The Department of Homeland Security is not expected to implement a congressionally mandated program that would confirm the departure of foreign visitors from the United States through electronic fingerprint scans — a so-called biometric exit system.
Two department officials, who asked not to be named because the
matter involves internal deliberations, told The Washington Times that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano will discuss options about the system at a special meeting Wednesday. But the officials said Ms. Napolitano is strongly leaning toward an exit-control system based on gathering the names of departing foreigners, rather than their fingerprints — an option known as a biographical solution.
Abandoning plans for biometric exit would require Congress to reverse
repeated legislative mandates for such a system, designed by lawmakers to solve
one of the thorniest problems in immigration control and enforcement: knowing
whether foreign visitors are leaving the country when they should.
Those who remain after their visas expire represent as much as 40 percent of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States, and many lawmakers see exit controls as an essential component of any effort to restore integrity to the troubled immigration system.
But planning for an exit system has stalled under successive administrations as
officials have grappled with the logistical challenges involved. There has been
widespread concern about the cost and the impact on the country's already
congested airports and border crossings...
"The department is working closely with its internal components,
Congress, and many stakeholders to determine the costs and benefits of
implementing a biometric air exit program," Bob Mocny said in a statement. Mr.
Mocny is director of US-VISIT, the Homeland Security program that collects
electronic fingerprints from most foreign visitors as they arrive — and is
widely seen as a rare success story for the department. US-VISIT, which would
be expected to implement any exit-monitoring system, ran pilot programs last
year at Atlanta and Detroit airports, where federal employees collected
fingerprints. In Detroit, Customs and Border Protection officers used hand-held
scanners for departing passengers as they boarded the planes. In Atlanta,
Transportation Security Administration personnel used the scanners at screening
One Homeland Security official said the pilot programs were
successful and demonstrated that the job could be accomplished at a much lower
cost than estimated. But in public, officials have downplayed the test
programs. At a hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee this year about
foreigners who overstay their visas, Homeland Security Undersecretary Rand
Beers who oversees US-VISIT, did not even mention the pilot programs in his
Instead, Mr. Beers highlighted the work with biographical exit data — using lists of arriving and departing foreigners to identify those who had entered the country but not left on time, so that overstayers could be reported to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
So ICE can release them later? What is the point? Of course the whole exercise of this miniscule effort at departure control is of use if ICE will not even process those that are arrested. However the whole program appears from the start to be headed for sabotage. The only important sentence in the whole story is this:
"The department is working closely with its internal components, Congress, and
many stakeholders to determine the costs and benefits of implementing a biometric air exit program,"
Ah, the most important words, costs and benefits. The fix is apparenlty in at DHS to not implement the law as written by Congress. There will not be a biometric air exit program, much less on on the land border. DHS has been stalling for years and refuses to implement the only effective system, departure control by inspection of aliens by an officer of the United States, as all other countries do. The United States is the only nation in the world that does not inspect persons departing from the country. In all other countries a traveler is inspected upon arrival and departure. The U.S. does not do it. Not because it is difficult, but because it is claimed to be costly. However, all international airports have sterile Federal Inspection Areas, where immigration and customs inspections are completed for arriving persons. Those areas could easily be expanded or duplicated at international airports. The greatest cost would, of course, be manpower. Customs and Border Protection currently performs entry inspections and spot departure inspections. The costs could easily be covered by a $10.00 fee added on to international airline tickets and a $5.00 fee on all pedestrians or vehicles entering the U.S. All international airports in the U.S. are cash cows for their operating authorities and those entities could easily cover the costs of the physical plant of a sterile departure area at airports. The fee on pedestrians and vehicles would correspondingly cover the costs of the new physical plant needed for land border departure control.
The important fact is that the U.S. government should be inspecting those who are departing as well as those who are arriving.
Further evidence that USVISIT was not designed to comply with the law is that it is run under the authority of ICE rather than CBP. ICE handles interior (non)enforcement, while CBP has the legal and customary authority over arriving and departing persons. Why was USVISIT given to ICE? Only to sabatoge the program. One need only go as far as the aforementioned Bob Mocny, who was a golden boy of the Doris Meissner regime at the legacy INS and closely associated with the non-enforcement policies of the Clintong Regime, especially that relating to the end of the public charge. He climbed the ladder from the most notorious legacy INS District for non-enforcement, San Francisco, to DC, during the Clintong Regime and apparently learned his lessons well, doing well under Bush's 6 years of non-enforcement, when the exit verification requirement was first passed and not implemented.
What the Obama Regime is doing is violating a legal mandate for a exit verification system. Another impeachable offense.