    [House Hearing, 106 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                      THE MIDWEST METHAMPHETAMINE EPIDEMIC

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
                        DRUG POLICY, AND HUMAN RESOURCES

                                     of the

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                               GOVERNMENT REFORM

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                 JUNE 26, 2000

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 106-226

                                   __________

           Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform

      Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
                          http://www.house.gov/reform

                                   ----------

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
    72-448                     WASHINGTON : 2001

    _______________________________________________________________________
     For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
                                     Office
    Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov  Phone: (202) 512-1800  Fax: (202) 512-2250
                   Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001

                         COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM

                         DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman
    BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York         HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
    CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland       TOM LANTOS, California
    CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut       ROBERT E. WISE, Jr., West Virginia
    ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida         MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
    JOHN M. McHUGH, New York             EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
    STEPHEN HORN, California             PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
    JOHN L. MICA, Florida                PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
    THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia            CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
    DAVID M. McINTOSH, Indiana           ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington,
    MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana                  DC
    JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida             CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania
    STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio           ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
    MARSHALL ``MARK'' SANFORD, South     DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
        Carolina                         ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
    BOB BARR, Georgia                    DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
    DAN MILLER, Florida                  JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
    ASA HUTCHINSON, Arkansas             JIM TURNER, Texas
    LEE TERRY, Nebraska                  THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
    JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois               HAROLD E. FORD, Jr., Tennessee
    GREG WALDEN, Oregon                  JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
    DOUG OSE, California                             ------
    PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin                 BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
    HELEN CHENOWETH-HAGE, Idaho              (Independent)
    DAVID VITTER, Louisiana

                          Kevin Binger, Staff Director
                     Daniel R. Moll, Deputy Staff Director
               David A. Kass, Deputy Counsel and Parliamentarian
                        Lisa Smith Arafune, Chief Clerk
                     Phil Schiliro, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

       Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources

                        JOHN L. MICA, Florida, Chairman
    BOB BARR, Georgia                    PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
    BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York         EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
    CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut       ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
    ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida         DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
    MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana              ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
    STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio           JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
    ASA HUTCHINSON, Arkansas             JIM TURNER, Texas
    DOUG OSE, California                 JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
    DAVID VITTER, Louisiana

                                   Ex Officio

    DAN BURTON, Indiana                  HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
               Sharon Pinkerton, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
                       Charley Diaz, Congressional Fellow
                               Ryan McKee, Clerk

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Hearing held on June 26, 2000....................................     1
    Statement of:
        Frisbie, Joe, chief, Sioux City Police Department; Marti J.
          Reilly, Tri-State Drug Task Force; and Penny Westfall,
          commissioner of public safety, State of Iowa...............    10
        Phillips, Linda, executive director, Siouxland Cares; and
          Carla Van Hofwegen, president, board of directors, Hava
          Java.......................................................    50
        Schoon, Leroy, president, Schoon Construction; and Jamey
          Miller, Rudy Salem Staffing Services.......................    70
    Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
        Frisbie, Joe, chief, Sioux City Police Department, prepared
          statement of...............................................    13
        Mica, Hon. John L., a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Florida, prepared statement of....................     5
        Phillips, Linda, executive director, Siouxland Cares,
          prepared statement of......................................    53
        Reilly, Marti J., Tri-State Drug Task Force, prepared
          statement of...............................................    20
        Schoon, Leroy, president, Schoon Construction, prepared
          statement of...............................................    72
        Van Hofwegen, Carla, president, board of directors, Hava
          Java, prepared statement of................................    62
        Westfall, Penny, commissioner of public safety, State of
          Iowa, prepared statement of................................    27

                      THE MIDWEST METHAMPHETAMINE EPIDEMIC

                                  ----------

                             MONDAY, JUNE 26, 2000

                      House of Representatives,
    Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and
                                       Human Resources,
                                Committee on Government Reform,
                                                        Sioux City, IA.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9 a.m., in
    room 6, Sioux City Convention Center, Sioux City, IA, Hon. John
    L. Mica (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
        Present: Representative Mica.
        Also present: Representatives Latham and Thune.
        Staff present: Charley Diaz, congressional fellow; and Ryan
    McKee, clerk.
        Mr. Mica. Good morning. I'd like to call this hearing of
    the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human
    Resources to order. I'm John Mica, and I Chair this
    subcommittee of the Government Reform Committee of the House of
    Representatives.
        The order of business this morning will be first I will
    begin our hearing with an opening statement, then I will yield
    to other Members for their opening comments.
        This morning our subcommittee has three panels to hear
    from, and we will proceed in hearing those three panels and the
    witnesses assembled this morning. Just for information of those
    attending, this is an investigations and oversight subcommittee
    of the U.S. House of Representatives, and this is one of the
    hearings that we're conducting on the problem of drug abuse and
    illegal narcotics. The title of today's hearing is Midwest
    Methamphetamine Epidemic. We will proceed in that order.
        As chairman of the Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human
    Resources Subcommittee, it's my responsibility to help oversee
    our Nation's drug control efforts in the U.S. House of
    Representatives. We've come to Sioux City, IA, in the Heartland
    of America this morning to conduct an oversight field hearing
    in an effort to understand what's going on throughout the
    Nation and particularly here in the Heartland dealing with our
    Nation's drug crisis. Congressional field hearings are a very
    crucial part of our work because they allow us to gain a
    national perspective through the eyes of local citizens and
    local officials. Today, we'll learn about the manufactured use
    and trafficking of illegal drugs here in Iowa and the
    surrounding regions.
        I had a little geography lesson this morning realizing how
    this is a tri-State area bordering South Dakota and also
    Nebraska and the tremendous impact illegal narcotics have had
    on these communities in this region of our country. Our focus
    in this morning's hearing is the growing methamphetamine
    epidemic that's ravaging the Midwest.
        We're privileged to have with us today a congressional
    leader who strongly supports efforts to protect our communities
    from the ravages of illegal narcotics. I am here foremost at
    the invitation of that Representative, Tom Latham, who during
    my year and a half as chairman of the Drug Policy Subcommittee
    has constantly reminded me about the need to pay attention to
    all of America, particularly this region, and the impact of
    illegal narcotics, and I thank him for his leadership in that
    regard and also for the invitation to be with you today and
    visit this community.
        We're also joined by another leader in the House of
    Representatives, John Thune, who represents the adjacent
    district in South Dakota. He also has taken on a leadership
    role in trying to find answers to this plaguing question that
    we have a problem of illegal narcotics, and I thank him for
    joining us on our panel this morning.
        Growing up in rural America used to be a shield against the
    seedier side of America's urban culture, including the problem
    of illegal drugs.
        Unfortunately, all that's changed. The National Center for
    Addiction and Substance Abuse recently announced that the rate
    of drug use among teens in rural America is now higher than the
    Nation's large urban centers.
        In a White Paper which was published last January, the
    center found that eighth graders living in rural America were
    104 percent more likely to use amphetamines, including
    methamphetamines, 83 percent more likely to use crack cocaine,
    and 34 percent more likely to smoke marijuana than kids in the
    urban areas. These sobering statistics should serve as a wake-
    up call to parents and community leaders across the Midwest.
    Your kids are in fact at risk. Drugs are no longer just a big
    city problem.
        Nationwide drugs directly killed 15,973 Americans in 1998.
    That's our last year of reported statistics. And many of those
    unfortunately are young people. The number of all drug-related
    deaths is much higher, and Barry McCaffrey, our national drug
    czar, testified before this subcommittee and said we've lost in
    the last year more than 52,000 Americans as a result of both
    direct and indirect causes related to illegal narcotics. This
    is in fact a staggering figure when you consider that in the
    whole of the Vietnam war we lost 58,000 Americans. We're losing
    that many almost every year in this battle with illegal
    narcotics. Additionally drugs cost our society, and the range
    is somewhere between $110 billion and a quarter of a trillion
    dollars annually, $110 billion to a quarter of a trillion
    dollars annually. Clearly much more must be done to combat the
    scourge.
        We're honored to have testifying before us today a number
    of State and local officials as well as everyday citizens who
    are actively engaged here in responding to the drug crisis and
    its terrible consequence on the youth of this region. These
    individuals serve on the front lines in preventing, educating
    and treating illegal drug use, both in our schools and in our
    communities as well as enforcing our laws. They are most in
    need of our support and assistance at the Federal level, and
    also in joining together in a cooperative effort.
        This subcommittee is particularly interested in how many
    communities and how our communities and regions are dealing
    with the critical responsibilities of successfully implementing
    our national, I say a national drug control strategy, not just
    a Federal drug control strategy. It is important that this
    again be a cooperative and coordinated effort. After all, State
    and local officials have their finger on the pulse of the
    community and can best respond to threats like the illegal drug
    epidemic we're facing. In Congress we try to ensure that the
    Federal Government is doing everything possible to assist you,
    both in reducing the supply of illegal narcotics as well as the
    demand for illegal drugs.
        Today, we're focusing on regional challenges and threats,
    like Iowa and again this tri-State region. As we'll hear,
    illegal drug production, use and trafficking pose special
    changes and dangers to the schools, communities, law
    enforcement agencies and officials in this region. The State of
    Iowa and the Midwest are increasingly becoming a primary
    consumption area for methamphetamine. While many of the
    methamphetamines are imported from large labs in Mexico and
    California, within the last several years this area has
    experienced a dramatic increase in the number of clandestine
    methamphetamine manufacturing labs. In fact in looking at the
    statistics that were provided to me by staff, from 8 meth labs
    that were seized in 1995, that's only 5 years ago there were 8,
    to I'm told more than 500 were seized in 1999, last year, a
    dramatic number, particularly given the population of this
    region.
        These labs which use volatile precursor chemicals in
    dangerous combinations pose an added risk to the dealers, to
    law enforcement officials and to the entire community here.
        In response to this terrible methamphetamine problem as
    well as the continuing problems with a host of other illegal
    drugs, Iowa along with Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, North and
    South Dakota, has been designated by the Office of National
    Drug Control Policy as a high intensity drug trafficking area
    [HIDTA]. Our subcommittee is responsible for authorizing and
    overseeing the HIDTA program. We have 31 HIDTAs now across the
    Nation to help Federal, State and local law enforcement
    entities better coordinate investigations, share intelligence,
    resources and conduct law enforcement operations. Today, we'll
    learn more about the effectiveness and operations of the
    Midwest HIDTA, hope to have a report on that, including what
    progress it is making in combating illegal narcotics in this
    area.
        I might say also that I'm extremely pleased at the
    leadership Mr. Latham has taken in helping create a regional
    training center here which I believe is the only center in the
    United States to provide free training assistance to the local
    agencies particularly dealing with the meth epidemic that you
    have had here. I salute him on putting that effort together and
    we'll hear a little bit about its success and challenges in
    this hearing.
        Again, I applaud the continuing dedication and
    professionalism of the witnesses who appear before us today,
    their willingness to share their ideas, their needs, their
    recommendations with us. In Congress we always find the best
    ideas from those that we represent, and we try to take those
    ideas back and incorporate them in our policy, and it is
    particularly important to our subcommittee that we find
    successful solutions and cooperative efforts to face this great
    challenge. And I might say too, I've been involved in many
    things in business, in my life and personally, and I have never
    seen a challenge like this that we face. It's just an
    unbelievable challenge. I'm here in the Midwest today. We've
    been in California. We've been in Louisiana, Texas. We've been
    in Baltimore, around the Nation. And you aren't alone. We are
    also facing an incredible challenge with this drug threat and
    the problems that it has caused for not only this community but
    our whole Nation.
        I can assure you that the Representatives that we have here
    today will be working with our subcommittee and with the other
    committees involved in Congress to do everything we can to
    assist you in ridding your community and others of the deadly
    poison that is affecting our loved ones. I think all of us
    recognize that this drug crisis demands a full utilization of
    all available resources and very close cooperation in a
    comprehensive regional and national effort. After all that's
    what HIDTAs have been designed to do and it's our job in
    Congress to monitor and ensure their success. If obstacles are
    identified then we must move to decisively overcome them. This
    community, this State and this Nation really can't afford to
    wait. The drug crisis demands promising approaches and decisive
    action, and we must act now.
        Again I want to thank the witnesses for appearing before
    us, and I want to thank my colleagues, Mr. Latham for the
    invitation to be here, Mr. Thune also for his leadership on
    this issue and both of them representing this area again on
    this tremendous problem.
        With those comments I'm pleased at this time to yield to
    the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. Latham.
        [The prepared statement of Hon. John L. Mica follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.001

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.002

        Mr. Latham. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I very
    much appreciate your taking special efforts to get here. We had
    the opportunity to have breakfast together this morning and to
    hear the saga of Mr. Mica making it to Sioux City yesterday
    coming from upstate New York yesterday and the various flights
    and challenges that you faced to get here. Very much
    appreciated. And what is most appreciated is your tremendous
    leadership in Congress on this most important issue I believe
    as far as the future for our young people, and really gets to
    the whole fabric of what our society believes it should be in
    maintaining the kind of society that we can all be proud of. I
    also want to thank John Thune, my very good friend and
    neighbor, for being here and his leadership in Congress on this
    issue.
        We really became aware in the last 5 years of what is a
    tremendously changing dynamic and problem in this part of the
    country. As you stated before, back in 1995 there were eight
    meth labs. Last year over 500. I think that's just what the
    State officials found. In addition to that with the DEA records
    there's another several hundred actually in the State of Iowa.
    But this is an epidemic that has absolutely exploded before us.
        With your leadership, Mr. Chairman, and efforts in Congress
    and the administration, I think we've made some very positive
    steps for, No. 1, looking at the interdiction problem, coming
    from other countries, No. 2, being of assistance to local law
    enforcement which has done a great challenge. There are
    differing ideas in Congress as to how to approach this problem,
    and who to support. I personally think that by supporting
    people on the ground, local law enforcement, that that is the
    way to go, because they are the ones that have to deal on a day
    to day basis with the problem.
        The education programs that we're seeing today in the
    Siouxland area was 1 of the 12 original pilot programs as far
    as the education efforts, and what we found there was that with
    the media messages that were going out we had a great effect on
    young children. But when we got to the high school age there
    was much less effect. What the most important part of that
    effort is is to finally have parents become aware of the fact
    that if they will simply sit down and talk to their children
    about this problem, that is in fact the most effective method
    of influencing these children never to get involved in drugs.
    And it's something that I think we as parents today think
    someone else is going to talk to our kids. Unfortunately it's
    going to be the drug dealer. If we don't talk to them somebody
    else will, and that person doesn't have their best hope and
    aspirations in mind for them. They want to sell them drugs.
        Treatment has also become a very, and is always a very
    important part of the four-pronged strategy that we're trying
    to put forward. And that is something that we in Congress are
    putting more and more money into, trying to make sure the
    treatment is available. But as people here in this district all
    know, and I've had 23 county-wide drug meetings, drug awareness
    meetings throughout this 30-county district. And it becomes
    more and more apparent that in fact what we have to do is to
    have all parents aware of what's going on, be a joint effort
    with communities, with the churches, with the schools, with the
    community groups involved to really approach this problem in a
    unified basis, to make sure that there is a statement in our
    society about zero tolerance for drugs. And if we can do that I
    think we've set a standard in our communities. We do not want
    to destroy what is very, very good about the upper Midwest,
    about Iowa, South Dakota, Nebraska, and this I think is the
    biggest threat to the long-term well being and safety of this
    whole part of the country.
        So again I want to thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for
    being here and making extraordinary efforts to be here. And I
    really look forward to the testimony from great people who are
    devoting their lives to addressing this problem, and these are
    the folks here who are going to solve it. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you. Driving tornadoes, thunderstorms,
    going through three different airports to get here, I don't
    think there's anything that would have kept me from this,
    because Mr. Latham has repeatedly brought this community and
    this region problem to my attention, and I was going to be here
    come hell or high water. Again thank you.
        I'm pleased now to yield to the gentleman from South
    Dakota, Mr. Thune.
        Mr. Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me echo my
    colleague from Iowa and say welcome to Siouxland as we like to
    call it here. Thank you for coming in the summer. We would
    certainly welcome the opportunity to return the favor and
    attend a hearing in your State of Florida in January perhaps. I
    do appreciate the leadership you have taken on in this issue. I
    would also say to my colleague from Iowa, Tom Latham, who is as
    close to a delegation that I have since I am the only member
    from South Dakota, we work very closely on a number of issues,
    whether it's agriculture or water development or transportation
    funding or anything like that in this part of the country, we
    really do have to work as a team, so I appreciate very much the
    leadership that Tom provides to many of those issues and the
    impact that they have on my State of South Dakota.
        I would just simply add to what has already been said and
    say that this is a personal issue for me. I have two young
    daughters, one of whom is in junior high and another who will
    be in junior high in a year, and nothing is more important to
    me as a parent than eliminating the scourge of illegal drugs
    that is destroying minds and ambitions of our young people.
        We just don't have any alternative. We have to snuff this
    thing out. I think that my experience is in a lot of issues
    like this that our faith-based institutions, our families, our
    community-based organizations are much more successful in
    helping solve and address these issues. Obviously there is a
    national responsibility here in the area I think of
    interdiction and cutting off the supply at the source, but when
    it comes to prevention, when it comes to education, when it
    comes to treatment, there are a lot of good things that are
    going on out there, and we want to make sure that we are good
    partners with local law enforcement, with those who are
    involved in efforts to combat, fight illegal drugs, and we want
    to work closely with you to make sure the resources are there,
    the tools are in place and we can successfully put together
    strategies that will help us really attack this problem.
        It is a great concern. I never would have thought, I grew
    up in the western part of South Dakota in a real small town,
    that we would be talking about this in the terms that we are
    today in a State like ours, and States like Iowa and Nebraska.
    But we are a high intensity drug trafficking area. That's a
    label, designation that is a concern, but it's also I think
    welcome in the sense that it helps us attack this problem and
    work collectively in putting together regional strategies that
    will help us address it.
        I am here today to listen and to learn and to find out
    exactly what the dimensions of some of the issues and the
    problems are, and then to hear from people who care very deeply
    about this, about what we might do to better combat it.
        So thank you for the opportunity to be here, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you for being here. And, Tom, thank you for hosting us in
    Sioux City, and I want to work collectively.
        I was noting in the testimony here too the number of deaths
    that are directly attributed to drugs, and those that are
    indirectly, and I would say that one is too many. We need to do
    everything we can to get to where we have this issue in hand to
    where we're not losing any of our young people to this problem.
        Thank you for the chance to be here. I look forward to the
    testimony and I hope we have an opportunity to ask questions
    later. Thanks.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you, Mr. Thune. I didn't get to see Mr.
    Thune earlier, but Tom and I did have coffee this morning
    together. I told him I feel a little bit like coming home.
    Actually my uncle who was the first Mica to go to college came
    to Iowa and received his degree here. My first job on
    graduating from college was in Iowa City where I worked for a
    little over a year, and actually my last business venture was
    in Aberdeen, SD. I started the cellular RSA service in
    Aberdeen, so I felt a little bit of a kinship to this area and
    pleased to be back, and to also conduct this most important
    field hearing.
        We'll now proceed, and Mr. Latham moves that we keep the
    record open for a period of 2 weeks, and without objection that
    is so ordered.
        I might just say for those visiting, we do have a limited
    number of witnesses who are testifying because it's impossible
    to hear from everyone in these official proceedings. However,
    the action which I just took and we passed by unanimous consent
    would allow anyone who would like to submit comments or
    statements for the record to submit them either to me as Chair
    of the subcommittee, or to Mr. Latham or Mr. Thune for
    inclusion and part of the official proceedings of today's
    hearing, and that will be open for a period of 2 weeks.
        Now as we proceed, I would like to go to our witness panel,
    and we do have three panels today.
        The first panel consists of Mr. Joe Frisbie, and he is the
    chief of the Sioux City Police Department. The second panelist
    is Marti J. Reilly, and Marti Reilly is with the Tri-State Drug
    Task Force. And then the third witness is Penny Westfall, and
    she is the commissioner of Public Safety for the State of Iowa.
        Again let me explain, since I don't think you've testified
    before our subcommittee before, this is an investigations and
    oversight subcommittee of the House of Representatives. In that
    regard we do swear in our witnesses. Additionally, in our
    proceedings we would ask that if you have a lengthy statement
    or statement beyond 5 minutes that you request and through the
    chair I will move by unanimous consent that we make an entire
    statement part of the record, a lengthy statement. We'll also
    include data information or background material upon similar
    requests to the Chair.
        With those opening comments, if I could, would you please
    stand to be sworn. Would you raise your right hands.
        [Witnesses sworn.]
        Mr. Mica. The witnesses, the record will reflect, answered
    in the affirmative.
        I'm pleased to welcome you before our subcommittee. Again
    pleased to be here with you this morning. I'll recognize first
    for his statement the chief of the Sioux City Police
    Department, Mr. Joe Frisbie. You're recognized, sir.

    STATEMENTS OF JOE FRISBIE, CHIEF, SIOUX CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT;
    MARTI J. REILLY, TRI-STATE DRUG TASK FORCE; AND PENNY WESTFALL,
              COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC SAFETY, STATE OF IOWA

        Mr. Frisbie. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Latham, Congressman
    Thune, thank you for being here today.
        There's no question that the methamphetamine problem in the
    Midwest, specifically in Sioux City, has reached an epidemic
    proportion. We have a long history of addressing the drug
    problem as a local problem. Communities in our tri-State area
    have suffered jurisdictional problems in developing cases.
    We've suffered a shortage of resources that prevent us from
    addressing the problem beyond the street level.
        In the past several problems have prevented us from
    conducting investigations in an organized manner, such as a
    lack of training funds, especially for smaller communities, a
    lack of collaboration between agencies, the absence of a highly
    organized sharing of information of intelligence systems, the
    lack of an organized task force to conduct collaborative
    investigations and a lack of Federal support beyond peripheral
    involvement. We have made some progress. While effort was made
    to address the problem in major metropolitan cities and ports
    of entry, the Midwest remained an open and lucrative market
    that offered little risk.
        However, there have been some promising developments that
    have been made over the last 8 to 10 years that have helped us
    become more organized in our approach to dealing with the drug
    problem in our area. In 1992, the Federal Government brought in
    two DEA agents to Sioux City. In 1995, they formed a
    provisional task force with the DEA with the help of
    Congressman Latham. In 1997, again with the help of Congressman
    Latham, we were able to establish a resident office for the DEA
    here in Sioux City. In 1997, it had become apparent that a
    significant number of individuals driving the drug culture in
    our area were illegal aliens. Congressman Latham again helped
    us secure an INS agent for our task force. In 1998 Congressman
    Latham helped secure funds to build a facility in the Federal
    building to house the task force. In 1999 again Congressman
    Latham helped us turn the task force into a fully funded task
    force.
        The task force today is made up of 18 sworn officers, 2
    analysts, 3 of these are DEA agents, 6 are Sioux City police
    officers, and the remainder represent the States of South
    Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa DNE, the South Sioux City Police
    Department, the Woodbury County Sheriff's Office. Becoming a
    DEA-sponsored task force allowed us to deputize all officers in
    the task force giving them the jurisdiction to follow the cases
    anywhere in the country. All this was made possible by
    congressional help that we've received from such grants as the
    Byrne and the HIDTA funding. Thanks to this support we are able
    to address cases with as broad a scope as Sioux Falls, SD, Fort
    Dodge, Norfolk and Omaha, NE, Worthington, MN, and many other
    communities.
        Recently HIDTA conducted a survey to assess the perceived
    strengths and weaknesses in law enforcement agencies today.
    Perceived strengths included a more cooperative approach to law
    enforcement with better communication, sharing of equipment and
    facilities, multi-jurisdictional task force which removed
    boundaries among jurisdictions, fueled a law enforcement
    cooperative effort and leading to the dissemination to not only
    drugs but property and violent crimes as well. And better
    prosecution has been secured by the U.S. Federal attorney's
    office who has increased the number of prosecutors dealing with
    the drug problems in our communities, specifically through
    HIDTA grants which help us tremendously.
        Perceived weaknesses revealed in the responses included
    insufficient funding for equipment, investigations and
    training, and insufficient manpower, especially in smaller
    agencies to spare officers to attend training. Congressman
    Latham approached me several years ago about the idea of
    establishing a training center in Sioux City that would address
    these problems. The goal of the training center is to provide
    training to agencies previously not able to train effectively,
    either due to a shortage of funding or manpower, especially
    smaller agencies. Over the past 3 years we have provided
    training to over 5,309 students within a 150 mile radius of
    Sioux City. Training is offered in such courses as clandestine
    laboratories, drug awareness recognition, the Reid technique on
    interrogation for narcotics and many others.
        Training through the center is offered free of charge to
    officers of law enforcement agencies of Iowa, Nebraska, South
    Dakota and a part of Minnesota. The response has been
    overwhelming, but we need to work harder to reach the small
    agencies that can't afford the loss of manpower to send
    officers even if the training is free. The training center and
    the seminars provide available opportunity for officers to
    share information and make contacts that can later help them
    develop cases in the future, and it's imperative that we
    receive congressional support in this endeavor, we plan to
    develop a multi-jurisdictional geographic information system
    [GIS], to coordinate drug intelligence information for agencies
    through the tri-State area.
        In closing, you can see that where we came from and where
    we are today are light years apart, and yet we have to travel
    much further to eliminate the methamphetamine problem in our
    country. I ask for your continued support for the programs such
    as the Byrne and HIDTA grants, the multi-jurisdictional task
    force that have provided proven methods for improving our
    approach. We thank you for the support and urge its
    continuation.
        However, the drug problem does not exist in isolation.
    Other problems considered include the illegal alien problem
    that drives the drug trafficking problem and the need for
    demand reduction programs.
        Also, we have become victims of our own success. By further
    contributing to the jails that are already filled beyond their
    capacity, and it's a terrible problem all across the country.
        We urge Congress to keep all these issues in mind as they
    initiate and guide policy that guides both our local and our
    national fight against the problem of methamphetamine.
        Again I'd like to personally thank Congressman Latham for
    his overwhelming support in this committee and Congress as a
    whole for their efforts. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Frisbie follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.003

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.004

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.005

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.006

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.007

        Mr. Mica. We'll withhold questioning until we have heard
    from all the witnesses.
        I'll recognize now Marti J. Reilly who is with the Tri-
    State Drug Task Force. You're recognized.
        Mr. Reilly. Good morning, gentlemen. My name is Marti
    Reilly. I'm a sergeant with the Sioux City, IA, Police
    Department. I have been a police officer for 19 years. My
    current assignment is the Tri-State Drug Task Force where I am
    the group supervisor.
        The Tri-State Task Force is a multi-jurisdictional drug
    investigation group located in Sioux City. The task force was
    formed in 1995 to combat the ever-growing drug problem in
    Nebraska, Iowa, South Dakota area which we refer to as the tri-
    States. By 1995, it was obvious to those of us who worked drug
    investigations that we had a larger problem, primarily with
    methamphetamine, than we as individual agencies could handle
    alone. With Federal assistance through the Drug Enforcement
    Administration, local and State law enforcement agents could
    work together as deputized task force officers. This did allow
    us to operate without jurisdictional boundaries around us. That
    didn't stop the drug dealers, and instead it was stopping us.
        Our group today has 18 agents and officers working together
    in a centralized office. The group receives funding from DEA,
    through HIDTA, and through the Gothic grants.
        I worked drug investigations in Sioux City for 7 years over
    three different periods of time. I started working drug
    investigations in 1988. The drugs we were seeing available on
    the street at that time were powder cocaine and marijuana. I
    stopped working drugs in 1990 and then returned to working drug
    investigations in the fall of 1993.
        In that 3-year period while I was gone the new drug that
    hit the streets of Sioux City was methamphetamine and it hit in
    a big way. The first seizure of methamphetamine that we had in
    the Sioux City area was 92 percent pure, and we discovered a
    pound at that time. That was controlled by a Mexican male
    subject who was not interested in cooperating with law
    enforcement on where his drugs came from.
        This marked the beginning of a disturbing trend that
    continues to this day. While the Hispanic population has grown
    in our community, Mexican drug dealers have been able to blend
    into neighborhoods and communities. While attempting not to
    paint a picture with a wide brush, we have found that drug
    dealers at the top of the distribution network in our area
    predominantly are resident aliens or illegal aliens from
    Mexico.
        New terms have sprung up in the drug community, terms like
    Mexican Meth and Mexican Mafia. The term Mexican Meth is due to
    the fact that in our investigations the higher up the source
    scale you seem to go, Mexicans seem to control the drugs. The
    term Mexican Mafia seems to identify the methods used by these
    drug dealers in the way that they conduct business.
        We have very good Hispanic families in our community.
    Dealers, like I said earlier, try hard to blend in. We have a
    disproportionate number of Hispanics involved in drug
    trafficking in this area. Meth laboratories or lab
    manufacturing has somewhat increased in our area. It's not as
    overwhelming as it is in the rest of the State, but our
    particular area has increased mostly due to the quality of the
    methamphetamine going down significantly and the prices
    remaining the same. Therefore, they're getting into
    manufacturing on small scales.
        In the tri-State area we have approximately 120,000 people.
    We received intelligence information reports of much larger
    amounts than we could possibly support in this area. We in the
    area are referred to as the hub city, a title that we are
    working hard to change. One of the things that go hand in hand
    with large amounts of drugs are large amounts of money. The
    task force is working hard to interdict and intercept as many
    and as much methamphetamine as we possibly can.
        An area that we could use help in is with financial
    investigations. Many drug investigations have a member of the
    Internal Revenue Service working with them who specialize in
    investigations. We do not have an IRS agent in our group. I
    believe the seizing process away from drug organizations hurts
    the drug organization more than seizing drugs.
        Last, I request that this group seriously look into the
    problem of illegal immigration in this country. The problem
    facing us now is that we have to take the good with the bad.
    The bad control drug trafficking in our area. We deal with
    subjects who get arrested and flee back to Mexico. These
    subjects have several identities and are gone out of the area
    before their true identities are known. We also see many
    transient transporters who show up with multiple pounds of
    methamphetamine who know little of the organization or who are
    willing to tell us anything about their organizations or
    cooperating. We have found that only through cooperative
    approaches to investigating and information sharing from law
    enforcement has an impact on the problems that have been faced
    in the Midwest. Thank you.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Reilly follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.008

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.009

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.010

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.011

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.012

        Mr. Mica. As I said, we'll withhold questions till we've
    heard from all of the panel.
        On the panel the last witness is Penny Westfall and she is
    the Commissioner of Public Safety for the State of Iowa. You're
    recognized.
        Ms. Westfall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We did bring along
    additional graphs and information that we would ask----
        Mr. Mica. Without objection those graphs and that
    information will be made part of the official record. Please
    proceed.
        Ms. Westfall. Over the last 5 years Iowa has been subject
    to dramatic increases in the number of meth labs that we have
    seized. Due to that the Department of Public Safety created a
    specialized team which is made up of members from different
    divisions within the department, the Division of Narcotics
    Enforcement, the Iowa State Patrol, the State Fire Marshal's
    Office and chemists from the Division of Criminal Investigation
    criminal laboratories. This team provides assistance to
    Federal, county and State law enforcement through the State of
    Iowa.
        As you know, the labs have increased tremendously from a
    small number to over 500 seized by the State last year. In
    addition to that there were 300 seized by the city and county
    law enforcement agencies, so we were over 800 labs seized.
        Two manufacturing methods are used in Iowa, the Nazi method
    and the red phosphorus. The primary one is the Nazi method. We
    have seen a change in clan lab operations. Labs are getting
    larger, capable of producing larger quantities of
    methamphetamine. The pooling of efforts and precursors by the
    smaller lab operators is occurring. The agents of the Division
    of Narcotics Enforcement are working major methamphetamine lab
    conspiracy cases involving multiple lab operators. Our
    intelligence gained through cooperating individuals indicates
    several out-of-state organizations view Iowa as a fertile
    ground to set up large-scale operations.
        The locations of Iowa's lab sites tend to be seasonal in
    nature. As the weather warms, the clan lab operations move to
    the rural open areas, and as winter approaches they become more
    urbanized by migrating back indoors. We have found labs in
    major metropolitan areas and in most rural areas. They have
    been found in various locations, and we have several small farm
    communities along the Iowa-Missouri borders that have
    experienced a large number of labs.
        The Department of Public Safety has sponsored four 40-hour
    OSHA certified lab certification schools during 1999 to assist
    local law enforcement agencies in combating the meth problem.
    Sixty-nine sworn city officers and 11 firefighters attended and
    were subsequently certified. We've also done several, four 1-
    day re-certification courses. The Division of Narcotics
    Enforcement, supported by the State Fire Marshal's Office,
    presented 90 classes on methamphetamine clandestine lab
    recognition to over 6,500 people. These classes were comprised
    of sworn officers and full and voluntary firefighters.
        The Iowa State Patrol established a full-time 11-person
    highway interdiction team in July 1999 to deter the importation
    of meth. Approximately 85 percent of our meth is believed to be
    imported from outside States. The Iowa State Patrol has 48
    troopers who are clan lab certified. These troopers reside
    throughout the State and can respond to assist as needed.
        Last year the Division of Narcotics Enforcement requested
    and received additional sworn officers, permitting the
    assignment of 11 agents to full-time meth lab enforcement
    efforts. The State Fire Marshal's Office has seven lab
    certified officers which respond to clan lab sites to assist in
    the identification and removal of explosive substances and
    devices when found. The State Fire Marshal's Office is
    responding to more fires that are the result of accidents
    occurring during the manufacturing of meth.
        The Division of Criminal Investigation's crime laboratory
    is also severely impacted by the number of active labs and
    seizures. Prompt analysis of the evidence is critical to any
    prosecution. Many of the lab sites seized require the presence
    of a chemist. This in turn slows down the evidence analysis.
    The DCI has six certified clan lab chemists. Last year they
    earned over $21,000 in standby time and over $52,000 in actual
    overtime at lab sites. This total is just under what is
    expended for the remaining 40-member crime laboratory staff.
    The current crime laboratory is severely limited in space. New
    facilities are needed as soon as possible to meet the demand
    for prompt testing. The passage of the National Forensic
    Science Improvement Act is imperative.
        These labs are extremely resource-demanding. Officers are
    diverted from their regular assignments, requiring overtime
    pay, the specialized equipment and physicals continue to rise.
    The clan lab related overtime costs to the department exceed
    thousands of dollars each quarter, including the
    recertifications.
        The specialized equipment required to safely enter lab
    sites is cost-prohibitive to most agencies. Even a small lab
    may cost $1,200 in expendable items. The actual cost of
    physicals is also quite costly. They are truly a safety
    concern. Lab sites are not only places where illegal substances
    are produced, but innocent people are subjected to possible
    explosion, fire and carcinogenic wastes. These labs are
    manpower and resource draining, costing thousands of dollars to
    clean up.
        It is imperative that the DEA be funded for their lab site
    cleanups and they help refund the States that had to cover the
    costs when they ran out of money.
        In closing, the labs create a true public safety hazard
    that demands law enforcement response. We appreciate your being
    here to address that.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you so much.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Westfall follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.013

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.014

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.015

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.016

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.017

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.018

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.019

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.020

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.021

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.022

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.023

        Mr. Mica. I appreciate all of the witnesses on the panel
    providing us with testimony this morning.
        Let me start with a few questions if I may.
        You've cited a couple of areas that are national
    responsibility, and that we need attention on this problem. One
    is the problem I guess of illegals coming into this area. What
    percentage of illegals of those who are involved in this meth
    production activity or criminal activity are illegals, is it a
    small percentage?
        Mr. Frisbie. I talked to Sergeant Reilly about this
    recently, and the figure we come up with is around 50 to 60
    percent.
        Mr. Mica. Fifty to 60 percent.
        Mr. Frisbie. Of the people that have been arrested in our
    community for the drug problems, methamphetamine, have been
    Hispanic, Hispanic individuals. They're highly over-
    represented.
        Mr. Mica. I'm talking, they're illegals, they're not people
    who are here legitimately?
        Mr. Frisbie. That's right.
        Mr. Mica. What about cooperation from INS, a Federal
    agency, in removing these individuals? I mean, if we have that
    many people who are here illegally to begin with, not to
    mention their criminal activity, it is a Federal responsibility
    to remove them. Are you getting proper attention from INS, or
    is there proper resources to deal with the illegal alien
    problem here?
        Mr. Frisbie. From the investigation standpoint, we have an
    INS agent in the task force, but, however, the removal I think
    is by justice, there has been a problem. And of course the
    housing, where to put these people, the length of time it takes
    to----
        Mr. Mica. Process and move them out.
        Are you also getting repeats now, are they coming back some
    of them? You talked about some use of aliases.
        Mr. Reilly. We have illegal re-entry problems. The thing is
    that many times we have problems identifying them in the first
    place. We do have an INS agent within our task force. The thing
    is that they have to be convicted of a felony before
    deportation hearings generally take place. So jail space is
    becoming more and more burdensome toward beds available. I
    think the standard is going to continue to raise on what it
    takes to actually deportate.
        Mr. Mica. That seems strange, because we get cases in
    Florida all the time where people who are here innocent and
    come in, they may have overstayed their stay, but they move
    them out in a hurry.
        Mr. Reilly. You're a lot closer than we are.
        Mr. Mica. So that's one of your problems, geographic.
        You said you don't have an IRS agent as part of your effort
    here, and you said you can also go after these folks through
    either a tax evasion or some financial improper activity. Was
    that a recommendation?
        Mr. Reilly. Yes, it was. IRS has a division called CID,
    Criminal Investigation Division, that they're law enforcement
    agents, not just accountants, who specifically work on money
    laundering, and that's the type of agent we would like to see
    assigned to our task force to assist us in the financial
    investigations of some of these organizations.
        Mr. Mica. I'd like to come away from these hearings with
    something positive. Maybe we can do a joint letter from us to
    local members, and may get some others to IRS. When I was
    chairman of Civil Service, I had over 110,000 employees and
    thousands of criminal investigators. Maybe we can get one for
    this area. And if the staff will remind me, we'll initiate that
    good recommendation.
        We know, and I've heard testimony among all three of you
    that we have Mexican illegals or Mexican traffickers involved
    which is kind of mind-boggling considering again the Heartland
    of America here. How far back are we able to trace these? I
    know that you probably have a certain number of people who
    immigrated here and worked here and conduct themselves very
    well. But you have got this illegal or criminal activity, and
    it must stem back to Mexico at least as far as supplies or
    finance. Is there a good connect here? Is this something that
    the DEA and FBI are following up on? And do we have the
    cooperation of Mexican officials in going after the bad guys?
    Chief.
        Mr. Frisbie. I wish I could answer that.
        Mr. Mica. You're not seeing that?
        Mr. Frisbie. No.
        Mr. Mica. Ms. Westfall.
        Ms. Westfall. We work closely with the DEA and the FBI in
    trying to develop the conspiracies and working with the Federal
    drug task force. I can't speak directly as far as the
    cooperation from the Mexican Government, but we certainly are
    receiving the cooperation from our Federal agencies in
    reaching, trying to reach the conspiracies. It's difficult.
        Mr. Mica. Are there specific cases that you have been able
    to go after and they're tracing them back to Mexican dealers,
    and are we seeing success, or was there some lack of resource
    or attention from the DEA or FBI to this area and your specific
    problems? Be candid. If you don't want to tell me publicly,
    I'll be glad, I don't want to embarrass anyone, and I know you
    work with these officials. But our purpose in being here is to
    get the resources here and to make certain that the Federal
    agencies are cooperating with the locals, and sometimes that
    doesn't always happen.
        Mr. Reilly. Let me go ahead and explain a case to you to
    kind of give you some idea what we see. We had an organization
    that involved several family members that ran a business, an
    auto parts business. In that business there were two, there was
    one in Iowa, actually it was in Nebraska, and one in
    California. We continually received information that this group
    was responsible for large quantity shipments, 30 to 60 pounds
    methamphetamine coming into this area every 2 to 3 weeks. We
    intercepted through a courier that came out here without drugs
    with her, but she had a pickup ticket at a local common
    carrier. We went out and with her cooperation we seized that
    auto part and x-rayed it. That auto part contained seven pounds
    of methamphetamine, completely wrapped in fiberglass, painted
    up to look like a spoiler on a car. When we started working
    that conspiracy from that particular seizure, that business
    disappeared. We sent agents immediately out to California
    because we figured that that was where they were going, is to
    the other auto parts store. They disappeared from there also
    and were back in Mexico within days.
        Mr. Mica. So the operation was linked to Mexican
    traffickers, and this operation was just a front. Did the part
    come in from California or from Mexico?
        Mr. Reilly. From California. Most of what we see is it
    seems like the Hispanic groups that control the drug
    trafficking have their last setup in California. I believe the
    chemicals come into California, they're manufactured in
    California, they're shipped through the Southwest.
        Mr. Mica. Being shipped through legitimate carriers, too?
        Mr. Reilly. Not ordinarily. I would say a vast majority of
    what is shipped is in compartmentalized vehicles. The
    interdiction teams are seeing more and more hidden compartments
    in semi-truck trailers, in regular vehicles. They're using
    families to look like mom and pop and the kids in an RV that
    may contain 30 to 60 pounds of drugs hidden in the vehicle. I
    think our roadways are inundated.
        Mr. Mica. You also testified that 80 percent of this stuff
    is coming in already produced and you have got the labs on top
    of it producing it here. You have described the transport and
    entry of the product and some of the routing. What about
    precursor chemicals that are being used in the local
    production, what are we finding here?
        Mr. Reilly. That we have seen in our area, and I'll let
    Penny address the statewide, are mostly the meth labs where you
    could get the precursor chemicals at a local hardware store,
    more like a Wal-Mart type store.
        Mr. Mica. So the precursors are not necessarily coming in
    from Mexico?
        Mr. Reilly. No. In fact, what we see the most of are
    smaller labs that manufacture an ounce or less, and most of
    those precursor chemicals are purchased at local department
    stores.
        Mr. Mica. Finally let me ask you about the HIDTA. We've put
    a lot of money in the HIDTAs. It's sort of a food fight,
    everybody going after the money. So many areas have such a
    tremendous problem right now. We have limited resources, and
    we're cutting the pie slices a little bit thinner. How is your
    money spent here, and do you feel it's effective?
        What I'd like to know is that some places build their own
    little HIDTA bureaucracy. Some of them put money into different
    agencies. Some of them have cooperative efforts. Perhaps you
    could describe how your money is being spent and do you feel
    that that's the most effective way? Then if we had a few more
    dollars where would you target, Chief Frisbee?
        Mr. Frisbie. We have six members of our task force right
    now that are supported by HIDTA grants. Those, all six of those
    people are investigators. Most of the money we have in our task
    force at least is supporting investigative efforts. In fact
    it's almost all of it really.
        Mr. Mica. How do you physically operate? Do you have a
    building? Some of these HIDTAs are buying buildings.
        Mr. Frisbie. That's an interesting question.
        When we first got in the business, we actually built our
    own out of an old warehouse, and Congressman Latham came down
    and took a look at it 1 day and said we probably should have
    something a little better than that. We actually built a center
    over in the basement of the Federal Building.
        Mr. Mica. Using an existing Federal resource and converting
    it. What about administrative staff?
        Mr. Frisbie. One secretary. It's a fairly nice arrangement.
        Mr. Mica. But the bulk of your money is going into
    personnel that are actively involved in investigating?
        Mr. Frisbie. Yes.
        Ms. Westfall. Mr. Chairman, if I may, for the State, I
    think speaking across the State, the HIDTA funds are essential
    for continuing the enforcement efforts across the State. I know
    with the Department of Public Safety, ours goes to personnel,
    to overtime, to equipment. We just recently received, asked the
    State, what are you needing for interdiction, and we added
    equipment and items that they're needing also. So it's multi,
    it covers several of the divisions within the Department of
    Public Safety.
        Mr. Mica. Your HIDTA money is really for multi-state
    efforts, too?
        Ms. Westfall. Yes.
        Mr. Mica. What ends up--like in Iowa, is there some kind of
    equitable distribution between Iowa, South Dakota and Nebraska?
    Is Missouri in this area?
        Ms. Westfall. Yes.
        Mr. Mica. Tell me how that's divided and is that a fair way
    to do it?
        Mr. Frisbie. Mr. Chairman, if I may, if we could recognize
    Tim Carter who is with us today from DNE, he was the chairman
    of the board of the Midwest HIDTA, who could really address
    these questions quite well, if that would be permissible.
        Mr. Mica. I'll tell you what we'll do. We can add him to
    the next panel. He's not on it. Or the last panel.
        Ms. Westfall. We believe that it is being equitably shared,
    although some of the States have not been as active as Iowa and
    Missouri has. So as other States become more active, then their
    requests are increasing for additional moneys, which means they
    will be taking it from the States that have been using it in
    the past. There are, I also understand, additional HIDTAs being
    formed that will also----
        Mr. Mica. My final question was again, we'll put more money
    in this time. Fortunately, we're in a surplus position, and
    more money will end up in HIDTAs overall. But then you get down
    to the specific activity that should be supported. If you had
    to list your top choices, one or two, where we might put more
    funds, maybe you could, Chief Frisbie and Ms. Westfall, maybe
    you could tell us what you would do with that, the biggest
    need.
        Mr. Frisbie. Obviously always there's a need for more
    manpower for investigations.
        Mr. Mica. So that would be the most effective use of our
    dollars if we add them would be for additional investigative
    staff.
        Mr. Frisbie. Yes. Followed by prosecution.
        And again I'll tell you, one of the biggest problems that I
    see, I keep hearing about it on a national level, we have over
    1 million people a year coming into this country illegally,
    which I think is fueling the entire problem. It's absolutely a
    huge problem. I don't know that this exactly ties to HIDTA in
    any way. Something has to be done about the influx of people
    into this country illegally. I think everybody understands
    that.
        The other problem is what bogs us down, some of the other
    problems we're having is the administration of handling these
    people once we do come up with them. When I said the jails are
    a problem here, it's not an exaggeration. Our jails are
    overflowing here to the point there's just no place to put
    anybody anymore.
        Mr. Mica. How many of those are illegal?
        Mr. Frisbie. There's no solution to it. I'd have to ask the
    sheriff for a breakdown, but there's a lot. The fact of the
    matter is there's no relief anywhere for this. We've been all
    over. We've been to the State. We've been out to DC, here
    recently, talked about the problem, and quite honestly there
    isn't anybody anywhere. We're very exasperated by this problem.
    We just don't know what to do with it.
        Mr. Mica. We also conduct oversight and investigations,
    have that responsibility over INS. Similar problem we've been
    hearing. We did a hearing north of Atlanta, GA. I think there
    were 20,000 illegals in this small county north of Atlanta. I
    couldn't believe those figures, but the same thing we're
    hearing. That may be something else we could weigh in and
    address. Did you want to comment in closing?
        Ms. Westfall. We would use the additional moneys for
    personnel costs and equipment. The expendable equipment, the
    equipment that's routinely needed and is extremely costly, the
    physicals that are required to keep a certified lab person
    certified, all of that is very expensive. Those would be some
    of the personnel costs that we would be utilizing.
        Would also note that in your earlier questioning with the
    INS, they have been very responsive to us. It's not unusual for
    the State patrol to stop vehicles and find maybe 15 people in a
    van, maybe 30 persons in a rental truck, the kind you don't
    know how people have survived in such tight, tight quarters.
    They try to be very successful. There was publicity in the last
    couple of weeks of a stop north of Des Moines in the Story
    County area where there were not enough INS personnel to
    respond, so two people, without really knowing who they were,
    had to be released because they couldn't come and take them.
    But they are really attempting to respond as much as their
    personnel can be allowed to.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you. I'll yield now to Mr. Latham.
        Mr. Latham. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to thank this panel very much for testimony. First
    of all, I want to say as far as bringing another IRS agent in
    here, I'll reserve judgment on that.
        Mr. Mica. Maybe he can work on this.
        Mr. Latham. To work specifically here, yes. I wish we had
    time for all the entities to be on the panel here. I will tell
    you the local law enforcement throughout the district, the
    sheriff offices, Sheriff Amick back here does a great job. I
    see the State patrol here, and the tremendous work that they
    have had, the tremendous job they do. The State DCI, the INS. I
    was going to say as far as INS, and we can get off into days of
    discussion, at the local level they do everything they can and
    I think do it very, very well. The people we have on the ground
    here are outstanding, working with the Tri-State Drug Task
    Force. We have a quick response team here in Sioux City. And we
    have more than quadrupled the budget for INS. I am on one of
    the subcommittees that funds it. It's not a matter of money.
        Mr. Mica. It's the resources.
        Mr. Latham. Well, it's a dysfunctional agency. It's
    probably the most dysfunctional. As an organization, it's
    systemic in the INS. The Federal DEA does an outstanding job
    here in cooperation.
        I do want to make one point about what we're seeing. We
    don't always identify people who are here illegally with
    intentions to sell the drugs and to destroy what we have in our
    community. Let's not in any way stereotype a group of people
    who I think are outstanding citizens and contribute greatly to
    this community. And it's unfortunate that there is this element
    who hides out in a tremendous part of our community. I'm always
    nervous when we kind of sometimes lump people together, because
    that simply is not the case. It's a tiny part of a community
    that are using them as cover basically for their illicit
    actions.
        As you know, Mr. Chairman, back several years ago, and I've
    seen maps were the upper Midwest actually was targeted and a
    marketing plan put into place by the Mexican drug cartels for
    this, this is the only part of the country that wasn't already
    taken over by certain organized crime, so this is no accident
    of what's happening here. There is a marketing plan in place to
    kill our kids basically.
        That's a statement again rather than ask questions here.
        I would like to ask Penny, we talked a lot about law
    enforcement, the challenges they face, what have you seen,
    local fire departments, we have all these labs out here. We had
    a situation over in Cherokee a couple months ago, 6 weeks ago,
    with a house fire and basically they went in and found out
    there was something strange. They were basically told to back
    off. Found out later there were booby traps and things in
    place. What do we do to assist in that way? And they're toxic
    waste sites basically.
        Ms. Westfall. We have 16 hazardous materials teams first,
    to respond to your question, that are made up of fire personnel
    across the State. They have a real interest in being able to
    come in and assist law enforcement in the clan lab sites that
    are not criminal sites. There are many that we find that there
    is just not much evidence there, and they're really not
    probably going to ever find somebody to charge with it. So we
    have been working with particularly the hazmat teams at this
    point to see about certifying them so that if it's not a crime
    scene, law enforcement arrives first, they find it's not a
    crime scene, allow them to remove themselves and go on with
    other investigations, and have the people from the hazmat team
    come in and clean up.
        There's been a couple problems. One is a 40-hour DEA
    certification required for site certification. The hazmat
    material persons have an extensive amount of training on
    hazardous materials. So we have been able to work with them to
    get it to a 24-hour course, as I understand, 24-hour course for
    the hazmat people that will be taught here at the training
    facility, so that they will be certified, but without the cost
    of going through that 40 hours.
        But we also have a problem with who can clean up. Right now
    there's only one or maybe a couple certified companies or
    companies that the DEA will pay for that they will come in and
    clean up. We are wondering if it wouldn't be possible, if it's
    not possible on at least some of the smaller sites, that the
    hazardous materials teams be allowed to clean them up and get
    paid for them at a lesser cost. At this point we're being told
    that can't happen, that it has to be the full group that comes
    in, and if somebody takes the risk of having someone else clean
    up hazardous materials, they will not receive the Federal
    funding for that cleanup. That's certainly a tremendous risk.
        In addition to that there were several fire fighters
    trained as we went around looking at the hazardous, at the lab
    recognition. We'd like to do additional training on that. We
    don't have any plans at this time. We do have concern for
    firefighters' safety. We have had deaths now from fire scenes,
    where there has been an explosion or a fire. So we do have
    concerns for their safety.
        Mr. Latham. Joe, do you want to comment as far as your
    training? And I want to publicly thank you for the tremendous
    job that you have done at the training center out here. It's
    been remarkable, the success you have had.
        Mr. Frisbie. Thank you. Congressman, I'll tell you, I think
    one of the problems that we'd like to address at the training
    center in the future is we're still finding that it's extremely
    hard to get the small communities to attend, the mom and pop
    operations, the one, two, three, four-man departments. A lot of
    that is even with the training being free, they have to have
    somebody watch the community when they're gone, and in these
    small communities that's a very hard problem. We're going to be
    looking at going out and trying to do some recruitment with
    these folks and encourage the sheriff's departments in their
    areas and the local police departments to help each other out,
    to backfill.
        I talked to Sheriff Amick who has done that, where they
    backfill while officers from the small communities are in the
    training center. We're going to try to encourage some of that.
    In the absence of that we're going to have to figure out a way
    to pay for the backfill to get these officers in there. I think
    this is crucial.
        The larger communities have a lot more capability of
    handling problems, because they have the investigative
    resources, a lot more at least than the small communities
    throughout the area. In the course of drug dealers realizing
    there's a lot of activity that goes on out in the rural areas,
    in the smaller communities--that's why we're trying to train
    the smaller departments on drug recognition and to be able to
    identify a lab when they see one.
        And then we hold a seminar each year so that all of these
    small entities and all of these people that have been taking
    this drug training from us can get together with our task
    force, and our task force comes in and talks to them about how
    you actually set up a case, or what level you have to be at to
    start a Federal case with them, or how to get assistance from
    the drug task force, so that these small departments can go
    from a one or two-man department to overnight they can be a 20-
    man department if those resources are necessary to go out there
    to aid and assist these folks and take care of this problem,
    because this problem is no longer a local problem. It's a
    regional problem. What's going on out here in the regional area
    is affecting us as well.
        So I think that's one area we have to put a lot more effort
    into. And I think this training is absolutely crucial. If the
    officers don't understand and cannot identify the drug problems
    in their community or what it takes to do these investigations,
    they're just basically out there doing their routine things and
    they just can't identify it and can't deal with it.
        The other thing that we'd like to see come out of the
    training center is that the GIS system which I was talking
    about, which is global information system, see if we can
    develop that, which is another way of handling intelligence
    information, where it's doing layering mapping, where you can
    identify different places of whether they sell precursors,
    where you have had known drug houses, and you start doing these
    relationship maps and a much better system of intelligence
    sharing. We think that that can make a tremendous difference.
    We're trying to develop that right now. Hopefully in the future
    we can get some support on that. We'll be talking to you about
    that in the future.
        Mr. Latham. Surprise.
        Mr. Frisbie. One thing I'd like to say is or encourage
    other locations or police officers or sheriffs or what have
    you, that one of the best things I think that has happened for
    us is being able to develop a relationship with the
    congressional office such as yours, to come in and take the
    time to talk to us, identify the problems. And I want you to
    know that we really appreciate it when you come to town. I
    never thought I'd see this in politics, but it actually happens
    that Congressman Latham will come to town, it's not a photo op,
    he actually comes in unannounced sometimes. We go in and look
    at the training centers; comes in and talks to the men on the
    task force to find out what's wrong.
        We don't always need congressional hearings to get these
    things done. I think more work gets done directly through the
    Congressman's offices on individual bases, because we're
    continually taking our problems to him. We're inundating him
    with our problems.
        Mr. Mica. He does the same thing to me.
        Mr. Frisbie. I think that's extremely important to have
    those lines of communications wide open. And we do hear, as you
    can see over the last 8 to 10 years the progress we've made,
    not even having a DEA office here. We worked out of a Sioux
    Falls office 8 years ago. Now we're a fully funded DEA task
    force here. That's tremendous progress. The only way you can do
    that is through constant collaboration between ourselves and
    Congress, not just in these kind of hearings here, but ongoing
    when these hearings are over. I think it's extremely important,
    because you're not going to hear it all here today.
        Mr. Latham. Check's in the mail, Joe. We're going to run up
    against time here. We knew this was going to happen.
        Mr. Chairman, I wanted to express, there is an initiative
    to help small local fire departments, have some resources. We
    do a lot with law enforcement. But it's something that I've
    been very supportive. I believe you have too. I think these
    people along with local law enforcement are on the front edge
    as far as danger, and the training that Joe can give them, and
    also some resources as far as equipment for self-protection out
    there on the local level, and these volunteer fire departments
    are really stressed today. We really need to help there. Thank
    you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Mica. The gentleman from South Dakota is recognized.
    Mr. Thune.
        Mr. Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chief Frisbie, I was noticing in looking at your resume,
    you have a degree from that extraordinarily fine institution up
    the road, University of South Dakota.
        Mr. Frisbie. I also teach there, Congressman.
        Mr. Thune. Your stock's going up all the time.
        Just a question. We had in South Dakota the biggest meth
    bust here in the last week, 8 pounds, some $200,000 street
    value, and it was actually initially detected by the Postal
    Service, because it came in a package that they thought looked
    suspicious, and that's what prompted the investigation.
        I'm wondering, you were using statistics here in part of
    your dialog earlier with the chairman, in talking about the
    amount of meth that is actually homegrown in labs and meth that
    is imported. I guess I'm wondering in your experience, your
    assessment of that, does a lot of this come from across the
    border, not just into Iowa or Nebraska or South Dakota, but is
    it coming from Mexico or outside the United States borders into
    this country, and percentagewise how much of a problem is that
    relative to that that is grown locally?
        Mr. Frisbie. Talking to Sergeant Reilly here in the past
    about this, the southwest part of the United States and Mexico
    is my understanding where a lot of our meth is coming from. But
    I think you would be better to address that.
        Mr. Reilly. It would primarily be coming from California.
    We still see large shipments of marijuana coming up that
    sometimes accompanies methamphetamine that I believe probably
    is grown in Mexico and brought up. But it seems as though
    primarily the methamphetamine is coming from the southwest
    United States.
        Ms. Westfall. Our intelligence shows that about 85 percent
    is coming in from outside the State. That was a couple years
    ago at 90 percent, so it's decreased a small amount it appears
    by intelligence. Primarily it's coming from Mexico into
    California, then across. Of the people who are cooking meth
    here in Iowa, they're primarily Caucasian, primarily upper
    20's, early 30's, you may get into the 40's.
        Mr. Thune. This is a question too, I guess, is how actually
    does this get into the hands of our kids, I mean what is it,
    the dealers, the distributors, once the supply comes in, how
    then is it making it out there to the kids?
        Mr. Reilly. In my report that I submitted I kind of looked
    at the history of what we saw locally was almost grocery store
    marketing. When we initially saw methamphetamine coming in, it
    was extremely pure and it was given out pretty much, hey, I
    just met you, I don't know the people around here, I don't
    speak the language very well, here, have a half pound, go
    distribute to your friends, bring me back the money. That type
    of grocery store marketing, almost like free sampling started
    it.
        That became a peripheral network. That dealer had several
    people then that he could deal down to, one person dealt to
    several people, and trickle down.
        You have to be at quite a high level to actually be dealing
    with one of the bigger people in this community. You work
    through several layers, and mostly those layers go through what
    we have as a local population, Caucasian males, Caucasian
    females, hand to hand to hand to hand several times before it
    gets down to a small level that's getting to your kids in the
    middle school. If you follow that up that seems to be where
    it's coming from.
        Mr. Frisbie. One of the problems that we're having with
    local law enforcement of course is we spend so much time and
    effort into the larger problem, trying to get to the sources.
    One place some of my investigators and other people tell me
    that is a bit of a problem is working the street level, because
    all our efforts and our manpower and resources are dedicated
    toward the larger cases, where the small cases, the street
    level stuff we need to pay a little more attention to in the
    future. And that usually will work its way into some of the
    larger cases.
        Mr. Thune. Sergeant Marti, I'm curious too as to the
    efforts of your task force, to what degree does South Dakota
    figure into those activities, I mean as far as what you're
    seeing activity in our State, and I have a followup question to
    that. But anyway if you could tell me.
        Mr. Reilly. Many years we have attended meetings with the
    agents who work the Sioux Falls area, and we've been beat up by
    them for quite a long time saying all their dope problems are
    in Sioux City, and if they built a snow fence across the
    interstate they would have no problems. Quite honestly we work
    together with agents from South Dakota. We have a South Dakota
    agent now in our task force.
        I don't think State lines have an effect on how a drug
    trafficker traffics his drugs. It only affects law enforcement
    really who has to deal with the jurisdictional boundary. I
    believe that right now a lot of the drug problems that they do
    have in Sioux Falls and throughout that little corridor between
    Sioux City and Sioux Falls are fed through us. We are kind of a
    hub city and I believe that a lot of the drugs are being
    filtered through Sioux City to Sioux Falls. So through that
    cooperative effort, and we deal with those agents coming down
    and working with our task force to identify people, they may be
    trained in their area but actually live as residents in our
    area. We have worked quite a few investigations together to
    combat the jurisdictional problem and the territorial problem
    between the two States.
        Mr. Thune. You talk about Sioux City-Sioux Falls corridor.
    I suspect probably over to Yankton and areas like that, are you
    seeing this going out into the rural areas, are you seeing much
    activity in the smaller towns? Like I'm thinking west of
    Yankton, you get to places like Tyndall, Tabor and up in
    Freeman, those areas surrounding Sioux Falls and Sioux City.
        Mr. Reilly. I believe because we are kind of a hub city,
    and if you have a network distribution that the drugs probably
    are filtering that direction, there are dealer sources out
    there in the small communities who are getting their drugs from
    somebody that would probably relate back to Sioux Falls, Sioux
    City, the major cities of the two. There is probably a nexus
    there. A lot of those people go undetected for quite a long
    time. Actually you would think in a small community they would
    be immediately identified, but people who traffic small
    amounts, and if they know and have known for years their
    clientele, people aren't willing to give them up as rapidly,
    especially in smaller communities, because they're actually
    relatives or friends.
        So sometimes what would appear to be very opposite, it
    would be very, everyone would be very upset in a small
    community, I believe they are, but it goes undetected and
    unknown for long periods of time. I do believe our drugs
    probably filter into those smaller communities.
        Mr. Thune. I guess I'm interested, Chief, in what you said
    too about the whole training effort.
        It would seem to me at least that part of the problem in
    our small towns is going to be detection, making sure you have
    people who understand what to look for. I think to me that
    would be, just from my observation listening to you all speak
    this morning, something that we are going to have to step up
    our efforts on.
        Mr. Frisbie. There is no question about that.
        As a matter of fact, the intelligence sharing is going to
    be extremely important there as well. We're actually building
    our intelligence network by when those people come in to train.
    We establish relationships with these other communities where
    before they have been kind of isolated. We didn't see them
    much. I think it's going to make a big difference. But we need
    to step up our efforts in training those individuals in the
    smaller communities. They literally have no training funds and
    no capabilities, and that's a tragedy.
        Ms. Westfall. Let me make a comment. One of the things that
    you need to keep in mind though, too, is that as you increase
    this training you will increase the amount of drugs being found
    and the need for more expendable equipment and equipment for
    the folks who are finding them.
        When we did the training across the entire State, the 6,000
    people, we wondered what impact that would have on the labs
    being found, and our numbers show it went from 320 up to 800
    some. We think at least some of that if not a lot of that
    increase is due to what happens when you train the folks. You
    need to not only provide for the training, you also need to be
    willing to go further and provide those people with the
    equipment and the capability to respond to what will be an
    increase in found drug activity.
        Mr. Frisbie. Like I said before, we often become victims of
    our own success. This whole thing funnels to all kinds of
    support services that are required once you get into these
    things. When you start identifying more labs, you know, we
    start buying pounds rather than ounces. It's not that it wasn't
    out there, it's our efforts increased and our capability of
    getting into these areas has been increased. Then we start
    making more arrests. We're dealing with large conspiracy cases.
        And I'll tell you a lot of our worries again, you look at
    the jail situation, the ability to process the drugs at the
    lab, different things of this nature, all support services out
    there with the INS, if we can get that straightened out.
        Mr. Thune. Last question, Mr. Chairman. Last question I had
    on this is when you catch the bad guys what is the success rate
    with prosecutions?
        Mr. Reilly. One of the things that we see on the task force
    level, we take many of our cases federally because a lot of the
    cases are large and the thresholds are met for Federal
    prosecution. The sentencing guidelines in the Federal system
    are much different than what we see in the State of Iowa. We
    have a problem in the State of Iowa with truth in sentencing.
    It's extremely poor. What sounds like a good deal, that you
    have got a drug dealer and he's going to get 10 years and he
    actually does 18 months, that's pretty disheartening. In the
    Federal system they will do 80 percent of their sentence.
        And the sentencing is just a very good structure, and we
    are having very good prosecutions in the Federal court system
    in our area. To go along with that, and what Chief Frisbie just
    mentioned too, as far as the support services to that, the U.S.
    Attorney's Office in Sioux City in 1993 had one drug
    prosecutor. Now they have five drug prosecutors. They had a
    district, a Federal district court judge and a part-time
    magistrate. Now they have a full-time magistrate and two
    Federal district court judges.
        One has taken senior status, but he's hearing full time
    cases primarily. It's working. The Federal system works
    slightly slower than the State system, but we are getting good
    sentences. And the Federal bite is a bigger dog than the State.
        Mr. Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the panel.
        Mr. Mica. I'm pleased to hear the comments about Federal
    prosecutions. They were going down, down, down. We finally got
    them going up, up, up. We're under a tremendous amount of
    pressure to change the minimum mandatory, from which I hear all
    the local witnesses that we have before our panel, do not
    change that. It is very effective, and it's a deterrent, at
    least those that are active traffickers and we catch them and
    convict them.
        I was just telling Congressman Latham that now we have the
    problem, we're getting prosecutions back up, but the
    administration now has, we've just got a report back that the
    sentencing is going down. So we're constantly trying to stay
    after the Federal enforcement prosecution and the judicial fuss
    to at least exercise the will of the Congress and the people I
    think in this case.
        I thank all of you for your testimony this morning. Chief
    Frisbie, you had said that you wanted a HIDTA director to
    provide some testimony. Who is that?
        Mr. Frisbie. Ken Carter has been the past HIDTA director.
        Mr. Mica. Rather than have him testify, we have to go
    through the swearing in and all of that, we have the panel, I'm
    going to ask unanimous consent that we submit questions to him.
    We'll do that so his testimony will be made a part of the
    record. And we'll have some specific questions that I already
    outlined to you that you said he could respond to without
    objection.
        I do again want to thank each of you for coming forward. We
    look forward to working with you, your local Members of
    Congress, to see that we can do a better job at addressing some
    of the problems you have outlined for us today. Thank you.
    We'll excuse this panel.
        Let me call the second panel. The second panel consists of
    two individuals this morning. The first is Linda Phillips, and
    Linda Phillips is the executive director of Siouxland Cares.
    The second witness is Carla Van Hofwegen, and she is on the
    board of directors of Hava Java, a local, I guess, faith-based
    organization. And both of them are testifying before our
    subcommittee today. Again I don't know if they were here when I
    made the introduction or comments. We do ask you to limit your
    oral presentation to the subcommittee to 5 minutes. You can
    submit lengthy testimony or additional data or information upon
    request to the Chair and that will be granted and made a part
    of the record.
        This also is an investigations and oversight subcommittee
    of the Government Reform Committee. We do swear in our
    witnesses. You will be sworn. If you will please stand, raise
    your right hands.
        [Witnesses sworn.]
        Mr. Mica. The record will reflect that the witnesses
    answered in the affirmative.
        I would ask the record reflect that the Chair recognizes
    first Linda Phillips, and she is executive director of
    Siouxland Cares. You are recognized.

      STATEMENTS OF LINDA PHILLIPS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SIOUXLAND
     CARES; AND CARLA VAN HOFWEGEN, PRESIDENT, BOARD OF DIRECTORS,
                               HAVA JAVA

        Ms. Phillips. Thank you. I have been the executive director
    of Siouxland Cares for the past 10 years. And primarily what
    Siouxland Cares is is a community anti-drug coalition. That's
    probably the easiest way to define it.
        First thing I want to do is thank Representative Latham. I
    think had he not stepped in years ago to really identify drug
    abuse as his No. 1 issue, we'd be talking about a lot of
    different things today than we are right now. The problem would
    be much, much worse. He has given us assistance as far as our
    community anti-drug coalition, as far as the meth training
    center, and the national anti-drug media campaign, he's also
    given support there and we would be talking about a much more
    serious problem, even though it is a serious problem that we're
    talking about today.
        I've seen the devastation that alcohol and other drugs have
    caused to individuals, families, businesses. The one thing that
    I do as an executive director is to really try to promote the
    wonderful things that are going on in our community, and I will
    do that in just a moment.
        But first I want to share some statistics with you. I think
    it's very, very important that you hear what's going on here
    locally as far as the methamphetamine issue. Approximately 12
    percent of the clients who are in treatment programs across the
    State of Iowa have identified methamphetamine as their No. 1
    drug of choice; 20 percent of those inmates have identified
    meth as the No. 1 drug of choice.
        I have worked for about 8 years with a group who is working
    on drug-exposed infants in our community. In the past 3 years
    we have had 32 drug-exposed infants. Of those six were exposed
    to methamphetamine, or 19 percent of the positive screens. One
    of those wonderful things that have happened once those ladies
    are identified and the babies are identified is we have an
    intervention team, and that intervention team is--their primary
    focus is to get help for that mom and that family. Of our
    students, 8 to 12 percent have used meth in the past.
        We have taken several surveys over the past couple of years
    and that's what has been identified. Those surveys have
    identified that drugs and alcohol are available to most youths
    in Siouxland. Students are most likely to use alcohol or other
    drugs at a friend's house in the evening. Engaging in high risk
    behavior is associated with alcohol and other drug use. And we
    know that. We thought we made a dent on kids drinking and
    driving, using drugs and driving. Something we've got to take a
    major look at again, because they are using alcohol and other
    drugs and they are driving. About two-thirds felt that it would
    be difficult for them to get methamphetamine. That tells us
    that one-third think it's pretty easy to get meth. That's an
    extremely high number if a kid can go out and get meth on the
    street. I think there are a lot of adults who have no idea
    where they can get it; 92 percent of those kids thought that
    meth was harmful, yet 9 percent of the seniors had used meth.
    We know that increasing awareness efforts will change the
    attitudes of kids. If they believe that a drug is harmful, they
    will be less likely to use. We know that, it's research-based.
        We do have several wonderful things going on in Siouxland.
    We have Siouxland Cares, community anti-drug coalition. We are
    part of a national youth anti-drug media campaign. We have a
    wonderful Website with lots of data available to us. We have a
    fairly new organization called the Siouxland Human Investment
    Partnership, and it is our local empowerment board.
        They also have a group called Community Alliance Treating
    Substance Abusing Teens, which is an intervention team at the
    high school level. We have a Tri-State Drug Task Force which
    you've heard. We have the meth training center. We also have a
    women's and children's treatment center run by Gordon Recovery
    Center. Women are able to go to a treatment facility that is
    residential and bring the children with them. That was one of
    the barriers we had identified in getting women treatment, was
    not being able to take their children with them.
        We have a wonderful new drug court that is both a juvenile
    and adult drug court. Community volunteers serve as panel
    members. Again, all about rehabilitation. The Air National
    Guard has in place a drug demand reduction program. The Iowa
    Poison Center provides information and consultation to
    emergency rooms about the toxic exposure such as
    methamphetamine. We have HIDTA. We have a Healthy Siouxland
    Initiative. We have identified drug abuse as the No. 1 concern
    in our community. And of course we work quite a bit with the
    Governor's alliance on Substance Abuse in Des Moines.
        While we have many, many wonderful services, we need to
    expand and strengthen our current prevention, intervention and
    treatment program. We need to reduce the demand for drugs and
    its availability. We need to provide parity for substance abuse
    and mental health on both the Federal and State levels. We need
    to provide a full array of treatment service options,
    especially in the rural areas. They're very lacking there. And
    we need to provide a continuum of care.
        We've learned a lot of wonderful lessons from
    Representative Latham on what we can do. Getting the Federal
    Government behind us to assist us locally is absolutely
    wonderful. We need to continue that. Again alcohol is our No. 1
    drug. I would be remiss if I did not state that. And that we
    need to take the lessons that we have learned from what we are
    doing as far as methamphetamine and apply those to other drugs
    as well. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Phillips follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.024

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.025

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.026

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.027

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.028

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.029

        Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
        We will withhold questions until we've heard the next
    witness. That's Ms. Carla Van Hofwegen, and she is president of
    the Hava Java board of directors. Welcome. You are recognized.
        Ms. Van Hofwegen. It is an honor for me to testify today
    before members of your subcommittee. I appreciate the
    opportunity to address both my concerns about and response to
    the methamphetamine epidemic in the Midwestern States of our
    country.
        As a life-long resident of northwest Iowa, I have observed
    many changes in our society. Increased global communication has
    made nearly any information almost anywhere in the world
    accessible within a few seconds. Families comprised of a
    husband and wife and their children are no longer the norm.
    Close family ties that once connected three or even four
    generations have been severed by a highly mobile society. The
    combination of this availability of knowledge, the structural
    change of the nuclear family and the decrease of
    intergenerational ties has opened the door to many
    opportunities to explore and experiment during increased hours
    of free time with less individual accountability. Society is
    ripe for the picking by people who profit from those who
    purchase, use, and become addicted to methamphetamine and other
    illegal drugs.
        The problem of illegal drug use inevitably affects the
    institutions of our society. School systems deal with those who
    are using, those attempting to free themselves of the
    addiction, recovering users, and those who choose not to use,
    but who live, learn, or work in environments influenced by drug
    users. During the 12 years from 1987 to 1999 I served on the
    board of directors of Spencer Community Schools the use of
    illegal drugs became increasingly evident. During the mid and
    late 1980's acceptability of underage cigarette smoking and
    alcohol consumption led to marijuana usage and eventually to
    experimenting with other addictive drugs. While pot smokers of
    the 1960's and 1970's looked on assuming that the reoccurrence
    of marijuana use wasn't really a problem, many of the teenagers
    of the 1990's progressed from smoking it to the use of other
    illegal drugs, one of them the highly addictive and readily
    obtainable methamphetamine, also known as meth, crank, crystal
    or ice. This experimentation and use by teens and other young
    adults has been further complicated by the fact that some users
    are also parents whose children's lives are shaped by their
    parents' unsafe choices. Thus, education systems find
    themselves dealing with the problem at the preschool and early
    childhood levels in addition to the middle, high school, and
    post-high levels.
        Families whose members become addicted to meth see the most
    direct effects of the drug's stronghold on the users. As they
    observe behavior and personality changes, they also have
    concern for the user's safety. Perhaps most often they wonder
    how they can help. Committing their loved one to treatment can
    be very difficult, while waiting for the use to acknowledge the
    need for treatment can be extremely worrisome and dangerous.
    Research shows that a drug treatment program is most successful
    when the addicted person voluntarily commits him or herself and
    when the program helps the user realize his or her need to rely
    on a higher power for the strength necessary to overcome the
    addiction. Even the most successful treatment programs are not
    always 100 percent failsafe after the initial treatment has
    been completed.
        Considering the negative societal ramifications of illegal
    drug use and the tenuous results of drug treatment, the more
    insightful way of responding is to attempt to prevent the
    problem from occurring at all.
        During the past 12 months I have been involved in the
    organization and opening of a not-for-profit coffeehouse in
    Spencer, IA, which welcomes people of all ages, but is
    especially inviting to teenagers and young adults. The Hava
    Java mission statement is: We will provide a comfortable
    coffeehouse atmosphere with the purpose of building
    relationships through Christian fellowship. In a non-
    threatening safe haven using beverages, food, music, art,
    actions and other means, we will convey the message of Jesus
    Christ and his saving grace.
        Hava Java is guided by an 11-member board of directors
    comprised of community members from nine different churches in
    Spencer. It is staffed by nine high school students and two
    adults, which are part-time, paid employees, and one full-time
    manager. A student advisory team made up of high school
    students is being formed to give ideas and recommendations to
    the board of directors. The team will function under the
    supervision of two adults.
        Many individuals, service clubs, churches, businesses and
    other groups helped to meet startup expenses and are assisting
    with ongoing costs as needed. Open for just 7 months, Hava Java
    is striving to attain its goal to become self-supporting. The
    only government dollars received have been in the form of a
    grant from the city of Spencer. The grant, designated for
    infrastructure needs, is made up of a small portion of the
    moneys collected from a local 1-cent sales tax made available
    to local not-for-profit organizations.
        Hava Java is becoming known to our community and the
    Spencer area as a hangout and a haven, a safe place to meet
    friends, listen to good music, enjoy coffee, smoothies, sodas
    and snacks, read a book, play a game, or study. It is a place
    to have conversations about current issues or events, a place
    to discuss decisions or choices that must be made. Patrons may
    also appreciate live entertainment with a positive message and
    encourage local budding artists. Future events for Hava Java
    include improv nights, storytelling, poetry readings and other
    drama and visual arts presentations.
        It is the hope and prayer of the Hava Java board and staff
    that its welcoming environment will nurture the development of
    personal skills and significance through connections made and
    relationships formed and strengthened within its walls, perhaps
    the personal skills, significance, connections, and
    relationships which are reason enough to help make the choice
    to be drug free.
        Thank you for your attention to this serious issue and your
    consideration of how your subcommittee can aid our society.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Van Hofwegen follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.031

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.032

        Mr. Mica. Thank you, Carla, for your testimony.
        Ms. Phillips, how is your organization funded?
        Ms. Phillips. We are a United Way agency.
        Mr. Mica. Do you receive Federal funds?
        Ms. Phillips. At this time we receive no Federal funds. The
    only Federal funds that we have received is through the K-Mart
    Foundation. That really isn't Federal funds, it's just
    designation.
        At this time we do not. We have applied for the Drug Free
    Communities Support Program.
        Mr. Mica. Your organization, Ms. Van Hofwegen, is strictly
    a private and community-based. We're certainly spending a
    tremendous amount of money and increasing it every year on this
    effort, and in a multi-faceted manner. The last several years
    we have started a $1 billion drug education and media campaign.
    $1 billion. The administration wanted to spend public money. We
    reached a compromise. The compromise was to have $1 billion of
    Federal funds and then that matched by local donations. That
    campaign has been a little bit over a year underway. Mostly
    funding television, radio, some newspaper ads in a national
    campaign in an effort on education and prevention. I'd like
    both of you to tell me your candid assessment of what you have
    seen so far of that Federal program.
        Ms. Phillips. The national youth anti-drug media campaign,
    is that what you're talking about?
        Mr. Mica. Yes.
        Ms. Phillips. We happen to be the local organization that
    is listed on the print ads for that. What I have seen, because
    I work with three youth groups around the community, probably
    almost 200 kids. We sat and had a discussion about this, and we
    said tell us about the ads, tell us about what you're seeing.
    The one thing they said was the meth ads scare me. Why would I
    be stupid enough to use meth. They scare me. They are very,
    very good. I think that's the one message that we need to get
    out. Again if they believe that it is harmful to them they will
    not use.
        Mr. Mica. Well, that conflicts a little bit with your
    testimony, because you said 90 percent of them now believe that
    it's harmful, yet you're running 8 to 12 percent of the
    students have tried it in this locale.
        Ms. Phillips. Have tried it, that's right.
        They have tried it in the past. The campaign has only been
    going for a couple of years.
        Mr. Mica. Just about a year. Has there been any recent data
    on the number of students now? Unfortunately I just had the CDC
    report last week, the Center for Drug Control. The statistics
    were absolutely alarming. It did follow your pattern about 8 to
    12 percent of the students nationally had tried meth, cocaine.
    In the Clinton administration I think it has doubled. Heroin is
    up dramatically, and not quite but almost a doubling of
    marijuana. And we had the folks in behind closed doors too to
    give us their assessment after they released this report. But
    since 1992-1993 we've seen an incredible surge, particularly
    among young people. Is this an effective use of your tax
    dollars?
        Ms. Phillips. I'm going to tell you that we now have the
    second annual survey that's being run right now probably to
    find out what the results are of that. I think that's going to
    tell us more on whether the methamphetamine use has gone down
    or not and the kids' perception of harm, I think that's really
    going to tell us a lot in this last year. The kids are seeing
    the ads.
        Mr. Mica. The meth ads are particularly effective. I guess
    they have been targeted for those kids because you have such a
    high incidence here. Maybe you could give me your assessment,
    Ms. Van Hofwegen.
        Ms. Van Hofwegen. To be honest, I'm not real familiar with
    your ads.
        Mr. Mica. You haven't seen the ads. That's very revealing.
        Ms. Van Hofwegen. They may have been on the radio, I may
    have heard them on the radio.
        Mr. Mica. That's one of the problems when people have not
    heard them. Some of them are targeted toward parents,
    specifically going out to parents, even grandparents. Then part
    of the problem is the intensity of the ads, have they reached,
    again you want to target and you want to have the saturation to
    have impact. We don't mind spending the funds on these
    programs, but we want them to be successful, and we have to
    have some measurement of their success. Finally if you were
    going to recommend that we put Federal dollars into some of
    these programs, education and prevention, how would you do
    that? And we have a problem a bit because your organization
    particularly is faith-based. We're trying to loosen some of the
    strings. Actually the most effective treatment programs have
    been in fact faith-based, and in most cases they run 60 to 70
    percent success rates, where the public-funded programs run
    that percentage in failure. Are you inclined for us to use
    taxpayer dollars in that fashion or what fashion to be most
    effective? Either/or both?
        Ms. Van Hofwegen. I would encourage the use of the tax
    dollars to be targeted toward parents. I feel having been on a
    school board for 12 years that I see that that's where the
    education is successful. If the parents are aware of what they
    need to do to prevent their children from experimenting with
    drugs, and if you can get that point across, the dollars won't
    have to be spent in the schools and elsewhere. I feel like
    there are so many parents that feel like they are powerless
    against what their kids are facing. If we can empower parents
    to remain parents through the high school years, I think that
    will be the most effective way to spend it.
        Ms. Phillips. I guess I'm one of these people that think
    real globally and I think that you have got to focus on the
    prevention, the education, the intervention, the treatment, the
    aftercare. It's not just a single focus. When you asked me
    before about the national youth anti-drug media campaign,
    that's one facet of what we need to be doing. Does it need to
    be stopped? No. It should be strengthened. Why? Because it's
    one facet of what we need to continue. We need to continue
    identifying model programs. We here in Woodbury County are
    using the comprehensive strategy process which is through the
    Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Planning. It focuses
    on risk factors. What puts kids at risk?
        One of those is substance abuse. What puts kids at those
    risks? Let's identify those and then build a community plan.
    Make us be responsible for what we think locally we need to do.
    So when you ask where would we put the money, I'd say empower
    the local communities to take that funding and build a program
    that they need, using research-based, data-driven model
    programs. We will make that commitment to you that we will do
    that with funds that we receive. Yes, the media campaign is
    definitely one part of it.
        Our community has been a tremendous advocate of public
    service announcements, media campaigns. We run two PSA contests
    now for youths, one for radio, one for television, and I had a
    person from the local Sioux City Journal say why aren't we
    doing that in the newspaper. So we've got a lot of support
    locally for those kinds of things. We've got to continue to
    focus on that prevention and education which we have not gotten
    money for in the past, the prevention programs.
        Reducing the demand. The supply will be there as long as
    the demand is. We've got to reduce the demand. And we need to
    recognize at the same time, our treatment right now, the amount
    of dollars in treatment is very inadequate. We've got a lot of
    people, you know, we've got 12 percent admitting that meth is
    their No. 1 drug of choice, how many people aren't getting
    treatment who could admit that meth is their No. 1 drug of
    choice. We need to look at those issues. There are a lot of
    people not getting treatment just because of the cost of it.
        I personally, again I'm a real global type person. If we
    could give treatment to any kid that needs it, any kid that
    needs treatment, we would be saving so many dollars down the
    road because we know that treatment works, and prevention
    works. And as a local community we are working very, very hard
    to identify risk factors to try to reduce those.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Latham.
        Mr. Latham. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        I would like to first of all, as far as the drug education
    program, as I mentioned earlier, Siouxland was 1 of the 12
    pilot areas in the country when this was first proposed. And we
    were unique here in a little program we call incidentally the
    Latham Project, but to go out--surprise, I know. We were the
    only ones who went out and solicited contributions from the
    private sector here. I am just so proud of this community and
    the region here. Gateway gave us $100,000. UPS gave us $30,000.
    And that was matched with the Federal dollars. Duluth, MN, was
    our control city, in comparison with Siouxland after 5 months
    of the program. And I think what Linda is talking about is
    there's hopefully a long-term effect. What we found was that
    there was a greater awareness with the parents, which is
    critically important, but the biggest impact that it had was on
    the fourth, fifth, sixth graders and lesser through the middle
    school, and very little effect, while it scared them it was
    only temporary in the high school age, in that class or that
    group.
        I think it's going to be a long-term situation before we
    actually find out whether the message sticks with our young
    people, and with the impact that it has had. The most important
    thing we can do is wake up the parents and tell them to talk to
    their kids. I mentioned that earlier too. But statistically and
    everything else, the parents still have the greatest influence
    on that child. After having done 23 convoy drug meetings here
    in the district, we always set an hour and a half aside for the
    meeting. I can set my watch. In 45 minutes someone will finally
    get to the point, is there a way to get to parents.
        And my question would be to you, both of you, how do you do
    that? I mean, Linda, you do it with your organization, with
    your experience, Carla, on the school board and faith-based. If
    you had a meeting today you would have the best parents that
    talk to their kids come to the meeting. The people who you need
    to get to are staying home or they're off having their own
    marijuana, drinking beer some place. How do you get to them?
        Ms. Phillips. I'm a parent of three teenagers, going
    through all of these issues.
        Mr. Latham. You're way too young.
        Ms. Phillips. I know. Way too young, right.
        We had this in the late 1980's, early 1990's, the parent
    networking. I don't know about other parents, but I am told
    that I'm the only person out there asking questions. I'm the
    only person doing this, and I'll bet if you would talk to 10
    parents they would tell you that their kid is telling you that
    they're the only ones.
        I think what we need to do is we need to as parents figure
    out that we do have a role in this. I mean we need to be, and
    we can change behaviors based on what we do, which is exactly
    why kids are drinking a lot more now and we're seeing that
    number is because of the parents' influence. Oh, thank
    goodness, it's only alcohol. And that is the attitude that kids
    get. If we are much more strict with the kids, if we're talking
    to each other and we know what's going on, we know that
    someone's parent isn't home, we know what's going on, we're
    talking to each other and we quote catch them, it does make an
    impact. We are able to influence their behavior. Consequences
    are so important. Sometimes it's hard as a parent to give those
    consequences when you look around you and no one else is doing
    it.
        What we need to do is switch what the norm is. Switch the
    norm to non-use. Switch the norm back to where it was before.
    We need to do that. And as parents we can do that. Takes a lot
    of energy, takes a lot of time, but it doesn't take very much
    money, and that's the one thing that we need to remember. That
    doesn't take money. That's talking. That's getting parents
    together. It takes people just to be empowered to do that.
        Ms. Van Hofwegen. I would agree with everything she said.
    I'm also the parent of two teenagers, and it is very important
    to keep the lines of communication open with your children.
    However, I do think there's sort of a hopeless feeling when you
    say that the parents are either at home smoking their own
    marijuana or in the bars. I think it's really important, and I
    don't know if there can be any government dollars that can help
    you do this, those of us who really care about kids in our
    community to become a parent, a father or a mother figure to
    kids, and become that person that's really important in their
    life, to make the communication and connection. I don't know if
    there's any special way to do that.
        I think that for these kids, if their parents aren't going
    to take responsibility, then someone else does need to. Whether
    it be our churches or community organizations. I know in our
    town there is a Big Brother and Big Sister organization that is
    really doing a good job at making an attempt. I think we as
    community members better take over.
        Mr. Latham. I just wanted to say one additional thing about
    my pride of this community. When we got the money to run the
    ads on top of the PSA announcements, and incidentally our media
    here in Siouxland, in the State of Iowa did over half of the
    PSAs before. So that's a tremendous contribution. And what was
    really fascinating and something I never thought I'd hear a
    complaint about was the fact that our media people were
    somewhat offended that we would pay them and actually would not
    take the money. It was incredible. And it says a lot for this
    community.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you. The gentleman from South Dakota, Mr.
    Thune.
        Mr. Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to credit
    both of you for the things that you're doing, obviously some
    great efforts are underway. To say that it seems to me when
    you're talking about prevention of course the best prevention
    is a mom and dad that love their kids enough to spend time with
    them, to take them to church and subject them to the kind of
    influences that will keep them away from bad choices. You know,
    we're always looking for a government solution to something
    that's fundamentally a family oriented issue.
        I guess I'd be curious to know, Carla, you mentioned here
    in your statement too that you have served on a school board
    for 12 years. What things in your mind could we be doing in the
    schools? I mean what activities could we do to help, the kids
    have their sort of communities, their family, hopefully their
    church and they spend an awful lot of time at school. From that
    aspect of it how do we, what can be done at the school levels
    to help deter them from getting involved in drugs?
        Ms. Van Hofwegen. I think a shift in the attitude of the
    schools toward parents. I was a teacher before I was a school
    board member. I remember in the late 1970's seeing signs on the
    doors of the middle school, please report to the office,
    visitors are welcome but please report to the office. It's sort
    of a stay out type of statement.
        I think schools are really trying to let parents know they
    want to work with them. They know if they open up the lines of
    communication, especially in those homes where there are
    difficulties, that the students will see the families and the
    schools trying to work together. I also think that we
    discouraged groups like PTAs for sometime and now they're
    trying to resurrect interest in them again. At least in our
    community, they're trying to get a parent group in each of our
    schools in the community. And I think that will help. There
    again, you often get the parents who already, sort of have it
    all together that come to those meetings. But we need to
    encourage other parents to do that as well.
        I do know the public school in Spencer is also getting
    involved more on the preschool level, which is the area that
    truly you're going to prevent problems. If you can get involved
    with the families at that point, that will help. The school
    doesn't have all the answers. I do see a big change from when I
    was a teacher until now. The teachers have a much bigger
    responsibility toward those kids. It's very important to
    include the families in the educational process, and to
    encourage them to give their input, to let them know that
    you're working together to help the students.
        Ms. Phillips. Could I respond?
        Mr. Thune. Sure.
        Ms. Phillips. One of the things that we have here, it's
    just been started for a few years, so we don't know the long-
    term impact on it, but we do have what we call social health
    groups at our schools, and that is run through the Action
    programs and the SHIP, but what it is is where a team of
    parents--excuse me, a team of educators are meeting with
    Juvenile Court Services and meeting with the other various
    agencies, the Department of Human Services in our community and
    they are identifying at a very young age some of the problems,
    behaviors within these kids in the schools, and they are then
    basically forming a case management plan, bringing the family
    in and discussing what's going on. I think we're going to see a
    great impact in the future from really surrounding the
    resources and our whole thing with the comprehensive strategy
    is the right resource for the right youth at the right time.
        That's what we're really trying to do, is to surround that
    kid and provide a safety net for them as they move up in the
    years. Because one of the things we've identified is academic
    failure beginning in early elementary school--in late
    elementary school, excuse me. If those kids are not going to
    get what they need at an early age they're going to fail.
    They're going to be a statistic to us and they're going to be
    in the community and we're going to have problems with them.
    Our school board and local agencies are really working hard for
    that.
        Another thing I just have to say is I am an advocate of
    DARE. I know there are a lot of people who have knocked DARE
    down and drug it through the coals. I am an advocate. In that
    year that they are in DARE, whether it's 11 weeks or 16 weeks,
    talk to those kids, those kids are going to tell that you
    they're not going to use drugs and they're going to identify
    people who are using drugs and they're going to realize all
    those things. But then don't teach the kid anything else about
    it and expect them to remember it.
        When we were in another hearing at one point they were
    talking about teach your kid math in the fifth grade and expect
    them to remember it when they get to high school? It's not
    going to happen. We need structured curriculum in our schools
    from kindergarten, preschool actually, kindergarten all the way
    through, curriculums that talk about it, that talks about
    methamphetamines. You can't expect the teachers to go out and
    research all of these things and bring them back to their
    classroom. Some do that. But it's going to be very
    inconsistent.
        We need structured curriculum. We need to be telling these
    kids the same message, and it needs to be very clear and it
    needs to be very consistent. If we're not going to do that,
    there's not going to be the big hope at the end that they're
    all going to remember what's going on, because they're not
    going to remember it if we're not constantly telling them,
    which is one of the reasons that these ads are good. They're
    giving the same clear consistent message. And they're there all
    the time telling us that. We need to always be reminded,
    whether we're young people or adults.
        Mr. Thune. I appreciate that. Now there is going to be a
    followup question to my original question on what schools can
    do as to whether there ought to be a structured part of the
    curriculum that addresses that. In visiting with law
    enforcement people and even with kids themselves, these
    problems are cropping up at a much earlier age. A lot of times
    we used to think it was high school before you were subjected
    to all these temptations and pressures. But anymore they're
    saying they start to identify these trends not just in middle
    school but prior to that, and I do think there has to be an
    after DARE or something that reinforces that message as they
    move on into the higher grades too. And I'm a big fan of the
    faith-based approach and the things that are going on out
    there, it's a wonderful program and I want to credit both of
    you for the things that are happening. I think it's all part of
    the solution. But we definitely have our work cut out for us.
    It's a challenge, and I guess we're all obviously looking for
    anything that we can do to enhance the successful things that
    are already underway and to find out if there are things that
    we aren't doing that we ought to be doing. Thanks for your
    testimony.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you, gentlemen. And I also want to thank
    both of these witnesses for coming forward today and providing
    our subcommittee with their insight and recommendations. And
    particularly thank you for the contribution that you're making
    in your communities and localities, in again what is one of the
    most serious challenges I think any one of us face as parents,
    Members of Congress or involved citizens. We thank you so much,
    and we'll excuse you at this time.
        And I'll call our third panel. Our third panel consists of
    two witnesses this morning. The first panelist is Leroy Schoon.
    The second, and I'm sorry, he is with Schoon Construction. The
    second panelist is Jamey Miller, and he is with Rudy Salem
    Staffing Services. Both of these individuals I want to welcome
    also.
        Again, this is an investigations and oversight subcommittee
    of Congress. If you have lengthy statements we'll make them a
    part of the material on request to the Chair. With that I'm
    also going to swear you in. If you will please stand, Raise
    right hands.
        [Witnesses sworn.]
        Mr. Mica. The witnesses answered in the affirmative. Let
    the record reflect that. I'd like to welcome both of you this
    morning.
        At this particular time recognize Mr. LeRoy Schoon for his
    testimony and comments. I understand you have a drug testing
    program as part of your employment, and we're anxious to hear
    about your experience. Thank you, sir. You're recognized.

    STATEMENTS OF LEROY SCHOON, PRESIDENT, SCHOON CONSTRUCTION; AND
               JAMEY MILLER, RUDY SALEM STAFFING SERVICES

        Mr. Schoon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Schoon Construction,
    Cherokee, IA. We specialize in fiber optics and general
    excavation construction. We work with municipalities and
    communication companies. We employ approximately 130 employees
    in our organization.
        In 1999 our company implemented a 100 percent pre-
    employment drug screening. We were having trouble finding good
    employees, so we decided we have to do that. And we went first
    to a random drug screening of 50 percent throughout our entire
    company, and we were not getting results we needed. We went to
    100 percent, and it has done tremendously well. We will spend
    approximately $10,000 in the year 2000 for drug screening new
    applicants and random drug testing.
        Drug screening has helped eliminate the illegal drug use in
    our workplace. But we feel it does not cure the drug problem in
    the work place and in the community. The reason for that is we
    have people that we have to come up, they come up with drugs,
    we have to terminate them or suspend them to get evaluated and
    get rehabilitated. They don't go to rehabilitation. They go
    down the street and go to another employment and find
    employment that they don't have to be drug screened. Our
    opinion is that we're just transferring our problems and
    confining it into one area.
        I'd like to list below some of the problems the employers
    have with illegal drug users in the workplace. We've
    experienced these. Employees are injured or killed. Equipment
    gets damaged because of not being alert. Property damage claims
    rose tremendously high to people that you're working with. The
    quality of work goes down. Poor productivity is a big result.
    As a result of this, insurance costs skyrocket for all
    employers because the insurance costs are shared through
    everyone. So if one company does a good job and three companies
    don't, we still help pay for that. We feel the solution is that
    we need to have 100 percent drug screening for all employees.
    Our company has already seen an improvement in applicants.
    We've had better applicants come in the door because the other
    ones aren't going to come in because they aren't going to get
    through anyway. Reduction of property damage and workmen's
    compensation claims since we have run this program has been
    reduced. We have a better experience model for our insurance
    carrier.
        If we can solve our problems, we need all sectors of
    business and government to work toward the same goal. Thank
    you.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Schoon follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.033

        Mr. Mica. We'll now hear from Jamey Miller. He's from Rudy
    Salem Staffing Services. Mr. Miller, you're recognized.
        Mr. Miller. My name is Jamey Miller. I work with Rudy Salem
    Staffing Services. I also run a safety division out of that.
    Back in about March 1998 I was approached by Senator Steve King
    and asked if I would be interested in conducting onsite drug
    testing. I thought, hey, that's an opportunity for me to be,
    just getting out of the Navy and stuff, moving back to my home
    town, I felt it was a good opportunity for me to grow and stay
    in the community. That ended up branching out into stuff like
    what LeRoy's doing here.
        The Drug Free Workplace Act was passed in April 1998, and
    I've been going on since then. I've seen firsthand what drugs
    can do to a person, their family, their bank account, their
    life and their future. I also know the extremes that people
    will go through in order to pass a drug screen. They try to
    adulterate their urine. They will put anything from bleach in
    there to dirt, whatever. If you can think of it they have tried
    it. There's all sorts of remedies out there. Some of them work,
    some of them don't. If you're trying to get a job and a good
    paying job, you have a 50-50 chance of passing or getting
    caught, it's really not worth the hassle.
        If you already have a good job and you're doing drugs and
    they implement the random drug screen at your workplace you're
    going to get caught, so it's not worth losing your job.
        I think the firsthand experience I've had has made me very
    knowledgeable in this field of onsite drug testing. In the past
    26 months I've personally administered 1,396 onsite drug tests.
    I've had 1,107 negatives, and I've had 289 people walk out on
    me, or I could assume those would be positive. Basically that
    means to me that 289 people refused to take the test and deny
    themselves employment. I guess their bad habits are more
    important than feeding their kids and paying their bills.
        I think that the new Drug Free Workplace Act has done some
    good, but I think right now the employers around here, I only
    have maybe two or three accounts or clients that are
    participating in this. I think they're afraid. Right now the
    unemployment rate in Sioux City, the last I heard was like 3
    percent, so most of those people are either housewives or
    disabled people or they're retired or whatever. So the rest of
    the people around here are working. Basically I think about 74
    percent of the population in Sioux City uses drugs, this is
    from my point of view. It's hard when you're trying to run a
    staffing service. Our business is helping people find a job,
    but how are you supposed to employ these people when they can't
    even walk through the door and pass a drug test. There's a
    definite problem here, and it's right here, right here in Sioux
    City.
        Then we also have an office up in Spencer, IA. And as they
    were mentioning before, when I was hired by Salem Management to
    be the safety director they had a mod rate that was so high
    because of injuries due to accidents on the job and people not
    paying attention to what they're doing, it cost $200,000 or
    $300,000 a year for a small business to have work comp
    insurance. I also do OSHA compliance, EPA compliance and stuff
    like that. Since I've implemented my policies and stuff, we
    have dropped our mod rate down, just the corporate office, down
    to point 65 which is pretty good for a staffing industry.
        However, the problem we're having now is that we opened up
    an office in Spencer about 5 years ago, Spencer, IA, and Sioux
    City's got quite a large, a lot more population here compared
    to Spencer, and now Spencer, their mod rate or their work comp
    claims are doubling what I have down here in Sioux City, and a
    lot of that has to do, I believe, with the drug abuse.
        So I'd like to wrap it up by saying that's all I have to
    say.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
        I compliment you both for the initiatives you've taken to
    try to ensure a drug free work place and work force. I think
    it's a model for other companies. If we had more private sector
    participation in this regard, we'd have a lot less drug abuse.
    One of the problems that we have is we do have people who use
    drugs, and we have the problem of trying to get them into some
    effective treatment. Have any of you had experiences, do you
    have any part of your program, Mr. Schoon, which puts these
    folks into treatment or gives them some opportunity to be
    treated if they're found with a positive result?
        Mr. Schoon. What we've tried to do, if we have a person
    come up we call hot, we will pay for the evaluation.
        Mr. Mica. So you do give them an opportunity to clean up
    their act?
        Mr. Schoon. Yes. If it takes rehabilitation, if it's a real
    serious case, we'll try to find them some temporary work or if
    they succeed we'll offer them their job back.
        Mr. Mica. What kind of success have you found with that
    treatment or rehabilitation?
        Mr. Schoon. What we have found is our success hasn't been
    good. They will go for rehabilitation maybe for 3 or 4 days,
    they leave and go find other employment, they say I have to
    make a living. We cannot pay them the salary while they're
    getting rehabilitated. In Iowa here just what happens, they
    will go down the street and find a job, and they will continue
    their habit.
        Mr. Mica. So the lasting of effective treatment is a
    problem and then also getting individuals to stick to treatment
    or follow it through is part of the problem?
        Mr. Schoon. That's correct. We've had one case where a
    young man, he left employment, we suspended him, he was
    supposed to take 3 weeks of rehab.
        He didn't continue that. He quit. He went to Des Moines to
    get a job. He said he had to make a living. He come back and
    about 9 months later, he said he had been cured, he
    straightened out. OK. You have got to take a new drug screen,
    we'll give you another chance to hire. I took him up, paid the
    fee at the hospital for drug screen, this is $47 for us. Come
    up hot. The applicants will come in and they're first informed
    that we do drug screening. It's no problem, I'm not on it. We
    take them in, it will come back, they're hot. Or they will call
    back the next day and say I can't work for you, I'm going to
    come up hot. So we've already spent the money.
        Mr. Mica. One of the problems we have, contrary to the
    perception out there, is actually Congress has more than
    doubled the amount of money for treatment if we take in all of
    the different programs since 1993, and the last 5 years under
    the Republican control, the Congress has increased the
    treatment some 26 percent.
        I don't think any of us have a problem with increasing the
    money for treatment. The problem is getting effective treatment
    programs, one, and then also getting people to even go to the
    treatment. We held a hearing in Baltimore where people who have
    been sentenced for offenses met most of the requirements, and
    part of their sentencing is to go to treatment. Less than 50
    percent show up even under court order.
        Of course you're dealing with a situation where you have
    absolutely no control over these individuals, only the
    possibility of their being employed, and with a tight job
    market here and throughout the country, they just go somewhere
    else is basically what you're both testifying. Are you seeing
    the same thing? Mr. Miller.
        Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. In our line of work we deal with
    people, top executives all the way down to general laborers
    daily. I deal with the whole spectrum of the population. What
    we're finding out is--I opened up a day labor here in Sioux
    City about 2 months ago, and our building is located right next
    to the Federal building. In any given day, there are 10 people
    that come into my office and I can't put any of them to work
    because they're hot.
        Mr. Mica. They have a drug problem.
        Mr. Miller. They're either drunk or----
        Mr. Mica. Drugs or alcohol.
        Mr. Miller. Yeah, there's something wrong with them. We
    can't put them to work. They can't speak right, they stutter.
    Too much of a risk. But they have to eat. They have to live. So
    most of these guys sleep under bridges. They live at the Gospel
    Mission, things like that.
        Mr. Mica. Is there anything that we're doing that we could
    do a better job at from the Federal standpoint or through,
    we're now block granting or sending money to the States, send
    money to local programs, is there something you see a greater
    need for that we aren't doing or that we can do in cooperation
    with local agencies to address this problem?
        Mr. Miller. I think part of the way to kind of fix this
    would be to let employers know that they have the option, the
    way the Drug Free Workplace Act, the way the law is written,
    you don't have to send a person to treatment. I mean just
    depends on what you want to do with that person. Right now the
    employment rate is so low that you're afraid, if we do this
    random thing, we're going to lose all these people. I think the
    biggest thing we need to do is educate employers as far as
    implementing drug testing. It's OK to do a random test. You're
    not going to lose your whole work force, I don't think. That's
    your choice.
        Mr. Mica. Anything, Mr. Schoon?
        Mr. Schoon. I'd like to comment on that. We have found
    since we implemented the 100 percent drug screen and the pre-
    employment, we're finding a better rate of applicant coming in.
    I think it's scaring some of the other ones that are on drugs
    away. I went to different contractors, fellow contractors and
    said, hey, you know, you need to get on a drug screening
    program, you need to do a drug screening program. We're kicking
    them out of our place, they're coming down to you and going to
    work, and I said pretty soon you're going to have everybody
    hot. What's it going to do to your workmen's comp and your
    general liability. It's going to make your risk higher. He
    said, well, what are we going to do, we need help. That's one
    of the problems they're faced with. They think, you know,
    money's not the issue I don't think. It's just an incentive for
    the employers to be able to go in and do this. Maybe the
    insurance companies need to offer more incentive for employers
    who are doing a good job with drug screening and that would
    help encourage the ones that aren't doing it, realizing there
    are a lot of smaller companies out than we are, but the
    resources are there. If there are only ten employees they can
    still get this done.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you. Let me yield to the gentleman from
    Iowa, Mr. Latham.
        Mr. Latham. I want to be very brief. We have both to be
    tonight in Washington, we cannot miss a flight here today.
    There's much debate and has been for years in Congress about
    the Federal role on funded mandates on States and small
    business. Are either of you suggesting from the Federal level
    that we should mandate drug screening in the workplace?
        Mr. Schoon. I think, Mr. Latham, it needs to come from our
    Iowa Legislature.
        Mr. Miller. I agree.
        Mr. Latham. I would agree with you. I don't think--it is a
    State situation and based at that level and also at least
    allowing individual businesses to drug screen so there's no
    prohibition as some people would like to have. That was a
    debate that went on for several years. I know about the State
    legislature not even allowing you to screen in the workplace. I
    appreciate that. Thank you both very much for being here.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you very much, Mr. Latham.
        The gentleman from South Dakota, Mr. Thune.
        Mr. Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm glad to hear that
    in Iowa you are State's rights advocates as we are in South
    Dakota. I just have one observation or question. You mentioned
    the cost of drug testing. Have either of you done an analysis
    of what the lost productivity cost is? Can you quantify that as
    a percentage of your bottom line or dollar figures in any way?
        Mr. Schoon. I have not been able to do that. I do know
    we're tracking for costs and time spent in interviewing
    employees and taking them up for drug screening, but a factor
    of percentage of sales I don't have that at this time.
        Mr. Miller. Neither do I.
        Mr. Thune. I know it's probably rather difficult to come up
    with, to put a quantitative, attach that to it, but I think
    it's obviously a concern in the workplace, and it's got to be
    not just the cost of drug screening and all that, but I would
    think too just the loss of productivity as a result of the
    effects the drugs have on people who are using.
        So anyway I again appreciate very much your testimony. I
    will yield back to the chairman as well in the interest of
    time, but appreciate you taking the time to do what you did.
        Mr. Mica. I also want to thank each of you for coming
    forward and sharing with us your experience and the
    contribution you have made in the workplace, work force setting
    an example which you have done. That's to be commended. If
    every employer stepped in and followed your lead, we would have
    a lot fewer problems, and we appreciate your insight.
        I particularly appreciate the insight of all the panelists
    today, the law enforcement, the local community, both private
    and public, that have testified before our subcommittee. Each
    of these field hearings gives us better insight as to what's
    going on throughout the country, so we can do a better job in
    Washington trying to address some of the serious problems that
    we're facing.
        Again, Iowa, South Dakota, this whole region is not alone
    being victimized by illegal narcotics. This is an incredible
    national challenge. I get to see it chairing the subcommittee,
    and it again is one of the greatest challenges I think we have
    ever faced in Congress, as parents, as community leaders or
    employers. So I thank you for the invitation.
        Mr. Latham. I thank you, Mr. Thune, for joining us today.
    Both of you represent incredible geographic areas. Mr. Thune
    has a huge, huge, huge district. I can't even imagine
    representing an area that large.
        I saw on the map this morning the size of Mr. Latham's
    district. You do an incredibly responsive job again in
    representing the people of this area, they're great people. As
    I said earlier, I had a chance to live among, work among and be
    part of the business community and have the greatest respect
    for you. So I thank each of you for allowing me to come here
    and hopefully learn and work with you as we move forward to
    meet this challenge.
        Mr. Latham.
        Mr. Latham. Yes. I just want to again thank you for making
    the extraordinary effort to be here.
        Mr. Mica. It was.
        Mr. Latham. And again I hope the folks here recognize the
    tremendous responsibility the chairman has, and the leadership
    in Congress that you have shown has been incredible on this
    issue, and it's been an honor and a real privilege for me to
    learn from you and to work with you, and I appreciate it, as
    well as my great friend and colleague here and my neighbor,
    John Thune. I just want to thank each of you.
        Mr. Mica. Thank you again so much. There being no further
    business to come before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice,
    Drug Policy, and Human Resources, this hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
        [Additional information submitted for the hearing record
    follows:]

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.034

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.035

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.036

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.037

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.038

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.039

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.040

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.041

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.042

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.043

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.044

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.045

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.046