[House Hearing, 108 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DEADLY CONSEQUENCES OF
ILLEGAL ALIEN SMUGGLING
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION,
BORDER SECURITY, AND CLAIMS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 24, 2003
__________
Serial No. 29
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/judiciary
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
87-993 WASHINGTON : 2004
_____________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., Wisconsin, Chairman
HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois JOHN CONYERS, Jr., Michigan
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
LAMAR SMITH, Texas RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
ELTON GALLEGLY, California JERROLD NADLER, New York
BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia ROBERT C. SCOTT, Virginia
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina
WILLIAM L. JENKINS, Tennessee ZOE LOFGREN, California
CHRIS CANNON, Utah SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama MAXINE WATERS, California
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
MARK GREEN, Wisconsin WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts
RIC KELLER, Florida ROBERT WEXLER, Florida
MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York
MIKE PENCE, Indiana ADAM B. SCHIFF, California
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California
STEVE KING, Iowa
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas
TOM FEENEY, Florida
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
Philip G. Kiko, Chief of Staff-General Counsel
Perry H. Apelbaum, Minority Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana, Chairman
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California
LAMAR SMITH, Texas ZOE LOFGREN, California
ELTON GALLEGLY, California HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
CHRIS CANNON, Utah JOHN CONYERS, Jr., Michigan
STEVE KING, Iowa
MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania
George Fishman, Chief Counsel
Lora Ries, Counsel
Art Arthur, Full Committee Counsel
Cindy Blackston, Professional Staff
Nolan Rappaport, Minority Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
JUNE 24, 2003
OPENING STATEMENT
Page
The Honorable John N. Hostettler, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Indiana, and Chairman, Subcommittee on
Immigration, Border Security, and Claims....................... 1
The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Texas, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Immigration, Border Security, and Claims....................... 3
The Honorable Jeff Flake, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Arizona............................................... 5
The Honorable Linda T. Sanchez, a Representative in Congress From
the State of California........................................ 7
The Honorable Steve King, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Iowa.................................................. 8
The Honorable Lamar Smith, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Texas................................................. 9
WITNESSES
Mr. Jose Garza, Chief Patrol Agent, McAllen Sector, Border
Patrol, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, Department of
Homeland Security
Oral Testimony................................................. 12
Prepared Statement............................................. 13
Mr. Tom Homan, Interim Resident Agent-In-Charge, San Antonio, TX,
Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of
Homeland Security
Oral Testimony................................................. 16
Prepared Statement............................................. 20
Mr. Peter Nunez, Former U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA
Oral Testimony................................................. 22
Prepared Statement............................................. 24
Ms. Maria Jimenez, Chair, Mayor's Advisory Committee for the
Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs, City of Houston, TX
Oral Testimony................................................. 27
Prepared Statement............................................. 28
APPENDIX
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
Federation for American Immigration Reform Statement............. 55
Law Enforcement Advisory Council Letter.......................... 57
Prepared Statement by the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a
Representative in Congress From the State of Texas............. 66
Prepared Statement by the Honorable Jeff Flake, a Representative
in Congress From the State of Arizona.......................... 68
The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee article from Daily News re:
Golden Venture................................................. 70
DHS sign warning against illegal alien smuggling................. 74
DEADLY CONSEQUENCES OF
ILLEGAL ALIEN SMUGGLING
----------
TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 2003
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Immigration,
Border Security, and Claims,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:10 p.m., in
Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John Hostettler
(Chair of the Subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Hostettler. The Subcommittee will come to order.
The recent tragic discovery of 17 dead illegal aliens in an
abandoned truck trailer filled with more than 70 illegal aliens
in Victoria, TX, has turned the spotlight onto alien smuggling
once again.
This tragedy was compounded when two more of these
immigrants succumbed to their injuries. Unfortunately, border
deaths of aliens trying to enter the United States illegally is
not a new phenomenon; rather, the manner of death seems to have
changed over the decades.
Years ago, border deaths primarily occurred by the aliens
drowning or being hit by traffic while running across
Interstate 5 near San Diego, for example. This latter
phenomenon was the cause for caution highway signs, like the
one we see here in the hearing room, to be posted along
Interstate 5 to prevent more aliens fleeing from the Border
Patrol from being hit by traffic.
In 1994, the Border Patrol began implementing a new border
strategy, the best known examples of which are Operation
Gatekeeper in the San Diego Sector and Operation Hold the Line
in El Paso, TX. The new strategy focused on deterrence on the
border to prevent illegal aliens from penetrating the border.
This approach differs from the border patrol's previous
operational strategy that mixed deterrence with traffic checks,
farm and ranch checks and jail checks.
The new strategy curtailed such Border Patrol interior
enforcement activities significantly in favor of a greater
emphasis on a show of force at the border to prevent illegal
immigration. With these operations in place, ports of entry in
nearby areas are more adequately monitored by agents, cameras
and motion sensors.
Citizens in the San Diego and El Paso areas are pleased
with the operations because they have caused a decrease in
crime, and closed down the alien smuggling corridors in their
communities. According to several witnesses at a March 10, 1995
border security hearing held by this Subcommittee, Operation
Hold the Line is humane enforcement of our immigration laws,
and has lessened the number of accusations of civil rights
violations by Federal officials, including the Border Patrol.
In addition, the Border Patrol has launched public service
advertising campaigns in Mexico, warning of the dangers of
remote crossings and devoted resources to search and rescue
training and operations. Illegal aliens still determined to
enter the U.S. Unlawfully cross the southern border at more
remote areas, particularly in Arizona desert land away from the
ports of entry.
In doing so, they disregard signs warning of the heat, lack
of water, desolation, great distances and dangerous animals.
Not unexpectedly, some die from these conditions.
Human rights advocates point to recent alien deaths along
the border and argue that the significant number of deaths is
caused by border control policies along the southern border.
I totally reject this notion. We should not blame those who
enforce our laws for the deadly actions of smugglers. Those of
the Border Patrol who, time and again, have saved illegal
aliens from dehydration, exposure and violence are not to be
blamed for the difficult job they carry out with
professionalism and compassion.
We in Congress have to ask why would people place
themselves in such jeopardy to get into this country? It seems
clear that aliens who subject themselves to smuggling believe
the benefits of jobs and eventual green cards outweigh the
risks of being caught and deported.
In 1986, Congress passed the Immigration Reform and Control
Act, which created two significant provisions, employer
sanctions to end the migration magnet of jobs and legalization,
an amnesty for illegal aliens who had resided in the U.S. For a
number of years.
The goal of IRCA was to end illegal immigration with these
two provisions. Clearly IRCA has not worked. The job magnet
continues because employer sanctions are not enforced and
employers fear civil rights actions if they request too much
proof of identity and work authorization.
In addition, after the one-time amnesty of IRCA, we now
have between 8 and 11 million illegal aliens here, and people
are again talking about another amnesty. Amnesty rumors
encourage aliens to get into the U.S. By any means, because
once here, they know it is unlikely that they will be deported
and believe they will eventually be awarded with a green card.
Hence, the dangerous smuggling and border deaths. It can be
argued that advocating for amnesty for illegal aliens
encourages smuggling and causes border deaths.
I haven't even touched upon the relationship between
smuggling and terrorism yet. Available information indicates
terrorist organizations often use smuggling rings to move
around the globe. We are compelled to prevent alien smuggling
and severely punish alien smugglers, not only to save
immigrants lives, but to prevent terrorists from entering this
country with the intent to kill large numbers of people.
By accepting illegal immigration and by not enforcing our
immigration laws, illegal aliens are encouraged to get to the
U.S. By whatever means possible, even if it means risking their
life or the lives of their children.
It is imperative that we enforce our immigration laws so
that aliens are not tempted to risk their lives to get here. At
this time, I turn to the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee,
Ms. Jackson Lee for any opening remarks she would like to make.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And
thank you for assenting to my interests, along with your
interests, to hold, I believe, this very, very important
hearing.
Let me, first of all, say that we appreciate the hard work
of all of those who are involved with the safety of this
Nation. We particularly respect and acknowledge that there are
many participants in that process.
Having had the opportunity to visit the southern border and
to see the combination of law enforcement agencies that work so
hard every day, to see in many instances the compassion that is
shown for individuals who are coming to this Nation for
opportunity, I know that this is not a left-hand, right-hand
analysis. There is a lot in the middle.
Let me also acknowledge, coming from Texas, the many
humanitarian agencies--churches, parishes, and advocacy
groups--who work every day to save lives as well, of those
individuals who come simply to this Nation to seek an
opportunity or a better life for their families.
Also, I do want to make mention, Mr. Chairman, and we
always work in this Committee, in this session, on issues that
we can agree on. But, we know that philosophically there are
many differences in our perspective. I am sorry that we did not
follow through on the dialogue and conversations that President
Vicente Fox and Mr. Bush had pre 9/11.
Those discussions would not in any way, I believe,
jeopardize the security of this Nation. And that is, to be able
to actualize peoples' hopes and aspirations as relates to those
already in this country in accessing legalization. We come
today to look upon the deadly consequences of illegal alien
smuggling.
Coming from the region that I come from, I can assure you
that after the tragedy that occurred in May, the many stories
of these families and the many stories of the loved ones, the
loss of life of a 7-year-old boy, and his father, all of them
seeking opportunities. I don't believe there was a terrorist
amongst the group, nor have we determined the bulk of these
individuals come to do harm.
With that in mind, however, I still believe we must find
the right kind of balance. Last week, prosecutors indicted 14
people who allegedly organized or facilitated the smuggling
incident that ended on May 14th, when a crowded trailer was
found abandoned at a truck stop in Victoria, 100 miles
southwest of my home town of Houston.
The 14 were charged with various counts of conspiracy to
conceal or transport immigrants. Twelve could face the death
penalty if prosecutors decide to pursue it. More than 70
immigrants from Mexico, Central America and the Dominican
Republic were crammed into the tractor trailer. Among the dead
was a 5-year-old boy from Mexico. 17 immigrants died at the
scene, and three others have died later. That is the human
tragedy. And this hearing must put a human face to that loss.
According to U.S. Attorney Michael Shelby, alien smuggling
is all about money. These aren't people who are trying to make
a better life for others, that is the smugglers, and just
providing them a pathway, this is about an American dollar and
people that will do anything and risk anyone's life in order to
gain that dollar bill.
I can imagine that that tractor trailer driver thought that
he was doing nothing more than would warrant a traffic ticket.
In this incident, the price per immigrant was $1,500 to $1,900.
Alien smugglers have reaped millions of dollars in profit with
some not only collecting a fee up front, but also robbing,
beating and raping the immigrants once they get into the United
States.
Last year, the General Accounting Office investigative arm
of Congress was critical of the U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service, with respect to its efforts to combat
alien smuggling. The GAO said that the INS efforts to curb the
smuggling were disorganized, seldom tracked, and did not meet
the required level of accountability.
The investigators stated further that in several border
States, including Arizona, multiple antismuggling units existed
that had overlapping jurisdictions, but were unable to handle
the job properly. The INS has since been disbanded and its
enforcement divisions have been folded into the Department of
Homeland Security as part of the Customs and Border Protection.
It does not follow necessarily, however, that this
organizational change will result in more effective field
operations. We need to do a better job. The Arizona border with
Mexico has become the hub of alien smuggling, about one-third
of the 1.2 million arrests of undocumented immigrants that the
Border Patrol expects to make this year will occur along that
border.
Last year Border Patrol agents in Tucson Sector apprehended
449,679 undocumented aliens, more than 1,200 a day. We must get
to the bottom line of this particular issue.
And, Mr. Chairman, I have been working on this issue for a
very long time, as I have watched it. Now, more closely, in
light of the fact that we had this enormous number of deaths.
Our highest priority should be to solve to problem and to
reduce deaths. I will be introducing a bill that I would look
forward to receiving bipartisan support working with our
advocacy groups, our law enforcement groups, that will have a
three-point program. The first point of this program would
provide incentives to encourage informants to step forward and
assist the Federal authorities in order to smash these rings.
My bill would also involve the ability to access
legalization for those who would come into the country who
would help us smash those rings. My bill would establish a new
third category for aliens who assist the United States
Government with the investigation, prosecution and conviction
of commercial smuggling operations. This would be a
nonimmigrant visa classification. The real incentive, however,
would not be a nonimmigrant, visa, it would be a lawful
permanent resident status.
In addition, the bill would offer a monetary incentive to
become an informant. It would establish a reward program to
assist in the elimination or disruption of commercial alien
smuggling operations in which aliens are transporting groups of
10 or more, and where either the aliens are transported in a
manner that endangers their lives or the smuggled aliens
present a life-threatening health risk to the people in the
United States.
The rewards program will be similar to the one the State
Department presently uses to obtain informant's information. We
have been able to talk to a number of law enforcement agencies,
and Federal agencies, who find these aspects of this
legislation to be not only humanitarian, but more importantly,
they believe that this will go a long way to help smash the
commercial smuggling rings that do so much to undermine the
lives and cause the deaths of innocent persons.
Today this hearing, I believe, will go a long way in giving
us insight, and I am delighted as well that the Chair will be
introducing Maria Jimenez, who has always been an advocate for
the rights of immigrants in a positive way. She has founded the
AFSCILEMP, Immigration Law Enforcement. She has been monitoring
these efforts since 1987. She has also played an important role
in the creation of various other programs in the community, the
Houston Immigration and Refugee Coalition, and she has worked
very hard to bring a balance to the lives of those who seek
simply an opportunity.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you, and I would ask to submit the
entirety of my statement into the record.
Mr. Hostettler. Without objection.
Mr. Hostettler. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
Arizona, for 5 minutes, Mr. Flake, for an opening statement.
Mr. Flake. I thank the Chair. I thank the Chair for holding
this important hearing. I have actually been requesting a
hearing like this on the border in Arizona for a couple of
years now. I think we would all benefit from actually going to
the border and see what we face right up close and personal.
But, this is a good start. I am glad we are here today. If
you read the papers in Arizona, you see that just about every
day in the summer, on the average, more than one immigrant dies
every day in the summer time in Arizona, crossing during the
desert heat. It is a very troubling situation. There are
countless stories of lost lives, destroyed property, and
mistreated people.
We have got to do something to change it. In addition,
health care costs in Arizona have skyrocketed. Hospitals have
had to cut back crucial services to the population in Arizona,
because of the cost of treating those who cross the border
illegally.
Shootings on the border are happening more frequently all
the time. Frustrated property owners have seen their property
destroyed and fearing that immigrant traffic across their
property will destroy more, have taken matters into their own
hands. It is a very unhealthy situation. Family members of
illegal aliens who have perished in the desert are now seeking
redress by suing the U.S. Government.
We are having situations like that as well. We may not
agree with the choices taken by these immigrants to break the
law, but you can't help but be moved by the fate that awaits
them, and the abuse at the hands, in particular, of smugglers.
As legislators, we are charged with addressing these
problems. And I think that we in Congress have to stand up and
see what we really can do, and not just say this is what we
have done in the past, we are going to do more of this. But
let's do what is going to work. And I feel that we have to have
a relief valve of some type in the border region to allow those
who are similarly coming to work, for no other reason than to
provide a better life for their family, to provide a temporary
worker program, to direct the flow of workers through legal
channels.
If we do that, we can free up a lot more resources to
actually focus on those who would do us harm. And we always
have to be reminded that the border region is dangerous. We
cannot take it for granted that everyone who is coming here is
coming just for work. But we know that overwhelming majority of
those who come across are coming just for that reason.
There is a demand in the U.S. for the labor that Mexican
laborers, in particular, are willing to provide. And we can't
turn a blind eye to that. The market forces are just too strong
to resist. I believe that many of the aliens that are coming
across know the risks quite well, and they are still willing to
take them, that is how strong the pull is. And that is why we
have to address it.
If we have a legal channel, as I mentioned, then we can
address that much more easily. It used to be, prior to 1986,
before the Immigration Reform and Control Act, the flow of
immigrants from Mexico to Arizona was largely circular. The
average stay of an immigrant was about 2.6 years. What we
managed to do with increased border enforcement is ensure that
those who make it here actually stay longer.
The average stay now is 6.6 years. So we haven't actually
stopped anybody, I would maintain, that really wants to get
here. We have made it more difficult. What we have done is make
sure that those who manage to get here stay longer. It is more
difficult to go home and visit their families. So they are more
likely to bring their families with them. So they won't have to
cross the border again and again. We have to address this. We
have to have a legal framework to do so.
From 1986 to 1998, the number of tax dollars that Congress
appropriated the INS increased eightfold, sixfold for the
Border Patrol alone. The number of Border Patrol agents
assigned to the southwest border doubled to 8,500. But the end
result, we still have 7 million illegal immigrants here in the
U.S. How can we honestly tell the taxpayers that our strategy
has been a success? We have got to take a new approach.
According to Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration
Studies, a real effort to control the border with Mexico would
require perhaps 20,000 agents, and development of a system of
formidable fences and other barriers along those parts of the
border used for illegal crossing.
I would say that the wisdom of embarking on such a strategy
is suspect at best. We have to recognize that if you sealed the
border tight as a drum, theoretically, and I don't believe you
could, but theoretically if you did, 40 percent of those who
are here illegally entered the country legally. And you not
going to solve the problem that way. We have got to look at
other things as well.
Myself and a couple of colleagues, Congressman Kolbe,
Congressman Reyes, are working on legislation to address these
concerns. We know that along the border region, immigrant
smugglers can earn up to $1.5 million dollars a day. Not each
but as a whole. With that kind of money, with those kind of
market forces, it is simply irresistible. We need to take a
serious look at what our current border policy has wrought, and
acknowledge that there may be a better away to address this
situation. We need to put the smugglers out of business by
formulating a more realistic approach.
I thank the Chair again for this important hearing and look
forward to the testimony of the witnesses.
Mr. Hostettler. I thank the gentleman from Arizona. The
Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from California, Ms.
Sanchez, for an opening statement.
Ms. Sanchez. Thank you Chairman Hostettler, and Ranking
Member Jackson Lee for holding this important hearing. And
thank you to the witnesses for being here today to discuss the
problem of immigrant smuggling. Last month we were shocked to
hear about the deaths of 19 immigrants who had been smuggled
into Texas in a tractor trailer. 19 people suffocated while
trapped in the back of a truck. I say we are shocked, but sadly
I don't think we are very surprised.
The truth is, that deaths along the border occur far too
frequently. For the past 18 years, there have been border
deaths of 200 to 400 people almost every year. Not all of those
are coming across the Mexican border either. Deaths happen
among the boatloads of people coming from Asia and the
Caribbean as well.
So who is at fault here? It is hard to really say. The
smugglers, I think we can all agree, are at fault for
transporting people in deadly conditions. But, is it fair to
say that this country bears part of the blame? Maybe.
Perhaps our immigration policies have created an
environment where desperate people will take desperate measures
just for the small chance of improving their lives.
Conditions in the majority of countries around the world
are frightening. Nearly 50 percent of people living in
subSaharan Africa in 1998 were surviving on less than $1 a day.
In 1995, when per capita income in North America was
roughly $22,000, the majority of the people of the world were
surviving on less than half of that, $10,000 per capita in
Eastern Europe and Central Asia, a mere couple of hundred
dollars in Asia and the Pacific. So it should not be surprising
that some people, unable to enter this country legally, are
willing to take great risks and find another way to enter.
There may be other parties to blame as well. There are
American companies actively seeking out and enticing workers
from across the border to come here undocumented, for work,
because these companies know that they can pay them low wages
and no benefits.
The bottom line to me is that people are dying and we need
to address the problem. We need to work together to figure out
what make the various--what are the various causes and how we
can remove them. Cracking down on smugglers is certainly one
step, but it doesn't solve the ultimate problem.
Until we take sensible positions on immigration and address
the core reasons why people emigrate, we cannot expect this
problem to go away. Clamping down on the borders is likely to
lead to even more desperation. Maybe it is time for this nation
to revisit guest worker programs that allow workers to
ultimately adjust their status and become fully participating
members of society.
I look forward to hearing from the witnesses on this
important and timely topic. And I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. Hostettler. I thank the gentlelady from California. The
Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. King, for an
opening statement.
Mr. King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for
holding this important hearing. I want to thank the witnesses
in advance for what you are about to present to us. My home
community where I graduated from high school is Denison, Iowa,
where we lost 11 illegal immigrants in the train car last fall.
That loss, it was ghastly and it was shocking, and it shocked
and grieved my community and the communities of those families
who lost those victims to that crime, and it was more than one
kind of crime.
As I look across this list that I see, actually from Mr.
Homan's testimony, 11 in Iowa, 17 in Texas, 3 in Washington, 6
in California, I think Mr. Flake has the strongest argument in
Arizona, 133 incidents, 10 in New York, 41 Florida. I know this
isn't all of the statistics, but I know it is a representative
sample of what we are seeing here and what we are up against.
There are going to be two different viewpoints on this. One
of the viewpoints says, whatever fashion, in whatever nuance,
open the borders and we won't have this problem. The other one
says, if we do that, what kind of problems will we create? And
I think that Ms. Sanchez brought up something that is very
interesting to me, and an interesting perspective that we all
need to evaluate. That is, the question that I asked at a
hearing last week is, what does this country look like? What
does the world look like if we simply erase our borders and go
with an open borders policy without restriction?
None of those testifiers at that hearing seemed to have an
answer to that question. I was kind of surprised at that. I
think that this is the question that we need to be asking, in
all of the policy that we implement from here on out, and the
policy that we have implemented in the past should have taken
into account. We should have that equation in mind.
So I propose this one: If you want to have some kind of a
prediction of what people will do, start with the premise that
people follow money. And that is the reference that Ms. Sanchez
brought forth. I would do this, take the population of the
United States, and divide it by our gross domestic product.
Then take the population of our contiguous neighbors,
individually, and divide that by their gross domestic product.
Compare those two figures and therein you will see the
incentive for illegal transfer across the border. It is an
economic equation. There is also a social equation here. We
have a culture that is attractive, that we should preserve and
protect it. We have a good educational system. We have a high
quality of life. All of those things are part of it. But we can
quantify and understood the economic equation.
Then, if you can look at the comparison between our
southern border, which we are talking about here today, and the
differences between the individual income, the average per
capita income of the two nations, if you can measure that and
see that quantifiable difference, then think about the
implications of the open borders beyond that--open borders that
go into the western hemisphere and around the world--and in
fact, we already have an open borders policy in this country.
Anyone who wants to come into the United States and can make a
credible allegation of citizenship can enter into the United
States of America through any country, and from the western
hemisphere except for Cuba. And I am not convinced that all of
those countries have a real tight border policy. So we can go
into the discussion about how important it is to preserve our
borders, and how we are going to be able--if we don't do that--
how the sovereignty of any nation can be sustained without
preserving its borders.
But I am going to be interested in looking at this from the
perspective of how we improve border security and how we
improve internal enforcement. Attorney General Ashcroft sat
there a couple of weeks ago. And of those who were adjudicated
deported, 85 percent blended back into society.
So I am going call this the 85 percent rule. If 85 percent
whom we spend the money, and I can't verify this number, but I
am hearing $35,000 as kind of an average cost for adjudication
for deportation. If we spent that kind of money and that kind
of effort to deport people, and 85 percent of them simply
disappear back into society, and then the 85 percent rule also
applies, and that is 85 percent of the methamphetamine that
comes into Iowa comes across our southern border.
Those two factors mean something to me. I think we have a
responsibility to the citizens of this country to provide them
the best opportunity for a high standard of living. We have got
an obligation to provide those opportunities in other countries
in the world and export our economy and the way of life.
This is my perspective and I am interested in your
testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Hostettler. I thank the gentleman from Iowa.
I would like to now introduce the panel----
Oh, excuse me. I apologize. The Chair now recognizes the
gentleman from Texas, Mr. Smith, for his opening statement.
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know you are eager to
get going. And I won't take up my entire 5 minutes.
Unfortunately, I have a conflict at 11 o'clock, so I appreciate
the opportunity to make some opening comments since I may not
be able to stay for the question period.
And let me just say that during the question period, I hope
that our witnesses will have an opportunity to respond to a
crying need to try to prevent these terrible tragedies from
occurring in the future.
But, I think that if we are going to be successful in this
prevention effort, it is going to require the cooperative
effort of both countries, when we are talking about our
southern border, both the United States and Mexico. And I hope
one or more of our witnesses will respond and let us know for
instance what the country of Mexico is doing to try to prevent
or to try to discourage individuals from heading north, into
dangerous circumstances, dangerous environment and
unfortunately many times leading to their deaths.
But, what is the country of Mexico doing to discourage this
type of illegal immigration that unfortunately results in these
kinds of tragedies that the hearing is on today?
The other thing, Mr. Chairman I want to mention, is that it
has been a surprise to me to hear some people say that as a
result of these deaths, as a result of the harm that is
occurring to individuals who are trying to come into the
country illegally, that somehow that is an argument for
legitimizing illegal immigration or regularizing illegal
immigration or making it easier for people to come into the
United States. I just don't see it that way.
Just to propose an analogy here. If, for example, you have
a lot of people trying to break into your house, may instead of
the country, but using the metaphor here, if you had a lot of
people trying to break into your house, the answer isn't to
open your doors and say, well, whoever wants to come in, come
in or make it easier for people to do so. That is going to even
lead to more dire consequences, for, in this case, the
homeowner, or for the United States.
So I think we need to be careful as to how we use these
tragedies, and not use them in a way that I don't think is
logical.
The other things that I have also heard some people say,
that somehow this is the United States's fault because we are a
prosperous country and have jobs for people. And that somehow
that attraction is responsible for peoples' deaths.
Well, again the analogy to me is like a homeowner who might
have some nice possessions in his house, he might have a big
screen TV, he might have some jewelry. And, if is someone is
trying to break into that house, I don't consider that to be
the fault of the homeowner with the nice things in his house. I
think you still need to prevent people from taking illegal
actions and protect the people who have a right to live under
the laws of their country.
And so I don't think we ought to use these tragedies to try
to promote certain immigration policies that are inimical to
the best interests of the United States. What we ought to try
to do, as I started off by saying, is to coordinate and
cooperate with the country of Mexico to try to prevent these
deaths from occurring in the first place, not take actions that
either condone those actions or lead to more dire consequences
for the people who live in the United States.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank the gentleman for his opening
statement.
The Chair will now recognize the panel of witnesses for
introductions. Jose Garza has been the Border Patrol's chief
patrol agent in the McAllen Sector since 1995. He previously
served as chief patrol agent in the Laredo Sector for 9 years.
Agent Garza began his career with the Border Patrol in 1969
as an agent in Laredo, TX. He also has been an immigration
inspector and supervisory inspector, officer in charge of two
international land border ports of entry, assistant chief
patrol agent and deputy chief patrol agent. Prior to joining
the border patrol, Agent Garza served in the U.S. Navy.
Tom Homan is the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement Interim Associate, Interim Special Agent in Charge
in San Antonio, TX. He entered on duty with the border patrol
in 1984 and was in the San Diego sector until 1998.
He served as a special agent, supervisory special agent,
deputy assistant, district director for investigations in
Phoenix, AZ, and assistant district director of investigations
in both San Antonio and Dallas, TX.
Agent Homan has worked anti smuggling investigations
resulting in the dismantling of 13 alien smuggling
organizations. He was one of the lead investigators in the
recent Victoria, TX, smuggling investigation.
Peter Nunez began his career in law enforcement in 1972 as
a Federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's Office in San
Diego, CA. He was appointed as the U.S. Attorney in San Diego
by President Reagan in 1982, where he served through August
1988.
In 1990 he was appointed by President George Bush to be the
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Enforcement. Mr. Nunez
is a member and past president of the San Diego Crime
Commission, the past vice president of the San Diego Prevention
Coalition, a member of the board of directors of the Center for
Immigration Studies, and a member of the board of visitors at
the University of San Diego School of Law.
He has been a lecturer in the political science department
at the University of San Diego since 1997, specializing in
criminal justice, international law enforcement, and
immigration policy.
Mr. Nunez graduated from Duke University, served in the
U.S. Navy, and graduated from the University of San Diego's
School of Law.
Maria Jimenez is the chair of the Mayor's Advisory
Committee for the Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs of
the City of Houston. She has always been an advocate for
immigrant rights. She founded the immigration law enforcement
monitoring project in 1987 and created various other community
groups such as the Houston Immigration and Refugee Coalition.
Ms. Jimenez worked as a union organizer in Texas, and 10
years as a community organizer and adult educator in Mexico.
She sits on several boards, including the AFL-CIO Union
Community Fund and has received several community service
awards.
I thank the witnesses for being here today. Mr. Homan's
full testimony will be over 5 minutes because he brought with
him some very enlightening video of a smuggling operation. So I
will be a little lenient with the 5-minute oral testimony rule
today.
Mr. Garza, the floor is yours, and without objection, your
full testimony will be in the record. And you are free to
testify at this time.
STATEMENT OF JOSE GARZA, CHIEF PATROL AGENT, McALLEN SECTOR,
BORDER PATROL, BUREAU OF CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION,
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Garza. Chairman Hostettler, Ranking Member Jackson Lee,
distinguished Subcommittee Members, I am honored to have the
opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the efforts
of the U.S. Border Patrol to prevent and deter the entry and
smuggling of undocumented aliens into the United States.
My name is Jose E. Garza, and I am the chief patrol agent
of the McAllen, Texas Border Patrol sector, Bureau of Customs
and Border Protection. I would like to begin by giving you a
brief overview of the McAllen Border Patrol Sector. The McAllen
Sector is one of 21 border patrol sectors nationwide. We are
responsible for patrolling 284 miles of international border
between the United States and Mexico, and 232 miles of
coastline along the Gulf of Mexico.
We are responsible for 19 South Texas counties which cover
17,000 square miles. We have 1,484 uniformed agents assigned
and 200 support personnel. The workforce is deployed at nine
stations, which include two checkpoint stations and one coastal
station located at Corpus Christi, TX.
In 1997, illegal immigration was at all time high in the
McAllen Sector. Border violence, drug and alien smuggling were
rampant. Farmers and ranchers and the local community were
complaining about the increasing numbers of illegal aliens
transiting their properties. Local police were responding to
numerous complaints relating to illegal entrants committing
crimes and other offenses in the Brownsville, TX area on a
daily basis.
Fiscal year 1997 was a big year for sector apprehensions as
we arrested nearly 245,000 illegal entrants. In August 1997,
McAllen Sector initiated Operation Rio Grande as part of the
Border Patrol's national strategy to control the border.
The concept of the operation was to forward deploy agent
and technical infrastructure to the immediate border to prevent
and deter illegal entry into the country.
Our operational manpower doubled from 701 agents to the
present level of 1,484. Technical infrastructure such as
lighting, sky watch observation platforms, infrared cameras,
boats, fingerprinting technology, night vision equipment,
aircraft and other equipment were purchased and provided the
McAllen Sector.
Our efforts have been very successful with decreases in
illegal entries since Operation Rio Grande began. I am proud to
say that in fiscal year 2002 we apprehended 89,928 illegal
entrants which is a 63 percent decrease from the 1997 levels
when we apprehended nearly 245,000.
Fewer illegal entries have resulted in positive
relationships with farmers, ranchers in our area and also with
the communities. Crime rates in places like Brownsville, TX
have decreased, increasing officer safety, safety of aliens and
safety of the Brownsville residents.
Due to our efforts in reducing the number of illegal
entrants in McAllen Sector, we never experienced problems with
vigilante groups, citizens or ranchers taking the laws into
their own hands. Building on the public safety and humanitarian
initiatives embraced by the U.S. Border Patrol, the McAllen
Sector has been a leader in initiating various border safety
initiatives to help reduce accidents, incidents and loss of
life along the border.
Among these initiatives are Operation Life Saver, which is
the establishment and promotion of a sector 1-800 toll free
number where citizens can call for assistance or to report
suspected illegal activity. We have trained 44 emergency
medical technicians and four paramedics, equipped border patrol
vehicles with water rescue and first responder equipment to
render aide to victims of border violence and crime.
Providing swift water rescue training to Border Patrol
agents and Mexican officers, initiation of a Border Patrol boat
patrol to patrol the Rio Grande River 24 hours a day, filming
public service announcements that have been aired in Mexico,
Central America and the United States.
Producing a videotape that is shown to all aliens coming in
contact with McAllen Sector Border Patrol agents, warning them
of the dangers involved in crossing the border illegally.
The sector in addition to all of these initiatives
maintains three 24 hour per day, 365 day per year traffic
checkpoints at strategic locations leading from the border to
the interior of the United States.
These inspection stations are an integral part of our
layered border control strategy and the last line of defense at
the border. The traffic flows through these stations are
voluminous, and we are not capable under our present
infrastructure and governing Supreme Court decision to inspect
and search every vehicle. They, however, are a deterrence and
disrupt a tremendous amount of elicit activities and smuggling
to the interior of the United States.
Since March of 2003, the Border Patrol has been part of the
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection. We are still adjusting
to the transition.
We believe that with the increased communication,
coordination and one mission, which is protection of the
border, that our reorganized border patrol will be able to do a
better job. With the recent tragedies on the border and
attention on our national security, the importance of having a
strong border patrol cannot be overemphasized. I would like to
thank the Committee for the opportunity to present this
testimony today, and I would be pleased to respond to any
questions the Committee may have.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank you, Agent Garza.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Garza follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jose E. Garza
Chairman Hostettler, Ranking Member Jackson Lee, and distinguished
Subcommittee Members, it is my honor to have the opportunity to appear
before you today to discuss efforts to prevent and deter the illegal
entry and smuggling of undocumented aliens into the United States,
through operations and law enforcement initiatives of the United States
Border Patrol, now a component of the newly created Bureau of Customs
and Border Protection.
My name is Jose E. Garza, and I am the Chief Patrol Agent of the
McAllen, Texas Border Patrol Sector, Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection. I would like to begin by giving you a brief overview of the
McAllen Border Patrol Sector.
The McAllen Sector is one of twenty-one Border Patrol sectors
nationwide and serves an integral part in securing our nation's
borders. We are responsible for patrolling 284 linear miles of
international border between the United States and Mexico, and 232
miles of coastline along the Gulf of Mexico, encompassing 19 South
Texas counties which cover 17,000 square miles. We have 1,482 uniformed
officers assigned to McAllen Sector, who perform various types of
enforcement duties. The agents are deployed at nine stations, two of
which are specifically assigned traffic checkpoints in Falfurrias and
Kingsville, Texas, and one that is coastal station in Corpus Christi,
Texas.
In late summer, 1997, illegal migration in McAllen Sector was at an
all-time high. 2The indicators that the situation was critical were
evident to all who lived and worked in the border community. The
associated criminal activity that accompanies an uncontrolled border
was of great concern: Border violence, and drug and alien smuggling
were taking their toll on urban and rural border residents. Farmers,
ranchers and the local community were complaining of increased numbers
of illegal aliens transiting their lands. Border communities, such as
Brownsville, Texas, were increasingly alarmed, and faced with an
atmosphere of swelling violence, which was degrading their quality of
life. Local police were receiving numerous calls relating to illegal
entrants committing petty and serious offenses in Brownsville on a
daily basis. Fiscal year 1997 was a peak year for McAllen Sector in
apprehensions, as we arrested nearly 245,000 illegal aliens.
In August of 1997, McAllen Sector initiated Operation Rio Grande as
a part of the Border Patrol's national strategy to control our nation's
borders. McAllen Sector was prioritized in Phase II of the national
strategy, after Phase I operations involving El Paso's Operation Hold
the Line, San Diego's Operation Gatekeeper, were shown to have a
significant effect on illegal migration along the El Paso and San Diego
corridors. In keeping with our national strategy, the concept of the
operation was to forward deploy our agent staffing and tactical
infrastructure resources along the immediate border area, the Rio
Grande River, to prevent and deter the illegal entry and smuggling of
aliens into the United States at the border itself.
Our operational manpower was increased from 701 agents to the
present levels, as the national strategy has progressed. Tactical
infrastructure such as portable and permanent lighting structures, sky-
watch observation platforms, infrared cameras, boats, fingerprinting
technology to measure recidivism and detect wanted criminals, night
vision equipment, newer aircraft and other equipment was purchased and
assigned to the sector. In essence, the new mindset and way of doing
business was fostered in line with the national strategy and McAllen
went from an apprehension-based strategy to a strategy that promoted
control through prevention and deterrence.
Our efforts have been very successful, with decreases in
apprehensions and illegal entries since Operation Rio Grande began. I
am proud to say that in Fiscal year 2002 we apprehended 89,928 illegal
entrants in the McAllen Sector. Although this is still a tremendous
workload, there are now significantly fewer arrests, due to the focused
strategy of Operation Rio Grande and the efforts put forth by our
dedicated men and women. Through it all, McAllen Sector has maintained
and encouraged a positive relationship with area ranchers, farmers and
the local community. The crime rate along the southern corridor of the
McAllen Sector paralleled the decline in apprehensions. The crime rate
in places like Brownsville, Texas has decreased, and the safety for our
officers and the local population has dramatically improved. The
overall quality of life was better due to enhanced enforcement by our
agents.
Remotely monitored sensing devices have been placed along smuggling
routes leading away from the Rio Grande to monitor the movement of
persons trying to illegally enter the United States. Mobile observation
platforms called ``Sky-Watch'' towers, platforms that extend twenty
feet into the air and are used to watch large portions of the river,
have been placed at strategic locations along the river. Remote Video
Surveillance Systems have also been placed at twenty-nine strategic
locations along the river. These systems have both day and night
cameras and are monitored twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week
for any illegal activity. A Boat Patrol was established in February of
1998 to detect and deter illegal activity, as well as to gather
intelligence along the river. Twenty-six specially trained K-9 teams
have been permanently stationed at our two permanent traffic
checkpoints.
Building on longstanding public safety and humanitarian measures
practiced by the U.S. Border Patrol, we have implemented initiatives to
increase border safety within the McAllen Sector and have taken steps
to enhance our levels of preparedness. Over the past several years,
unscrupulous alien smugglers have moved migrants into more remote areas
with hazardous terrain and extreme conditions. As smuggling tactics and
patterns have shifted, our strategy has been flexible enough to meet
the challenges head on. The Sector's Special Response Team (SRT) and
Border Patrol's Search, Trauma and Rescue Teams (BORSTAR) have received
training in search and rescue, and Border Patrol Emergency Medical
Technicians (EMT's) have been placed in each Station. At the present
time there are 44 trained EMT's in the Sector.
The Boat Patrol was established by the McAllen Sector as a border
safety tool and as a deterrent to prevent illegal aliens from entering
into the United States. The Boat Patrol has deterred the entry of
thousands of illegal aliens within our sector. Furthermore, the patrols
have served as a Border Safety tool by rescuing hundreds of potential
drowning victims, many of which were abandoned by smugglers. The Boat
Patrol has become an integral part of our every day operations. We have
enhanced our Air Operations to increase aerial vigilance in remote
areas in our efforts to prevent alien deaths directly attributable to
the high heat and limited water sources in remote South Texas.
The McAllen Sector Public Awareness Program is a proactive network
of contacts that aggressively facilitates the dissemination of
information. Working with local Television, Radio and Newspaper
agencies, we have developed and delivered public service announcements
and advertisement campaigns to increase public safety awareness and to
educate the public regarding our mission, which has benefited our law
enforcement efforts throughout the region.
The McAllen Sector maintains three 24-hour checkpoint operations in
the sector, which are strategically located to prevent and disrupt
alien and narcotic smuggling. Border Patrol Checkpoints are an integral
part of Border Protection measures. Their strategic placement and
operation provides increased control and deterrence at the border. The
presence of a Checkpoint forces smugglers and illegal entrants to
change their entry and travel patterns to border cities and away from
the border. Sustained border enforcement presence, supported by
Checkpoints that screen traffic traveling away from the border, adds an
additional level of security nationally. It is of utmost importance to
note that operations conducted at these checkpoints are not based upon
authority similar to border inspections at ports of entry, with regard
to searches and seizures, but are exercised based upon authority
granted from Supreme Court decisions. Current case law also supports
operating checkpoints in the same location to assure maximum law
enforcement benefit while protecting 4th amendment guarantees.
Even though Border Patrol Agents have the authority under Section
287 (a) (3) of the INA to ``board and search'' any vessel, railway car,
aircraft, conveyance or vehicle within a reasonable distance from any
external boundary or border for aliens, agents must still have probable
cause in order to conduct a search for contraband as outlined in
Almeida-Sanchez v. U.S., 413 U.S. 266 (1973).
In U.S. v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975), the court held that
``officers on a roving patrol may stop vehicles only if they are aware
of specific articulate facts, together with rational inferences from
those facts, that warrant reasonable suspicion that the vehicle
contains aliens who may be illegally in the country.''
In both Almeida-Sanchez v. U.S. and U.S. v. Brignoni-Ponce, the
court held that ``no act of Congress can authorize a violation of the
constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.''
Border Patrol agents are required to skillfully and prudently exercise
the authority granted to them, balancing the standards between
reasonable proof and probable cause during detainment and questioning
of undocumented aliens, vehicle stops, and searches and seizures.
The challenges we face with existing infrastructure at our
checkpoints will continue to be addressed in an effort to update,
expand and modernize, and we will continue to work diligently under the
limitations that now exist. With an ever-increasing volume of traffic,
agents in the McAllen Sector have mere seconds to conduct immigration
checks, and to decide if probable cause exits to warrant additional
inspection.
The McAllen Border Patrol Sector continues to help lead the way in
an effort to increase border security, and curb illegal alien and drug
smuggling along the southwest border. In fiscal year 2002, McAllen
Sector apprehended 89,927 undocumented aliens. Of those apprehensions,
11,339 were of persons whose nationality was other than Mexican (OTM).
The sector also made arrests in 1,382 alien smuggling cases, involving
1,610 alien smugglers and 7,558 smuggled aliens. During fiscal year
2003 (through May), the Sector has apprehended a total of 50,744
undocumented aliens, of which 8,910 were OTMs. During this time, the
sector has also made arrests in 1,233 alien smuggling cases, involving
1,462 alien smugglers and 5,468 smuggled aliens.
McAllen Sector is also among the leaders on the Southwest border in
narcotics cases. In Fiscal Year 2002, the sector made 1,692 narcotic
seizures, including 1,492 seizures of marijuana totaling 334,630
pounds, 10 seizures of heroin totaling 125 pounds, and 171 seizures of
cocaine totaling 6,902 pounds. During Fiscal Year 2003 (through May),
the sector has recorded a total of 1,151 cases, including 1,008
seizures of marijuana totaling 210,644 pounds, 8 seizures of heroin
totaling 86 pounds, and 89 seizures of cocaine totaling 4,200 pounds.
Not only does the Border Patrol provide a significant law
enforcement presence in the region, we are also recognized as a major
source of information and intelligence. Our Sector Intelligence Unit is
recognized as a major source of information regarding Special Interest
Aliens in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas. Recognizing that border
security cannot be a singular effort, but a collaborative, multi-agency
effort; we coordinate our efforts, disseminate information, and share
intelligence with other federal, state and local law enforcement
agencies, strengthening the cord of better enforcement, better
intelligence and better security.
Nationally, the Border Patrol is tasked with a very complex,
sensitive, and difficult job, which historically has presented immense
challenges, and for which we have been given 100% responsibility. Since
March 1, 2003, the U.S. Border Patrol has been a part of the newly
established Bureau of Customs and Border Protection within the
Department of Homeland Security. The Border Patrol is proud to be the
``front line'' of defense for this very important mission. The
challenge is huge, but one which we face every day with resolve and
dedication. Together with our new partners, we are standing ``shoulder
to shoulder,'' to present ``one face'' at the border.
I would like to thank the Committee for the opportunity to present
this testimony today, and I would be pleased to respond to any
questions that the Committee may have at this time.
Mr. Hostettler. Agent Homan.
STATEMENT OF TOM HOMAN, INTERIM RESIDENT AGENT IN CHARGE, SAN
ANTONIO, TX, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Homan. Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee,
thank you for the opportunity today to address you regarding
the efforts of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, known as BICE to combat the smuggling of illegal
aliens into the United States.
I am the associate special agent in charge in San Antonio,
TX and recently assisted in the investigation into the deaths
of 19 smuggled aliens in Victoria, TX. I am pleased to have the
opportunity to share my experience and knowledge with you
regarding this important issue.
Specifically, I am here to testify regarding alien
smuggling and human trafficking, which includes smuggling
related deaths, juvenile smuggling and trafficking, roles and
the effects of organized crime, and the nexus with terrorism.
The creation of the new Department of Homeland Security,
and specifically BICE, combined legal authorities,
investigative tools to effectively combat organized human
smuggling and trafficking by investigating and prosecuting
criminal organizations involved in smuggling and harboring of
aliens, money laundering, racketeering violations, human
trafficking and child forced labor provisions.
In addition, the new BICE structure provides a more
effective means of dismantling, disrupting the criminal
activities of those organizations. With tools such as financial
data, analysis, telecommunication intercepts, and air and
marine interdiction capabilities.
I would like to begin by providing an important
clarification, a necessary distinction between the terms of
alien smuggling and human trafficking. Alien smuggling and
human trafficking, while sharing certain elements are different
offenses. In some respects, human trafficking may be regarded
simply as an aggravated form of alien smuggling.
Human trafficking involves force, fraud or coercion, and it
occurs for the purpose of force labor or commercial sexual
exploitation. Alien smuggling is an enterprise that produces
short-term profits based on migrants smuggled.
Trafficking enterprises rely on forced labor or commercial
sexual exploitation of the victim to produce profits over the
long term and the short term.
Smugglees are willing to risk potential death seeking their
dream and are normally free to seek it once they reach their
final destination. On the other hand, we know that trafficking
victims find themselves in a servitude arrangement that does
not end once they have reached their final destination.
Human smuggling has become an international lucrative
criminal market in the United States. This trade generates an
enormous amount of money, globally an estimated $9.5 billion
per year. The commodities involved in this trade are men,
women, and children, coming from as far away as China, Ukraine
and Thailand.
The trafficker's goal, like the smuggler is to maximize
profits. The U.S. Department of State has estimated that at any
given time, there are hundreds of thousands of people in the
smuggling pipeline being warehoused by smugglers, and their
primary target is the United States.
In recent years, there has been a surge in smugglers trying
to smuggle juveniles into the United States. Smuggled children
are often lured by promises of education, a new skill or a good
job, other children are kidnapped outright, taken from their
home villages or towns and brought and sold as commodities.
Attracted by enormous profits and minimal risk, criminal
organizations at all levels of sophistication are involved in
the trafficking of children as human cargo across international
borders for sexual exploitation and forced labor.
BICE is developing a foreign and domestic strategy which
includes the implementation of critical incident response
teams. The purpose of these investigative teams is simple and
effective. Beginning the investigation of a critical incident
as quickly as possible, and assembling the broad spectrum of
technical and subject matter expertise that is needed to solve
the complex investigations.
These teams will consistent of special agents drawn from
BICE assets who possess specialized skills in the full
constellation of investigative techniques, language and
cultural skills, crime scene management, technical operations
and forensics.
The national and international enforcement environment
changed dramatically after September 11 attacks. BICE targets
alien smuggling organizations that present threats to the
national security. This emphasize recognizes that terrorists
and their associates are likely to align themselves with
specific alien smuggling networks to obtain undetected entry
into the United States.
As in our war on terrorism, the most effective means of
addressing these issues is by attacking the problems at the
source and transit countries, thereby preventing entry into the
United States. The overarching BICE strategy requires
intelligence-driven investigations against major violators,
specifically targeting organizations with ties to countries
that support terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda.
I brought along some images and video to illustrate the
means and methods used by smuggling organizations, and how BICE
is investigating these organizations.
San Antonio and Houston started an investigation 2 years
ago called Operation Night Riders where we actually opened up
our own load house. It was an undercover operation
proprietorship case.
What you see there on the right hand side of the screen,
that is a smuggling house that we set up. On the left hand side
of the screen with the arrow pointing to it, that was our
listening post. The smuggling house was wired for video and
sound through every room, inside and outside.
This is another example to shoot it, the video cameras that
we hid outside of the house and inside the house so we can see
all of the aliens arriving at the house, and as they leave, and
all of the communications inside the house were also monitored.
Again, this is video cameras hidden inside the house. We
have undercover agents acting as load house operators, and we
actually contracted with 11 different alien smuggling
organizations to bring their aliens to our load house. We will
house those aliens. We will make arrangements to get them to
our final destination. By doing this, we identified the guides,
the drivers, the main smugglers, we identified where the alien
was going, who is paying the fees, we identified the full alien
smuggling organization.
This is a picture of the listening post which was next
door. We put it next door in case anything was to happen where
we had quick response to the house. This clearly shows we had
video cameras placed both outside and inside the house.
We have total 24/7 surveillance inside and outside of that
house. This is a short film that is going to show the arrival
of aliens that just crossed the border near Laredo, TX. They
were in the back of this pickup truck for 6 to 7 hours. This
shows how the smugglers have no concern for the health and
safety of the aliens. These aliens, as you will see, will
unload the front of that pickup truck. That is not a super cab.
And you will see how many aliens come out of the front behind
the front seat, and also how many come rolling out of the bed
of that truck like sardines.
Again, they have been in this position for several hours.
You are going to notice some of the aliens as they get out of
this vehicle have trouble walking because they were in this
position for so long. The person unloading the truck is one of
the defendants that was prosecuted and arrested.
And as you can see this is during broad daylight. As the
aliens get out of truck, they are going to enter the side
fence. They enter the house through the back.
As the aliens enter the house, the load house operator who
was an undercover officer, records their name, and records what
smuggling organization brought them to the house. Again, we had
11 different organizations bringing aliens to this house.
At a later time we would bring the aliens one at a time to
the table. They would call their relatives, let them know they
are safely in the United States, they need to wire the agreed
amount per Western Union to our account, and then we would send
them to their final destination.
This is the typical way that alien smuggling organizations
operate. They are subcontractors, subcontractor guides,
subcontractor load house operators, subcontractor transporters.
Now, you will see the target of the investigation open the
back of the truck and they will start rolling out of the back
of the truck, again having trouble walking, because they have
been stuck in that position for 6 to 7 hours.
The good thing about this investigation is we controlled
the house. We made sure they ate well. We made sure their
medical needs were taken care of. The aliens were moved down to
their final destinations. And since we were the ones that
talked to the relatives, recorded those conversations, we were
later able to go to those destinations, pick those aliens up,
take them into custody. And many have served as material
witnesses in the prosecution of the 11 organizations.
Mr. Hostettler. That is six out of the cab were from behind
and six out of the bed in a pickup truck.
Mr. Homan. Yes. Next screen, please. This is a load
arriving at night. You see there are a lot of women and
children in this load. There are babies in arms in this load.
Again, callous disregard for their safety. They were bought in
brought in the same arrangement. They are in the back of the
pickup truck, in the bed of the pickup truck, stacked like cord
wood. You can see this--they arrived 24/7. You can see a baby
in arms. Many female aliens. They come in groups of 30 and 40
out of two pickups.
Next screen, please. And this is a group of smuggled
Peruvians that came in that same night. This is just a quick
shot of the inside of the house. At one point, we had over a
100 smuggled aliens inside this house.
Next screen. While we are waiting for the screen to load
up, I can say that the undercover agents of this house were
seasoned veterans of the legacy INS. Every room was, again,
monitored, video, audio, we even had sensors put in the
hallway. So we know when aliens were moving from one room to
another. This is what I was explaining earlier. This alien is
now meeting with our undercover agent. A contact will be made
with his relatives saying he has arrived, he is in Houston at
an undisclosed location. And their relatives or employer needs
to wire money to our account, then we will send him to his
final destination.
Next screen, please. The result of this investigation, we
totally dismantled 11 alien smuggling organizations. Twenty
people were found guilty. Only one went to trial. With a case
such as this, rather than attacking organizations one at a
time, we become part of the organization, we open up our own
load house, we can totally dismantle many organizations rather
than just doing one. The downfall? It is expensive, it takes a
lot of resources.
If I can continue my testimony. Last month 19 undocumented
aliens were found dead inside a tractor trailer in Victoria,
TX. Four hours into their 300-mile trip to Houston oxygen ran
out in their sealed trailer. Within 72 hours of the discovery,
the collective efforts of special agents from BICE, our
counterparts from Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, the
Texas Department of Public Safety, the Victoria County District
Attorney's Office, the United States Secret Service, and the
Victoria County Sheriff's Office led to the identification and
arrest of 40 defendants in Ohio and Texas. As of today, a total
of 14 defendants have been charged with various crimes
involving alien smuggling. The successes that we achieved in
this operation are a direct result of fully integrating BICE
special agents, other personnel and equipment in a unified law
enforcement effort. Still, the smugglers remain undaunted by
this tragedy. They continue to use railroad cars and tractor
trailers to move illegal aliens to the south Texas smuggling
corridor. BICE looks forward to working with the Committee in
our efforts to save lives and secure our national interests. I
hope my remarks today have been informative and helpful to each
of you in understanding the complexity surrounding these
issues.
I thank you for inviting me to testify. I am happy to
answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank you, Agent Homan.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Homan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Thomas Homan
MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, thank you for the
opportunity today to address you regarding the efforts of the Bureau of
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (BICE) to combat the smuggling of
illegal aliens into the United States. I am the Interim Associate
Special Agent in Charge in San Antonio, Texas and recently assisted in
the investigation into the deaths of 19 smuggled aliens in Victoria,
Texas. I am pleased to have the opportunity to share my experience and
knowledge with you regarding this important issue. Specifically, I am
here to testify regarding alien smuggling and human trafficking, which
includes smuggling-related deaths, juvenile smuggling and trafficking,
roles and effects of organized crime and the nexus with terrorism.
The creation of the new Department of Homeland Security, and
specifically BICE, combined legal authorities and investigative tools
to effectively combat organized human smuggling and trafficking by
investigating and prosecuting criminal organizations involved in
smuggling, transporting, and harboring of aliens; money laundering;
racketeering violations; human trafficking and child forced labor
provisions. In addition, the new BICE structure provides a more
effective means of dismantling and disrupting the criminal activities
of these organizations, with tools such as financial and data analysis,
telecommunication intercepts, and air and marine interdiction
capabilities.
I would like to begin by providing an important clarification and
necessary distinction between the terms alien smuggling and human
trafficking. Alien smuggling and human trafficking, while sharing
certain elements and attributes and overlapping in some cases, are
distinctively different offenses. In some respects, human trafficking
may be regarded simply as an aggravated form of alien smuggling. Human
trafficking, specifically what U.S. law defines as ``severe forms of
trafficking in persons,'' involves (unless the victims are minors
trafficked into sexual exploitation) force, fraud or coercion, and
occurs for the purpose of forced labor or commercial sexual
exploitation. Alien smuggling is an enterprise that produces short-term
profits based on migrants smuggled. Trafficking enterprises rely on
forced labor or commercial sexual exploitation of the victim to produce
profits over the long-term and the short-term.
Smugglees are willing to risk potential death seeking their dream
and are normally free to seek it once they reach their final
destination. On the other hand, we know that trafficking victims find
themselves in a servitude arrangement that does not end once they have
reached their final destination.
Human smuggling has become an international lucrative criminal
market and continues to do so in the United States. This trade
generates an enormous amount of money--globally, an estimated $9.5
billion per year. The commodities involved in this illicit trade are
men, women, and children. Traffickers or smugglers transport
undocumented migrants into the U.S. for work in licit, semi-illicit and
illicit industries. The traffickers' foremost goal, like the smuggler,
is to maximize profits. The sale and distribution of smuggled humans in
the U.S. is a global, regional, and national phenomenon. Women and
children are trafficked short distances within the U.S. (small towns to
bigger cities), as well as coming from as far away as China, Ukraine
and Thailand.
The U.S. Department of State has estimated that at any given time,
there are hundreds of thousands of people in the smuggling pipeline,
being warehoused by smugglers, waiting for new routes to open up or
documents to become available--and their primary target is the United
States.
While human trafficking cases have attracted media attention, the
loss of life in an alien smuggling case is no less tragic. To
illustrate the callous disregard smugglers have for human life I would
like to provide you with the details of some tragic incidents involving
deaths (noting that some of these smuggling cases may be trafficking
cases as well):
Iowa--In October 2002, 11 undocumented aliens were found dead in a
covered grain car near Dennison, IA. It was determined that they had
been smuggled and their bodies trapped in the grain car for four
months. This is an ongoing investigation.
Texas--Last month, 17 undocumented aliens were found dead inside a
tractor-trailer in Victoria, Texas. Four hours into their 300-mile trip
to Houston, oxygen ran out in their dark, sealed, hot, airless trailer.
These aliens had beat their way through the trailer taillights in a
desperate attempt to signal for help. Within 72 hours of the discovery,
the collective efforts of Special Agents from BICE, our counterparts in
the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, the Texas Department of
Public Safety, the Victoria County District Attorney's Office, the
United States Secret Service, and the Victoria County Sheriff's Office,
led to the identification and arrest of four defendants in Ohio and
Texas. As of May 27, 2003, a total of twelve defendants have been
charged with various crimes involving alien smuggling. The successes
that we achieved in this operation are a direct result of fully
integrating BICE special agents and other personnel, equipment and
methodologies into a unified law enforcement effort. Still, the
smugglers remain undaunted by the tragedy. They continue to use sealed
railroad cars and tractor-trailers to move illegal aliens through the
South Texas smuggling corridor.
Washington--In January 2000, three undocumented aliens were found
dead in the cargo container of a vessel in Seattle, WA. The three were
part of a group of eighteen Chinese smuggled aliens that had been
sealed in the container for a period of two weeks. The survivors, who
were in dire medical condition, remained in the container with the
deceased until their discovery.
California--In March 2000, six undocumented aliens were found in
the
San Diego east county mountains, four of whom died due to
hypothermia. The smugglers abandoned the group in the snowy mountains
as the aliens pleaded not to be stranded.
Florida--In December 2001, a capsized vessel was found in the
Florida Straits, known to have been carrying 41 Cuban nationals,
including women and children. All are believed to have perished at sea.
New York--In June 1993, the Golden Venture, a vessel that had
traveled 17,000 miles in 112 days from China, ran aground off the coast
of Queens in New York City. The human cargo suffered subhuman living
conditions during the voyage with inadequate food and ventilation. Most
of the 286 people jumped into the frigid Atlantic Ocean, 10 of whom
drowned.
Arizona--In 2002, 133 deaths were recorded relating to alien
smuggling loads in the Arizona deserts. The ICE Phoenix Special-Agent-
in-Charge is currently involved in an investigation in which as many as
13 homicides have been attributed to alien smuggling. Several of the
deceased were undocumented aliens who were unable to pay their
smuggling fees. Local law enforcement agencies attribute most of the
increase of violent crime, hostage taking, and home invasions in
Arizona as being related to alien smuggling.
As you can see, alien smuggling is not confined to any geographic
region; it is a problem of national scope, which requires a coordinated
national response. BICE is developing a foreign and domestic strategy,
which includes the implementation of critical incident response teams.
The purpose of these investigative teams is simple and effective: begin
the investigation of a critical incident as quickly as possible,
assembling the broad spectrum of technical and subject matter expertise
that is needed to solve complex investigations.
The teams will consist of Special Agents drawn from BICE assets who
possess specialized skills in the full constellation of investigative
techniques; language and cultural skills, land, air and maritime
smuggling, crime scene management, technical operations and forensics.
This investigative response will be coordinated at a proposed BICE
Smuggling Coordination Center utilizing resources and equipment
deployed in key geographic areas nationwide.
In recent years there has been a surge in smugglers trying to
smuggle juveniles into the United States. This increase is driven by
the demand created by U.S. citizens wanting to illegally adopt children
from abroad, immigrants attempting to reunite their families, and child
exploitation. Mexican consulates in Southern Arizona alone handled more
than 1,500 repatriations of unaccompanied Mexican juveniles during the
first half of 2002.
In contrast to the smuggling of family members, trafficked children
are often lured by promises of education, a new skill or a good job;
other children are kidnapped outright, taken from their home villages
or towns and then bought and sold as commodities. Attracted by enormous
profits and minimal risks, criminal organizations at all levels of
sophistication are involved in the trafficking of children as human
cargo across international borders for sexual exploitation and forced
labor. The fall of communism, coupled with the deteriorating third
world economies, has fueled the dramatic rise of this heinous form of
commerce.
International organized crime groups such as the Chinese Triads;
Japanese Yakuza; Russian, Albanian, Georgian, Ukrainian, Polish,
Nigerian, and Thai criminal networks have also capitalized on weak
economies; corruption, and improved international transportation
infrastructure in order to facilitate the smuggling and trafficking of
some 700,000 to 2,000,000 people globally each year. These
organizations have abandoned their historic ethnic alliances to join
together in criminal enterprises and to hinder U.S. Government law
enforcement efforts.
The national and international enforcement environment changed
significantly after the September 11 attacks. BICE places a significant
emphasis on targeting alien smuggling organizations that present
threats to national security. This emphasis recognizes that terrorists
and their associates are likely to align themselves with specific alien
smuggling networks to obtain undetected entry into the United States.
In addition to the emerging terrorist threat, three factors have
created an environment in which terrorists and smuggling enterprises
may combine their criminal efforts to pose a significant national and
international threat. These factors are:
1) The involved criminal organizations growing volume and
sophistication,
2) Their ability to exploit public corruption; and,
3) Lax immigration controls in source and transit countries.
As in our war on terrorism, the most effective means of addressing
these issues is by attacking the problem in source and transit
countries thereby preventing entry into the United States.
Consequently, BICE is developing a strategy that will address alien
smuggling and human trafficking at the national and international
levels. The overarching Anti-Smuggling/Human Trafficking Strategy
requires intelligence-driven investigations against major violators,
specifically targeting organizations with ties to countries that
support terrorist organizations such as Al Queda.
We look forward to working with this Committee in our efforts to
save lives and secure our national interests. I hope my remarks today
have been informative and helpful to each of you in understanding the
complexity surrounding these issues. I thank you for inviting me to
testify and I will be glad to answer any questions you may have at this
time.
Mr. Hostettler. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Nunez for your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF PETER K. NUNEZ, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY, SAN DIEGO,
CA
Mr. Nunez. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Jackson Lee and
other Members of the Committee, thank you for asking me to
appear today. I am going to supplement the written statement
that you already have in front of you with some remarks some of
which I think are responsive to issues that have already been
raised.
I guess the place I would like to start is to recognize
reality. The world is currently about 6.2 billion people, two-
thirds or three-quarters of whom live in the developing world,
many of whom would love to come to the United States. It is not
just Mexico we are talking about, although Mexico, obviously,
is the gateway and the single-biggest contributor of immigrants
to the United States. So when we start thinking about
solutions, we have to look at this big picture that we are
faced with, an ongoing, demographic onslaught from everywhere
in the world, and we are one of the target countries, one of
the preferred places for people to come to improve themselves.
So whatever solutions we think of have to have that reality in
mind.
Secondly, we already have, if not the--certainly one of the
most generous legal immigration policies in the world. We
admit, and have admitted for every year for the last decade, a
million people legally. That should be more than adequate to
supply whatever needs our employers have. If not, there are
provisions in the current immigration law for people to import
labor if they can demonstrate the need. But instead, what many
people do, the unscrupulous employers, is take advantage of
illegal immigrants who are here by the millions, 8 million at
the last count, probably more than that, from all over the
world. And the reason why people prefer illegal immigrant
workers is that they can exploit them. So we have to also keep
in mind that we don't need illegal immigrants. That to me is
absurd that someone would suggest we need illegal immigrants.
If we need immigrants, if we need labor, then that is the
purpose for which Congress has put in place an immigration
policy, to handle legitimate needs for employers. But we should
not mix the two up, legal and illegal immigration.
Two things, basically two different parts of this formula.
One is border control and certainly we must do better at that.
We have made some improvements since the early 90's, and that
certainly is a step in the right direction. It is a shame that
we stopped increasing the Border Patrol in the late 90's. I
don't know how many people it would take. I know Mr. King, I
think, mentioned the number 20,000 Border Patrol agents, I
don't know how many it would take. I don't think anybody knows
at this point, but we know it takes more than that. So my
suggestion is let's continue to build up the Border Patrol to
the point where they can close the gaps, especially the places
where people are in the most jeopardy. Let's extend Gatekeeper,
let's extend Hold the Line, let's extend the Rio Grande project
with more Border Patrolmen. Now, that is going to take time.
So the question in the short run is, is there some other
remedy that we should undertake or look at in the short run?
Use of the military, is that something that should be
considered in the short run if we want to stop death? If that
is the highest priority, it seems to me that is something that
should be considered.
You know, we now have more FBI agents than we have Border
Patrol agents. So I don't know, again, Mr. King, what number,
what the magic number is either, but it seems to me whatever
the number is required to do the job, that is the number we
should aim at.
And as a former prosecutor, I have dealt with all kinds of
cases similar to the ones that have been described here today.
The issue of what reward or what incentive should be given to
people who assist is always a touchy one. I guess I should say
that we should not expect that offering some sort of immunity
or amnesty to people who inform on smugglers is going to end
alien smuggling. I mean, we still have drug smugglers, we still
have bank robberies, we still have people committing all kinds
of other crimes, and we have a number of incentives available
in those other areas of the law to promote or to incentivize
people to come forward to help. This is a big money deal. It is
big for everyone on all sides of the issue. So while we
certainly should look at ways to improve the prosecution and
investigation of these offenses, I don't think we should be so
optimistic that we think that is going to stop or smash these
alien smuggling rings. We haven't stopped drug traffickers by
using some of these same devices.
Thank you.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank you Mr. Nunez.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nunez follows:]
Prepared Statement of Peter K. Nunez
Thank you for inviting me to testify concerning ``The Deadly
Consequences of Illegal Alien Smuggling.'' The tragic deaths involving
the truck in Victoria, Texas, last month once again demonstrate the
deadly consequences arising from the complete failure of our current
immigration policy to deal with the chaos along our borders resulting
from illegal immigration.
My perspective on this issue is based on my experience over the
past thirty years, first as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorneys
Office in San Diego, California, from 1972 to 1988, then as the
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement at the Treasury Department from
1990 to 1993, and as a person who has lived on the border for most of
the past 40 years. I currently serve as a lecturer in the Political
Science Department at the University of San Diego, where I teach
courses in Transnational Crime and Terrorism, American Criminal
Justice, and the Politics of Immigration Policy. Finally, I have been
affiliated with a number of immigration reform organizations, and
currently serve as the chairman of the board of directors for the
Center for Immigration Studies here in Washington, D.C.
Unfortunately, deaths along the border related to illegal alien
smuggling are not a new phenomenon. It was not at all unusual for
people to die trying to enter this country along our southern border
during the sixteen years I served as a federal prosecutor in San Diego.
Deaths due to exposure to the elements, to traffic accidents, and to
the inhumane treatment received from smugglers were all too common even
during the '70's and '80's. It has always been a matter of the highest
priority for both the Border Patrol and the U.S. Attorneys offices
along the border to investigate and prosecute cases where a death was
involved. And I am aware of the extraordinary efforts that have been
made over the past ten years--since the inception of Operation
Gatekeeper in San Diego and Hold the Line in El Paso--by agencies of
both the United States and Mexican governments, to warn would-be
illegal aliens of the potential dangers they faced in trying to cross
the border illegally through the deserts and mountains.
Notwithstanding these efforts, deaths have continued to occur, and
will continue as long as we fail to control our borders and as long as
we cling to an outdated, failed, and disastrous immigration policy.
Because if we try to find the cause of these deaths, and if we are
trying to prevent them, then we need look no further then to the
unwillingness of the United States to reform its immigration laws in
light of the realities of the 21st Century.
Clearly criminal responsibility for these deaths can be laid at the
feet of the smugglers who left these poor people to die in the back of
a truck. It can also be argued that the illegal aliens themselves are
partly responsible for their own deaths, given their willingness to
risk harm by entering this country illegally, in violation of our
criminal laws. But the illegal aliens who attempt to enter this country
by putting their lives at risk, and the smugglers who feed off the
desperation of these people, are all reacting to a set of circumstances
that act as both ``push'' and ``pull'' factors in stimulating the flow
of immigrants from Mexico and the Third World to the United States. The
plain fact is that the huge disparity in economic conditions between
Mexico and the United States, as well as the abundant social services
available to immigrants once they arrive here, will compel people to
attempt the journey even in the face of danger and hardship.
So until Mexico is willing and able to deal with the ``push''
factors that force millions of its citizens to seek a better life in
the United Sates, and until the United States is willing to deal with
the ``pull'' factors that lure millions of poor people here from around
the world, we should expect that deaths among immigrants will continue
to occur. These deaths are not ``caused'' by law enforcement or by
efforts such as Gatekeeper and Hold the Line; the Border Patrol and the
INS have been the scapegoats, told to enforce the law, but not given
the resources needed to do the job correctly. What we need to do, at
least along the border, is to expand Gatekeeper and Hold the Line to
those trouble spots that now represent the biggest threats of illegal
entry. Just as the Border Patrol was doubled in size during the early
and mid-'90's to provide the resources needed in San Diego and El Paso,
now we must add however many more Border Patrol agents are needed to
close the remaining gaps.
But ``border control'' alone will never be enough. What is needed
is a comprehensive reform of our immigration policy designed to
eliminate all of the perverse incentives that continue to draw illegal
aliens to this country. If it is true that most immigrants--both legal
and illegal--come to this country to work, then it is essential to
finally enact an employer sanctions provision that works. Equally
important, however, is the need to reestablish an effective interior
enforcement mechanism designed to locate, arrest, and deport the 8
million-plus illegal aliens now living in the United States. For
nothing works as a better incentive for illegal aliens than the fact
that they know that no one will bother them if they are able to reach
the interior of the United States.
Beginning in the late 1980's, INS began retreating from their
historical and statutory mandate to locate, arrest, and deport those
illegal aliens who managed to evade the Border Patrol or INS inspectors
at our ports of entry, and those non-immigrants who originally entered
legally but who overstayed their visas. This abdication of the interior
enforcement function escalated during the '90's, and has all but
disappeared in the current environment. Only the horrors of 9/11 have
resulted in any effective interior enforcement, and that is aimed
solely at potential terrorists.
In fact, while the latest INS figures show a 75% increase in the
deportation of Arabs and Muslims (FY 2002 compared to FY 2001), the
same figures show an OVERALL DECREASE of 16% in the total number of
deportations. In FY 2002, 28,833 fewer deportations took place than the
preceding year; the biggest decline was among Mexicans, the single
largest national group, which saw a decline of 32,692 illegal alien
Mexicans.
So if you were a poor Mexican living in Mexico, you would know that
your chances of being caught crossing the border would be slight, and
even if you were caught, nothing bad would happen to you. There would
be no prosecution, and no other meaningful sanction to dissuade you
from attempting to enter illegally. And you would also know that once
you made it past the Border Patrol, you would essentially be home free,
that no one would be looking for you after you arrived at your
destination in the interior of the United States. And you would know
that there would be jobs available for you, even if you might be
cheated by your employer, that there would be some level of free
medical care for you and your family, free public education for your
children, and perhaps even some additional benefits for you and yours,
all at the expense of the American taxpayer.
Some states are also offering additional benefits for illegal
aliens. To make it easier for you to survive once you are here, some
states will allow you to get a genuine government ID card in the form
of a drivers license, which you can then use to obtain other indicia of
legality that will allow you to burrow deeper into the fabric of
America.
And to make sure that you aren't bothered, various state and local
governments have adopted policies that prevent state and local police
from participating in the effort to locate, arrest, and deport these
criminals, or of even cooperating with INS and the Border Patrol.
And in order to help American banks to make a profit, the Treasury
Department has authorized financial institutions to accept as valid
proof of identity documents such as the matricula consular, which will
enable illegal aliens to open bank accounts so they can more
conveniently send home to Mexico their share of the roughly $10 Billion
in remittances that flows south every year, which, indeed, explains the
zeal with which the Mexican government endorses and encourages its
citizens to break our laws by sneaking across the border illegally.
And what to make of the various other agencies of the federal
government that act in ways to make enforcement of our immigration laws
more difficult, that act in ways designed to subvert the
responsibilities of those assigned the task of enforcing our
immigration laws. We already know about the disconnects that exist(ed?)
between the State Department, the FBI, the CIA, and INS prior to 9/11
that prevented INS from even attempting to do its job properly. But
what about the more mundane business of the federal government, where
the Social Security Administration does nothing about the bogus-on-its-
face information it receives from employers demonstrating phony social
security account numbers, the failure of IRS and the Labor Department
to lift a finger to share information with INS that could be used to
identify illegal aliens and lead to their arrest and removal. How many
federal governments do we have? Why are not all agencies of the
government cooperating to assist INS in performing its duty, all of
which makes it infinitely easier for illegal aliens to avoid detection
and remain here for decades?
And we need to stop the talk of a coming amnesty, or of a guest
worker program, both of which, by themselves, serve to encourage
additional illegal immigration. What kind of message are we sending
when we dangle that possibility before people desperate enough to put
their lives at risk? Doesn't this kind of talk also indicate that we
really don't care much about law breaking, that we don't really care
that much about the rule of law that these immigration laws exist only
as a token objection to the violation of our sovereignty?
And finally, if you are able to avoid detection long enough, your
children will be allowed to enter a state college or university and pay
in-state tuition, unlike other law-abiding American citizens from out
of state who must pay a significantly higher amount.
Soon after 9/11, Attorney General Ashcroft quite appropriately
suggested that he wanted the state and local law enforcement
communities to assist the federal government in locating suspected
terrorists, all of whom, almost by definition, are here as immigrants
or non-immigrant guests. Somehow, then, we expect state and local law
enforcement to be able to distinguish between illegal aliens who might
be terrorists and illegal aliens who are only criminals because they
broke some other American law. At about the same time, the federal law
enforcement agencies began to round up illegal aliens who were from the
Middle East or who were Arabs, but not those from anywhere else in the
world. Law enforcement also began to locate, arrest, and deport illegal
aliens if they worked at airports or other high security locations, but
not of they worked in some other sector of the economy. We also became
concerned about those illegal aliens that worked at our military bases,
such as the U.S. Navy Submarine Base in San Diego, but not those
working outside the base. We even arrested and deported those illegal
aliens who had the misfortune of working as limo drivers for the NFL
Super Bowl held in San Diego this past January. But all other illegal
aliens--most of the 8 million-plus who are here--have nothing to fear,
because no one cares that they are here, and no one is doing anything
about it. If that is not an incentive for illegal immigration, nothing
is.
One last point about deaths relating to illegal immigration. We
should be as concerned about the deaths (and other violent crimes)
caused BY illegal aliens as we are about the deaths of illegal aliens
that occur during the course of their own volitional acts of illegally
entering this country.
On June 13 of this year, Oceanside Police Department officer Tony
Zeppetella, age 27, was gunned down and executed by one Adrian Camacho,
described as ``an Oceanside gang member with a history of violence and
drugs.'' (San Diego Union-Tribune, June 20,2003) What the news article
does not report is that the defendant has been convicted on numerous
felonies, and has previously been deported as an illegal alien! Too bad
the Oceanside Police Department and the San Diego County Sheriff's
Office were not interested in illegal aliens. Too bad that the INS in
San Diego does not have an effective program designed to locate,
arrest, and deport illegal aliens. Maybe if they did, Officer
Zeppetella's widow and six-month-old child would not be suffering today
over their loss.
Or take the recent case from Northern California involving the
kidnapping (and who knows what else) of a 9-year-old girl, who,
thankfully, survived her ordeal. Her kidnapper? Another illegal alien,
who was able to hide in plain sight, due in part to the policy of the
San Jose Police Department to look the other way with regard to
immigration violators. And of course the INS has no program to fulfill
its statutory duty to locate, arrest, and deport illegal aliens.
So as we mourn the deaths of those who voluntarily decided to break
our criminal law by entering this country illegally, let's also save a
little compassion for those who become the victims of illegal aliens,
with the full complicity of the federal government and state and local
law enforcement agencies that have decided to look the other way.
The bottom line is that this Congress has to end the chaos of our
past and present immigration policy, and put in place serious reform
efforts that will enhance the ability of the new INS to do its job. We
must, as a country, stop sending a mixed message to the downtrodden of
the world that we will leave you alone if you have the courage and the
ingenuity to make it past our borders. The federal government must use
all of its resources to attack this problem comprehensively. The state
and local governments must be brought into the effort, and any and all
incentives dangled by state and local governments must be ended. Only
by turning off the magnets that provoke this lawlessness can we ever
stop the chaos at the borders that results, unfortunately, in the loss
of life.
Mr. Hostettler. Ms. Jimenez.
STATEMENT OF MARIA JIMENEZ, CHAIR, MAYOR'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FOR THE OFFICE OF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE AFFAIRS, CITY OF
HOUSTON, TX
Ms. Jimenez. I would thank the Committee for the
opportunity to address you, and particularly Congresswoman
Sheila Jackson Lee, who made an effort that we be here to
articulate the perspectives of immigrant communities in the
United States and the problem of commercial enterprises that
are contracted in order to enter this country without
Government authorization.
As I have stated in the written testimony, immigrant
communities throughout this country are very well aware of the
risks of crossing the border. Death has been part of the
experience throughout decades in the journey to the United
States. It was part of what the Irish experienced, it was part
of what is experienced in the Caribbean, and it is part of what
people experience crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. They have
become more numerous as it has become more difficult to enter
legally, and as well as fortification has made necessary the
use of smugglers, where 10 years ago--and those are studies by
Douglas Massey at the University of Pennsylvania--10 years ago,
persons walked in alone. Now, given the fortification of the
border, this has consolidated multinational, multibillion
business operations to have people come into the country.
The house that we saw, it is very common in immigrant
communities. We know of them. We know of the people who, when
persons reach their destination, are quickly let call the
relatives, and then people are freed within a matter of hours
as they pay the sums required by the smugglers. Occasionally,
there are those who kidnap and engage in other activities. But
it is usually, again, known throughout the community and those
type of enterprises are no longer accessed.
The different risks involved in these operations are well
known in immigrant communities. Immigrant communities also know
where to access people who can cross a person safely into the
United States. The fact that we have millions of people who
have done so are testimony to that. The recent study by the
University of Houston in which Salvadoran immigrants were
questioned, for instance, showed that in order to cross women,
who are not authorized by the government to cross, Salvadoran
families access known people who engaged in these enterprises
who guarantee safety for women as they cross the border.
So one of the things that I think you have to understand is
that, from the immigrant perspective, these type of enterprises
are a necessary evil given the limited options of crossing
legally into the United States. I often refer to my own
personal experience, my grandfather when he crossed in 1912,
went to the bridge and in the State of Coahuila, simply paid a
nickel in crossing over. He crossed legally. My father sits
watching television and he says, ``I don't understand it.'' he
said, ``Why don't people--the United States Government just
require that people pay $1,000. It would go to the U.S.
Treasury instead of going to the smugglers.'' that is, there is
a real essence here in understanding that people know of these
commercial operations, access them, and understand the risks
that are undertaken. But the risks that people know of are
minimum to the need to migrate and to search for the well-being
of themselves and their family.
Now, we believe that the human costs of migration can be
reduced by expanding and making more flexible avenues for legal
migration. In no means are we calling for open borders. We
understand, as international law so describes, that nations
have the sovereign right to determine who enters and stays and
under what conditions people are made members of a society. But
we believe that, especially in the relationship to Mexico,
there is a very true need to look at ways that people can
migrate legally, and that is a matter that will definitely put
a tremendous dent on these operations and the need for people
to access them.
We also believe, in our experience, that the human cost of
migration can be reduced by developing provisions to encourage
persons to come forward. I gave a specific example, 2 years
ago. I had a family, three members from a small town in Mexico
had died in a railroad car near Victoria, TX. And I went to the
apartment house where the family member lived, where many of
the townspeople lived, and no one wanted to come forward,
simply because the person who brought them over belonged to the
town, and people were unwilling to risk their safety in order
to turn this person in. So how can we provide mechanisms that
will provide an incentive and at the same time be able to ask
people to come forward, and hold accountable those commercial
enterprises that do not deliver the services as contracted, as
understood by the community.
The human cost also of these illicit commercial enterprises
can be reduced by increasing public education as to the
penalties, especially the fact that people can receive the
death penalty when these operations go wrong. I think that
many--in the case of immigrant communities, many people have
been doing this for decades. And many, as I have stated in the
example before, are from small towns. So there isn't an
understanding that there are serious liabilities. And this may
also dissuade people from engaging in them in terms of entering
into the probability of these commercial enterprises.
In sum, this is our testimony, and, again, we thank the
Committee. And we hope that this will be the beginning of a
dialogue to look at ways that we can bring sense to our
immigration policy in making it more congruent with the reality
of integrated international economy.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank you, Ms. Jimenez.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Jimenez follows:]
Prepared Statement of Maria D. Jimenez
My name is Maria D. Jimenez. I am currently Chair of the Mayor's
Advisory Committee for the Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs of
the City of Houston. Houston is the fourth largest city in the nation;
twenty-eight percent of its population is foreign-born. I myself am an
immigrant from Mexico and a naturalized citizen of this nation for the
last thirty-four years. I now live and work in one of the oldest
Mexican immigrant neighborhoods in the city.
In my professional life, I have worked with many community-based
organizations in documenting human and civil rights violations in the
enforcement of immigration law in border areas and other immigrant
communities in the last sixteen years. In my current capacity as a
human rights consultant, I am working with several non-profit
organizations on establishing human rights training programs for
targeted immigrant population groups in Houston, Texas.
Both professionally and personally, I have interacted with
immigrant and refugees who have survived and been victimized commercial
enterprises that move them across the border without government
authorization.
From these experiences, the following conclusions may be drawn:
The risks of crossing the border without documentation are
well known in immigrant communities.
Jesus Galvan first entered the United States from Mexico as a
bracero or guest worker in the early 1950's. At the end of this
program, he continued crossing, but without documentation to work in
agriculture in Arizona and later, in light manufacturing in Los Angeles
and Houston. He became a permanent resident during the legalization
program authorized by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.
He became a US citizen in 1997.
In the course of his travels to and from his native Colima, he
narrates stories of death and injuring in a perilous journey to evade
immigration authorities. He talks about the death of a cousin who
traveled with him in the late fifties and of the dangers of sleeping
night at night in rattlesnake infested fields. He has known of many
incidents of bodies spotted on route to destinations of work or
settlement. It was no surprise to Mr. Galvan when the University of
Houston's Center for Immigration Studies on ``Death at the US/Mexico
Border'' in March of 1997 released its studies of deaths of migrants
crossing the US-Mexico border. He, like many others from sending
communities in countries in Central America and Mexico, can attest to
friends, family members and other migrants dying as they move
clandestinely to worksites and hopes of providing a better life for
themselves and their families.
He, like many others, can attest to groups being left by ``guides''
to wander on their own. He, like many others, can attest to family
members, friends or neighbors held captive until they paid smugglers
for their release. He, like many others, can attest to family members,
friends or neighbors who have never again been heard from once they
started on route to join family or to seek employment. He, like many
others, relate the to numerous incidents of deaths, kidnappings, rapes
and other violations of human rights and dignity now frequently
reported on the myriad of Spanish-speaking media, and now more
frequently, by English-speaking media. It is a phenomenon integral to
the clandestine movement of persons across international borders. It is
a fact of life for many immigrant communities throughout the United
States.
The networks of persons who can cross persons without
government inspections are known and accessed by
immigrant communities.
Persons who transport those unable to enter with government
authority are known in immigrant communities in the United States, on
the border and in hometowns. Some are relatives or other townspeople.
Others are individuals who will provide this service on recommendations
of previous customers. Some are offering their services in particular
places in border towns. Some are linked to legitimate businesses like
immigrant transport companies. Some are tied in to other illicit
businesses like the drug trade or organized crime. All have grown,
flourished and consolidated as avenues for legal migration reduced due
to changes in law and border enforcement resources and strategies
increased and received impetus by the policy decisions to stop
undocumented migration in the last decade.
Andrea Delgado, a legal immigrant in Houston, heard from others in
the neighborhood of a group of coyotes or smugglers in Brownsville that
could cross her 42-year-old brother from Hidalgo, Mexico; he was
finding it increasingly difficult to support his wife and five
children. She contracted their services and told her brother to wait
for the contact at the bus station in Matamoros. Her brother called her
in Houston as soon as he arrived; he told her he carried the four
hundred dollars she had sent him to pay the smugglers.
This was November 1988; to date the Delgado family has made
extraordinary efforts to find an answer to their brother's whereabouts
both in the United States and in Mexico. They have spent an astonishing
amount of time and money to attempt to locate him in the Rio Grande
Valley. Throughout the years, they have paid lawyers and investigators
who called them to say that reports of their brother/son have been
spotted. They have met with numerous laws enforcement officials on both
sides of the border and none has taken them seriously, even when they
filed complaints containing the addresses of the remaining members of
the smuggling ring. In 1993, a few of the leaders of the smuggling
operation were jailed for drug trafficking. On many occasions, the
family and/or Andrea have been threatened by the smugglers for
continuing their search.
Yet many immigrants contract persons who can safely transport
family members. Amelia Perez needed her son to be with her after she
found stability in selling cosmetic products in Houston. She traveled
to the border and made sure the smuggler would be one to transport her
son in a vehicle and not walk him through the dry desert lands. She
found one that immigrant networks in Houston said was tied into
``immigration authorities who looked the other way.'' Her son arrived
safely and now works in a trucking company on the docks of the ship
channel.
For many in immigrant communities, the necessity of finding a
decent life for themselves and their families, joining family members
already in the country and/or escaping political repression makes
crossing the border an enterprise that is fundamental to their survival
as human beings. Risks and hardships are possible, but in general, most
understand that smugglers are businessmen and few expect to come across
those that may fail to meet the terms of service as contracted. They
have the experience of family, friends and communities that reinforce
that most clandestine crossings are safe; the risks are less than the
want and suffering at home.
The factors driving people to migrate in these conditions outweigh
known risks and costs in immigrant communities.
Agapito Jaime is a permanent resident who works on remodeling
homes. Many in his hometown now live and work in Houston. In 2000,
three young men on their way to join other townspeople died in a locked
railroad car near Victoria, Texas, the city of the recent, tragic
incident in which 19 immigrants lost their lives. Families of the town
were unwilling to cooperate with the police; they knew the smuggler who
had locked them in and was responsible for their death and dehydration.
They feared coming forward; they feared for their safety and those of
the families back home. Others acted to protect the smuggler from
prosecution.
No one was ever brought to justice. It simply became another story
of the town immigrants. All knew that they must continue to migrate and
simply accepted the incident as another story of the townspeople. It is
simply explained as a trip that went bad.
From these experiences, the following recommendations are placed for
your consideration:
The human costs of migration can be reduced by expanding
and making more flexible avenues for legal
migration.
The orderly migration of persons and financial disincentives for
clandestine operations can be achieved by expanding and making more
flexible laws that ensure legal migration. People would not migrate
illegally if the could do so legally. The adoption of measures that
coincides with the reality of the movement of people in an ever,
interlocking global economy has to be made congruent. An overhaul of
our immigration laws to give that congruency is urgently needed. A few
important aspects are: (1)a legalization program that can grant
permanent residency of those already here without government
permission; (2) changing those aspects of current law that impede the
adjustment of status creating obstacles to legalization; (3) permitting
individual waivers for transgressions; (4) a temporary program for
workers that guarantee a workers choice of employer, fair employment
protections, labor rights and options of permanent residency; and
(5)finally increases in allocation of resources for expediting legal
migration and family reunification petitions.
The human costs of migration can be reduced by developing
provisions to encourage persons to come forward and
assist in the investigation and prosecution of
human commercial smuggling enterprises.
A safe space for persons who are victims of commercial smuggling
operations that endanger lives has to be created by legal measures to
protect persons and their families, who come forward with information
and/or as witnesses. Working permits leading to permanent residency
will increase the stakes for immigrants who otherwise feel that they
gain little by not informing authorities of these situations,
especially if they know these are tied to larger, criminal activities.
Visas to allow families to also join their loved ones and be protected
from harm are also important. Working will give the incentive to await
the long period required by the investigation and prosecution of those
involved in these criminal enterprises.
The human costs of these illicit commercial enterprises
can be reduced by increasing public education of
the penalties for death and injury of persons
transported by under these circumstances.
The multi-billion dollar enterprises that profit from the
clandestine movement of human beings across international borders must
be held accountable for placing persons who have contracted their
services in danger. Anyone who engages in these activities must have
clear knowledge that actions leading to death or serious injury is
unacceptable and that these unlawful actions carry with them serious
penal consequences. Many town ``guides'' to ``coyotes'' have operated
relatively unencumbered by law enforcement consequences for decades.
Heavier penalties for the serious injury or death of those in transport
need to be publicize to dissuade persons from engaging in crossing
human beings illegally and/or placing their lives at risk. Knowing the
degree of punishment may dissuade and prevent persons from engaging in
this illicit activity or at least, to act more responsibly in carrying
through on their services.
In conclusion, persons take the risk of entering without government
authority in the hopes of bettering their lives and those of their
families. The choice to move for the opportunity of improving one's
well-being in a stronger economy or a more open society is made by
individuals responding to the driving forces of labor needs in an ever,
integrating international economy. The shortcomings of current
immigration law and policy that create obstacles to an orderly, safe
and legal movement of people across international borders to resolve
these labor market needs frame the context for increasing, the
profitability for international commercial enterprises to move persons
clandestinely across borders. In the equation, human life, rights and
dignity are subordinated to profit. It is time to take the profit
motive out of this illicit activity. It is time to provide legal
alternatives of moving across international borders. It is time to
reclaim life, dignity and rights for all persons.
Mr. Hostettler. We now go to a round of questions for 5
minutes. The Chair recognizes himself for 5 minutes.
I would like to begin with you Mr. Nunez. You make an
interesting point near the conclusion of your testimony, and
you put this discussion into some context. And as the father of
four, this is difficult for me to fathom this, the depth of
this tragedy, but even more so the point that you make in that
you point out that those that subject themselves and their
families to this process, do so voluntarily. And that Mr. Homan
made a distinction in his testimony between smuggling and human
trafficking, in that human trafficking has elements of force
and coercion that is not present, to a great extent, in
smuggling. Is that not true? Is that not true that the
individuals that put themselves this situation to be smuggled
in the manner we saw in the film and in the manner that
resulted in the tragedy in Victoria, TX recently, do so
voluntarily.
Mr. Nunez. Absolutely. They are desperate people,
obviously. They are driven by various forces or attracted by
various forces or both. They want to leave where they are, and
they want to come here, but they make that calculation. It is a
calculation. I think all of us, in one way or another, have
recognized that the risk is known, it is voluntarily
undertaken, but the volunteers, they certainly aren't hoping
that something bad will happen to them in the process of it,
but, yes, they volunteer, because they realize that if they can
get past the border, they are home free. And I think the main
point of my testimony is that our immigration policy is so
dysfunctional beyond the border because we basically do nothing
about the 8 million plus that are already here, everyone in
Mexico or Central America, they know that. They know if they
can get past the border they are home free. They will get a
job, no one is going to bother them. The police won't look for
them. The INS or the new INS, BICE, there is no real interior
enforcement capability. If they are lucky, their kids will get
a free education, they will get medical care, they will get
public benefits, they will get driver's licenses, they will get
college aid, in-State tuition. We have laid out a potpourri of
benefits that people in the Third World recognize. So, yes, I
will volunteer to take the risk, because I know that the reward
is tremendous if I can survive.
Mr. Hostettler. You make another point in your written
testimony speaking to the issue once you get here, you are
``home free'' in your words. You say the following, quote, and
we need to stop the talk of a coming amnesty or a guest working
program, both of which by themselves serve to encourage
additional illegal immigration. What kind of message are we
sending when we dangle that possibility before people desperate
enough to put their lives at risk, end quote.
Do you effectively equate the result of discussion of
amnesty with the result of a discussion of a guest worker
program with regard to the attraction of illegal immigration
and those willing to put themselves and their families in this
risk?
Mr. Nunez. There are some differences. Obviously, amnesty
is the brass ring. That is the best benefit you can get. Guest
worker, we have a guest worker program now, but nobody wants to
use it. The immigration policy, the immigration law in United
States provides a number of ways for employers to import
workers. Employers don't want to do it because it is easier to
hire illegals. So why another guest worker program? We already
have guest worker programs for farmers, for any industry.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank you. Agent Garza, is it correct, as
some have done, to Blame Border patrol policies for aliens
dying while trying to cross the border illegally, in your
opinion?
Mr. Garza. In my opinion, absolutely not. The Border Patrol
is like any other law enforcement agency. When we see a
problem, we address it. Naturally, when our strategy calls for
moving our resources forward and stopping the flow, the alien
or the smugglers will move to other areas and in those
instances, it is the smugglers, not the Border Patrol agents,
that put these people in jeopardy. As far as the risks are
concerned, sometimes the aliens must not know the risks, but
the smugglers know the risks, and the Border Patrol has been
involved in these Border Safety Initiatives since 1998. We are
the most proactive agency in addressing the issues of border
safety, more than any other agency on either side of the
border. We have this public information campaign. Recently,
after the tragedy in Victoria, those handbills that we are
passing out to the truck drivers, trying to discourage them by
educating them as to the consequences of illegal aliens, public
service announcements that we have had aired in the Republic of
Mexico, Central America. And the Border Safety Initiatives such
as the 1-800 numbers, training our people to respond to
emergencies and just working, even working with the Mexican
Government to raise the awareness every which way that we can
think of.
In my sector with the boat patrol, we were one of the first
sectors that started patrolling the river 24 hours a day. Our
agents are not there in the middle of the river in boats to
arrest people. They are there to talk to them on the loud
speaker if they are going to enter illegally or to rescue them
they should fall into distress. That is the only time our boat
patrol people will try to touch an alien. Because we don't want
to cause them any harm. But the Border Patrol is very active in
this area. And absolutely not, I don't think the Border Patrol
is to blame for these tragedies.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank you, Agent Garza. The Chair now
recognizes the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Jackson Lee, for 5
minutes.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank to you all
the witnesses who have presented us challenges today that I
think we can work together.
Let me raise questions that I hope will work with helping
Mr. Garza and Mr. Homan. And Mr. Homan, being part of the
investigation, we appreciate the work that was done. That was
enormous tragedy. It impacted not only the victims, the
immediate victims who lost their lives, but certainly many of
their families have legal status here in the United States.
One of the issues that I have come across is the ability to
really go after, as you have indicated, the smuggling rings, to
really go after these commercial rings for whatever purposes
they may be organized. And I notice that your testimony talks
about the overarching, antismuggling-human trafficking strategy
requires intelligence-driven investigations against major
violators. So you need information; is that not correct?
Mr. Homan. Well, under the new agency, ICE brought to bear
the new integrated and unique authorities from customs, legacy
INS, Federal Protective Service and Air Marine Interdiction.
They all have intelligence branches. All those branches are
being coordinated, all the information is being shared.
Ms. Jackson Lee. So you need to receive information that is
my question?
Mr. Homan. Right.
Ms. Jackson Lee. If we had legislation that would provide
extra incentives to those victims, to help smash the rings, as
I think Ms. Jimenez indicated that she went to an apartment,
and first it was fear, and then they began to provide
information, would that be helpful in your operations if you
could get the family members and even the victims to come
forward, provide a close contact information right away, would
that be helpful?
Mr. Homan. Well, in some cases, the family members do come
forward now. For instance, in Victoria the Mexican-American
community was outraged. Many families came forward through the
Mexican----
Ms. Jackson Lee. But extra incentives, would that help
others who may not have been involved in such a terrible
tragedy come forward?
Mr. Homan. Yes.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Homan. Mr. Garza,
I understand that there is a memo from the Department of
Justice that indicated that there was a utilization in February
of 2002 of some unique technology, AVIAN, I believe it is the
Advance Vehicle Integration and Notification, has to do with
sensoring the heart beat, it is technology that has come from
the Department of Energy, where this equipment would be able to
sensor human life inside these large--and I saw the large 18-
wheeler, huge, obviously with no ventilation. Is that the kind
of technology are you suggesting in the work that you do at the
border? When I say you are suggesting, would additional
technology help you? We are looking at technology. I am a
Member of the Homeland Security Committee that has been to the
northern border. We have been to the southern border, at least
I have. And I notice that these are busy borders. These are
enormous borders. And so we want to ask the question whether
additional resources and technology in your hands, would that
help you detect human cargo, would that not be helpful to you?
This indicated that this technology was used in an
experimental fashion on February 7th and 8th in 2002. It may
not have come to your attention, but it has to do with being
able to use this sensor equipment without even opening the
cargo, but being able to do so on the basis of suspiciousness.
Mr. Garza. Thank you, Ms. Jackson Lee. And absolutely, that
technology would help us. I am not familiar with this
particular technology that you are talking about. At our
checkpoints, we are pressed with high volumes of traffic. We
have about 15 seconds per vehicle. That is always a concern
about how much time you take to look at a vehicle. On top of
that, we have to comply with the laws of search and seizure. As
you know, our check points are not equivalent of the border. So
we have to do things according to the rules. Since the tragedy,
and now that we are the Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection, the McAllen Border Patrol Sector has been using
vehicle cargo inspection machines, x-ray machines that the
Customs Agency Service was using at the ports of entry.
Ms. Jackson Lee. So the greater technology would help you?
The only reason I am asking you that question is it would help?
New resources?
Mr. Garza. No question about it, Congresswoman Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me ask you on the issue of incentives
for those that would help provide with you information. Because
you are the law enforcement, you are on the ground, even though
you are at the border, but you provide information as well,
would that not provide you a greater opportunity to get this
information, help smash those rings?
Mr. Garza. Yes.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me just to Ms. Jimenez, Mr. Chairman,
if I may. The days after the tragedy dealing with Victoria, and
you have seen many tragedies, and we appreciate the leadership
have you given to the City of Houston as the Chairman of the
City of Houston Advisory Committee on Immigration and Refugees,
in seeing that, what is the key that you gleaned from these
individuals coming across the border? And the vulnerabilities
that they may face? How many families did have you to deal with
who suffered a great loss because of the tragedy that occurred
to their family members?
Ms. Jimenez. In these particular cases, we deal with them
on almost a daily basis. They are not new to immigrant
communities. This one was very tragic because so many families
were involved. I would like to just put in perspective the
situation of the well-being and the responsibility that we do
have as a society toward ensuring that people's lives are
protected. I hear that, well, it was people, it was their
choice to engage in this activity. We can say the same of
teenagers who are involved in car accidents, or we can say the
same of women who choose to be in abusive relationships with
their spouses. Nonetheless, as a society and the United States
Constitution, we search for the well-being of persons within
our borders. And the 14th amendment guarantees those
protections to all persons. And so in that sense, I did want to
put that in perspective. And in dealing with these tragedies on
a daily basis because we do so and have done so over many, many
years, families, you know, it was a bad trip. It is a
commercial enterprise. It is a necessity to contract these
services so that is what people say. It was simply a bad trip.
They do want the person held accountable.
The only way I can relate it to you is when a business
operation, for instance, restaurants doesn't put its food at
the right temperature and all the people in the restaurant
become sick and maybe some even die, there is a call for
accountability of that business person, there is a call for
accountability within the community for those people, but that
doesn't mean people won't go back to the restaurant, doesn't
mean people won't engage with another person hoping that this
time this trip will be a safe one. And I can't stress this,
that is why I congratulate Mr. Flake and his colleagues for the
bill that they have developed because I think it recognizes the
reality, that integrated relationship, in terms of labor
markets in Mexico, in the United States and Canada, at least in
the three countries.
And the families, like all families in such situations, do
go through the suffering that any human being does when there
is a loss of life. But the family will recuperate and others
will come.
Ms. Jackson Lee. You think that financial incentives or
incentives would help give families more opportunity and
encouragement to give information, smash these rings?
Ms. Jimenez. I believe that they will help more than the
financial incentives, I believe that the incentives are with
respect to the ability to make a living legally, as they a----
Ms. Jackson Lee. Access legalization.
Ms. Jimenez. As they wait the--because they are long
trials. They have to work. This is one of the problems that is
happening with the survivors of the Victoria, increasingly they
want to work. That is why they came, they have a need to
support families back home and families here, some of them
lived here. And then the other issue, of course, is simply how
to deal with other people. One of the recent cases in Houston,
maybe 2 weeks ago, was a safe house in my own neighborhood a
few blocks from where I live, in which the 29 people who were
freed from that particular safe house are now in quarantine
because they had chicken pox. So now, these people are frozen
in terms of their ability to earn a living and at the same time
to be able to be useful as witnesses for the Government.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the Chair for indulging me. That
is the same legislation that we have dealing about earning
access to legalization that I am writing as well.
Mr. Hostettler. I thank the gentlelady. The Chair now
recognizes the gentleman from Arizona for 5 minutes, Mr. Flake.
Mr. Flake. Thank the Chair. Thank the witnesses. Mr. Homan
and Mr. Garza, whoever is first on this, when someone is caught
coming across the border, they are taken and their
identification is taken down through the Ident system, as I
understand it. With the average person that is caught, how many
times have they tried previously to come across? I am told that
there are records of some who have tried dozens and dozens of
times who are apprehended sometimes and how many times are they
caught and simply taken back across as opposed to actually
prosecuted?
Mr. Garza. Thank you, Mr. Flake. It depends on the
situation. I cannot give you an answer as three times or four
times or five times. It would depend on the situation and the
particular sector that you are operating in. If it is an
aggravated case, somebody who has been a difficult person to
apprehend, he could be set up for a prosecution or a
deportation. Sometimes it is you just catch somebody, he is
just an illegal entrant, he hasn't entered in 2 years or a
year, and he enters again or a span of time maybe five times,
we will set him up for a prosecution or even a deportation
hearing. But I can't give you a specific answer, sir.
Mr. Flake. If you looked at your sector and looked at the
records on the average, how many times would each person have
been apprehended?
Mr. Garza. I would say probably about six times.
Mr. Flake. Mr. Homan, are there any figures on--I know we
have figure on number of apprehensions per day and per month in
each sector, and we run those against what happened last year
and what not, what kind of figures or estimate do we have about
the number of apprehensions, as opposed to number of successful
entries if you will, for every person apprehended? How many
people come across and are not apprehended in some of the
sectors you are familiar with?
Mr. Homan. I would have to refer that question to Chief
Garza because they track the number of border crossings.
Mr. Flake. Mr. Garza.
Mr. Garza. I am sorry, Mr. Flake, would you repeat the
question?
Mr. Flake. For every person that is apprehended, what are
the figures on the people that cross successfully or are not
apprehended, for every person are there two people that come
across successfully or is it .5, .25? Mr. Garza, I know you
can't be precise. I know there are some figures out there.
Mr. Garza. Yes, sir. That is almost an impossible question
to respond to because not all our border is under control. In
areas where the border is under control or where we think we
have an acceptable level of control, such as in Brownsville,
TX, where we have the human resources and the technology, and
we patrol on a routine basis and check for tracks at the known
crossings and things like that, I could probably say 92
percent. But there are isolated areas such as the west part of
my sector, Rio Grande City, and up in those areas where we are
not totally staffed that I could never tell you how many are
getting away from us. It is a very, very difficult question,
and all I could ever do is give you an educated guess.
Mr. Flake. In your opinion, Mr. Homan's as well, would it
be useful to have a relief valve of some type, where individual
workers who want to come across, willing workers to come across
and then return home, where they are getting legal entry, there
is a legal framework for them, would it make life easier for
you actually targeting those who want to come across
extralegally or outside of the system?
Mr. Garza. Are you asking about a guest working program,
sir?
Mr. Flake. Yes.
Mr. Garza. We already have a system by which people can
enter the country such as tobacco farmers, and some of the
States I understand that they import foreign labor and things
like that. I think--I don't know exactly. I think the difficult
thing would be to know how many of these people are you going
to let in. But of course it would always be good if you knew
who was entering. That is the problem for illegal immigration,
you don't know these people who are entering.
Mr. Flake. Mr. Nunez, you don't draw much distinction
between an amnesty and guest working program. I happen to think
there is a quite good distinction. If you have, as myself and
my colleagues are proposing, a temporary worker program where
those who are here illegally at present are disadvantaged,
assuming their ultimate goal is to become a citizen of this
country, are disadvantaged relative to those who apply for a
similar permit from their home country, be it Mexico or
Guatemala or elsewhere, is that not an incentive to actually
return home or not to cross illegally if it is a disadvantage
to be here illegally in terms of signing up for a guest worker
program?
Mr. Nunez. Well, I don't think an employer looks at it that
way. I think many employers want illegal workers. They don't
want guest workers because then they have to play by the rules.
And many employers don't want to play by the rules. They want
to underpay, mistreat, abuse the workers. So the guest worker
program will not appeal to at least that group of employers.
Mr. Flake. I would submit, just my time remaining, I would
submit that that is say very--there are certainly those, but
that is a small group. My experience has been that employers
out there are in legal no man's land. They are required to take
some identification to ensure that the person is here legally.
But they can't ask twice or they can't ask for too much for
fear of being sued. It has been my experience that employers
want to play within the rules. They would love to, but it is a
very difficult thing right now.
Mr. Nunez. If they wanted to play within the rules, they
could apply to bring in workers legally. The law currently
allows any employer to do this.
Mr. Flake. With all due respect, we do have some of those
programs, H-2-Bs, and some are specific to agriculture or high
tech industry. We don't have a large, comprehensive, portable
guest worker program.
Mr. Nunez. Then the solution would be to expand the, expand
the existing----
Mr. Flake. Or create a new categories.
Mr. Nunez. If you need new categories, but not just open
the door.
Mr. Flake. Thank you.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank the gentleman from Arizona.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. King,
for 5 minutes.
Mr. King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, I thank the panel
for your testimony. This has been interesting to listen here
today.
I direct my first question to Mr. Homan. First I want to
thank you for bringing the documentary on the immigrant
smuggling that is actually--seeing it makes a difference, so we
can see how that is done.
As I sit here and listen to this, it reminds me of the
Kunta Kinte, the series Roots. People are packed in, when they
get out, they can barely walk. So now slave ships from the
south is how I would describe it, in the form of pickup trucks
and people packed in like sardines. You testified that human
smuggling worldwide was about a $9.5 billion industry. Do you
know how much of that is related to the United States itself,
of that 9.57 billion?
Mr. Homan. No. I do not. A vast majority.
Mr. King. Really. So that would mean certainly over half.
So is it, could be conceivably $4 and a half to $5 and a half,
even more, billion?
Mr. Homan. I wouldn't have the exact figures. Smuggling
occurs globally in all countries, but the United States is by
far the most popular destination for smuggled aliens and
organizations.
Mr. King. Would that be a number that could you provide to
this Committee?
Mr. Homan. I could get back to you on that. I would have to
check on that.
Mr. King. I would think if that is a quantifiable number,
it would be broken down Nation to Nation or at least by
hemisphere. I would be very interested in that and ask you to
do that. Then the numbers that you have given us, and I see the
difference between 17 and 19, two died later in that particular
incident, do you have an estimate of the annual deaths due to
human smuggling coming into the United States?
Mr. Homan. Approximately 200 to 300 per year annually. I
believe Chief Garza in discussions with him yesterday has the
exact figure for the last couple fiscal years.
Mr. King. Two hundred to 300 is in the region. Then I don't
see Mr. Smith here, but I would credit this to him. As he
pointed out in previous hearings, 20 percent of our prisons are
populated by illegal aliens. Would you have any idea how many
American citizens are murdered on an annual basis by an
undocumented or illegal aliens?
Mr. Homan. I do not have the exact figures, but I can say
that criminal aliens pose a great risk to the citizens of this
country.
Mr. King. The equation of how many are seeking to enter
this country illegally versus how many citizens murdered by
those illegals is a legitimate evaluation of our policy.
Mr. Homan. Yes, sir.
Mr. King. Thank you very much, Mr. Homan.
Mr. Garza, yours was also very interesting testimony. And
the way you have utilized resources there in showing the
positive results. I particularly appreciate the technology and
the methods you have and also the tone that you presented this
with. The fact that you are not there necessarily to apprehend
but to warn and to take care of people. I think Mr. Flake may
have asked this question a little bit differently, but if we
provided those resources and you the authority for the entire
southern border, by what percentage illegal border crossings do
you think would be reduced?
Mr. Garza. That is a very difficult question. The border is
very long. We are responsible for the northern border and
southern border. In my area, the areas that I have under
control, I can tell you with some sense of certainty that
places like Brownsville, TX, we could have about 90 percent
effectiveness with the resources that we have there. But to try
to establish that type of control throughout the Mexican border
would be something very, very difficult. Regardless, I think
somebody would crack through the line, even if we had that many
resources.
Mr. King. Thank you very much. Mr. Nunez, as I listen to
your testimony, it struck me that you might be the person to
ask this question. That is if we continue on the current
policy, what does America look like to you at 25 and 50 years
down the road?
Mr. Nunez. Well, you look at the census projections and
again depending on what you want America to look like, we are
rapidly growing past all of the initial projections that the
census and demographers predicted back in 1970. So the impact
on air quality, water quality, you know, environmental issues,
how many people live in a certain area, I mean those--most
people don't want to live in a congested befouled environment.
So I am very concerned. Even at the number of legal immigrants
we are allowing in, I think it is way past what is in the
national interest at this time in our evolution as a country.
It is the highest sustained immigration in the history of the
country. We are not building transcontinental railroads, we are
not trying to settle the Middle West or fill up the western
half of the country, so I see no rational interest in what we
are currently doing.
And I think you can clearly make the case that the more
legal immigration you have, the more illegal immigration
results from that because people who come always leave somebody
behind. And not everybody can come legally, every year, so
whoever is left behind, now they have got an anchor in the U.S.
somewhere, so it just promotes more immigration. And it just
never stops. So we are clearly headed, I think, in the wrong
direction, and the America that I see down the road is an
overcrowded, unpleasant place to be.
Mr. King. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank the gentleman from Iowa.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr.
Gallegly, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Gallegly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I really appreciated the testimony of each of the
witnesses. I find it very interesting.
Ms. Jimenez, you have focused a great deal on an issue that
is a concern to everyone and that is the safety of people that
are illegally crossing the border; is that correct? That has
been a major concern of yours for a long time?
Ms. Jimenez. Yes. It has.
Mr. Gallegly. Would you----
Ms. Jimenez. Yes, that has been a major concern. It was our
work that asked the University of Houston to do the first study
of death at the border.
Mr. Gallegly. Would you say then that your concern has been
to look out for the safety of those that have illegally
crossed, illegal crossings and the all the potential danger
involved in that would it be safe to say that have you been one
of those campaigning aggressively to encourage people not to
illegally cross the border?
Ms. Jimenez. That I--none of us want to cross without
Government authorization. If people had an alternative----
Mr. Gallegly. Have you been aggressively outspoken in
discouraging people from trying to come into the country
illegally?
Ms. Jimenez. I think that anyone in the immigrant community
understands, and I myself understand, of the great dangers of
crossing----
Mr. Gallegly. Would you----
Ms. Jimenez.--without documentation.
Mr. Gallegly. Would you----
Ms. Jimenez. I don't think anyone, willingly, wants to
contract a smuggler, cross borders, deserts, mountains----
Mr. Gallegly. Ms.--Ms.----
Ms. Jimenez.--die in the desert or pack in the back of a
trailer.
Mr. Gallegly. Ms. Jimenez, would you say that the fact that
we have, as we know, millions of people that are in this
country illegally, and there is a notion out there, I think as
evidenced by the witnesses and general knowledge, that the
overwhelming majority of the people that once they get into
this country feel as though they are in a pretty safe position
because of the lack of interior enforcement or the will to
enforce our immigration, whatever that issue is, that this
provides a great incentive for people to take a chance to come
across the border; is that a safe assessment?
Ms. Jimenez. I believe that people understand that you live
in fear of an instability in the family and the community if
you know that Immigration and Naturalization Service will take
you at any moment. I can give you an example. A week and a half
ago my father and I were watching television, we had four
agents of the INS come into our home----
Mr. Gallegly. I think we know that is an exception rather
than the rule, that otherwise we wouldn't have 8 or 10 million
people illegally in the country. Would you say that the fact
that many people do believe that once they get here that the
biggest hurdle is over; is that a safe assessment?
Ms. Jimenez. Well, that is----
Mr. Gallegly. Yes or no.
Ms. Jimenez. Yes.
Mr. Gallegly. That being the case, would you say that it
would be very wise for to us have a very aggressive program to
remove those that are illegally in the country to remove that
incentive, to enforce the immigration laws of the country,
would you say that would be a bad or good idea?
Ms. Jimenez. If you wanted to have a police state, I think
that is correct. The Mexican community has gone through that
during the Depression, the repatriation program of the United
States in cooperation with the Mexican Government. Over half a
million people were repatriated to Mexico. And it is--there are
many stories of deaths of people----
Mr. Gallegly. We are----
Ms. Jimenez.--on the repatriation to Mexico.
Mr. Gallegly. So in other words, you are basically saying
you don't think that would be a good idea.
Ms. Jimenez. I think you should legalize people. People in
my community, in the immigrant community, when you ask them
what do we do with the undocumented, they rarely answer deport
them. Their answer is document them.
Mr. Gallegly. If you can illegally get into the candy
store, once you are there you should be able to take whatever--
--
Ms. Jimenez. I think you should have alternatives of coming
in legally as a first priority.
Mr. Gallegly. If you haven't done that and you have entered
illegally, do you think you should be removed and given an
opportunity to be processed legally?
Ms. Jimenez. I think you should have an opportunity,
demonstrated rewards.
Mr. Gallegly. After or before you have returned to your
native land?
Ms. Jimenez. I think we have a problem of people who are
already settled here. I know many people that who have been
here since 1977, and they still don't have legal documents.
Mr. Gallegly. People that were here in 1977 had the right
to apply for amnesty and go through the process, in fact, about
57 million people did that.
Ms. Jimenez. Not if--I can give you cases in Houston, not
if they were some shyster who said they would turn in their
papers and they didn't. So they missed that opportunity, not
necessarily because they didn't comply, but because having an
undocumented population is a big business for many, many people
and they are interested in keeping it that way.
Mr. Gallegly. Mr. Chairman, just for the record, may I ask
one short, hopefully, what hopefully will be a very quick----
Mr. Hostettler. Without objection.
Mr. Gallegly. Ms. Jimenez, I think it is commendable you
are an American citizen. You have pledged your allegiance to
this country as an immigrant. I would like to see everyone that
is legally in this country, aggressively, be willing to pledge
their allegiance to this country if they are here legally. If
they are here illegally, I think they should return to their
homeland. Could you share with the Committee, as an immigrant,
how you initially entered the United States?
Ms. Jimenez. My father entered legally in 1956. And he
brought our family legally into the United States in 1957. But
at that time, it was fairly easy for someone with my father's
skill, he is a machinist to quickly get his legal work done,
and it only took us a year of petitioning. Now, it take years
for a Mexican family to be reunited.
Mr. Gallegly. Mr. Chairman, I thank you, and I yield back.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank the gentleman from California.
The Chair will now entertain a second round of questions
and will yield to the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Jackson Lee,
who has an appointment elsewhere. So we wanted to facilitate
her asking questions.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Homeland
Security Legislation is on the floor, and I am on that
Committee, and I thank you very much for your, again, for your
indulgence.
Let me pursue. Ms. Jimenez, as you well know, we are
writing legislation, in particular, on trying to smash
smuggling rings and bring a real answer to this concern. The
Jackson Lee Legislation in particular has a provision that
deals with the new class of nonimmigrant aliens even the
ability to earn access to legalization. Would that be a viable
tool to deal with individuals who are not trying to come to do
harm to the United States, but, in fact, are coming to fill in
many of the gaps in the workforce that are here in this
country?
Ms. Jimenez. Legalization and permanent residency, for
those already here and in the future, is probably the most
effective method combating these type of operations. Even the
billions of dollars that are reaped by these commercial
enterprises could easily be reoriented toward the U.S. Treasury
because immigrants are willing to pay $1,500, $2,000, every
time they cross. And have demonstrated that they----
Ms. Jackson Lee. So that nonimmigrant status would be
helpful, in this portion of the bill that I am writing, would
be helpful?
Ms. Jimenez. Yes, that would be helpful.
Ms. Jackson Lee. And the incentives to provide to families
to provide information to the source, the actual source, the
culprits, would that be helpful as well?
Ms. Jimenez. It would provide an incentive for many people
to come forward that other wise don't.
Ms. Jackson Lee. If I might, I would ask to have an article
dated Sunday, June 17, 2003, in the New York Daily News, I
believe refugees still held captive by red tape. I would like
to ask unanimous consent to include this in the record.
Mr. Hostettler. Without objection.
Ms. Jackson Lee. It begins: Michael Chin vividly remembers
the Golden Venture as if it were yesterday. He will never
forget the rats, the rations and his thirst for freedom.
Michael Chin happened to be a Chinese-American, and he came in
on the infamous Golden Venture June 6, 1993. To date, Mr.
Chairman, Mr. Chin is married, and owns a restaurant that many
Americans are eating in in this part of this country. I think
the point should be made that the immigrants have come to serve
a working process or purpose. We understand our responsibility
to our borders and to our Nation, but we have got to find a
balance. Let me ask, Mr. Nunez, your history, knowledge of this
country, were we not built on the work and the influx of
immigrants in many ways?
Mr. Nunez. Certainly.
Ms. Jackson Lee. That is--I thank you very much. I want to
put that on the record. Let me go again to Mr. Garza. And
simply say that in the course of working on the Border Patrol,
as you well know, I have had legislation to increase
professional development, to provide more resources. And I
think with Chairman Rogers, formerly of the Committee that
deals with this and Ranking Member Serrano, all of us and
dollars have come to the Border Patrol, I think, and we have
tried to increase your numbers. In the course of seeing the
kind of individuals coming across the border, the southern
border, are these the kinds of individuals that--we must be
astute and learned--I am not disregarding that there are by and
large terrorists that are inclined to do harm to this Nation.
What are you finding in your work?
Mr. Garza. Ms. Jackson Lee, thank you. The majority of the
people that the Border Patrol encounters are economic refugees.
They are looking for a better way of life. However, we do have
a criminal alien situation. And in my sector, we are running a
pilot program with a system called IAFIS. And we are doing that
since January. We have had about 10,000 searches into this
program. We have hit on about 800 criminal aliens, but most of
the people that are coming in are coming in to look for a
better way of life. But we do have a criminal alien element
that is of great concern to many areas of our country.
Ms. Jackson Lee. So, therefore, if we were to provide you
legislation that would give you the added incentives, not you,
but added technology, as I have indicated in previous question
that you are not familiar with it, but it is in a Department of
Justice memo that this technology was used in an experimental
basis, I do know the timing question is an issue but I think
that with your expertise, you can tell the suspicious looking
18-wheelers versus the others. And then with laws that might
provide extra incentives to those who would give information to
help get at the source of the smuggling rings would be helpful
as we move to smash these rings?
Mr. Garza. This technology has been a great help, like
IAFIS and the extra machines such as are depicted in the
picture there, for checking those 18-wheelers are a big boost
to us, although those x-rays machines are not ours, they belong
to the Customs Agency Service. We are looking to try to acquire
them, and surely, they would increase our capabilities of doing
a better job.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me just close by saying that I know
that the Chair is familiar with this issue. I thank him for his
good work. I know that you are working with some of these
individuals who have suffered, but I wanted to acknowledge that
these were from China who were involved in this. They have
lived, I think, legally and respectfully here since 1993, and
they are trying to overcome red tape to get where they need to
be. But they are serving in their community, and they are
serving their country, frankly, and they love this country.
They simply want to be able to access legalization. These are
the kinds of problems that we need to try and solve. With that,
Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this very, very, I think,
effective hearing. Very instructive. Many of us will have
legislative initiatives that will be moving through the
Congress. We hope that they will be bipartisan legislative
initiatives that we can work on and ensure that we solve this
problem in a fair and just manner.
Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Hostettler. I thank the gentlelady.
The Chair now recognizes himself for 5 minutes.
Mr. Garza, a couple of times we have been talking about
technology today, as a result of Ms. Jackson Lee's questions,
and if you could, just briefly for the record, discuss and
describe the technology associated with the card that is up
here with the plate that we have.
Mr. Garza. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In the checkpoints that we operate in Falfurrias, Texas,
and Sarita, we have a tremendous volume of 18-wheelers that
come there on a daily basis. An 18-wheeler is nothing more than
a container on wheels. These vehicles are very, very difficult
to check. They are loud, they are high, and an officer cannot
look in the cab. Our dogs do a great job of detecting loads of
contraband that may be hidden anywhere on that 18-wheeler.
In this particular case, you are seeing some aliens up on
the air dam that we would probably not have caught unless we
had these x-ray machines that are presently on loan to us from
the port of entry. They belong to the Customs Service.
Now, we are the same agency. Because of the merger we were
able to get them to assist us and provide those x-ray machines
for us. They are doing a great job for us. But, in some of
those cases, I feel that if we did not have that technology we
probably would not have been able to make those cases.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank you, Agent Garza.
Mr. Nunez, there has been some discussion about the
incentivizing of individuals to help in the apprehension and
prosecution of smugglers and to destroy smuggling rings. The
folks at the Border Patrol, Agent Garza has supplied us with
some of the leaflets and other postings that have been done by
the Border Patrol with regard to disincentivizing those that
might take part in the process of smuggling illegal aliens into
the country; and that is available also as a card, as a placard
that is being displayed right now.
There are already incentives in the law to allow
individuals to help in the prosecution of and apprehension of
smugglers, prosecution of smugglers, and the destruction of
smuggling rings. Is that not correct?
Mr. Nunez. Well, yes, there are some. The biggest, I
suppose, incentive is that, at least for those people who are
themselves here illegally, there is the incentive that they
won't be prosecuted for having come here illegally or remaining
illegally. In fact, you know, during the 20 years of my time
prosecuting cases, we did not have that particular--the
proposed incentive, and we really didn't have any problem
prosecuting alien smuggling cases.
There is one other issue that you always have to deal with,
and we--again, we see this in drug cases and tax cases. That
is, that if you provide an incentive to a witness, that has to
be disclosed.
Now the jury is--and the defense attorney is obviously
going to try to impeach that witness by saying, well, you are
just testifying so that you will get amnesty;and it would be a
great fear that we would have to deal with, that people would
come forward--people that are here illegally would come forward
to point their finger at some neighbor that they didn't like,
saying, hey, this guy is a smuggler or he has been involved in
smuggling; now give me my amnesty.
So you have to figure out a way to make that incentive not
lead to perjury and obstruction of justice and other more
difficult problems.
Mr. Hostettler. Very good.
Ms. Jimenez, there has been discussion today about various
programs to normalize, regularize illegal immigrants into our
society and give them status. The Immigration Reform and
Control Act of 1986--I was not here during that process, but my
understanding is that there was a lot of discussion that it
would reform and control immigration and especially control
illegal immigration.
But, today, as we have heard testimony today, and the
statistics tells us that we have record levels of legal
immigration and we have record levels of illegal immigration;
and if we would pass legislation that would create some new
form of legalizing of those that are here in the country
illegally, isn't it--or isn't it our history that this would
not stop illegal immigration, that there would still be those
who would seek to enter the country illegally? And if we
charged people coming into the country, if the Government
charged them $1,500 to come here, then smugglers would charge a
thousand dollars to came here, and if we charged a thousand,
they would charge $750, and there would always be this
incentive for the illegal immigration process to continue? Is
that not right, given the history?
Ms. Jimenez. I think that if you also--beside the reform of
immigration law--look for ways to expand economic opportunity
in countries of origin--one of the things I think that is
usually missed, whether the immigrant is undocumented or not,
is that the person is also an agent of development in the sense
that the billions of dollars sent home build communities. But
they do not build them to the degree that we need to build them
in order to develop sustainable economies that will allow for
opportunities south of the border, if we are talking about
Latin America.
So I think that, coupled with that, and not just
immigration reform alone as a unilateral action, one can begin
to see that legalization does minimize the need for a smuggler
simply because you don't need to contract, you come in
perfectly without any problem. And I think that the reason that
smuggling rings particularly have consolidated into multi-
billion dollar operations at this point is because it is much,
much more difficult to cross borders.
Again, these are studies done by the University of
Pennsylvania. Doug Massey has studies on this issue. They were
not as necessary 10 years ago as they have become, because of
border fortification.
So legalization will ease that pressure, and I think
particularly the lead that many of the representatives in
Congress of Arizona have taken is because I think that they
have observed that, no matter how much we try to correct after
the incident happens, that there is a benefit in preventing it
from happening and that one of those avenues is mechanisms of
legal migration, whether they be temporary workers, as
described in the bill that Mr. Flake has, or permanent
residency, as the one that Ms. Jackson Lee has.
Mr. Hostettler. The Chair recognizes himself for an
additional minute.
I want to follow up. My question dealt mainly with
immigration into the country. The idea of bettering the
economic status of other nations is an issue of jurisdiction of
another Committee. My concern is immigration into the country.
The experience says that amnesty does not work, and I guess
what I should say is regularizing those that are here illegally
does not work. It, in fact, has created--I think the statistics
would show very easily that it has created an incentive to
expand illegal entry into this country.
So it sounds to me like what you are talking about is not
limited legalization of those that are here but a process
whereby there is essentially endless legal--and limitless legal
immigration into the country for anyone in the world that wants
a better life for themselves. Is that what you are suggesting?
Because we cannot control the issues of other countries,
their economic destinies, their political destinies, we are
asking--you are asking, you are suggesting limitless and
endless--and when I say endless, I mean no end with regard to
chronology or time period--immigration to our country until we
reach a critical mass where most--where everyone that wants a
job in the world can get and has gotten a job in the world in
the United States of America. Is that what I am hearing?
Ms. Jimenez. Well, if I understand from population studies
of the United Nations, the people--worldwide, the population
movements, the United States receives 1 percent of those
movements. So I think first we have to understand the
percentage that actually do move to this country.
Mr. Hostettler. If I can. And we constitute 4 percent of
the world's population. That means a 25 percent increase in the
population of the United States. So you are right with regard
to percentage of the world overall. You are correct. But with
regard to the growth of the United States itself, you are
suggesting and the United Nations is suggesting 25 percent
growth of the United States every year.
Ms. Jimenez. Well, I am not a population expert, so I
can't--I only know facts which are published and known and in
many testimonies I am sure that you have had before. But I
would like to sort of, as part of this dialogue, recommend that
we do engage in a more serious study as to the effects of
populations and economic growth.
One of the arguments that is always placed forth publicly
by one of our city council people and Mayor Pro Tem Gordon Quan
in Houston is that if you do take all of the population of the
United States and put them in California and Nevada, we still
do not have the density of the population that Japan has. Yet,
nonetheless, Japan has economic growth and development.
So there are different issues that perhaps I cannot answer
because I am not a population expert, but I think it is worth
exploring and dialoguing about to understand that relationship
between population growth and movement of people.
The case we are making is for the case of particularly the
population that is most--or when NINA says that 1.9 percent of
the people arrested for being undocumented are Mexican
Nationals, 97 percent of them are Mexican Nationals, that there
is at least a case for regulating the entry and exit of persons
between Mexico and the United States and Canada. It has already
been designed in terms of free trade agreements as partner
countries, and labor market integration should be one of those
goals.
Mr. Hostettler. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
Arizona, Mr. Flake, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Flake. I thank the Chair.
I think that--I appreciate the testimony of everyone here
and the perspective that each of you bring to this.
I think it is important that when we talk about
regularizing or we throw terms around like amnesty or guest
work or whatever that we be precise in what we mean by that.
The legislation that I and my colleagues have introduced or
will introduce very soon is not amnesty in any way, shape or
form.
Amnesty is saying that, if you are here, that we are going
to regularize you and make you legal or let you leap-frog over
others in the process to become a legal permanent resident and
thereafter a citizen.
The legislation that we contemplate, that we will
introduce, actually penalizes someone for being here illegally.
They have a tougher track to legal permanent residence and then
citizenship if that track is what they choose to take. So it is
actually a disincentive to be here illegally.
But we also recognize--and I think sometimes this is lost
on people--that not everyone who comes here wants to become a
legal permanent resident and thereafter a citizen. A good
portion of those who come here, particular from Mexico, simply
want to make life better for themselves in Mexico. They can
only do that by earning money and sending it home to their
families.
When we look at the figures, the long-term data, the
migration studies that been done--and I mentioned before we
used to have a largely circular pattern of migration. Those who
had come here stayed an average of 2.6 years. Now, because of
increased border enforcement, it is more difficult to come.
They stay an average of 6.6 years.
A good number--certainly there are people who come here who
want to become citizens. It is the American dream. A lot of
people want it. Others simply want to make a life better for
themselves in their home country and want to send money home to
do that. So I think we ought to look in totality and look at
the long-term history that we have with immigration and
recognize that not everything we associate with one group of
people applies to another, that there are differing needs that
migrants have.
Ms. Jimenez, I was interested in your testimony. Do you
see--if you have a policy, if you have a guest worker program
that does not give advantage to those that are here illegally
right now, if they are not advantaged by being here illegally,
do you see that as a way to encourage people to come over,
rather than apply for a similar type of work permit from their
home country, which would actually give them that advantage to
somebody who is here illegally?
Ms. Jimenez. It is difficult for me to answer that question
because I don't think immigrants or people who migrate think
of, I am going to move because there is going to be a
legalization program, and that is going to benefit me. People
move whether there is or there isn't. They will contract
smugglers in order to come.
There are other factors which motivate the people, the
reasons people come in or out. Now, immigrants have been
willing in the past to pay penalties such as the penalties by--
required by those in 245(i). They were significant amounts, a
thousand dollars per person; and they were willing to pay it
per person and family. So those practices are acceptable in
immigrant communities.
Is there an advantage? I think what we are saying is that
it doesn't make much sense to work out a temporary worker
program that does not include the protection of rights as well
as the option for legal permanent residency of those that are
not in the country if you already have so many within the
country that don't have legal status.
Again, I don't think this is the motivating factor for why
people migrate. That is the essence of criminality around
undocumented migration, is because the motivations are other
than legal status. Otherwise, if it was there, people would
access them; if they are not, people still come.
Mr. Flake. I want to associate myself with the comments
made by the Chair with regard to the Immigration Reform and
Control Act of 1986. I think it was an unmitigated disaster, in
that you granted amnesty and you encouraged people to came here
for that purpose; and that is why I think, moving ahead, we
need to distinguish. Like I said, words are important. We need
to make sure that we have policies that actually don't
encourage that but rather policies that recognize why people
want to came here.
I thank the Chair.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank the gentleman.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. King,
for 5 minutes.
Mr. King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The gentlelady from Texas made the remark that we have to
find a balance to this policy I was raised in a different
school, if something is wrong, it is wrong; if it is right, it
is right. Sometimes you can't balance between two opposing
positions, and this may be one of those. I mean, I can hear
clear divisions between this panel in the remarks made by the
testimony.
But she also asked the question pointedly, I think, of Mr.
Nunez that was this Nation built by immigrants? I heard an
answer in the affirmative. It was you, Mr. Nunez?
Mr. Nunez. Yes.
Mr. King. Thank you. So the question I would pose would be,
Ms. Jimenez, do you agree with that comment, that this Nation
was built by immigrants?
Ms. Jimenez. Yes.
Mr. King. Thank you. And then could you name me a nation
that was not built by immigrants?
Ms. Jimenez. I guess, previous to the greatest migration to
the Americas, the European migration, I suppose the Aztec
nation or the Inca nation.
Mr. King. They migrated across the Bering Straits,
according to any anthropologist.
Ms. Jimenez. Well, thousands of years earlier.
Mr. King. Thank you.
I will just go down the panel. Mr. Nunez.
Mr. Nunez. One modification to my answer. Basically, this
country was built on legal immigration; and I think that is a
huge distinction when we are talking about this particular
issue. We had no immigration laws really until 1882. Everybody
came legally. Then, even after that, most of the people
camelegally up until 1965.
Mr. King. While I have you, can you name a nation that was
not built by immigrants?
Mr. Nunez. No, I think Mexico is another nation--all of the
countries of the Western Hemisphere today, obviously, were
taken over or populated or colonized or--pick your word--by
European powers.
Mr. King. Thank you, Mr. Nunez.
Mr. Homan.
Mr. Homan. I do not know of any, sir.
Mr. King. Thank you.
Mr. Garza.
Mr. Garza. I don't know of any, sir.
Mr. King. Thank you.
I appreciate having that in the record, that none of us can
name a nation that was not built by immigrants. That is the
typical mantra that we hear over and over again is that this
nation was built by immigrants. It was. We need to respect and
appreciate the efforts and the contributions made by
immigrants. But it is world-wide phenomena, and no nation can
shed itself from that history. We need to construct a nation
that is built upon a wisdom that goes beyond that statement.
Let me see. Ms. Jimenez, you know, as I listened to your
testimony, you made some remarks, including ``that by no means
are we calling for open borders'' would be one of them; and
``that we respect the need to maintain sovereignty'' is another
one.
Some of your testimony seemed to be somewhat inconsistent
with those statements, so I would pose to you this question:
What, in your estimation, would be an appropriate number of
immigrants to allow into the United States through any means,
total, between legal and illegal immigration?
Ms. Jimenez. I leave that up to you. What we do know,
though, is that the current framework of immigration law
creates a great deal of obstacles for people in terms of
adjusting their status as well as in, like in my case----
Mr. King. However they come here, there are obstacles, that
is certainly true, and I think you have testified to that very
well. But how would you propose--if we have a legitimate
obligation and a right to maintain our sovereignty and control
our borders and have a limitation on immigration policy, which
I think we concur that is a logical thing, then how would you
propose that we maintain those limits? What would you do to
enforce our laws?
Ms. Jimenez. Well, I think that if people--I--first of all,
I do think there is a case for allowing the right of mobility
between the nations that are part of the North American Free
Trade Agreement to begin.
Mr. King. Are you referring to enforcement by----
Ms. Jimenez. Well, just taking another example of the
Americans, the Mercosur agreement, in which the eight member
countries of the Mercosur have agreed to basically allow its
nationals to work as temporary residents for 2 years in any of
the member nations----
Mr. King. Neither does that sound to me like enforcement or
limitations. I am asking you, would you propose any method or
would you support any means by which we would limit or enforce
our border laws?
Ms. Jimenez. I believe that, in the case of the three
countries, we do need to look at ways of permitting mobility.
Mr. King. Rather than enforcement? So you don't want to go
down the path of enforcement with me. But you have advocated or
at least suggested that the population density of Japan is
certainly greater than that of the Southwest, and that that
would be something that seems to be acceptable in your view.
Would that also be acceptable for the United States as a whole
to reach that kind of population density that Japan has?
Ms. Jimenez. I clarified that I wasn't a population expert.
What I suggested was that we needed to look, as part of this
dialogue, which I am thankful that this Committee has taken the
initiative to begin this dialogue, as to all of the elements in
terms of economic growth of countries, that we look at the
example of Japan. Perhaps the Committee could subsequently hold
hearings with people who are demographic experts in it as well
as other experts that deal with these types of issues, but I
think that it is a consideration for those people who
preoccupy--or are preoccupied with numbers in terms of
population.
Mr. King. Ms. Jimenez, I do want to thank you for that.
That is a legitimate response to my question. It is something
that should be put on the table and considered, along with a
whole series of the demographics that we have to consider--
population density, the load on our resources, on our
environment, on our law enforcement, on our health care, on our
transportation industries, and our entire infrastructure. The
pressure and the changes that will inevitably take place in the
culture of this country versus the culture of the donor
countries, all of these things need to be considered as we set
forth on our national policy. Because, as we look back 25 years
and see what kind of country it was then and what that policy
brought forth with immigration policies that we have today, we
need to be able to project that into the future.
There are very weighty decisions to be made, and those
decisions are something that I don't hear this Congress really
looking at or discussing. I appreciate all of the input that
has come out here today.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. Hostettler. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
California, Mr. Gallegly, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Gallegly. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman.
I am sorry Sheila isn't here, but I know that Mr. King and
others have referred to the question that she asked of Mr.
Nunez as it related to the contribution that immigrants make.
Let's face it. We are the greatest country on the face of
the earth, and we are a country of immigrants. We are also a
country of laws. We allow more people the legal right to
immigrate to this country every year than all of the rest of
the countries in the world combined, and I support that.
I think it was Father Hesburg--and someone correct me if I
am wrong--that said one of greatest threats that we have to our
immigration in this country is the fact that the front door is
being threatened to be closed because the back door is off the
hinges; and that is something that I think that we have to be
very, very careful about.
We have a situation in California, my home State. The
Golden State, the beautiful State of California, $40 billion in
red ink. We have a governor that very likely will be recalled,
the first time in history. Very few have been willing to step
up to the plate and identify one of the principal reasons that
the State of California is facing bankruptcy.
We look at the issues of health care, education, criminal
justice. And the issue of criminal justice, Mr. King asked the
question about how many illegal immigrants are in prison. Well,
I happen to know that, on a Federal basis, my understanding is
26 percent of the Federal penitentiary population, the people
are in that penitentiary for committing a crime that has
nothing to do with their immigration status, yet they are
illegally in the country.
In my home county of Ventura I am told by the district
attorney that 50 percent of the cases where he puts people in
jail for committing a crime, they are people that are illegally
in the country.
The illegal immigrant population in Los Angeles, and to a
large degree the entire State of California, are using our
emergency rooms and trauma centers not for emergency care but
for general health care. Emergency rooms are closing every day.
We are in an absolute crisis with health care in California.
The wisdom of our legislature in the State of California is
denying an American citizen that might have lived in California
all of their life, transferred to another State for a year
because of business, their child moves back to California and
is required to pay in-State--or out-of-State tuition at $18,000
or $20,000 a year. If you are illegally in the State or if you
are illegally in the country, you pay $600 or $700, as compared
to $20,000 for a citizen.
These are issues that are creating tremendous problems in
California and across the Nation. This is no longer limited to
California. Illegal immigration is an issue that someone is
going to have to be bold enough to stand up and not be mean
spirited but for the good of the country and for everyone
involved identify this as a real problem.
Mr. Homan, a question that I have for you. We have talked a
lot about the integrity of the border today; and, of course,
the purpose of this hearing has to do with the smuggling of
people across the border. But I think that we also have focus
on why people are coming here to start with, because if there
was no need there wouldn't be a smuggling problem.
Do we have the will, do we have the resources, and do we
have any form of commitment to interior enforcement? Because I
firmly believe that the issue of interior enforcement is every
bit as important as border enforcement. Because if you have
don't have a magnet, vis-a-vis jobs, benefits and so on and so
forth, there is no reason to come. People don't come to the
wonderful State of California because of our beautiful beaches.
There are beautiful beaches in many of the countries that they
come from.
Could you address that?
Mr. Homan. Yes. I have been enforcing immigration laws for
19 years. I started in the Border Patrol, and I have been a
special agent for the past 15 years. As a street agent, not a
policymaker, I can tell you that interior enforcement has not
received the resources the Border Patrol has. Interior
enforcement under the legacy INS was not a priority.
I can honestly say under this new structure we now have an
organizational structure and operational support through ICE,
through the leadership of the Assistant Secretary, Michael
Garcia, and Director of Operations, Michael Dougherty. I can
tell you that investigators in this country under ICE are
excited about our new structure and by our new strategy. I can
honestly say. As an investigator in the field, Operation No
Mercy in Victoria, TX. Was a clear example of how this new
integrated authority from all of these legacy agencies came
together.
INS now has ability to do data analysis, telecommunication
intercepts. We bring our experience of alien smuggling to the
table. This agency I think will excel in interior enforcement
in the future, like the legacy INS was not allowed to.
Resources are always an issue. Legacy INS had approximately
2,000 interior enforcement special agents. After 9/11, the
Border Patrol saw a huge augmentation in resources. Internal
enforcement has seen nothing. Under this new integration, we
now have about 5,500 special agents. We are going through an
assessment period now of finding out, do we have enough
resources to attack the issues?
The strategy is being put in place now, for the incident
response teams, the proposed command coordination center that
we are going to set up for incident response teams. So in the
next few months we are going to find out what our resource
issue is. But, right now, I can tell you we are in better shape
now than we were with the legacy INS. The leadership that we
have now is much better than the leadership I have ever seen in
the past.
Mr. Gallegly. Mr. Chairman, unanimous consent for 20
seconds.
Mr. Hostettler. Without objection.
Mr. Gallegly. Mr. Homan, again, for the record, we know
that the budget has been tripled for INS over a period of 10 or
12 years. We know that interior enforcement for the last at
least--I don't know how many years--5 or 6 years has been
almost nonexistent. For the record, are you absolutely
convinced that there is going to be a more aggressive
enforcement on our interior for the purposes of removing
people, criminal or otherwise, that are illegally in the United
States?
Mr. Homan. Since the integration of ICE, I can tell you the
attitude, the strategy, the leadership has changed. They are
more dedicated to interior enforcement than I have ever seen in
19 years.
Am I convinced we will be successful? We will be a lot more
successful than we have been in the past.
Will we need resources? Of course. We are dealing with--you
know, in San Antonio alone last year, we processed nearly
10,000 criminal aliens. We did that with a staff of 50 agents,
half of them dedicated to nothing but the jails and the
prisons. That leaves another 25 agents to investigate anti-
smuggling investigations, work-site enforcement initiatives
such as Operation Tarmac, fraud investigations such as the sale
of fraudulent documents on the street, visa fraud, people
entering the country through visa fraud.
One of the things that can help us is I think is this
Government needs to send a message: If you enter this country
illegally, we got to stop dangling this carrot of amnesty and
guest worker programs.
If there is a legislation on guest worker programs, I am
hoping it is open to the people in Mexico to enter the United
States, not giving the opportunity to people that are illegally
in the United States. Because in my 19 years I have interviewed
literally thousands of aliens that I have personally arrested;
and they are all looking for that amnesty. They are all looking
for that guest worker program.
So, hopefully, in this legislation--I haven't seen the
legislation, but, hopefully, they take that into account.
Because as long as that carrot is being dangled, we are going
to continue having immigration problems.
Mr. Gallegly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for a
very, very good hearing.
Mr. Hostettler. Thank the gentleman from California.
The Chair wishes to inform the Committee that the record
will stay open for 7 days for any additions that Members would
like to make.
I would like to thank the witnesses for your very excellent
testimony and your assistance in this matter. It is our hope
that the situation that took place in Victoria, TX, is not
repeated, for the sake of those that may be impacted. I thank
you for all of your input that you have given today. It has
been very helpful to the Committee.
The business of the Subcommittee being completed, this
hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
Prepared Statement of Dan Stein, Executive Director, Federation for
American Immigration Reform
This statement outlines FAIR's views on the causes and tragic
consequences of nearly unchecked illegal immigration, including the
growing development of alien smuggling operations.
Background
Illegal crossing of international borders has always been
dangerous, as tragically recorded in the shooting deaths of persons
fleeing persecution at the Berlin Wall. Fortunately, this cruel era is
behind us, but accidental deaths continue to occur at the U.S.-Mexican
border and elsewhere. Too often we learn of illegal migrants who drown
or in past years were hit by vehicles as they ran across the border
highway in San Diego.
Today the incidence of tragic deaths in urban areas has declined as
the Border Patrol has regained control over illegal entry into what
were once the primary corridors for illegal immigration. The pattern
has now shifted to deaths in new rugged areas far from population
settlements. At the same time this pattern of illegal entry has come to
be associated much more with the operations of alien smugglers than in
the past. Alien smuggling has become a major business in Mexico, and it
operates as well on the U.S. side of the border, as was tragically
demonstrated in recent instances of the deaths of illegal immigrants in
Victoria, Texas, in highway accidents, and in rail cars used to
transport illegal aliens into the interior of our country.
United States and Mexico Share Responsibility for Tragic Losses
It is clear that this ongoing loss of life of illegal immigrants is
a challenge to our immigration law enforcement authorities to find
means to ameliorate the danger without at the same time abrogating
their responsibility to uphold the law. It seems obvious that the
current level of continuing illegal immigration across the Mexican-U.S.
border would not continue at the current level if the Mexican
government were to adopt an active and continuous policy of
identifying, apprehending and prosecuting alien smugglers. Recent
campaigns announced by the Mexican government towards this end should
be carefully watched to see if they are successful and sustained.
The responsibility to deter illegal immigration to the United
States does not, however, lie entirely with Mexico. For example, every
time local, state, or federal policymakers take steps or announce plans
for some form of amnesty through a new guestworker program, offer cut-
rate college tuition for illegal aliens graduating from American public
schools, or otherwise act to make life easier for illegal resident
aliens, the result is always the same. Predictably, that result is new
waves of illegal aliens, more death on our desert border, and more
death at the hands of alien and drug smugglers. Similarly, our efforts
to diminish the magnet of easy access to jobs in the United States have
been deficient.
United States Must Effectively Counter the Work Magnet
Congress recognized in 1986 that to deter illegal immigration it is
necessary to deny access by illegal workers to U.S. jobs and adopted
the employer sanctions system to discourage employers through penalties
from knowingly hiring illegal alien workers. Ten years later Congress
acknowledged that the system had a major loophole because employers had
no way to verify the identity and employment eligibility documents that
new employees were required to show their employer. The result was the
establishment of the pilot verification projects. The Basic Pilot
project has been operated on a test basis since then, has been
evaluated by outside contractors, and has been found to be successful
with only minor glitches.
Congress last year reauthorized the Basic Pilot and other test
verification studies for another two years even before having received
or studied the project evaluation. Thus, unless Congress acts more
expeditiously, the issue of deciding to adopt the document verification
system as a national mandatory system for all new employees will not be
on the agenda for at least another year or two.
FAIR believes that the delay in adopting document verification to
correct the primary deficiency of the employer sanctions system is
unconscionable, especially when seen in light of the loss of human life
that results from the continuing strong magnet of easy access by
illegal alien workers to U.S. jobs. We urge members of the Subcommittee
to shortcut the delay built into the reauthorization of the study of
the Basic Pilot verification system and to initiate legislation to
implement it at the earliest possible date as a national mandatory
system.
It is clear that this will not entirely deny work opportunities to
illegal alien workers. However, it will remove the job magnet for all
employers who are unknowingly hiring illegal aliens as a result of
counterfeit documents, and that is the vast majority of all jobs taken
by illegal alien workers. When that is achieved, it will be much easier
to concentrate the enforcement capability of immigration inspectors on
those employers who continue to knowingly hire and exploit illegal
alien workers. Prosecutions will become much easier when the defense of
claiming to be unaware of the status of the illegal alien workers is no
longer available.
Those defending a dependence on illegal alien workers are sure to
claim that large sectors of the economy would collapse if illegal alien
workers were removed. While it is true that some sectors of the
economy, e.g., seasonal crop agriculture, have become addicted to
illegal alien workers, that does not mean that the economic sector
would confront disaster if illegal aliens were cut off from filling
those jobs.
First, the inception of document verification by employers would
apply only to all new employees. So only newly applying illegal aliens
would be denied jobs. Illegal alien workers who are already employed
would be denied employment only when they changed jobs. Thus the
weaning process would be gradual.
Secondly, weaning these sectors of the economy from their
dependence on illegal alien labor is necessary to restore the effective
operation of the law of supply and demand to the sectors. If the
employers in these sectors are unable to recruit legal workers for the
wages that they have been paying--which in inflation adjusted wages are
lower than were paid thirty years ago--they will have to offer higher
wages to this most poorly paid segment of the U.S. workforce.
Third, the operation of document verification will put employers on
a level playing field that has been absent for a long time. Today, an
employer who wants to have a stable workforce by attempting to avoid
hiring illegal alien workers by verifying valid Social Security numbers
with the SSA, may face unfair competition from a competitor who,
because of the profit motive, chooses to turn a blind eye toward the
likelihood that illegal alien workers are on the payroll. This tends to
penalize the responsible employer and reward the unscrupulous employer.
Finally, the on-going discussion of a new guestworker agreement to
deal with the millions of illegal alien workers from Mexico and
elsewhere ignores the fact that there is already a guestworker program
designed to provide access by U.S. employers when they can demonstrate
that they are unable to attract U.S. workers at the prevailing wage. In
a period of contraction of the illegal alien worker population, there
would be no reason that the H-2a and H-2b visa programs could not be
used increasingly with only minor modification during the period of
weaning away from illegal alien labor.
The objective would be to assure that temporary workers supplant
illegal alien workers. The obvious benefits would include combating the
exploitation of illegal alien workers and assuring a regulated and an
orderly flow of foreign workers while avoiding the costs and dangers of
entering the country illegally through smuggling operations. An added
benefit would be that the job contracting process would assure that
U.S. workers are not discriminated against by being undercut by illegal
alien workers.
To summarize, both Mexico and the United States share a joint
responsibility to combat the alien smuggling operations that increase
the jeopardy for aliens attempting to illegally enter our country.
Congress can make a major contribution to deterring illegal immigration
and channeling foreign workers into temporary legal work programs by
establishing the Basic Pilot document verification program as a
national mandatory system without further delay. This will not only
combat illegal immigration, it will reduce alien smuggling and the
attendant risks to the illegal aliens, and it will put U.S. employers
on a level playing field in which the law of supply and demand is
restored as the principal means for deciding the earnings of U.S.
workers.
----------
----------
Prepared Statement of the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a
Representative in Congress From the State of Texas
Last week, prosecutors indicted 14 people who allegedly organized
or facilitated the smuggling incident that ended on May 14th when a
crowded trailer was found abandoned at a truck stop in Victoria, 100
miles southwest of Houston. The 14 were charged with various counts of
conspiracy to conceal or transport immigrants. Twelve could face the
death penalty if prosecutors decide to pursue it. More than 70
immigrants from Mexico, Central America, and the Dominican Republic
were crammed into the tractor-trailer. Among the dead was a 5-year-old
boy from Mexico. Seventeen immigrants died at the scene, and 2 others
died later.
According to U. S. Attorney Michael Shelby, ``alien smuggling is
all about money. These aren't people who are trying to make a better
life for (others) and just providing them a pathway. This is about an
American dollar bill and people that will do anything and risk anyone's
life in order to gain that dollar bill.''
In this incident, the price per immigrant was $1,500 to $1,900.
Alien smugglers have reaped millions of dollars in profits, with some
not only collecting a fee up front, but also robbing, beating, and
raping the immigrants once in the United States.
Last year, the General Accounting Office (GAO), the investigative
arm of Congress, was critical of the U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS) with respect to its efforts to combat
alien smuggling. The GAO said that INS efforts to curb smuggling were
disorganized, seldom tracked, and did not meet the required level of
accountability. GAO investigators stated further that in several border
areas, including Arizona, multiple antismuggling enforcement units
existed that had overlapping jurisdictions, operated autonomously, and
reported to different INS officials. The INS officials had no clear
criteria about which cases needed to be investigated.
The INS has since been disbanded and its enforcement divisions have
been folded into the Department of Homeland Security as part of the
Customs and Border Protection unit. It does not follow necessarily,
however, that this organizational change will result in more effective
field operations. We need to use our oversight authority to ensure that
the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection does not make the same
mistakes that were made by INS.
The Arizona border with Mexico has become the hub of alien
smuggling. About one-third of the 1.2 million arrests of undocumented
immigrants that the Border Patrol expects to make this year will occur
along a 260-mile stretch of the U.S.-Mexican border southwest of
Tucson. This section of the border has alien-smuggling corridors that
run through hostile desert terrain where there is little or no water,
and summer temperatures can soar to 120 degrees.
Last year, Border Patrol agents in the Tucson sector apprehended
449,675 undocumented aliens, more than 1,200 a day. Despite these
enforcement efforts, more than a hundred undocumented aliens died in
the desert, and many more had to be rescued.
The high level of activity along this border is a consequence of an
increase in the effectiveness of law enforcement along other sections
of the border. As it becomes more difficult for the smugglers to cross
along one section of the border, they shift their smuggling activity to
another section of the border.
Alien smuggling will not stop until we establish an immigration
policy that substantially reduces the need for illegal entry into the
United States. In the meantime, our highest priority should be to do
what we can to reduce the deaths. I will be introducing a bill later
this week that would help in achieving that objective. It would do this
by establishing a three-point program which has been designed to
facilitate the investigation and prosecution, or disruption, of
reckless commercial smuggling operations.
The first point of this program would provide incentives to
encourage informants to step forward and assist the federal authorities
who deal with commercial smuggling operations. The Immigration and
Nationality Act presently provides a nonimmigrant classification for
aliens who assist the United States government with the investigation
and prosecution of a criminal organization or with the investigation
and prosecution of a terrorist organization. My bill would establish a
new, third category for aliens who assist the United States government
with the investigation and prosecution of a commercial smuggling
operation.
This new nonimmigrant visa classification would be offered to
potential informants by the State Department and the Justice
Department, in addition to being offered by the Homeland Security
Department. Alien smuggling operates across international lines. No
single federal agency can deal with it.
The real incentive, however, would not be a nonimmigrant visa
classification. It would be lawful permanent resident status. If, in
the opinion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of
State, or the Attorney General, the informant has supplied information
which has substantially contributed to the success of the
investigation, prosecution, or disruption of a commercial alien
smuggling operation, the Secretary of Homeland Security would have the
authority to adjust the status of the informant to that of an alien
lawfully admitted for permanent residence. Moreover, adjustment of
status could be offered also to the spouse, the married and unmarried
sons and daughters, and the parents of the alien.
The bill also would offer a monetary incentive to become an
informant. It would establish a reward program to assist in the
elimination or disruption of commercial alien smuggling operations in
which aliens are transported in groups of 10 or more, and where either
the aliens are transported in a manner that endangers their lives or
the smuggled aliens present a life-threatening health risk to people in
the United States.
The rewards program would be similar to the one the State
Department presently uses to obtain informants in cases involving
terrorists. It would be administered by the Secretary of Homeland
Security, in consultation, as appropriate, with the Attorney General
and the Secretary of State.
I am concerned about the safety of the people who become
informants, so the bill also would establish a protection program. If
the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of State, or the
Attorney General determines that the identity of an informant or the
members of the informant's family must be protected, such official
would be able to take such lawful action as the official considers
necessary to protect them.
The second point in the program would be a penalty enhancement
provision. In the case of a person who has been convicted of smuggling
aliens into the United States, the sentencing judge would be able to
increase the sentence by up to 10 years if the offense was part of
ongoing commercial smuggling operations, the operations involve the
transportation of aliens in groups of 10 or more, and either the aliens
are transported in a manner that endangers their lives or the smuggled
aliens present a life-threatening health risk to people in the United
States.
The third point would be an outreach program. It would require the
Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation, as appropriate, with
the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, to develop and
implement an outreach program to educate the public here and abroad
about the penalties for smuggling aliens. It also would provide
information about the financial rewards and the immigration benefits
that would be available for assisting in the investigation, disruption,
or prosecution of a commercial alien smuggling operation.
I believe that this can be a bipartisan bill and that the three-
point program it would establish would reduce the number of deaths from
reckless alien smuggling practices.
Thank you.
----------
Prepared Statement of Congressman Jeff Flake
Mr. Chairman, I applaud you for your leadership in conducting this
oversight hearing today on the very important topic of alien smuggling.
As you know, this issue is of particular relevance in my home state of
Arizona where, according to the Border Patrol, 146 aliens died in 2002
while attempting to enter the country from Mexico. As you know, I have
requested a field hearing by the Subcommittee in Arizona on this very
important topic, and remain hopeful that a visit by Members of the
Subcommittee to the southwest border would be instructive to them on
the many issues facing Arizona as a result of its location on the
border. But this hearing is certainly a great first step in that
direction.
Mr. Chairman, the situation on the U.S.-Mexico border has spawned
numerous problems. One need only glance at the Arizona papers on any
day, and the headlines tell countless stories of lost lives, destroyed
property, and mistreated people--in general, a troubling situation:
Nearly every day, the desert claims the life of another illegal
immigrant attempting to enter the U.S., most likely seeking work and
the chance to make a better life for themselves and their families.
The Maricopa County Sheriff's office is puzzled by a string of
execution-style slayings, but speculates that it could be a turf battle
between rival gangs of coyotes.
Health care costs have skyrocketed and hospitals have cut back on
crucial services in Arizona, as they must treat those injured while
trying to cross the border illegally.
Shootings on the border have been observed with alarming and
increasing frequency.
Frustrated property owners, seeing their property destroyed, and
fearing the immigrant traffic across their property, take matters into
their own hands.
Family members of illegal aliens who have perished at the hands of
smugglers while attempting to cross the border have filed lawsuits
against the U.S. government. The lawsuits contend that the immigrants'
deaths could have been prevented if a humanitarian group had been
allowed to install water stations in the desert.
While we may not agree with the choices taken by these immigrants
to break the law and enter our country without proper authorization, we
cannot help but be moved by the abuse that many of them face at the
hands of unscrupulous coyotes. However, sympathy alone is not enough.
As legislators we are charged with addressing problems as serious as
the ones faced on the southwestern border, and that is why I believe
Congress should consider an initiative that could alleviate many of the
burdens that Arizona and the rest of the country suffers due to the
problem of illegal immigration. A temporary foreign worker program
would direct the flow of workers into legal channels and promises to
aid the government in getting a better handle on who is here and who is
crossing the border.
There is a demand in the U.S. for labor that many Mexicans are
willing to supply. Rather than turning a blind eye to that fact, I
support a program that would allow these workers legal entry into the
U.S. so that they can perform the jobs that U.S. employers are
offering. This legal framework would allow the U.S. to collect taxes
and would provide the workers a safe and legal way to return to their
homes and families.
I recognize that there are many who say the answer to the problem
of illegal immigration is to tighten border security. Certainly, the
southwest border should be secured more effectively. However, it is
naive to assume that more agents along the border alone will stem the
flow of illegal immigration.
Research indicates that, prior to the passage of the Immigration
Reform and Control Act in 1986, the flow of Mexican laborers was
largely circular. The average stay in the United States of an
undocumented migrant from Mexico was 2.6 years; by 1998, after the
enhanced border enforcement of the 1990s, the median stay had risen to
6.6 years.
Our border policy aimed at reducing illegal immigration has
perversely encouraged illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. Crossing
the border is risky, so illegal workers are increasingly reluctant to
repeat the trip more often than necessary once they are here. Also,
smugglers are expensive, so workers must remain in the U.S. longer to
pay for the high cost of crossing. A temporary worker program that once
again permits immigrants to enter and work in the United States, then
return home again, will re-establish this circular migration flow.
From 1986 to 1998, the amount of tax dollars that Congress
appropriated for the INS increased eightfold, and for the Border Patrol
six fold. The number of Border Patrol agents assigned to the southwest
border doubled to 8,500. The end result of this huge increase in
enforcement efforts? More than 7 million illegal aliens reside within
U.S. borders. How can we honestly tell the taxpayers that this strategy
has been a success?
According to Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies,
``A real effort to control the border with Mexico would require perhaps
20,000 agents and the development of a system of formidable fences and
other barriers along those parts of the border used for illegal
crossings.'' The wisdom of embarking on such a project is questionable,
at best, I believe. Many of these illegal immigrants do know the risks
of an illegal border crossing, and it does not deter them. They believe
that the opportunities in the U.S. outweigh the risks associated with a
desert crossing.
Mr. Chairman, we can crack down on alien smugglers more harshly,
and impose stricter penalties on them when we catch them. I am working
on legislation to do just that. However, when we hear law enforcement
officials estimate that, in certain Mexican border regions, immigrant
smugglers can earn up to $1.5 million a day, I would submit that we
cannot fight such irresistible market forces. We need to collect the
courage to take a serious look at the problems that our current border
policy has wrought, and acknowledge that there may be a better way to
address the situation. Let's put the smugglers out of business and
formulate a more realistic approach.
Thank you again for the hearing on this important topic. I look
forward to the testimony of the witnesses.
----------
----------
-