PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Gonzales, Tony [R-TX-23] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 28, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1861 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1861 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1861 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1861 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-03-05 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Checkpoint Modernization Act would prioritize Border Patrol checkpoint renovations intended to protect personnel, improve detection and deterrence of smuggling, and reduce congestion and improve public safety along the southern border. Renovations would depend on available funding. The bill would also permanently cancel remaining Environmental Protection Agency funding for environmental and climate justice block grants that had not already been committed.
This Act may be cited as the Checkpoint Modernization Act.
Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall prioritize renovation projects at U.S. Border Patrol checkpoints that directly— (1) improve the safety and well-being of law enforcement personnel, (2) enhance the ability of U.S. Border Patrol agents to detect and deter human smuggling, contraband, and other illicit goods, and (3) reduce traffic congestion and improve overall public safety, to accommodate the increasing volume of traffic along the southern border of the United States.
The unobligated balance of all amounts appropriated or otherwise made available to the Environmental Protection Agency to carry out section 138 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7438; relating to environmental and climate justice block grants) is permanently rescinded.
If enacted, the bill would require the Customs and Border Protection Commissioner to prioritize checkpoint renovations meeting all three stated objectives: directly improving personnel safety and well-being; enhancing agents’ ability to detect and deter human smuggling, contraband, and other illicit goods; and reducing congestion and improving public safety. This requirement would depend on available appropriations—funding provided by Congress.
Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall prioritize renovation projects at U.S. Border Patrol checkpoints that directly— (1) improve the safety and well-being of law enforcement personnel, (2) enhance the ability of U.S. Border Patrol agents to detect and deter human smuggling, contraband, and other illicit goods, and (3) reduce traffic congestion and improve overall public safety, to accommodate the increasing volume of traffic along the southern border of the United States.
The Commissioner would have to report on renovation cost estimates, progress, justifications, and other necessary information within 180 days after enactment and annually afterward. Reports would go to the House Homeland Security Committee and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and annually thereafter, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report on the cost estimates, statuses, justifications, and other relevant information as necessary of the renovation of U.S. Border Patrol checkpoints described in subsection (a).
The bill would authorize Congress to provide at least $150 million for each fiscal year from 2025 through 2028 to carry out section 2. This authorization would not itself provide that funding.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection not less than $150,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2025 through 2028 to carry out this section.
The bill would permanently withdraw all remaining funding not already committed by the Environmental Protection Agency for environmental and climate justice block grants under section 138 of the Clean Air Act. The provision does not specify a dollar amount or direct that the canceled funds be transferred to checkpoint renovations.
The unobligated balance of all amounts appropriated or otherwise made available to the Environmental Protection Agency to carry out section 138 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7438; relating to environmental and climate justice block grants) is permanently rescinded.
The official-actions snapshot updated March 28, 2025, records introduction in the House on March 5, 2025, and referrals that day to the House Homeland Security Committee, the Energy and Commerce Committee, and the Border Security and Enforcement Subcommittee.
Source snapshot updated 2025-03-28T08:07:14Z. 2025-03-05: Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement. 2025-03-05: Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-03-05: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-05. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
Findings to examine
One provision appears unrelated to the bill’s main subject. This is a subject-matter assessment, not a documented account of how the provision was attached.
The permanent cancellation of Environmental Protection Agency environmental and climate justice block-grant funding appears to be an unrelated policy provision within a section devoted to Border Patrol checkpoint renovations. It is a possible rider; the supplied text does not document an amendment or attachment history.
2. Renovation of U.S. Border Patrol checkpoints
The unobligated balance of all amounts appropriated or otherwise made available to the Environmental Protection Agency to carry out section 138 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7438; relating to environmental and climate justice block grants) is permanently rescinded.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No earmarks were identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish their absence in other versions or accompanying materials, or resolve formal earmark status.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-outs, special exemptions, or preferential benefits were identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Mar 28, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI