and processing capacity
and to improve dated infrastructure at our ports.
Since 2013, the CBP has entered into reimbursable service agreements
with 29 stakeholders at land, sea, and air ports of entry. These
agreements have contributed to more than 125,000 additional processing
hours to meet stakeholder demand during which 3 million travelers and
almost 460,000 vehicles were processed. The pilot programs have been
widely regarded as forward-leaning and an effective way to enforce our
laws at the border and to meet the demands of increased trade and
travel.
Today's legislation would move beyond these tested pilot programs to
establish more permanent authority for the CBP to enter into these
arrangements, providing the opportunity to make the CBP more efficient
and effective at our borders.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
House of Representatives,
Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, DC, December 5, 2016.
Hon. Kevin Brady,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Brady: I am writing concerning H.R. 875, the
Cross-Border Trade Enhancement Act of 2015.
This legislation contains provisions within the Committee
on Agriculture's Rule X jurisdiction. As a result of your
having consulted with the Committee and in order to expedite
this bill for floor consideration, the Committee on
Agriculture will forego action on the bill. This is being
done on the basis of our mutual understanding that doing so
will in no way diminish or alter the jurisdiction of the
Committee on Agriculture with respect to the appointment of
conferees, or to any future jurisdictional claim over the
subject matters contained in the bill or similar legislation.
I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming
this understanding, and would request that you include a copy
of this letter and your response in the Committee Report and
in the Congressional Record during the floor consideration of
this bill. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
K. Michael Conaway,
Chairman.
____
Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, December 5, 2016.
Hon. K. Michael Conaway,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Conaway, Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 875, the ``Cross-Border Trade Enhancement Act of 2015.''
As you noted, the Committee on Agriculture has a
jurisdictional interest in this bill.
I am most appreciative of your decision to waive formal
consideration of H.R. 875 so that it may proceed
expeditiously to the House floor. I acknowledge that although
you waived formal consideration of the bill, the Committee on
Agriculture is in no way waiving its jurisdiction over the
subject matter contained in those provisions of the bill that
fall within your Rule X jurisdiction. I would support your
effort to seek appointment of an appropriate number of
conferees on any House-Senate conference involving this
legislation.
I will include a copy of our letters in the committee
report on this legislation, as well as in the Congressional
Record during consideration on the House floor.
Sincerely,
Kevin Brady,
Chairman.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) will control the time.
There was no objection.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
[[Page H7219]]
I stand in support of the Cross-Border Trade Enhancement Act of 2016.
This bill offers a pragmatic and bipartisan solution to a real and
growing problem: Customs and Border Protection simply has not been able
to keep pace, and has not been given the resources to keep pace, with
the dramatic growth in travel into the United States.
In the last fiscal year, for example, the CBP processed more than 384
million passengers and more than $2.4 trillion of imported goods
through our air, land, and sea ports, but the CBP's staffing levels
have not kept pace with this growth over the years. The result has been
substantial and unnecessary delays as passengers and cargo ships wait
to be processed.
Not only is this a bipartisan issue, but just as importantly, I think
it calls into meaning how we might solve some of the problems that
confront America economically. A case in point: it is generally large
businesses, medium-sized businesses, and small businesses that tend not
to take a position in support of more government but which, in this
instance, would ask for more government. There is nothing wrong with
that inconsistency. In fact, I think, in this particular instance, it
works quite well because they will ask for more agents for the purpose
of moving cargo faster. I think that is an entirely reasonable
position.
This bill will help to address those delays by increasing trade and
travel efficiencies and by eliminating unnecessary redtape in the
hiring process at no cost to the taxpayer.
This approach has already been tested, and it has passed the test. In
2013 and 2014, Congress authorized pilot programs, as Dr. Boustany has
noted, to enable the CBP to enter into agreements with private sector,
State, and local government entities that would reimburse the CBP for
customs-related personnel services at ports of entry. These public-
private agreements are believed to have decreased wait times by an
average of 30 percent at the ports at which they were implemented. The
bill also allows for more of these agreements and for a longer period
of time.
For these reasons, I support this bipartisan bill, and I urge my
colleagues to vote for it later on this afternoon.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Hurd).
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 875, the
Cross-Border Trade Enhancement Act.
This bipartisan bill is the product of significant work throughout
the course of the 114th Congress across both Chambers and across
committee jurisdiction to ensure that a program that many border
communities rely upon continues to return dividends.
I am proud to represent over 800 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border,
including the communities and the businesses that thrive on cross-
border trade. Over the past two decades, our Nation's trade with Mexico
has grown by leaps and bounds, much of it through our land ports of
entry. In 2015 alone, Texas businesses exported $92 billion in goods
and services to Mexico--that is $92 billion with a ``B''--more than the
next four largest markets combined. However, border infrastructure has
not kept up with the growth. The lack of infrastructure and staffing
that is necessary to support increased levels of trade crossing into
this country has a very real impact on those we serve and work with
daily.
This legislation fixes the problem by empowering local leaders and
increasing flexibility, with little to no cost to the Federal
Government and taxpayers. By allowing local communities and
organizations to form public-private partnerships with the Federal
Government and to make improvements to our ports of entry, we are
investing in the infrastructure that supports our economy. Similar
legislation passed the House in a bipartisan manner earlier this year
and passed out of the Senate unanimously.
The failure to capitalize on this momentum merely leaves this
critical program adrift right when its benefits are about to be
realized. Decreasing the time it takes to move goods and services
safely across the border will have a tremendous economic impact on not
only the region, but on our Nation.
I thank the leadership of fellow Texans and my friends, Senator
Cornyn, Mr. Cuellar, and Mr. O'Rourke; and I urge my colleagues to
support this legislation.
{time} 1415
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Cuellar), who has been a leader on this very issue and has helped
to design the very product that is in front of us today, and I think
that he can take great satisfaction from the bipartisan nature of the
legislation that we are about to entertain.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts
(Mr. Neal) and his staff for helping to put this together. I appreciate
it.
I also want to thank the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany) and
his staff for putting this bill on a very fast-moving track.
And in particular, I want to thank my good old friend--and I say
``good old friend'' in a nice way--Chairman Kevin Brady. We go back to
working together in the State legislature. We have been working in
Texas on issues like this for so many years, and I certainly want to
thank Chairman Brady for his work and the bipartisan staff for moving
this bill quickly.
In particular, I want to thank my colleagues. Mr. Hurd over here, who
has a lot of border and he has got a lot of ports of entry, I want to
thank him for his leadership on this bill.
I also want to thank Beto O'Rourke, my friend from El Paso, who also
understands, just like Mr. Hurd does, the importance of trade.
I thank our Senate sponsor, Senator Cornyn, who has done a great job
on this particular bill.
The Cross-Border Trade Enhancement Act of 2016 is a bill that builds
upon the work that Chairman John Carter and myself added in the
appropriations bill back in 2013 and 2014 to ease the delays and
improve the infrastructure at our Nation's land and sea and air ports
of entry.
As has been said, trade and travel to the U.S. has been increasing
for the last 10 years. In fiscal year 2015, our Nation saw 382 million
travelers processed at the Nation's 328 land, sea, and air ports of
entry. In particular I want to emphasize the land ports of entry. Over
80 percent of all of the people who come into the United States, all of
the goods that come into the United States, come in through land ports
of entry, and that is why this bill is very important.
As was mentioned a few minutes ago, $2.4 trillion of trade was
processed at our ports of entry. And just as an example--and I know Mr.
Hurd mentioned it; I know Mr. O'Rourke is going to mention it--in my
port of entry, Laredo, for example, it is a small town of 250,000, but
it handles 14,000 trailers a day of trade between the U.S. and Mexico.
If you look at the largest customs districts, you have L.A., New York,
and then you have Laredo. So this bill is very important to Laredo and
the rest of the border itself.
Despite this growing trade that we have at our ports of entry, CBP
staffing levels have been stagnant. Back in 2014, the Appropriations
Committee and Congress authorized over $255 million to increase the CBP
workforce, which includes hiring 2,000 new CBP officers. However, they
have been struggling to hire those 2,000 CBP officers due to attrition,
but also due to the long time that it takes to hire those new officers.
The other part that is important is, if you look at the land ports of
entry, for example, there are a lot of challenges--and I am talking
about the southern and the northern ports of entry that we have. In
fact, it would cost us about $5 billion in capital improvements to make
sure that we do this work.
What are we doing in Congress? Well, we are adding about $146 million
a year to meet this $5 billion that we need. So at this rate of $146
million a year, it would take 34 years to meet that $5 billion that we
need. Therefore, the Federal Government is not going to add those
appropriations.
I understand money is tight. We need to bring in the local government
and especially the private sector to make sure that we address the
undersized facilities, the outmoded technologies that we have, the
officer safety issues that we have, and the long wait times that we
have, which I call parking lots, because a lot of times these trucks
are waiting in the middle of the bridge.
[[Page H7220]]
Therefore, on sections 559 and 560, what we did is we said we are
going to bring the private sector in, and it has worked well in doing
this. We have seen--and I think it has been mentioned, but I will
mention it again. We entered into 29 of those stakeholder reimbursement
service agreements, and we saw more additional processing hours to make
sure that we moved 3 million additional travelers and almost 460,000
new vehicles.
Again, this is going to help us.
What does this bill do? This bill will help us expand that pilot
program in many ways and authorize it for 10 years. This bill will
limit the number of reimbursable service agreements that we have at the
ports of entry, but, more importantly, it is going to allow us to hire
CBP officers faster. I know the chairman knows this very well. Imagine
if we have this. We have got to bring officers into the CBP faster, and
this is what this bill will do.
So again, I want to thank the House sponsors, Kevin Brady, Chairman
Michael McCaul, Mr. Hurd, and Mr. O'Rourke, and, of course, on the
Senate side, Senator Cornyn and Senator Klobuchar for making sure that
we did it and that we are doing it in a bipartisan way.
I ask that we pass this bill.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Nevada (Mr. Amodei).
Mr. AMODEI. I thank my colleague from the Pelican State and also the
ranking member from the Bay State.
Mr. Speaker, I am a bit nervous. I don't want to break up this Lone
Star class reunion here, but speaking on behalf of a small place in the
intermountain west, section 481 of H.R. 875 addresses a CBP staffing
issue at smaller land port of entry airports.
As we all know, the CBP mission at our numerous ports of entry is
growing, and adequate staffing at the larger ports needs to be
augmented. However, airport authorities and smaller land ports of entry
are also increasing their international passenger counts and need
additional CBP personnel to adequately screen their passengers.
The language contained herein allows small land port airports to
reimburse CBP the actual cost of assigning up to five more CBP
screening personnel, thereby keeping screening times within reasonable
limits for those air passengers. This language represents bicameral,
bipartisan, nationwide consensus on a needed staffing reimbursement
option for CBP. Similarly, I urge Members' bipartisan nationwide
support.
God bless the State of Texas and the other 49 also.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. O'Rourke), another individual who has had a profound influence on
this legislation and has had a long-time interest in the topic as well.
Mr. O'ROURKE. I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts, our new
ranking member on the committee, for yielding and for his work on this
important bill.
Mr. Speaker, there are few things as important for us in this
Congress to work on as creating more jobs and sustaining those that we
have right now. U.S.-Mexico trade today supports more than 6 million
jobs in every single State of the Union, 500,000 jobs in the State of
Texas alone, and one out of every four jobs in the community that I
have the honor to represent, El Paso, Texas.
The men and women who serve in Customs and Border Protection, the
officers in blue at our ports of entry, are understaffed and
overstressed, and they need our help. What we are doing in this bill is
allowing local communities and local stakeholders who have an interest
in the success of our ports of entry and in U.S.-Mexico trade and in
creating more jobs to fund the necessary overtime hours and
infrastructure improvements at those ports.
I want to thank my colleagues from both sides of the aisle and in
both Chambers--Senator Cornyn in the other Chamber, Members Cuellar and
Hurd and others in this one--who see the wisdom in allowing local
communities to fill the gap where government has been unable to do so.
Whether it is the $90 billion in U.S.-Mexico trade that crosses the
El Paso-Ciudad Juarez ports of entry every year or the 32 million
inspections that are conducted there, this is a way to grow our
economy. It is a way to ensure that we are more secure because we know
precisely who is coming in when we have the manpower and infrastructure
to inspect all those who want to cross in here. We are allowing local
communities and not the Federal Government to pick up the tab in a way
that is going to benefit this country as a whole.
I couldn't help but notice the current chair of the House Veterans'
Affairs Committee, the incoming chair, and the ranking member, who are
all here. I know they are all pleased to see in this bill an expedited
process to hire our veterans, to transition them from Active Duty
service to meaningful employment as a Customs officer through an
expedited process in this bill. That means we staff more of our CBP
positions, we put more veterans to work, and we do better for this
country.
This is a bill that should have the support of every single Member of
this Congress, and I urge its quick passage.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, I have no other Members wishing to speak
on the bill, and I am prepared to close.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to thank Dr. Boustany, who has been a friend on the Ways and
Means Committee. I assume this might be his last time handling
legislation on the floor. He was great to work with over the years.
I take some satisfaction, Mr. Speaker, that having either been
chairman or ranking member of the Tax Policy Subcommittee of the
Committee on Ways and Means, that I simply wore them all down because,
every 2 years, they would send somebody else over to share that
responsibility.
Dr. Boustany is a real gentleman. He has been a friend, and he has
been a very nice guy to work with.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for his very, very
kind words. It has been a true pleasure working with him on the Tax
Policy Subcommittee. I want to congratulate him on becoming ranking
member of the Ways and Means Committee. I know he will do a fabulous
job. I am only sorry I won't be around next year to work with him and
beyond. I congratulate him.
Godspeed, do a great job, and get tax reform done.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 875, the Cross-
Border Trade Enhancement Act of 2016, to strengthen our ability to
enforce U.S. trade laws.
I am very pleased that our solution has such strong bipartisan
support and makes good on our commitment to stop the flow of illicit
goods while also facilitating legitimate trade that is vital to
American economic competitiveness. I urge passage of this bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 875, 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.
____________________