Overview
Title
To terminate the Shelter and Services Program of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H. R. 1668 wants to stop a part of FEMA's work where they help with crowded places at the border by providing shelter. The bill also plans to take back some money that was set aside for it before.
Summary AI
H. R. 1668 aims to end the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Shelter and Services Program specifically related to supporting non-Federal entities in providing shelter and other activities to relieve overcrowding in U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities. The bill involves prohibiting FEMA from carrying out these types of programs and rescinding certain funds allocated for these purposes in past appropriations acts. It is titled the “End FEMA Benefits for Illegal Immigrants Act.”
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary
H.R. 1668 is a bill introduced in the United States House of Representatives with the intention of terminating a specific Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) program. The program in question supports non-Federal entities in providing shelter and related services, particularly in relation to alleviating overcrowding at U.S. Customs and Border Protection holding facilities. The bill, titled the “End FEMA Benefits for Illegal Immigrants Act,” seeks to prohibit FEMA from continuing these activities and rescinds certain funds previously allocated for this purpose under recent appropriations acts.
Significant Issues
This bill raises several important issues. One primary concern is its politically charged title, “End FEMA Benefits for Illegal Immigrants Act,” which might be perceived as contentious or divisive without the provision of clear definitions or context within the text. This could lead to differing interpretations about its intentions and effects.
Furthermore, the language used in the bill is somewhat vague. Terms like “program to support sheltering and related activities” and “non-Federal entities” lack specific definitions, which could lead to ambiguity about what precisely is being terminated and which organizations would be affected. This lack of clarity extends to the rescission of funds from two prior appropriations acts, posing questions about the impact on FEMA and U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s operational capacities.
Public Impact
From a broad public perspective, the bill could affect how emergency management resources are allocated, particularly in contexts involving immigration and border control. By terminating funding for certain sheltering activities, it might change how quickly and effectively border facilities can respond to overcrowding issues. The possible repercussions could impact not just the individuals directly involved in such situations but also broader humanitarian and civil rights considerations.
Impact on Stakeholders
For specific stakeholders, such as FEMA and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the bill would have direct operational implications. It might create changes in how these agencies manage overcrowding in holding facilities and could influence their overall efficacy in emergency management and border control.
Non-Federal entities, potentially including charities or local governments that provide shelter-related services, may face challenges if funding and support are abruptly discontinued. This could influence their capacity to assist in managing overcrowded facilities, especially in areas heavily impacted by immigration.
Lastly, the communities near border facilities might experience changes in local dynamics, particularly if overcrowding issues are not effectively managed due to the rescission of funds and support. This could also lead to wider societal debates about the treatment and humanitarian considerations of immigrants and asylum seekers.
Overall, while the bill’s intentions are clear in addressing specific immigration-related benefits, its broader impacts and the clarity of its provisions remain areas requiring careful consideration.
Issues
The title of the Act, 'End FEMA Benefits for Illegal Immigrants Act', is politically charged. Without definitions or context in Section 1, the title could lead to divisive interpretations regarding its intention and scope and may impact public opinion and legal interpretation.
Section 1 lacks clarity due to the absence of details, provisions, or definitions, making it difficult to understand, implement, or audit for potential issues.
Section 2(a) leaves vague what is meant by ‘program to support sheltering and related activities’. The lack of precise definitions could lead to confusion in what specific activities are terminated and could have broader impacts than intended.
The term 'non-Federal entities' in Section 2(a) requires clarification to prevent ambiguity about which organizations are affected.
The implications of rescinding funds in Section 2(b) may have significant operational impacts on FEMA and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, especially given the lack of rationale or assessment on the use and effectiveness of these funds.
The bill's cross-references to other legal documents in Section 2(b) could confuse readers unfamiliar with them, leading to misunderstandings about financial and administrative implications.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section gives the short title of the Act, which is called the “End FEMA Benefits for Illegal Immigrants Act”.
2. Termination Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section prohibits the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) from supporting programs that improve or build facilities for non-Federal entities to alleviate overcrowding in U.S. Customs and Border Protection's short-term holding facilities. Additionally, it rescinds specific funds previously allocated to FEMA for these purposes from two recent Consolidated Appropriations Acts.