A Department of Homeland Security plan to track foreign visitors leaving the U.S. by land will be set aside after a report showed that it would be too expensive and cause significant inconvenience to travelers who frequently cross the border.

On Thursday, the Government Accountability Office reported (PDF) that the US-VISIT exit system, which processes foreign visitors as they leave the country, would cause “a major impact” if used at land border crossings. It also said that DHS could not ensure that the program strategically fit into land security initiatives and as a result, was at risk to be a colossal waste of money.

As a result, Homeland Security officials are preparing to announce they will set the program aside, focusing instead on implementing the exit system at airports.

“It comes down to, we have to get at this elephant in chunks,” one senior official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because a formal decision has not been announced. “It’s a recognition that over the short term, over the next couple of years, you can’t do an exit system, holistically, land borders and air. Which one do you get more bang for your buck? It’s air.”

In comments reported by the New York Times and confirmed by Agen, DHS assistant secretary for policy Stewart A. Baker said a land-border exit system would cost “tens of billions of dollars,” which he called daunting. — Washington Post

According to a GAO analysis of DHS data, US-VISIT processing of foreign visitors was required for only 1.4 percent of land border crossings in fiscal 2004. The remaining 98.6 percent of people entering were U.S., Canadian and Mexican nationals who are exempt from the program.

If implemented, the program would cause miles-long lines at land border exits, as everyone would have to be stopped and screened, Secretary Michael Chertoff acknowledged. The “technology does not exist to enable biometric verification of those leaving the country without major infrastructural changes,” the GAO report said.

“If we required all the people leaving the country by land going into Canada to stop to give a biometric print,” Chertoff said, “you would see lines that are 10 or 15 miles long, stretching from the border deeply into New York or into Detroit.”

Chertoff cited progress in tracking and screening unwanted people before they enter the United States. US-VISIT has captured more than 1,100 criminals who were using false documents, officials have said. . . .

“The highest priority is to keep terrorists out of the country. Letting them come in the country and then worrying whether they haven’t left in 90 days seems, to me, an inferior concern to keeping them out in the first place,” Chertoff said. — Washington Post

The funniest part of all this, though, was Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) criticizing the department: “Billions of dollars and countless hours have been invested, and if DHS is going to throw this all away, the American people deserve to know why.”

Because it would turn the borders into giant parking lots? And not do much for security anyway? I find myself not very concerned with whether a terrorist leaves the country. Goodbye and good riddance. If a terrorist enters the country, then we have a problem. And that’s where counterterrorism resources should be focused.

And she’s going to be the chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security. I can only hope that somebody talks some sense into her.