Southern New Mexico Economic Development Act

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Privacy Act Modernization for the Information Age Act of 2011.

In 1974, Congress enacted the Privacy Act to protect Americans' personal information from improper disclosure by the Federal government. Broadly, the Privacy Act requires that government agencies allow individuals to see any records an agency keeps on him or her, with some exceptions for security and law enforcement, limits the extent to which the government may share data with and agencies and third parties, allows individuals to access and correct their records, requires agencies to provide notice of what data is collected and how it is used and to keep records of disclosures, and provides individuals the ability to enforce their rights under the act.

With the expansion of technology and the proliferation of personally identifiable information in the hands of government agencies, the risk of losing, abusing, or misusing information has grown exponentially. In particular, over the last 10 years security needs have created pressure on agencies to use existing personal information in new ways, not contemplated when the information was collected. The growth in the business of buying and selling individuals' information also raises new questions about the extent to which the Privacy Act applies to these sources of data on individuals used by the government. Meanwhile, there have been few updates to the Privacy Act, leaving it better suited to file cabinets and clunky 30 year old databases than the modern information technology systems in use at agencies today.

In 2008, the Government Accountability Office, GAO, released a report that I requested entitled, ``Privacy: Alternatives Exist for Enhancing Protection of Personally Identifiable Information'', GAO-08-536. GAO later testified about its findings at a Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing where it identified issues in three main areas that could be enhanced: applying privacy protections consistently to all Federal collection and use of personal information; ensuring that collection and use of personally identifiable information is limited to a stated purpose; and establishing effective mechanisms for informing the public about privacy protections.

After examining these recommendations and consulting with outside privacy experts, working groups, and privacy and civil liberties advocates, I am introducing the Privacy Act Modernization for the Information Age Act of 2011. This bill addresses the issues raised by GAO, adds stronger privacy leadership at the Office of Management and Budget to ensure effective execution of the Privacy Act, and extends authority for privacy officers to investigate possible violations of privacy laws.

This bill updates the Privacy Act in several ways. It simplifies some of the definitions to apply them to modern information technology management ideas that were in their infancy in 1974. It also tightens requirements for agency controls and maintenance of records to ensure their use is authorized, and that personally identifiable information is not misused.

Agencies would also be more accountable to the public in protecting information. Notifications of systems with personally identifiable information would be more relevant, transparent, and accessible, allowing Americans to know which agencies may have what information about them and in what systems. Importantly, the bill would create a centralized privacy website containing System of Records Notices and other related privacy information.

If civil or criminal violations of the Privacy Act do occur, the penalties have been updated to reflect similar penalties in other laws. The bill would also clarify Congress's intent in the statutory damages provision in the Privacy Act by overturning Doe v. Chao, in which the Supreme Court, I believe wrongly, held that an individual has to show actual damages resulted from an intentional or willful improper disclosure of personal information in order to receive an award.

My bill also builds on important new privacy protections introduced in the E-Government Act of 2002, which established a requirement for a Privacy Impact Assessment on certain new systems developed at agencies that contain personally identifiable information. It also codifies the term ``personally identifiable information,'' which has been defined by the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, for years in conjunction with the Privacy Act. This will let us focus on protecting personally identifiable information rather than defining it.

The Privacy Act Modernization for the Information Age Act of 2011 would expand a successful tool given to the Department of Homeland Security, DHS, Chief Privacy Officer, CPO, to other major agency CPOs. In 2008, I championed the POWER Act, which gave the DHS CPO the authority to investigate possible violations of privacy laws if an Inspector General declines to investigate. I am pleased to say this authority has not been abused, and in fact has been used only once at DHS where its Inspector General inadvertently experienced a minor data breach, and the CPO investigated the issue. This is a useful tool that I believe other privacy offices overseeing massive amounts of personally identifiable information could benefit from.

Finally, my bill would create a strong Federal Chief Privacy Officer, FCPO, at OMB as well as a government-wide Chief Privacy Officers Council, to fill the wide gaps in government-wide privacy leadership and ensure consistent development of policies and guidance on the Privacy Act across agencies. The FCPO position existed under President Clinton, but it has not been replicated by subsequent administrations. I have been impressed with DHS's leadership on privacy issues, thanks to tools we have put into law and the resources we have provided. It is equally important to enhance government-wide leadership through the FCPO and the Chief Privacy Officers Council, which will create a better environment to share ideas across agencies.

This bill would be an important step forward in modernizing how government agencies execute their obligations to protect the personal information provided to them by all Americans. With the proliferation of data about every one of us online, and possibly creeping into government databases, we need more transparency so the average person has a place to go to learn about what information the government is keeping and how they can access that information. I urge my colleagues to support this effort and to continue to work with me and the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee to produce legislation to improve Federal privacy before this Congress adjourns.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to join Senator Bingaman in introducing the Southern New Mexico Economic Development Act, legislation that will bring additional business from Mexico to cities and towns in southern New Mexico.

Our bill would increase economic opportunities for southern New Mexico businesses by extending the distance that Mexicans who are issued Border Crossing Cards, BCC, by the U.S. State Department can travel in New Mexico without the need to obtain a Form I-94 and pay an additional fee.

The BCC is a credit card-style document with many security features and 10-year validity. BCCs are only issued to applicants who are citizens and residents of Mexico. Applicants must meet the eligibility standards for B1/B2 visas and undergo fingerprinting and an interview at the U.S. Consulate and they must demonstrate that they have ties to Mexico that would compel them to return after a temporary stay in the United States.

Currently, BCC holders who are authorized to enter into the United States can remain up to 30 days and travel no more than 25 miles beyond the border, except in Arizona where they can travel up to 75 miles. Those who wish to travel farther or remain longer must request an I-94 form, arrival/departure record, at the port of entry and pay a small fee. Our bill would extend the distance BCC holders who enter the United States from New Mexico ports of entry can travel within the State from 25 miles to 75 miles.

Arizona provides a precedent for making this change. In 1999, the border zone in Arizona was extended from 25 miles to 75 miles because there were no large Arizona cities within 25 miles of the border. This was done through the Federal rulemaking process. The extension was designed to specifically include Tucson within the zone so that it could get the economic benefit of BCC holders entering Arizona. Tucson conducted a study indicating that, after implementation of this rule, the commercial gain from Mexican visitors was estimated to reach $56.3 million a year.

However, in Texas, New Mexico, and California, the border zone limit remains 25 miles. This doesn't hurt Texas and California since El Paso, San Diego, and many smaller towns in those states are within the 25 mile zone. However, like Arizona, New Mexico does not have a city within 25 miles of the border. This means BCC holders cannot travel to southern New Mexico cities like Las Cruces, Deming, and Lordsburg without additional paperwork and paying a fee. Because of this, many visitors face the inconvenience

of having to drive all the way to Juarez and enter the U.S. at an El Paso port of entry, despite living closer to a port of entry in New Mexico.

Extending the zone can be done through rulemaking, as it was with Arizona, and I am happy to work with Secretary Napolitano and CBP Commissioner Bersin to make that happen. However, if we are unable to resolve this issue through rulemaking, I believe it will be necessary to push for passage of the legislation we are introducing today.

There is strong support from elected officials and the business community in southern New Mexico for extending the border zone to 75 miles. Just recently, Luna County Commissioner Jay Spivey worked with State Senator John Arthur Smith and Representative Dona Irwin to introduce a Joint Memorial calling on DHS to extend the border zone to 75 miles. The Memorial unanimously passed both houses of the New Mexico state legislature in September.

This is fundamentally an issue of fairness--New Mexico should have the same opportunities the other three Border States enjoy because of the economic benefits of BCC holders visiting their cities.

Mr. President, I rise today to join Senator Bingaman in introducing the Southern New Mexico Economic Development Act, legislation that will bring additional business from Mexico to cities and towns in southern New Mexico.

Our bill would increase economic opportunities for southern New Mexico businesses by extending the distance that Mexicans who are issued Border Crossing Cards, BCC, by the U.S. State Department can travel in New Mexico without the need to obtain a Form I-94 and pay an additional fee.

The BCC is a credit card-style document with many security features and 10-year validity. BCCs are only issued to applicants who are citizens and residents of Mexico. Applicants must meet the eligibility standards for B1/B2 visas and undergo fingerprinting and an interview at the U.S. Consulate and they must demonstrate that they have ties to Mexico that would compel them to return after a temporary stay in the United States.

Currently, BCC holders who are authorized to enter into the United States can remain up to 30 days and travel no more than 25 miles beyond the border, except in Arizona where they can travel up to 75 miles. Those who wish to travel farther or remain longer must request an I-94 form, arrival/departure record, at the port of entry and pay a small fee. Our bill would extend the distance BCC holders who enter the United States from New Mexico ports of entry can travel within the State from 25 miles to 75 miles.

Arizona provides a precedent for making this change. In 1999, the border zone in Arizona was extended from 25 miles to 75 miles because there were no large Arizona cities within 25 miles of the border. This was done through the Federal rulemaking process. The extension was designed to specifically include Tucson within the zone so that it could get the economic benefit of BCC holders entering Arizona. Tucson conducted a study indicating that, after implementation of this rule, the commercial gain from Mexican visitors was estimated to reach $56.3 million a year.

However, in Texas, New Mexico, and California, the border zone limit remains 25 miles. This doesn't hurt Texas and California since El Paso, San Diego, and many smaller towns in those states are within the 25 mile zone. However, like Arizona, New Mexico does not have a city within 25 miles of the border. This means BCC holders cannot travel to southern New Mexico cities like Las Cruces, Deming, and Lordsburg without additional paperwork and paying a fee. Because of this, many visitors face the inconvenience

of having to drive all the way to Juarez and enter the U.S. at an El Paso port of entry, despite living closer to a port of entry in New Mexico.

Extending the zone can be done through rulemaking, as it was with Arizona, and I am happy to work with Secretary Napolitano and CBP Commissioner Bersin to make that happen. However, if we are unable to resolve this issue through rulemaking, I believe it will be necessary to push for passage of the legislation we are introducing today.

There is strong support from elected officials and the business community in southern New Mexico for extending the border zone to 75 miles. Just recently, Luna County Commissioner Jay Spivey worked with State Senator John Arthur Smith and Representative Dona Irwin to introduce a Joint Memorial calling on DHS to extend the border zone to 75 miles. The Memorial unanimously passed both houses of the New Mexico state legislature in September.

This is fundamentally an issue of fairness--New Mexico should have the same opportunities the other three Border States enjoy because of the economic benefits of BCC holders visiting their cities.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation, along with Senator Tom Udall, aimed at increasing economic activity in New Mexico communities situated along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Currently, Mexican nationals holding biometric Border Crossing Cards, also known as Laser Visas, may travel up to 25 miles into the United States for a period of up to 30 days. The purpose of this initiative is to promote border commerce by allowing frequent, low-risk visitors to travel to U.S. border communities to conduct business, visit family, and shop.

Unfortunately, New Mexico has not benefited under this program to the extent that other border states have. The three largest cities along the New Mexico border--Las Cruces, Lordsburg, and Deming--are all outside of the current 25-mile geographical limit, and Mexican nationals with BCCs must acquire additional permits to visit these cities.

In order to address a similar situation, an exception was made for Arizona in 1999 to allow BCC holders to travel to Tucson. This change resulted in increased economic activity without in any way jeopardizing security. Tailoring the program to maximize its impact in the respective border states is the right approach, and I fail to see why a similar modification should not be made for New Mexico.

The legislation we are introducing today, the Southern New Mexico Economic Development Act, would expand the geographic limit from 25 miles to 75 miles to permit visitors coming to New Mexico to reach the larger cities in the southern part of the state. This change would facilitate economic activity at a crucial time as border communities are looking to increase tourism and create growth.

Changing this regulation wouldn't cost taxpayer money, it will increase economic activity in communities that have been hit hard by the economic downturn, and will do so in a manner consistent with our border security efforts.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation, along with Senator Tom Udall, aimed at increasing economic activity in New Mexico communities situated along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Currently, Mexican nationals holding biometric Border Crossing Cards, also known as Laser Visas, may travel up to 25 miles into the United States for a period of up to 30 days. The purpose of this initiative is to promote border commerce by allowing frequent, low-risk visitors to travel to U.S. border communities to conduct business, visit family, and shop.

Unfortunately, New Mexico has not benefited under this program to the extent that other border states have. The three largest cities along the New Mexico border--Las Cruces, Lordsburg, and Deming--are all outside of the current 25-mile geographical limit, and Mexican nationals with BCCs must acquire additional permits to visit these cities.

In order to address a similar situation, an exception was made for Arizona in 1999 to allow BCC holders to travel to Tucson. This change resulted in increased economic activity without in any way jeopardizing security. Tailoring the program to maximize its impact in the respective border states is the right approach, and I fail to see why a similar modification should not be made for New Mexico.

The legislation we are introducing today, the Southern New Mexico Economic Development Act, would expand the geographic limit from 25 miles to 75 miles to permit visitors coming to New Mexico to reach the larger cities in the southern part of the state. This change would facilitate economic activity at a crucial time as border communities are looking to increase tourism and create growth.

Changing this regulation wouldn't cost taxpayer money, it will increase economic activity in communities that have been hit hard by the economic downturn, and will do so in a manner consistent with our border security efforts.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.