PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 25, 2018
Emergency Port of Entry Personnel and Infrastructure Funding Act of 2018
This bill directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to hire, train, and assign to duty, by September 30, 2023: (1) 5,000 additional full-time U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers to serve on all inspection lanes and enforcement teams at U.S. land ports of entry on the northern and southern borders, and (2) 350 full-time support staff for all U.S. ports of entry.
The bill also requires DHS to:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
ensure that each CBP officer is equipped with a secure two-way communication and satellite-enabled device that allows communication between ports of entry and inspection stations and with other law enforcement entities;
award grants for the purchase of identification and detection equipment and mobile, hand-held, two-way communication devices for state and local law enforcement officers serving on the southern border;
develop a strategic plan for standardized collection of vehicle wait times at land ports of entry and update it to reflect new practices, time lines, tools, and assessments;
develop a standardized model for the allocation of CBP officers and support staff at land ports of entry; and
identify and adopt at least two new, outcome-based performance measures that support the trade facilitation goals of the CBP.
People & committees
Rep. O'Rourke, Beto [D-TX-16] · D–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 and Maritime Security.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Appropriations, 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 Committees on Ways and Means, and Appropriations, 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 Committees on Ways and Means, and Appropriations, 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 currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 11, 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.5619 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.5619 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.5619 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.5619 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.