The terrorist attacks of September 11 have presented America with a challenge. Our government must do a better job of screening people who want to come to the U.S. to do us harm. At the same time, we must preserve our tradition as an open society and a nation of immigrants. Some in Congress would have us turn our backs on our traditions. They have proposed legislation that would isolate America, but would do little to isolate the terrorists who threaten us.

As the details of the terrorist plot have emerged, what has become clear is that any change in the way we manage our immigration system will have only a limited impact on our national security. Far more important is our capacity to collect and analyze intelligence. Unless we know who it is that seeks to do us harm and make sure that information is in the hands of the proper authorities, the immigration system will be unable to catch these individuals.

Changes to the immigration system that will make us more secure involve, primarily, better access to and timely use of information collected by our intelligence agencies. To a lesser extent, systems that help authorities determine whether a person who came to the U.S. is complying with the terms of his or her visa might be useful should authorities become interested in a person after they have entered the U.S. Below are suggestions for steps that can be taken to increase the likelihood that potential terrorists would be caught before they act.

Better Access to and Coordination of Human Intelligence

All federal law enforcement agencies collect the names of persons who should not be admitted to the U.S.—individuals who have criminal records, who are suspected to have connections to terrorism, who were denied visas in the past, or who have otherwise been identified as suspect in some way. For this data to be useful, intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies must share the latest intelligence, consolidate their lists, update the information as soon as possible after it is obtained, and get the information into the hands of those who make decisions on who to admit to the U.S.

New Technologies to Verify Identities

A database of names of individuals the authorities are interested in will be more useful when it includes some unique characteristic of the individual being watched for, such as a facial pattern, fingerprint, or some other "biometric identifier." This will make it difficult for potential terrorists to avoid detection by using an alias. Any widespread use of such new technology will have to incorporate protections of our privacy and civil liberties and should be strictly limited to national security or criminal law enforcement functions.

Secure Travel Documents

As soon as is practical to deploy them, persons traveling to the U.S. should be required to carry travel documents—passports and, when required, visas—that are machine-readable. These documents are difficult to forge because digitized information on the documents—read by machines—confirm the printed information and the photograph on the document. This would make it easier to ascertain a continuum of identity—that the person the passport was issued to, the person who obtained the visa, and the person entering the country are the same person.

Adequate Funding to Deploy and Operate the Necessary Tools

The government already has an arsenal of tools to increase our security. However, the agencies and offices charged with carrying out security responsibilities are often under-funded. For example, the State Department is now issuing machine-readable visas, but in most ports of entry to the U.S., the machines to read these visas were not in place prior to September 2001. Any new technology and human intelligence capacity that we deploy to deter terrorists will take a commitment of funding above and beyond the funding needed to fully implement the present tools available. For example, an increase in technological capacity will require an increase in capacity to analyze and interpret data effectively.

The Visa Screening Process

When a person wishes to come to the U.S. legally, he or she must first apply for a visa from a U.S. consulate abroad (except for nationals of countries in the visa waiver program who are coming for brief periods of time as tourists or business travelers). A State Department consular officer interviews the applicant, and assesses whether the applicant is admissible or whether the applicant would likely violate the terms of a visa once here. Up to now, consular officers have tended to focus on denying visas to individuals who they suspect really intend to stay in the U.S. permanently ("intending immigrants").

In the effort to increase our security, we will have to consider changing the screening process, the way it is staffed, and the expectations of visa applicants themselves. There will have to be a shift in the process so there is more emphasis on weeding out potential terrorists. The adjudication of visas might be accomplished by a dedicated consular corps, specializing in evaluating visa applications, and not using the job merely as a stepping-stone to more prestigious and better-paying positions in the foreign service. Finally, we may have to change the expectations of visa applicants. The adjudication process may require a more thorough background check, and it may no longer be wise to approve a visa on the spot.

Immigration Checks at Airports Abroad

For the most part, people traveling to the U.S. are inspected by immigration officers at the point of arrival in the U.S., at international airports here. In some high-volume airports abroad, U.S. immigration checks are performed at the point of departure. That is, a passport is inspected and the name is run against the lookout list before the individual boards a plane to the U.S. A system for screening for inadmissible persons at the point of departure allows more time for inspection—and increases the likelihood of a more thorough check—than is possible when a plane-load of passengers gets off the plane in the U.S., where the Immigration Service is required to inspect all passengers of an offloading plane within a 45-minute timeframe. An expansion of these pre-inspection sites to other high-volume airports might be considered.

Sharing Passenger Lists

Airlines know in advance who will be flying to the U.S. through their reservation system. As travelers prepare to board a plane, they must identify themselves to the airline. Requiring all airlines to submit this information would give U.S. authorities an opportunity to compare the passenger list to their lookout lists. In this way, those who should not be permitted to enter the U.S., or those who are wanted for criminal activity can be prevented from entering, or apprehended while attempting to enter or leave.

North American Perimeter Security

The United States must employ multilateral strategies in all aspects of combating terrorism, not the least of which is partnering with Canada and Mexico in creating a North American perimeter that will bolster security through law enforcement coordination, intelligence sharing, and better joint use of enforcement resources. Closer cooperation with our North American neighbors might include a better understanding of our mutual security concerns, so that those issues are taken into account in the issuance of visas and in the asylum process. Such coordination and cooperation would reduce the chance that someone wishing to do harm to the U.S. would travel to one of our neighboring countries and then cross by land to the U.S.

Exit/Entry Tracking Systems

Every individual who comes into a U.S. airport must be inspected by immigration officers, where the entry is recorded. Airlines collect information from a person as he or she departs the U.S. Some airlines, but not all, have automated the collection of information from the boarding pass and forward the information to the U.S. government. All airlines should be required to do this, and the government should fund this security function.

Entry and exit information would give authorities information on whether a person left within his visa timeframe. It would not tell authorities why a person did not depart in time, nor would it tell authorities where to find the person. It would not distinguish between someone staying an extra week to take care of a sick relative and someone plotting a terrorist act. The information might be useful where law enforcement officials develop an interest in an individual after the person entered the U.S. (for example, in the case of an individual who has been placed on the lookout list after being issued a visa). Authorities would then have a record as to whether the individual entered the country, and whether he departed.

An entry/exit information system has been discussed for land border points of entry into the U.S. as well. Such a system would be much more difficult to implement, would potentially be extremely disruptive to commerce with our largest trading partners. As a security measure, a partnership with Mexico and Canada in carefully scrutinizing those flying to North America might be more effective in screening out persons who might potentially harm our country.

Monitoring Foreign Students and Trainees

Each year, hundreds of thousands of foreign students are admitted to the U.S. Certain conditions are attached to the student visa. For example, students are supposed to be enrolled in a certain amount of coursework. If they fail to maintain the conditions of their visa, the educational institution is supposed to inform the INS. Over the last several years, the INS has been working with colleges and universities to develop a system—the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System—to collect information electronically, in a timely manner, on the status of foreign students. Currently, the system is only beginning to be implemented, and could be fully deployed in all schools authorized to enroll foreign students with adequate funding from Congress. As with the exit/entry system, even if such a system were in place it would only be able to tell authorities whether the student was properly maintaining status. It would not distinguish between someone who fell out of status for innocent reasons or malicious ones, nor would it help authorities locate the individual.

The Government Must Act Responsibly

As it considers alternative courses of action in responding to the terrorist threat, Congress and the administration must act responsibly. They will have to weed out extreme measures proposed by those with other agendas, and find effective solutions to our new security needs. Any measures enacted must simultaneously deter terrorism, safeguard our civil liberties, keep our doors open to those who see us as a land of opportunity and a beacon of freedom, and treat everyone equally under the law.