SB 9101: Consistency in Immigration Status Act Thread II (Passed) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 16, 2024, 12:29:01 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  SB 9101: Consistency in Immigration Status Act Thread II (Passed) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: SB 9101: Consistency in Immigration Status Act Thread II (Passed)  (Read 1099 times)
Fmr. Representative Encke
Encke
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,203
United States


« on: March 06, 2019, 03:50:29 AM »

Alright, an analysis can be found here:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=308863.msg6700442#msg6700442

If more information is needed about a specific part of the bill, give me the word and I'll add that on.

I'll also add that the countries qualifying for aid (as described in Section 5.1 of COOTS) are the same as what they were in 2017 (Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala), as they were the only countries contributing 5% or greater to the undocumented population at the time of the bill's passage. I would expect some increase in immigration from countries in East Asia due to the recent war, but that wouldn't affect anything in a potential analysis of that section because the qualifying countries will only be reevaluted by the SoS after 2021.
Logged
Fmr. Representative Encke
Encke
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,203
United States


« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2019, 10:26:15 PM »

Alright, an analysis can be found here:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=308863.msg6700442#msg6700442

If more information is needed about a specific part of the bill, give me the word and I'll add that on.

I'll also add that the countries qualifying for aid (as described in Section 5.1 of COOTS) are the same as what they were in 2017 (Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala), as they were the only countries contributing 5% or greater to the undocumented population at the time of the bill's passage. I would expect some increase in immigration from countries in East Asia due to the recent war, but that wouldn't affect anything in a potential analysis of that section because the qualifying countries will only be reevaluted by the SoS after 2021.

What is the main factor delaying implementation of entry-exit system?

  • technical and operational challenges in the development of more sophisticated verification software (notably, a lower-than-expected confirmation rate during testing)
  • potential lack of dedicated staff to oversee operation of the new system in some locations
  • general inertia
  • concerns about dedicated long-term funding for updating potentially outdated systems (plus a healthy amount of concern trolling)
Logged
Fmr. Representative Encke
Encke
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,203
United States


« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2019, 08:09:56 PM »

Alright, an analysis can be found here:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=308863.msg6700442#msg6700442

If more information is needed about a specific part of the bill, give me the word and I'll add that on.

I'll also add that the countries qualifying for aid (as described in Section 5.1 of COOTS) are the same as what they were in 2017 (Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala), as they were the only countries contributing 5% or greater to the undocumented population at the time of the bill's passage. I would expect some increase in immigration from countries in East Asia due to the recent war, but that wouldn't affect anything in a potential analysis of that section because the qualifying countries will only be reevaluted by the SoS after 2021.

What is the main factor delaying implementation of entry-exit system?

  • technical and operational challenges in the development of more sophisticated verification software (notably, a lower-than-expected confirmation rate during testing)
  • potential lack of dedicated staff to oversee operation of the new system in some locations
  • general inertia
  • concerns about dedicated long-term funding for updating potentially outdated systems (plus a healthy amount of concern trolling)

What do you mean by the fourth one on the list?

Future updates to the software/hardware may need to be made down the line, and dedicated personnel will need to be hired who will be able to stay up to date in the operation of these systems. Thus, additional funding may be required beyond the initial costs of setting up the verification system. Note that these are not my opinions, but the opinions that have been expressed by a handful of airport officials. Analyze that however you want.

These are somewhat valid concerns but are sometimes made by those who are adverse to taking initial steps towards making any infrastructural changes in the first place, hence the comment about concern trolling.

I'll add that some smaller, older airports that were not originally built to handle departure inspections may need to make extensive changes and renovations.

As a resource, here's a paper that outlines some other potential logistical problems that could face airports and other ports of exit/entry:
http://cdn.bipartisanpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/default/files/BPC%20Immigration%20Entry-Exit%20System%20Progress%2C%20Challenges%2C%20and%20Outlook.pdf
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 12 queries.