Overview
Title
To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop a plan to identify, integrate, and deploy new, innovative, disruptive, or other emerging or advanced technologies to enhance, or address capability gaps in, border security operations, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 7832 wants the leaders in charge of protecting the U.S. borders to make a plan to use cool, new technologies like smart computers and radars to keep the country safe. They'll work with others to find and use these gadgets, checking to see if they make everything better without causing any problems, and share updates on how it's all going.
Summary AI
H.R. 7832 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to create a detailed plan for using new and advanced technologies to improve U.S. border security. The plan will explore various technologies, including artificial intelligence and radar systems, and assess their impact on security and privacy. It outlines how the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will work with other government and private sector partners to identify and deploy these technologies, aiming to fill current gaps in border security capabilities. The bill also requires regular reporting on the progress and results of these efforts, including studies of potential improvements and any negative consequences.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Overview of the Bill
H.R. 7832, titled the "Emerging Innovative Border Technologies Act," is designed to task the Secretary of Homeland Security with developing a comprehensive strategy to modernize and enhance U.S. border security operations. The focus is on using cutting-edge technologies, including artificial intelligence, machine learning, drones, and other advanced systems, to close existing security gaps. The bill mandates collaboration between various government bodies, particularly U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and involves coordination with external partners such as the private sector and academic institutions.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several issues accompany the implementation of this legislation. Firstly, the bill sets a 180-day deadline for the initial plan, which might be too ambitious, risking rushed or incomplete outcomes. There is concern about the broad range of technologies discussed; this could dilute focus and accountability, making it difficult to target specific border security challenges efficiently. The use of terms like "disruptive" could also carry negative implications, potentially causing friction among stakeholders.
Additionally, the bill lacks detail on how CBP will determine if it requires new or additional procurement authorities for these technologies, leading to potential procedural inefficiencies. Financial implications are not explicitly addressed, which poses questions regarding budgeting and resources for these initiatives. Lastly, the lack of precise definitions for terms such as "capability gaps" and "metrics" might lead to inconsistent interpretations and evaluations of the program's effectiveness.
Potential Impact on the Public
The implementation of this bill could have substantial effects on national security, potentially making border areas more secure and efficient in managing illegal activities. For the general public, this could translate into enhanced national safety and reduced illegal trafficking. However, there is also the potential risk of privacy concerns, particularly relating to the deployment of intrusive technologies like surveillance drones and data collection systems.
The emphasis on new technologies could also stimulate innovation and job creation in the tech sector. However, the swift push for deployment, driven by the bill's timelines, may lead to public skepticism regarding oversight and the responsible application of these technologies.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Various stakeholders will be affected differently by this legislation. CBP and the Department of Homeland Security stand to gain enhanced operational capabilities, but they also face the challenge of rapidly developing and integrating these technologies within current systems. Success will depend highly on inter-agency cooperation and adaptation to new technology-induced workflows.
The private sector, particularly technology firms, could benefit significantly. Businesses that can provide relevant technologies may find new opportunities for collaboration with the government, potentially spurring growth and innovation in the tech industry. Yet, there might be competitive pressure to meet the high demands in a rapidly progressing market.
For border communities, the potential deployment of advanced technology brings concerns about privacy and local impact. It's crucial that any new systems implemented consider community welfare and do not overly infringe on civil liberties or disrupt day-to-day life.
In conclusion, while the "Emerging Innovative Border Technologies Act" aims to advance U.S. border security through modern technology, it presents several challenges that need careful navigation to ensure that its implementation is both effective and sensitive to the needs and rights of all stakeholders involved.
Issues
The phrase 'not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act' in Section 2(a) might create a tight deadline, potentially leading to rushed decisions or incomplete plans for integrating and deploying new technologies in border security.
The long and diverse list of technologies referenced in Section 2(a) implies a broad scope, which could lead to fragmented efforts, diffuse accountability, and challenges in effectively targeting specific security needs.
The term 'disruptive' used in Section 2(a) might have negative connotations, creating resistance or misunderstandings during the implementation of new technologies.
Section 2(b)(5) lacks specificity regarding the criteria for determining if additional or alternative procurement authorities are needed, which could hinder the clarity and efficiency of CBP's technology adoption processes.
The bill, including Section 2(b), does not explicitly address budgetary implications or constraints, raising concerns about the risk of overspending or the need for additional appropriations.
Many terms within Section 2 such as 'disruptive technologies', 'capability gaps', and 'metrics' are high-level and abstract without precise definitions, potentially leading to inconsistent understanding or measurement of success.
The language regarding 'existing or new programs of record' in Section 2(c)(1) and Section 2(c)(2)(A) is vague, potentially causing confusion in the transition processes for new technologies.
The bill, specifically Section 2(b)(12), passively identifies technologies without addressing if CBP has the capabilities or resources to effectively adopt them, which may raise concerns about practicality and implementation.
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 first section of the bill states that the official name of this legislation is the "Emerging Innovative Border Technologies Act".
2. Innovative and emerging border technology plan Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines a plan for the Secretary of Homeland Security to identify and deploy new technologies, such as artificial intelligence and drones, to improve border security. It also explains how the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will form teams to research these technologies, evaluate their effectiveness, and coordinate with other government and private sector entities to enhance border operations.