Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act
The new act was proposed to transpire through three different stages, the first of which was to be in effect by December 31, 2005 but has been delayed until December 31, 2006 due to complaints regarding the tourism industry (Bly). This component called for all travelers to carry a current passport when traveling to and from the Caribbean Islands. The second stage will require travelers to carry a passport in order to cross into the United States from Canada and Mexico via air and sea travel by December 31, 2006. The last stage will go into effect on January 1, 2008 and will call for passports to be presented to cross land borders with Canada and Mexico (Chardy and Cordle). Although the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act will help secure United States land borders with Canada and Mexico and regulate air travel with the Caribbean Islands, the loss of money in the tourism industry will hurt the United States economy and may harm international relations with their neighbors, the act should be revised and a security agreement with neighboring countries should be made in order to insure complete protection along with support from the tourism industry.
Nonetheless, since the 9/11 bombings in New York, Washington DC, and Pennsylvania the Bush Administration and the American people have scrutinized the state of security in the United States. The Terrorism Prevention Act was designed by the Bush Administration to help protect the United States from further security breaches caused by lose borders with neighboring countries that allow terrorists easy access to the country and are means for the transport of illegal drugs and immigrants. The Bush Administration therefore believes the United States will be a much safer country with the act in play.
However, the assumption that terrorists would use highly patrolled borders to access to the United States is a risible one in itself. Andrew Rudick of the Buffalo Niagara Partnership argues that “a passport requirement would not stop terrorists who aren’t likely to use official checkpoints to cross the border” (Hall). So the Terrorism Prevention Act is unlikely to stop any terrorists and criminals that cross the border from what the United States Department of State refers to as a “highly developed stable democracy” (“Consular Information Sheet, Canada”) that is Canada.
Also in opposition to revising the act, the administration believes that because passports are government issued standard forms of identification along with a proof of citizenship they would be a better alternative then the current border crossing laws. The current border crossing laws allow for people to cross the border or fly to the Caribbean Islands with a photo ID and a proof of citizenship that does not necessarily have to be a passport (“2005-2006 Version of Foreign Entry Requirements”). The photo ID usually comes in the form of driver’s licenses, which vary greatly from state to state, and it is hard to distinguish which licenses are fake and which are genuine (Hall). The Terrorism Prevention Act will get rid of these hindrances so that all border crossings are uniform and more secure. The Administration believes that because current passports have digitally printed pictures, holograms, and scannable barcodes, they are difficult to fake, so making them a requirement will help insure their carriers are indeed who they say they are.
To help citizens who are not willing to pay the $97 fee for a passport and a $67 subsequent fee for renewal of said passport the Bush Administration and the United States Department of State are proposing a “border-crossing card” (Hall). They will be substantially cheaper than passports but will also be a nationally standardized identification that in addition proves citizenship.
Even so the crossing cards will still cost the American population money that as of now they do not have to pay to cross the border to countries that the United States deems “highly developed” and “democratic” (“Consular Information Sheet, Canada”). If the security breach was much more drastic and the United States did not consider it’s neighbors “friendly” then it would be reassuring to have a border control plan. However this is not the case and border towns in all three countries – Canada, Mexico and the United States – will suffer greatly from a loss of quick over the border tourists. Towns like Windsor Canada have a considerable base of their economy in tourism. Windsor has large Casinos that reap most of their profit from young Americans traveling over the border for a weekend of gambling and drinking where it is legal to do so. Also like Windsor is the city of Niagara Falls in Ontario Canada across the border from Buffalo New York. The cities of Buffalo and Niagara have long since been in a tourism partnership due to the 15 million people who travel to the area to see the Niagara Falls each year (Hall). Interviews with United States residents of the northern border city of Detroit confirmed the opinion that many citizens would not pay the $97 fee for a passport, consequently hurting the Canadian tourism industry. Also the residents believe that a “border-crossing card” would be beneficial because they would be less expensive, but they would be just another form of ID would further confuse processes at the border (Hilbers. Topor).
The Bush Administration and the United States Department of State have more plans then just the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, they also announced a plan to reform the passports themselves. These new passports will include “electronic chips encoded with information on the document, such as sex, date of birth, place of birth, passport number and expiration date” (Yancey). This will be in addition to the passport control plan and another step in increasing United States security at the borders. The Bush Administration sees both these proposals as a necessity. So, if the Terrorism Prevention Act is delayed past January 1 st , 2008 then the plan for the new passport to start circulation will also be delayed, recreating security problems the United States Department of States sees as ones they cannot afford to face.
However, the new passports were not proposed along with the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, and they are on a completely different time schedule. The new passports can begin circulation at any time, with complete disregard to the January 1 st , 2008 deadline. In addition, the Unites States has been the leader in new applications of biometric identification since 9/11 (“Look Me in the Eye”). In Germany for example, the Interior Minister initiated an iris-scanning system in 2004 that will “both speed up conventional passport controls as well as enhance existing security procedures” (“Look Me in the Eye”). So, it is foolish to think that these new biometric passports will cause a problem when released because all previous implementations of security reform have gone smoothly.
These newly reformed passports will indeed help with security in the United Sates. However, if they were instead part of a treaty with Canada and Mexico for the unified protection of external borders, and not necessarily the internal borders of which they are the focus, then the United States, Canada and Mexico can have a secure region similar to that of the European Union (EU). The continental countries of the EU have recently stopped checking passports between their borders by plane, train, and road. There are border checks only between new member states and old member states but these will eventually resolve, resulting in a secure, and complete, European Union border (“Border Control – One Single EU Border”). If the United States, Canada and Mexico could duplicate this then in addition to free trade agreements there could be free travel agreements and the tourism industry would experience a boost.
The United States is already on their way to accomplishing a similar Tri-national Union. In 2002 the United States and Canada formed the Bi-national Planning Group to establish mutual land and maritime defenses along with an agreement to assist in the time of an emergency (“Consular Information Sheet. Canada”). Furthermore, in March of 2005 the three countries established the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) to “enhance security, competition, and economic resilience” (“Consular Information Sheet. Mexico”). These are the qualities that the EU is based on. the SPP does not have much farther to progress until it reaches the point where the security and economic status of the three countries are viewed as one entity. When the Tri-national Union reaches this point, a passport control plan within the border will not be needed. Therefore there is no need to even start the border control aspect of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorist Prevention Act. This will help the tourism industry as well because with out the act not instated the traffic flow over the border will not be disrupted.
Also, there is a one-billon dollar a day trade industry with Canada (“Consular Information Sheet. Canada”) and a 110 billion dollar export business with Mexico annually (“Consular Information Sheet. Mexico”) that would be seriously damaged by the Terrorism Prevention Act. Implementing a passport and border control plan will not only slow tourist crossings but also shipments by air and sea, although by land in particular. Cargo trucks traveling over the border will be significantly slowed because every truck would have to be stopped and every driver would have to show a passport, or border crossing card, therefore more “bilateral trade disputes” will take place. As of now, 98% of trade between Canada and the United States flows smoothly (“Consular Information Sheet. Canada”), if the Terrorism Prevention Act goes into effect and border crossing cards are introduced this will be disrupted. The trade industry is directly related to the tourism industry when land borders are taken into consideration because the checkpoints that the cargo trucks cross are the same that the tourists cross. So when the Terrorism Prevention Act slows the commercial portion of crossings it then has an effect on the traffic and backups roads leading to the border in both countries.
In addition, the state of affairs with Canada and Mexico are currently strained due to the public display of doubt concerning the safety of their respective nations by the Bush Administration. Currently United States and Canada have a stressed relationship but it is not yet “dysfunctional” (Gatehouse), although with the state of American international affairs, including the war in Iraq, the Canadian people, and therefore their government, are starting to distance themselves from the United States (Gatehouse). This movement of thought, combined with the strain of executing the Terrorism Prevention Act, is going to cause a hazy time in American Canadian relations. In addition to this wary relationship is the disappearing “19 th century vision of diplomacy, where nations interacted through their ambassadors and ministries” (Gatehouse),now in a rapidly more globalized world this is no longer true. In such a globalized world the tourism industry is no longer as simple as packing up the car and driving to Canada or Mexico for an afternoon. The reputation of the United States politically has a large effect on the tourism industry because of internationally conscious tourists that may want to distance themselves from a country, like the US, that takes unprecedented political stands.
The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act is an ill prepared law that the United States Department of State is using to cover up the security problem in the United States. Yet, what really should be organized is a cooperative partnership with the neighboring countries of Canada and Mexico to insure that economic industries like trade and tourism will not be needlessly harmed. A Tri-national Partnership will insure that new security measures are effective but more importantly that the economies, and the tourism industry in particular, will not be hurt by the overzealous tactics of the Bush Administration. If this act is allowed to passively go into effect then there will be detrimental effects on the United States economy through a drop in tourism and very heavy delays on the transport of merchandise.
