[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND VIOLENCE
ALONG THE SOUTHERN BORDER
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
AUGUST 16, 2006
__________
Serial No. 109-96
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
index.html
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
35-565 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
Committee on Homeland Security
Peter T. King, New York, Chairman
Don Young, Alaska Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Lamar S. Smith, Texas Loretta Sanchez, California
Curt Weldon, Pennsylvania Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
Christopher Shays, Connecticut Norman D. Dicks, Washington
John Linder, Georgia Jane Harman, California
Mark E. Souder, Indiana Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Tom Davis, Virginia Nita M. Lowey, New York
Daniel E. Lungren, California Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of
Jim Gibbons, Nevada Columbia
Rob Simmons, Connecticut Zoe Lofgren, California
Mike Rogers, Alabama Sheila Jackson-Lee, Texas
Stevan Pearce, New Mexico Bill Pascrell, Jr., New Jersey
Katherine Harris, Florida Donna M. Christensen, U.S. Virgin
Bobby Jindal, Louisiana Islands
Dave G. Reichert, Washington Bob Etheridge, North Carolina
Michael McCaul, Texas James R. Langevin, Rhode Island
Charlie Dent, Pennsylvania Kendrick B. Meek, Florida
Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
Michael T. McCaul, Texas, Chairman
Christopher Shays, Connecticut Bob Etheridge, North Carolina
Daniel E. Lungren, California Bill Pascrell, Jr., New Jersey
Dave G. Reichert, Washington Donna M. Christensen, U.S. Virgin
Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida Islands
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Officio) (Ex Officio)
(II)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS
The Honorable Michael T. McCaul, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Texas, and Chairman, Subcommittee on
Investigations:
Oral Statement................................................. 1
Prepared Statement............................................. 4
The Honorable Gene Green, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 13
Prepared Statement............................................. 15
The Honorable Sheila Jackson-Lee, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 6
Prepared Statement............................................. 10
The Honorable Ted Poe, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Texas................................................. 11
Witnesses
Panel I
Mr. T.J. Bonner, President, National Border Patrol Council:
Oral Statement................................................. 55
Prepared Statement............................................. 57
Mr. Rick Flores, Sheriff, Webb County, State of Texas............ 28
Mr. D'Wayne Jernigan, Sheriff, Val Verde County, State of Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 36
Prepared Statement............................................. 38
Colonel Russell Malesky, Counter-Drug Commander, Texas National
Guard:
Oral Statement................................................. 23
Prepared Statement............................................. 25
Mr. Steve McCraw, Director, Governor's Office of Homeland
Security, Texas................................................ 18
Mr. Alonzo Pena, Special-Agent-in-Charge, Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, U.S. Department of Homeland Security:
Oral Statement................................................. 29
Prepared Statement............................................. 31
Mr. Gordon Quan, Resident, Houston, Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 52
Prepared Statement............................................. 54
Panel II
Mr. Robert Eckels, County Judge, Harris County, State of Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 73
Prepared Statement............................................. 77
The Honorable Adrian Garcia, Member, Houston City Council, State
of Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 94
Prepared Statement............................................. 98
Panel II-Continued
Mr. Harold Hurtt, Chief of Police, City of Houston, State of
Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 100
Prepared Statement............................................. 102
Mr. John Moriarty, Inspector General, Department of Criminal
Justice, State of Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 92
Prepared Statement............................................. 93
Mr. Michael O'Brien, Sheriff's Office, Harris County, State of
Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 88
Prepared Statement............................................. 90
Mr. Charles Rosenthal, District Attorney, Harris County, State of
Texas:
Prepared Statement............................................. 83
Panel III
Mr. Jaime Esparza, District Attorney, El Paso County, State of
Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 134
Prepared Statement............................................. 137
Mr. Dennis Nixon, Chairman, International Bank of Commerce:
Oral Statement................................................. 128
Prepared Statement............................................. 131
Mrs. Carrie Ruiz, Resident, Houston, Texas....................... 125
Mr. Steven Stone, State Trooper, Department of Public Safety,
State of Texas:
Oral Statement................................................. 123
Prepared Statement............................................. 124
CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND VIOLENCE
ALONG THE SOUTHERN BORDER
----------
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Subcommittee on Investigations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:38 a.m., at
Civil Courthouse, 201 Caroline Street, Houston, Texas, Hon.
Michael McCaul [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representative McCaul.
Also Present: Representatives Jackson-Lee, Poe, and Gene
Green.
Mr. McCaul. Good morning. The Committee on Homeland
Security, Subcommittee on Investigations will come to order.
The subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on criminal
activity and violence on our southern border.
First, I would like to ask unanimous consent that Ms.
Jackson-Lee, Mr. Green, and Mr. Poe be permitted to sit and to
question during the hearing today. Hearing no objection so
ordered.
I also ask unanimous consent that statements by Shelley
Sekula-Gibbs and George Benton be included for the record.
Hearing no objection, so ordered.
I have also been requested to state that photography and
cameras are limited to accredited press only.
First, I want to thank everybody for being here today. I
want to thank the witnesses have attended this hearing. As a
former Federal prosecutor, I sort of feel like I am back in
Federal court again, although I have never sat at this level as
a judge, although Judge Ted Poe has in his prior career.
It has taken a lot of work to put this together, and I
appreciate the interests.
Because this is an official congressional hearing, as
opposed to a town hall meeting, we have to abide by certain
rules of the committee and of the House of Representatives. So
we kindly ask that there be no applause of any kind or any kind
of demonstration with regards to the testimony. It is important
that we respect the decorum and the rules of this committee.
Now today we will examine the expanding crisis of violence
and criminal activity on America's border with Mexico. We will
hear what I expect to be sobering testimony from Federal, State
and local government officials and law enforcement, as well as
the victims of violence committed by those in our Nation
illegally. It is my hope that this hearing and the testimony
will open the eyes of America to the violence, crime, drugs and
overall far-reaching impact of our unsecured borders. Today we
will hear the facts and understand the true effects of illegal
immigration on our society.
I would like to thank the witnesses for appearing here
today, many of whom I have worked with when I was a Federal
prosecutor. I am grateful for your presence here today, and I
look forward to hearing your testimony.
The violence our border patrol and local law enforcement
encounter continues to increase at an alarming rate, and the
organized criminal element on Mexico's side of our southern
border is heavily armed and very dangerous. From 2004 to 2005,
violent incidents against border patrol agents on the southern
border increased more than 100 percent. Since October of last
year there have been 630 violent incidents against our border
patrol agents.
In January 2006, the Department of Homeland Security sent a
confidential memo to border patrol agents warning that they
could be the targets of assassins hired by alien smugglers. The
point is, America's border with Mexico is a violent and
dangerous place today, and this is largely due to the drug
trafficking along our southern unsecured border.
Increasing violence on the border is directly related to
the increased narcotics seizures. Last year, the border patrol
seized more than 1 million pounds of marijuana, nearly 20
percent more than last year. Today, there is also a 10 percent
increase in cocaine seizures compared to last year.
On top of this, the number of illegal aliens entering our
Nation each year is staggering. Last year, well over a million
illegal aliens were apprehended along our borders. But this
number represents only those caught by the border patrol. It is
estimated the number of those caught represents only a fraction
of the illegal aliens who really enter the United States.
This perpetual flood of illegal aliens into our country is
also adding to the health care crisis and to increasing
problems we are having in America's jails and prisons. Overall,
the influx of illegal immigrants into our Nation is causing an
increasing strain on nearly every social program in the United
States, and at the end of the day, it is the American taxpayer
who is economically dealing with that increasing stress.
This threat posed by an uncontrolled border, narcotics
smuggling and rising violence is the reality facing American
communities. For instance, immigration investigators broke up a
16-member smuggling ring in El Paso that brought thousands of
illegal aliens into the United States. They were squeezed into
two truck trailers with virtually no food and only one bottle
of water.
Powerful criminal organizations support their operations by
torturing, kidnapping and murdering citizens on both sides of
the border.
Last year, 42 American citizens were kidnapped in Nuevo
Laredo alone. Los Angeles county sheriff's deputy, David March,
was brutally murdered by a three-time deported illegal alien
during a routine traffic stop. David March's murderer escaped
back to Mexico.
Some 4 years later, Teri March is still awaiting the
extradition of her husband's killer.
According to the U.S. DEA, 65 percent of all meth consumed
in the United States now comes from Mexican drug cartels and is
distributed by gangs such as the MS-13. The gang, which is
prevalent in Texas, MS-13, is engaged in violent crime on both
sides of the border.
And in the post-9/11 world, border security is not simply
about immigration, but rather, it is an issue of national
security. Before running for Congress, I was chief of
counterterrorism in the U.S. attorney's office. I had the
Mexican border in my jurisdiction. My job was to determine
whether terrorist cells were in this country and if so where.
But that question cannot be fully answered, and many, including
myself, are concerned that they are already here. Our Nation's
borders are our last line of defense in the war on terror.
Just yesterday, an Afghanistan national was caught crossing
into Hidalgo County. He is now being detained and questioned.
Hezbollah has already brought sleeper agents into the U.S.
across our southern border. On March 1, 2005, Mahmoud Youssef
Kourani pled guilty to Federal charges of raising money for
Hezbollah terrorist activities in Lebanon. Kourani was an
illegal alien who had been smuggled across the border after he
bribed a Mexican consular official in Beirut to get him a visa
to travel to Mexico. Kourani and a Middle Eastern traveling
partner then paid coyotes in Mexico to get into the United
States.
In another case, a cafe owner in Tijuana, Mexico was
arrested for smuggling more than 200 Lebanese citizens
illegally into the U.S., including several who are believed to
have terrorist ties to Hezbollah.
The Val Verde county sheriff's office warned that drug
traffickers are helping terrorists with possible al-Qa'ida ties
to cross the Texas Mexico border into the United States.
An estimated 400,000 people who have been ordered out of
the U.S., including many convicted criminals or those from
terrorist States, are still living in the U.S. because Federal
officials have failed to ensure their removal.
Terrorist organizations, including al-Qa'ida, are seeking
to exploit our porous border. Last year alone, 135,000 people
who are not of Mexican descent were apprehended entering Texas
illegally.
The McAllen border patrol sector alone reports that it
released more than 42,000 other than Mexicans, or OTMs, in 2005
and more than 90 percent of those failed to show up at their
court hearing.
Mexican officials recently apprehended four Iraqis headed
across the Texas-Mexico border.
Our government recently seized an enormous cache of weapons
in Laredo, Texas. U.S. authorities confiscated two completed
improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, materials for making 33
more, military style grenades, 26 grenade triggers, large
quantities of AK-47s and AR-15 assault rifles, 1,280 rounds of
ammunition, silencers, machine gun assembly kits, 300 primers,
bulletproof vests, police scanners, sniper scopes, narcotics
and cash.
But Texas is doing something about the violence along its
border with Mexico. This year, Texas Governor Rick Perry
launched operations Rio Grande, Del Rio and Laredo in response
to the increasing criminal activity and violence along the
Texas-Mexico border. I look forward to hearing about these
border security initiatives from the Texas homeland security
director, Steve McCraw.
Despite the lack of a real Federal response to the violence
on the border, we in the House have worked hard to pass
legislation aimed at securing America's border. Last year, the
House passed a border and immigration bill which makes border
security a paramount priority for America, as it should be.
H.R. 4437 authorizes additional border agents, mandates
detention thereby ending the catch and release program,
supports our local law enforcement, including our border
sheriffs to assist in securing the border. The bill also adds
new penalties for alien smuggling and passport fraud, provides
for the use of state-of-the-art technology and military assets
on the border, and authorizes fencing along the southern
border.
The House immigration reform bill secures the border
without amnesty. Today's illegal immigration crisis in the
United States is a product of the failed amnesty policies of
the past and the lack of enforcement of our laws on the books.
However, in any attempt to secure America's border with
Mexico, the Mexican government must cooperate. We share a
common border with Mexico and a responsibility for developing
effective policies to deter highly organized and armed criminal
elements which threaten both of our Nations. We must hold our
friend and our neighbor to the south to a high standard of
cooperation and responsibility. This organized criminal element
threatens the security and well-being of the citizens of both
of our great Nations.
The first duty, paramount duty, of the United States
government is to protect and defend its citizens. Our borders
cannot become the gateway for criminal enterprise, drug
trafficking and terrorist activity.
In closing, it is my sincere hope today, that we will work
towards providing real results to these real and deadly
problems and more safe and secure borders for America. There
are those who will try to politicize the testimony and facts
presented by the witnesses. For anyone to politicize this issue
would mean playing politics with our national security, and in
my view, that is unacceptable.
[The statement of Mr. McCaul follows:]
Prepared Opening Statement of Hon. Michael T. McCaul
Today, we will examine the expanding crisis of violence and
criminal activity on America's border with Mexico. We will hear what I
expect to be sobering testimony from federal, state and local
government officials and law enforcement, as well as victims of
violence committed by those in our nation illegally. It is my hope that
this hearing and the testimony will open the eyes of America to the
violence, crime, drugs and overall far reaching impact of our unsecured
border. Today we will hear the facts and understand the true effects of
illegal immigration on our society.
I would like to thank the witnesses for appearing here today, many
of whom I have worked with when I was a federal prosecutor. I am
grateful for your presence today, and I look forward to hearing your
testimony.
The violence our Border Patrol and local law enforcement encounter
continues to increase at an alarming rate, and the organized criminal
element on Mexico's side of our Southern border is heavily armed and
very dangerous. From 2004 to 2005, violent incidents against Border
Patrol agents on the Southern border increased more than 100%. Since
October of last year, there have been 630 violent incidents against our
Border Patrol agents.
In January 2006, the Department of Homeland Security sent a
confidential memo to Border Patrol agents warning that they could be
the targets of assassins hired by alien smugglers. The point is,
America's border with Mexico is a violent and dangerous place today,
and this is largely due to the drug trafficking along our Southern
unsecured border.
Increasing violence on the border is directly related to increased
narcotics seizures. Last year, the Border patrol seized more than one
million pounds of marijuana, nearly 20% more than last year. Today,
there is also a 10% increase in cocaine seizures compared to last year.
On top of this, the number of illegal aliens entering our nation
each year is staggering. Last year, well over a million illegal aliens
were apprehended along our borders. But this number represents only
those caught by the Border Patrol. It is estimated the number of those
caught represents only a fraction of the illegal aliens who really
entered the United States. This perpetual flood of illegal aliens into
our country is also adding to the health care crisis and to increasing
problems we are having in America's jails and prisons. Overall, the
influx of illegal immigrants into our nation is causing an increasing
strain on nearly every social program in the United States. And, at the
end of the day it is the American Tax Payer who is economically dealing
with that increasing stress.
This threat posed by an uncontrolled border, narcotics smuggling
and rising violence is the reality facing American communities. For
instance:
Immigration investigators broke up a 16-member
smuggling ring in El Paso that brought thousands of illegal
aliens into the U.S. for as much $6,000 each, depending on the
point of origin. They were squeezed into two truck trailers
with no food and one water bottle.
Powerful criminal organizations support their
operations by torturing, kidnapping and murdering citizens on
both sides of the border,
Last year, 42 American citizens were kidnapped in
Nuevo Laredo alone,
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy David March was
brutally murdered by a three time deported illegal alien during
a routine traffic stop. David March's murdered escaped back to
Mexico. Some four years later, Teri March is still awaiting the
extradition of her husband's killer.
According to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration,
65 percent of all meth consumed in the United States now comes
from Mexican drug cartels and is distributed by gangs such as
the MS-13,
The MS-13 gang is in Texas, and is engaged in violent
crime on both sides of the border.
In the post 9/11 world, border security is not simply about
immigration, but rather it is an issue of national security. Before
running for Congress, I was chief of counter terrorism in the US
Attorney's office in Texas. I had the Mexican border in my
jurisdiction. My job was to determine whether terrorists cells were in
this country, and if so where. But the question cannot be fully
answered, and many are concerned that they are already here. Our
nation's borders are our last line of defense in the War on Terror:
Just yesterday an Afghanistan national was caught
crossing into Hidalgo County, is detained and is now being
questioned,
Hezbollah has already brought sleeper agents into the
U.S. across our southern border. On March 1, 2005, Mahmoud
Youssef Kourani pleaded guilty to federal charges of using
meetings at his home in Dearborn, Michigan to raise money for
Hezbollah terrorist activities in Lebanon. Kourani was an
illegal alien who had been smuggled across the border after he
bribed a Mexican consular official in Beirut to get him a visa
to travel to Mexico. Kourani and a Middle Eastern traveling
partner then paid coyotes in Mexico to then get into the United
States,
In another case, a cafe owner in Tijuana, Mexico was
arrested for smuggling more than two hundred Lebanese citizens
illegally into the U.S., including several who are believed to
have terrorist ties to Hezbollah,
The Val Verde County Sheriffs Office warned that drug
traffickers are helping terrorists with possible al-Qa'ida ties
to cross the Texas-Mexico border in to the United States,
An estimated 400,000 people who have been ordered out
of the United States, including many convicted criminals or
those from terrorist states, are still living in the U.S.
because federal officials have failed to ensure their removal,
Terrorist organizations including al-Qa'ida are
seeking to exploit our porous border. Last year alone, 135,000
people who are not of Mexican descent were apprehended entering
Texas illegally,
The McAllen border patrol sector alone reports that it
released more than 42,000 OTMs in 2005, and more than 90%
failed to report to court,
Mexican officials recently apprehended four Iraqis
headed across the Texas-Mexico border,
Our government recently seized an enormous cache of
weapons in Laredo, Texas. U.S. authorities confiscated two
completed Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), materials for
making 33 more, military style grenades, 26 grenade triggers,
large quantities of AK-47 and AR-15 assault rifles, 1,280
rounds of ammunition, silencers, machine gun assembly kits, 300
primers, bullet-proof vests, police scanners, sniper scopes,
narcotics, and cash.
But Texas is doing something about the violence along its border
with Mexico. This year, Texas Governor Rick Perry launched Operations
Rio Grande, Del Rio and Laredo in response to the increasing criminal
activity and violence along the Texas-Mexico border. I look forward to
hearing about these border security efforts from Texas Homeland
Security Director Steve McCraw.
Despite the lack of a real federal response to the violence on the
border, we in the House have worked hard to pass legislation aimed at
securing America's border. Last year, the House passed a border and
immigration bill which makes border security a paramount priority for
America. HR 4437 authorizes additional border agents, mandates
detention thereby ending the catch and release program, and supports
out local law enforcement, including our border sheriffs, to assist in
the enforcement of immigration laws. The bill also adds new penalties
for alien smuggling and passport fraud, provides for the use of state
of the art technology and military assets, and authorizes fencing along
the Southern border.
The House immigration reform bill secures the border without
amnesty. Today's illegal immigration crisis in the United States is a
product of the failed amnesty policies of the past, including amnesty
and the lack of enforcement of the laws on the books.
However, in any attempt to secure America's border with Mexico, the
Mexican Government must cooperate. We share a common border with
Mexico, and a responsibility for developing effective policies to deter
highly organized and armed criminal elements which threaten both of our
nations. We must hold our friend and neighbor to the South to a high
standard of cooperation and responsibility. This organized criminal
element threatens the security and well being of the citizens of both
of our great nations.
The first duty of U.S. government is to protect and defend its
citizens. Our borders cannot become the gateway for criminal enterprise
and drug trafficking and terrorist activity.
In closing, it is my sincere hope today that we will work towards
providing real results to these real and deadly problems, and more safe
and secure borders for America. There are those who will try and
politicize the testimony and facts presented by the witnesses. For
anyone to politicize this issue would mean playing politics with our
national security and that is unacceptable.
Mr. McCaul. The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from
Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee, for any statement she may have.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. I thank the chairman very much.
Good, morning. I would like to ask for a moment of silence
for National Guard Specialist Kirsten Fike. She was 2 hours
into the first day of a border surveillance mission near Yuma
when she collapsed and died in the 100-plus degree weather in
Yuma, Arizona. She is from Pennsylvania and she is survived by
her 13-year old son Cody.
[Moment of silence.]
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for your service to this
Congress and to this Nation. I have great respect for this
committee and this Congress as a member of the Homeland
Security Committee, and the ranking member on the House
Judiciary Committee, two committees charged with the
responsibility of listening to the American people on the
question of comprehensive immigration reform. Thank you for
accepting our invitation and my invitation to come to Houston,
Texas.
Houston, Texas, of course, the fourth largest city in the
Nation, is blessed by its diversity and the ability for all of
us to live harmoniously together. If it is not through our city
council and mayor, to our Harris County commissioners and
leaders of our Harris County government, it is to our city
clubs and neighborhoods. We do live together harmoniously.
We are very grateful for a very effective law enforcement
system, both the county and the city, that works effectively
together. We are some hundreds of miles away from the border.
So the question of border violence is certainly a national
question, but we in Houston are attuned to the fact that our
responsibilities of our law enforcement officers are to ensure
the protection of our local citizens.
You are right, Mr. Chairman, this is not a political
question. But I simply disagree with the perspective that has
been put forward by the Republican majority.
There is a House bill and there is a Senate bill. Out of
regular order, the appropriate procedures would be that we
would be in a conference, adjusting both of the legislative
initiatives so that we could reconcile the issues and needs of
the American people.
As I expect to hear the testimony of many sheriffs from the
border, they know that we have had vigorous discussions in
Washington, and I have joined in their effort to be reimbursed
on the work that they have had to do because of the failing
funding of those who are on the front lines, the Federal
authorities that are on the front line, and we thank those
sheriffs who themselves have been engaged because of the
Federal failures that we have had.
Today, we will hear from 17 witnesses about criminal
activities and violence along the borders. I would only say
that that is an important question but we have a disagreement.
We want to ensure that our borders, whether they are
airports, ports, the northern border or the southern border are
secure. I would simply say that immigration is a very important
issue to the great State of Texas, as well as the Nation, but
the concept is comprehensive immigration reform.
As I indicated, as the ranking member of the House
Subcommittee on Immigration and as an attorney, I know
firsthand the complexities of the issue. That is why I am
saddened by the simplistic and sometimes caustic rhetoric
regarding immigrants and comprehensive immigration reform.
I would hope that we would not engage as the chairman has
asked us in traveling road shows and mock hearing and really
digest and discuss how can we solve this problem, how can we
secure our borders, how we can engage in a discussion of
comprehensive immigration reform.
This committee knows that 99 percent of all immigrants
coming to this country do so because they want to work, improve
their opportunities for success and reunite with their
families.
I was reminded of the Irish who fled Ireland in the 1800s
because of the potato famine and that there is some fifty
thousand undocumented Irish in this country, all, I hope,
seeking an opportunity for status, not attempting to be a
felon.
President Bush recognized that fact in his May 15 address
to the Nation calling for the passage of the Senate immigration
bill.
It is not lost on me that this hearing has been convened in
a courtroom, more so than at a university or city hall. Let me
thank Harris County for its hospitality, but, of course, many
people think of a courtroom as an adversarial setting rather
than one designed for the free-flowing exchange of ideas with
the community members directly impacted by immigration.
Mr. Chairman, I accept your challenge. I want to work with
you to make sure that our borders are secure enough to keep out
OTMs, al-Qa'ida and others, who might be interested in doing us
harm, who might be left to run amock amongst the population.
Let's stand united together for border security. But as we go
through this hearing, it is my wish that we not smear the
overwhelming number of decent persons who are hard working, tax
paying, law abiding immigrants.
We must also acknowledge that our border patrol agents and
law enforcement officials do their best along the border but
face challenges that include lack of support from this
administration and the Congress.
I want to congratulate the border patrol agents, because,
in fact, they have stopped over 1.7 million-plus individuals
who are attempting to come into this country illegally. Having
walked along the borders of California and Mexico and New
Mexico, I know their hard work and the confidence of the
citizens along that border have been there in terms of their
intent their decency and their commitment and their patriotism.
I salute them and I thank them.
I thank the National Guard that has been called into duty,
even though their resources have been depleted and most of
their resources as we learned in Washington State, some 60
percent of that State's resources of the National Guard are
behind the front line in Iraq.
This is a difficult challenge for America. There are some
who paint as criminals all who cross the border. Yet while the
Republican leadership in Congress focus on the southern border
with 10,000 border patrol agents stationed along the 2000-mile
border with Mexico, only one-tenth of that amount is on the
Canadian border, one that is 2.5 times as long as the Mexico
border. Recent news stories document how people fly, drive,
walk, sail, ski and sled across the northern border all the
time. That, is why we must have a unified comprehensive
approach to immigration reform.
Now I know there is violence along the southern border.
Criminal enterprises are trying to control their turf with
trafficking and smuggling of human beings and drugs. We have
seen the violence and tragedy in losing 19 individuals in a
stuffed, if you will, conditions coming across the border, but
we also know there is violence and there is trepidation on the
northern border. We congratulate the Customs and Border
Protection officer that stopped the individual coming across,
the bomber. If had not been for their intuition, their insight
and the ability to turn that person over to secondary, we might
have had enormous tragedy on New Year's Eve of 2000.
But that was because they had the resources to secondary.
Mr. Chairman, the Customs and Border Protection are suffering
because they do not have a enough resources for what we call
secondary investigation. That is why the Congress needs to go
back to work. That is why Congress and the President must do
more than give lip service to securing the border. Since 9/11,
House Republicans have rejected seven Democratic amendments
that will increase, strengthen our borders by increasing staff
and funding for necessary security measures.
If Republicans had not defeated these Democratic efforts to
enhance border security over the last 4 years, there would be
6,600 more border patrol agents, 14,000 more detention beds,
and 2,700 more immigration agents on the border.
On December 16, 2005, all 219 House Republicans voting that
day opposed a Democratic proposal to improve border security
and immigration enforcement by fulfilling the 9/11 border
security recommendations.
The proposal would have hired more border patrol agents,
ended the catch and release practice by authorizing 100,000
additional detention beds and incorporating state-of-the-art
surveillance technology, including cameras, sensors, radar,
satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles in order to ensure 100
percent border coverage. That happened to be H.R. 4437 and it
was captured from my legislation, H.R. 4400, that I offered as
a member of the House Judiciary Committee and Homeland Security
Committee.
I introduced H.R. 4044, the Rapid Response Border
Protection Act, which calls the White House and call the
Congress and indicate that there is a crisis in their State. It
allows for the United States Government then to dispatch a
thousand border patrol agents to that particular area. That
bill was to meet our border security needs by providing the
border patrol with the personnel, equipment and resources they
needed to secure the border. Yet our Republican leadership in
Congress has not allowed this bill to move forward.
When the administration and Congress obstructs efforts to
secure the border, State and local governments are left holding
the bag. In fact, the reimbursement dollars that we have
supported over the years, called SCAAP money, have been zeroed
out by this administration. That would allow our district
attorneys to be reimbursed for any of those individuals that
might not be in status or incarcerated in our jails. Cities and
States have to choose between funding schools versus doing the
Federal Government's job of securing the borders.
The President has acknowledged that our border security
needs more than just fences and deportation, but we need
leadership, not rhetoric, on this issue.
The public needs to know these facts so that it is not
duped into believing that Congress and the administration is
now doing, or in the 5 years since 9/11, has not been doing all
it can to protect our borders.
In a forum yesterday, I was asked the question why do not
these people just go into the United States military. Having
just recently come back from Iraq, I can answer the question
they do. On the front lines of Iraq and Afghanistan, we have
soldiers who are not yet citizens, but they have been willing
to carry the flag of the United States of America.
I look forward to hearings that will confront their service
in a reasonable, rational way: full funding for border
security, comprehensive immigration reform, pathway to
citizenship that allows those from Ireland, India, Pakistan,
and places south to be able to get in line and assume their
rightful place and commitment to the United States of America.
I look forward to hearing from the witnesses about real
tools that they need to secure our borders, and I look forward,
as I said, to upholding the flag of the United States for all
of those who choose to carry the flag, respect it and love it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back my time.
[The statement of Ms. Jackson-Lee follows:]
Prepared Opening Statement of Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee
Thank you Mr. chairman, and welcome to my district.
I want to begin by asking for a moment of silence to honor fallen
National Guard Spc. Kirsten Fike. She was two hours into the first day
of a border surveillance mission near Yuma when she collapsed and died
in the 100+ degree weather in Yuma, Arizona. She is from Pennsylvania
and is survived by her 13 year old son, Cody.
Today, we will hear from seventeen witnesses about criminal
activities and violence along the border.
Well, Mr. Chairman, Houston is quite a ways from the border.
Nevertheless, immigration is a very important issue to the metropolitan
city of Houston, to the great State of Texas as well as to the Nation.
Moreover, I think it is imperative that we in Congress deal jointly
with the inseparable issues of border security and comprehensive
immigration reform rather than stall the process of much needed
legislative reform.
As the Ranking Member for the Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on
Immigration, Border Security, and Claims and as a Member of the
Committee on Homeland Security, I know firsthand the complexities of
the issues surrounding border security and immigration reform. That is
why I am saddened by the simplistic and sometimes caustic rhetoric
regarding immigrants and immigration reform which is too often
articulated in an attempt to fuel anti-immigrant sentiment.
Mr. Chairman, 99% of all immigrants coming to this great country do
so because they want to work, improve their and their families'
opportunities for success, and reunite with their families. President
Bush recognized that fact in his May 15th address to the Nation calling
for the passage of the Senate immigration bill.
It is not lost on me, Mr. Chairman, that this hearing has been
convened in a courtroom rather than at a university or at City Hall. In
other words, Mr. Chairman, we are in an adversarial setting rather than
one designed for the free flowing exchange of ideas with the community
members directly impacted by immigration.
As we go through this hearing today, it is my wish that we not
smear the overwhelming number of decent persons who are hard-working,
tax-paying, law abiding immigrants.
We must also acknowledge that our Border Patrol agents and law
enforcement officials do an incredible job along the border, despite
facing tremendous challenges which include lack of personnel,
equipment, resources, and other types of support from this Republican
Administration and Congress.
There are some who paint as criminals all who cross the southern
border. Yet, While the Republican leadership in Congress focuses on the
Southern border with 10,000 Border Patrol agents stationed along the
2,000-mile border with Mexico, only 1/10th that amount is on the
Canadian border, a border that is 2.5 times as long as the Mexican
border. Recent news stories document how people fly, drive, walk, sail,
ski, and sled across the Northern border all the time. Furthermore,
Operation Frozen Timber, a multi-agency probe targeting cross-border
aerial drug smuggling along the U.S.-Canada border, uncovered one of
the most brazen criminal schemes ever in which a network of criminal
smuggling organizations used helicopters to ferry tons of drugs to
remote wooded locations in Washington and British Columbia.
Now I know there is violence along the Southern border. Criminal
enterprises are trying to control their turf for the trafficking and
smuggling of humans and drugs. That is why Congress and the President
must do more than simply and opportunistically give lip service to
securing the border. Since 9-11, House Republicans have rejected 7
Democratic amendments that would have strengthened our borders by
increasing personnel and funding for necessary security measures.
If Republicans had not defeated these Democratic efforts to enhance
border security over the last four years, there would be 6,600 more
Border Patrol agents, 14,000 more detention beds and 2,700 more
immigration agents on the border.
On December 16, 2005, all 219 House Republicans voting that day
opposed a Democratic proposal to improve border security and
immigration enforcement by fulfilling the 9/11 Commission's border
security recommendations.
The proposal would have hired more border agents, ended the ``catch
and release'' practice by authorizing 100,000 additional detention
beds, and incorporated state-of-the art surveillance technology,
including cameras, sensors, radar, satellites, and Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles in order to ensure 100% border coverage, [HR 4437, Vote #660,
12/16/2005, 198--221].
In addition, I introduced H.R. 4044, the ``Rapid Response Border
Protection Act'', to meet our border security needs by providing the
Border Patrol with the personnel, equipment, and resources they need to
secure our border. Yet, the Republican leadership in Congress has not
allowed this bill to move forward.
When the Administration and Congress obstructs efforts to secure
the border, states and local governments are left holding the bag.
Cities and states have to choose between funding schools versus doing
the Federal governments job of securing the borders.
The President has acknowledged that our border security needs more
than just fences and deportations. But we need leadership, not just
hollow rhetoric, on this issue.
The public needs to know these facts so that it is not duped into
believing that Congress and the Administration is now doing--or in the
five years since 9/11 has been doing--all it can to protect our
borders.
I look forward to hearing from the witnesses honest, complete, and
balanced testimony about the real tools they need to secure our border.
Thank you Mr. Chairman. I yield the balance of my time.
Mr. McCaul. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
Texas who is probably more accustomed to sitting where I am
rather than in the witness chair, Judge Ted Poe.
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for having this
hearing.
It is great to be back in a Harris County courtroom,
somewhat going through withdrawals. As soon as I walked in the
door, I said get a jury to the bailiff, and then we get a jury
made up of members of the press. I have never had a jury like
that before.
But it is great to be back here. Thank you for holding this
hearing.
As a member of the International Relations Committee and
the subcommittee on terrorism, this is a vital, important
hearing that the country knows exactly what is taking place on
both our northern and southern borders, and I think if the
American public was a jury, and they were deciding whether or
not our government is guilty or not guilty of securing the
border, our American jury would find the government guilty of
failure to secure the national sovereignty of the United States
on both borders, and that is why this hearing is extremely
important.
The issue is not legal immigration. The issue is those that
come to this Nation illegally and what, if anything, should be
done about that situation. You know, it is still illegal to
come to the United States without permission and that
permission is from the American people, the American
Government, and the Federal Government has failed to secure the
sovereignty of the United States.
All of our troopers that are here in this room to testify
later today do as good a job as the Federal Government will let
them do, and because of people who come here illegally, some of
them come here and commit crime. That should not be a surprise
to anyone.
We know that three drug cartels that work in Central
America and Mexico have found a haven for their product in the
United States, and they cross our southern border to sell that
cancer among our people. We know those coyotes--what an
appropriate name for those people, for money, smuggle other
people, that human cargo, into the United States, but we know
those coyotes, for a fee, will smuggle anybody in this country,
including those people who wish to cause us harm, we call those
people terrorists, and, of course, the gangs and the cartels
work alongside these individuals.
It is great to have one of my favorite sheriffs here,
Sheriff Flores, because the Texas sheriffs do a tremendous job
on border security, and thank you, Sheriff Flores, for being
here today to testify.
But we know that lawlessness on the border breeds more
lawlessness in the hinterlands of America, including Houston,
Texas. There are shootings on the border. There are burglaries.
Our ranchers down on the Texas border lose property, livestock.
Their homes are burned. That is all crime in America because of
those people illegally coming in here.
The GAO now has released a report that has stated that 25
homicides a day are committed by people in the United States
illegally in the United States. Twelve of those homicides are
vehicular homicides for the drivers under the influence of some
type of intoxicants. The other 13 are just old fashioned
murders that occur in the United States. That is a staggering
number of people murdered, both citizens, legal immigrants and,
yes, even illegal immigrants by people illegally in the United
States. It is because of the failure of our government to
secure the dignity and sovereignty of our border.
There have been 231 incursions by military police in the
last 10 years into our southern border. Some people deny that
this is the Mexican military by saying it's people playing
dress up and wearing Mexican uniforms that come into the United
States. Tremendous problem.
This weekend, I spent the weekend with Sheriff Luca Trevino
of Hidalgo County, another right-thinking American that is very
concerned about the crime that occurs in Hidalgo County. He
informed me of a little known fact that just a little over a
month ago down at Hidalgo County two of his deputy sheriffs
came under fire from automatic weaponry on the Mexican side of
the river. These deputies received 300 to 400 rounds of
automatic fire, fired from the Mexican side of the river, and
of course, it is a little-known fact because for some reason,
we do not print the truth that occurs, the lawlessness, on our
borders.
50,000 OTMs were arrested in this one county in 2005.
42,000 of them were released back into our community, and as
you have said, Mr. Chairman, most of those people with the
promise to come back to court to have their deportation
hearing, they did not show up. Why are we surprised? And they
were from Iraq, Iran, Indonesia and from China, all over the
world.
The United States protects the borders of other Nations.
Why do we not protect our own border? The Federal Government
has a responsibility to protect the border and prevent
incursions of those people who come here without permission.
Our community has become a haven for people who are
illegally here, and some of those people are committing
felonies.
The United States Government has prosecuted and ordered
deported 135,000 convicted felons that are from eight Nations
that refuse to take people back. One of those Nations is China.
Another Nation is India. What I am saying, Mr. Chairman, is
that these people have gone to our penitentiaries in the United
States, 135,000. They have been deported or ordered deported
and eight Nations refuse to take them back. So what happens to
those individuals? These convicted felons, illegally in the
country to begin with, are released back into the community
because of our government's failure to encourage other Nations
to take lawfully deported individuals back.
We must do a lot. It is not rhetoric. It is not politics.
We have the problem. We can solve the problem if the Federal
Government has the will to support the effort to protect our
borders.
And I do want to thank all of the witnesses here from the
military, to our local folks, to the sheriffs and to the
individuals that work for the Federal Government, and I yield
back the remainder of my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McCaul. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
Texas, Mr. Gene Green, for any statement he may have.
Mr. Green. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I would like to
thank both you and our colleague Congresswoman Jackson-Lee, who
serves on the Homeland Security Committee. Both Congressman Poe
and I serve on other committees, and I want to thank the
chairman for allowing me to have an opening statement, because
of this effort on these hearings around the country I was told
about a month ago that unless I showed up at my Energy and
Commerce hearing, which I was a given a week's notice for the
hearings in Georgia and Indiana, I could not participate in
these hearings. So, Mike, let me thank you for working our
differences out in a Texas way.
Like Judge Poe, I came to the courthouse for many years on
behalf of the company I helped manage, but I was never on this
side of the bench. So it is nice to sit here. I was always in
front of the bench. It is much better, I can see, sitting here
than out in front.
Immigration has been one of the major political topics, not
only nationally but in the Houston area, for decades. I have
been honored to represent districts, with most significant
Hispanic and Anglo populations, for many years, varying
districts in the State and in Congress.
I wanted to be present particularly today to express my
support for my constituents from the 29th district, Mr. and
Mrs. Ruiz, who will testify in the third panel, who lost a
daughter in a terrible murder that occurred by someone who was
here, as far as we know, illegally.
I am glad to see the committee in Texas listening to our
local concerns, but I am also worried that these hearings will
be used to prop up some inaccurate stereotypes and promote some
counterproductive policies.
Of the estimated 12 million undocumented people in the
United States, some of these people have certainly committed
crimes, including terrible ones like the murder of the Ruiz's
daughter, and we are working with local Federal law enforcement
officials and the government of Venezuela to apprehend and
bring this accused back to trial.
Undocumented workers and legal residents should know by now
that if they commit a serious crime or violent crime in our
country, it is the fastest way to be deported after you pay
your penalty and serve your time.
I certainly hope that the majority's purpose with this
hearing is not to try to blame Texas' crime on our Hispanic
undocumented immigrants. Almost all of the crime in Nuevo
Laredo and along the border involve drug traffickers, not
immigrants.
I also hope this hearing is not an attempt to support a
ballot initiative that may or may not be on the ballot in the
city of Houston to require the Houston police department to do
the work of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs enforcement.
The initiative is an unfunded mandate, and I think we will
learn more about that when our second panel with council member
Adrian Garcia, Houston Police Department Chief Hurtt testifys.
Requiring the HPD to enforce Federal civil immigration law
would mean they would have less time and resources to enforce
our own State and local criminal law. If the ballot initiative
passes, witnesses who are undocumented would not want to talk
to the police or testify. We know that from the history. Legal
residents and U.S. citizens in these communities will also be
afraid of HPD because they may have undocumented members of
their family.
We do not want a 16-year old citizen who has witnessed gang
violence, to refuse to talk to the police for fear that his
mother may be deported.
I have great sympathy for our witnesses from the border
areas who are seeing a huge increase in border violence due to
drug and kidnapping gangs and support their efforts.
Congress promised an initial 8,000 beds in the 9/11
Intelligence Reform Act, but Congress failed to put our money
where our mouth is. Conflicts overseas and recent tax cuts have
left little money on the table to fund border security
properly. America must secure our borders and we have to
sacrifice to do that, and that we should consider. If we are
going to protect our country, we have to do that.
The Democrat minority in Congress has offered several
amendments to add 600 additional border patrol agents and
14,000 detention beds along the border. When Judge Poe talked
about the countries that will not take their folks back, then
there is no reason they should be released into the population.
They are felons. They ought to be detained here until that
country, whatever country, will decide to take them back. We
need to have that bed space.
Our Texas colleague, Charlie Gonzalez, also offered a
recent amendment to the House immigration bill to increase
fines on employers that hire undocumented workers but the
majority rejected this amendment.
In 1999, the Clinton administration initiated fines against
417 companies for hiring undocumented workers. In 2004, the
Bush administration issued fines to a grand total of three
companies. I do not think it is gotten any better since 1999.
So I think we may be blaming the wrong folks for the increase
in crime.
The solution to our undocumented worker program is an
increase in border security and enforcement on employers. I
hope some of the hearings around the country will hear also not
just about the criminal problem, but I want to talk about an
incident, a case in my own district that I hope will get into
the testimony.
I had a young United States Marine from our district that
was killed in Iraq, the first time the Marines went in
Fallujah. He was a U.S. citizen as one of his sisters. In
working with his family, we found out that one sister was not a
citizen and is not a legal resident. His two parents who have
been coming back and forth across the border for probably 25 or
so years were not legal and actually had been picked up twice,
and under our civil law now, if you are picked up once you are
deported and you have a 5-year bar. You can never come to the
United States in 5 years, no matter what the reason. If you are
picked up a twice, you have a permanent bar. So they have a
permanent bar under current law ever coming to the United
States.
I would ask you, those parents are here but do we want to
have the parents of their son who died in Iraq, who volunteered
as a United States Marine, be deported to Mexico? I do not
think that is an issue. I think we ought to have a law that
would address this, and we cannot do it unless we pass
comprehensive immigration reform.
We need to stop the leaks on the border. We need to deal
with the undocumented population that is here. We need to
deport the criminals and find the ones who have been here and
not broken any criminal laws but may have broken our civil
laws.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, again, for being fair. That may
not be the case, in lots of jurisdictions under our committees.
[The statement of Mr. Green follows:]
Prepared Opening Statement of Hon. Gene Green
Thank you Chairman McCaul and Congresswoman Jackson-Lee for
allowing me to participate today.
Immigration has been one of the major topics of political debate in
the Houston area for decades.
I have represented districts with significant Hispanic and Anglo
populations for many years, so I am very interested in this hearing.
I also wanted to be present to express my support for our
constituents in the 29th District, Mr. and Mrs. Ruiz, who lost a
daughter in a terrible incident and will be testifying today on the
third panel.
I am glad to see this Committee in Texas listening to our local
concerns, but I am worried these hearings are being used to prop up
some inaccurate stereotypes and promote some counter-productive
policies.
Of the 12 million undocumented people in the United States, some of
these people have certainly committed crimes, including terrible crimes
like the murder of the Ruiz's daughert
Undocumented immigrants or legal residents should know by now that
committing a serious or violent crime is the fastest way to be deported
after you pay your penalty or serve your time.
I certainly hope that the majority's purpose with this hearing is
not to try to blame Texas' crime on Hispanic undocumented immigrants.
Almost all the crime in Nuevo Laredo and along the border involves
drug traffickers, not immigrants.
I also hope this hearing is not an attempt to support a ballot
initiative this November to force the Houston Police Department to do
the work of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The initiative is an unfunded mandate that will make us less safe.
I hope we can learn more about that issue from our panelists like
Councilmember Adrian Garcia and HPD Chief Harold Hurtt.
Requiring HPD to enforce federal civil immigration law will mean
they have less time and resources to enforce state and local criminal
law.
If the ballot initiative passes, witnesses who are undocumented
will not want to talk to the police or testify. Legal residents and
U.S. citizens in those communities will also be afraid of HPD because
they may have undocumented family members.
We do not want a 16-year old citizen who witnessed gang violence to
refuse to talk to the police for fear that his mother will be deported.
I have great sympathy for our witnesses from the border areas who
are seeing a huge increase in border violence due to drug and
kidnapping gangs.
Congress promised an additional 8,000 detention beds and 2,000 more
Border Patrol agents in the 9/11 Intelligence Reform Act, but Congress
has failed to put our money where our mouth is.
Conflicts overseas and recent tax cuts have not left enough money
on the table to fund border security properly. America must secure our
borders, and if we have to sacrifice to do that, then we should
consider it.
The Democratic minority in Congress has offered several amendments
to add an additional 6,600 Border Patrol agents and 14,000 detention
beds on the border, but these votes have failed due to the Republican
majority's opposition based on budgetary reasons.
Our Texas colleague Charlie Gonzalez also offered an amendment to
the recent House immigration bill to increase fines on employers that
hire undocumented workers but the majority also rejected his amendment.
In 1999, the Clinton Administration initiated fines against 417
companies for hiring undocumented workers. In 2004, the Bush
Administration issued fines to a grand total of three companies.
The solution to our undocumented worker program is to increase
border security and enforcement on employers.
We need to stop the leaks along the border and then we can deal
with the undocumented population that is here--deport the criminals and
fine the law-abiding ones.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Gene. And it is my intention at this
hearing, really, to get to the facts. No spin zone, no
politics, let's just hear the facts.
With that being said, I think it is fitting to set the
stage at the very beginning of this hearing before the
testimony to watch a video of real life down on the border in
Nuevo Laredo, which illustrates the state of violence better
than anything I could say up here. I would like to show this
video, and Sheriff Flores, since you are the one who tendered
the video, if you would narrate the video for us.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Chairman, might I inquire, is this to
be played on the record.
Mr. McCaul. Yes, it is.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Can the video testimony be submitted into
the record.
Mr. McCaul. Yes it can. Please proceed.
[Video was played.]
Mr. Flores. Mr. McCaul, distinguished members of the panel,
I do not think the video is doing justice because of the
volume. I think if you would have seen the beginning, the
actual volume of this video, you will get to hear the gunfire
of this incident that happened in Nuevo Laredo, and this is one
of many incidents that have occurred in Nuevo Laredo.
This one specifically is with the AFI, the Mexican
equivalent to the U.S. FBI, against one of the narco-
trafficking cartels that is taking place on the Mexican border.
Right now there is a turf battle between two cartels that, at
least, I understand is in Texas, all the way up to California,
between two cartels, which is the gulf cartel and the seno
lauro cartel and that is gun battle. The AFI, which was the
Federal police against the gulf cartel, and as you can barely
hear, this gun battle took some time, and just listen to all
the rounds that were spent during this battle.
There was cars that was blown up, people that were killed,
murdered in the streets, and you will actually get to hear one
of the individuals stating that he is working for his cousin
and calls him Lobo, Si Quinta Sia, which is known to be one of
the cartel leaders of the gulf cartel.
Mr. McCaul. Sir, can you describe the type of weapons
involved.
Mr. Flores. As far as we are concerned they are high
powered weapons, AK-47s, even up to maybe 50 calibers, RPGs. As
you can see the cars being blown up.
Mr. McCaul. By rocket propelled grenade.
Mr. Flores. Yes. The cartel is heavily armed. They have got
the resources. They have more resources than we do. It is
unfortunate, but I would like to add that these people who are
causing this terrorism on the border are not from Nuevo Laredo.
These are people that are coming from the Interior of Mexico
who want to take control over the border and pretty much have
taken control over the border but these are not people from
Nuevo Laredo and actually the people from Nuevo Laredo are
moving out of their communities and coming across into Laredo
do to live, due to the fact of safety issues and concerns.
We are talking businesses are opening up in Laredo do,
closing Nuevo Laredo because of the safety and security. Mr.
McCaul, you can see some of the bodies there but because we are
not being able to listen, at any time if you wanted to, you can
go ahead and stop the video.
Mr. McCaul. I believe the sheriff is correct. I think
everyone who sees this video and the destruction of bodies get
the point of the level of violence that we are dealing with.
This is the reality. This is what is bleeding over into our
communities. This is the violence coming into the United
States, and with that having been said, I will ask that we stop
the video.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Chairman, let me simply acknowledge
the video can be submitted, but I do want to acknowledge on the
record that the videotape is of Nuevo Laredo in Mexico, another
sovereign nation. The video is not of Laredo, Texas, and I
think it is important that distinctions are made, having had a
hearing in Laredo, and Sheriff Flores was there. The officials
in Laredo indicated that they feel that they have their city
under control, and this does not reflect the violence in
Laredo, Texas.
Mr. McCaul. Your comments are duly noted, Ms. Jackson-Lee.
We will hear more about that from sheriff Flores on that issue.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Thank you.
Mr. McCaul. I would like to say, a picture speaks a
thousand words, and I think the pictures behind me are speaking
1,000 words about the state of violence across the border that
impacts our border, that impacts our communities all across
this Nation.
With that having been said, I am pleased to have a
distinguished panel of witnesses before us today on this
important topic, and I want to remind the witnesses that their
entire written statement will appear in the record. We ask, due
to the number of witnesses on our panel, that you try to limit
your testimony to five minutes.
The chair now recognizes the Texas homeland security
director Steve McCraw for his testimony.
STATEMENT OF STEVE McCRAW, DIRECTOR, TEXAS HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. McCraw. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the
committee.
On behalf of Governor Perry, I want to thank you for
conducting this hearing here in Houston today. We think it is
very important you do so, to get out in the field, and it is a
reminder, and I see Chief Hurtt over here, is that what happens
on the border certainly impacts the border, but also impacts
Houston, Texas, and Houston police officers and the Travis
County Sheriff Department are also faced with the residue that
comes from the violence at the border.
Quickly, you did a great job, all members, in terms of
assessing the threat. I think you have got it nailed. You asked
what's different than if you worked it 10 years ago, or 20
years ago or from your career, Chairman, is that the, I will
call it, ruthlessness and violence is it is a different breed
in terms of impact.
In fact, it is better categorized, there is less Mexican
drug trafficking organizations and more organized crime
families, not unlike what we saw previously at the height of
the cosa nostra, the Sicilian mafia, and Russian organized
crime because they are no longer focused on drugs, and they no
longer just leave their drugs along the side of the road and
run for cover. In fact, they get a piece of all the action that
goes on between those corridors.
That is why, as Sheriff Flores pointed out most
appropriately, and he has to deal with it, they are competing
in the Nuevo Laredo to gain that corridor. Why? Because it is
organized crime. It makes money and it is not just in terms of
drug trafficking that it matters. Human smuggling. They are
getting a piece of it, and it is a very lucrative market.
People do not realize that you can make anywhere from $2,000
for a foreign national from Mexico up to 45,000 and beyond
depending upon country of origin.
So that is what you are up against right now. That is your
enemy, Mexican organized crime families that are competing, and
unfortunately they are the same names I recall 10 years ago
when there was Vicente Furio Fuentes or Cardenas. We know who
the enemy is. The difference is they are more ruthless and more
powerful and well financed, and they are deeply engaged in
intelligence collection on both sides of the border and can we
say, yes, they are involved in corruption, and that is the
situation that we face right now.
The most significant threat to Texas is two things:
catastrophic hurricane, number one, and this is the same, one
in one, and an unsecured unprotected 1246-mile border. Customs
and Border Patrol protection deserve great credit. The men and
women everyday are risking their lives. They have been
outstanding. We are very proud to work side by side with them.
There are other parts of this threat, and you mentioned it
very well: Number two, criminals. I think Congressman Poe
brought that out. It is not just the ones that are attached to
organized crime. America is the opportunity certainly for the
economic emigre but it also the opportunity for criminals
around the world. People from 134 different Nations were
arrested along the southern border of the U.S. from different
countries and some of those embedded in there unfortunately are
criminals.
The third, OTM, other-than-Mexican nationals, Texas,
135,045 were arrested in 2005 by border patrol, apprehended.
That constitutes roughly 85 percent of the OTMs that are
captured Nationwide, including the northern border, and
although the northern border, we could agree, is important, we
need to recognize in terms of the impact on the southern
border. The most significant threat in the prioritization has
got to be southern border. In fact, 98.5 percent of all illegal
apprehensions at the border including coastal, occur along the
southern border. That is where Mexican organized crime do
better.
The other thing is transnational gangs. I never would have
believed it. In 1995, we saw the first of it when Arellano
Felix started working with San Diego-based gangs, but who would
think that we would have MS-13, 80,000 members strong, and
10,000 members in the U.S. and moving across the country. In
fact, you know, the Canadians have a problem with MS-13, and
they are not getting there with help from Alaska. They are
coming through the southern border into Canada and other parts
of the east coast. That is a concern.
That said, what do we do? What is the governor to do?
Because two things that line up here. It is a national security
threat because we know that al-Qa'ida and now Hezbollah intends
to exploit the southern border of our country and Texas to get
in. So what do we do? And not just do something in terms of
declare an emergency. Actually do something.
One thing we found obviously, and I think the sheriffs, two
of them here today deserve great credit in terms of leadership,
hey, why don't we, one, work together and, two, what about
increased patrol presence. It works in urban areas. What about
along the border? And sure enough, they have demonstrated that
guess what it does work along the border. Increased patrol
presence decreases crime, all crime. That is very important.
These traffickers, organized crime families, they do want
to lose their human loads or drug loads. It forces them to shut
down when this patrol presence is in there, and it is not just
about the crime on American citizens. It is also crime on
illegal aliens.
People sometimes forget those that are most often raped,
robbed and murdered are the illegal immigrants coming here for
economic reasons, on both sides of the border that cross the
border. In fact, their biggest friends is law enforcement in
terms of rescuing them from these types of atrocities that
occur. That is who comes to their rescue, border patrol, the
sheriffs out in the middle of you know nowhere and desolate
areas.
It is important to remind that when it comes to the threat
we are not talking about Laredo proper. We are talking about
between the ports of entry and the sustainment in terms of
movement across. Those are the key things we just wanted to
talk about.
The other part in terms of increased patrol presence if we
look at the governor's strategy and you mentioned Rio Grande,
trying to watch my time here, Mr. Chairman, the other parts of
it is very simple. Increase patrol presence, okay, we have got
that. What about centralized intelligence, intelligence-driven
operations? Absolutely. There is no reason not to do that. Bad
guys do it. We need to be doing it as well. We need to get
inside the decision-making cycle.
The third one simply is command and control. We don't need
to be competing as law enforcement agencies. If the border
patrol does something and sheriffs do something and highway
patrol does something, it needs to be coordinated.
Last, technology, leverage it, information share it across
the board. Why not? We are confident and I will get back to the
one recommendation you will get from Texas is simply leverage
locals, leverage these professionals that know the threat
better and are charged with protecting their citizens from all
threats, foreign and domestic.
[The information follows:]
Prepared Statement of Steve McCraw
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on an
issue of such vital importance to the nation. My name is Steve McCraw
and I am Governor Rick Perry's Director of Homeland Security for the
State of Texas.
Criminal activity and violence along the porous Texas/Mexico border
is not new to Texans; however, what is new is the escalating national
security, public safety, and public health implications to our nation.
In December of 2000, I had an opportunity to testify before the House
Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime where I discussed the significant
threat posed by the convergence of organized crime, drug trafficking,
and terrorism. As I testified then, the convergence was a result of
world-wide economic, political, social, and technological changes that
resulted in a more dispersed, complex, and asymmetric threat to our
nation. I specifically cited the Carrillo-Fuentes Drug Trafficking
Organization based in Juarez, Mexico, to illustrate how violence had
become an integral part of drug trafficking activities along our
southern border. At the time, there were 300 drug related
disappearances in Juarez, Mexico, including 27 U.S. citizens. In El
Paso, there were 120 drug related homicides and 73 drug related
disappearances. I also discussed the emerging alliance between Mexican
drug traffickers and U.S. based gangs.
Much has changed since 2000; most significantly, the events of 9-
11. Border related crime has also changed as Mexican Drug Trafficking
Organizations have transitioned into powerful and ruthless Organized
Crime Families that now dominate the lucrative U.S. drug and human
smuggling market.
Over a year ago, Governor Rick Perry tasked me to conduct a
comprehensive border threat assessment as a result of the increased
incidents of violence on both sides of the Texas/Mexico border to
include the kidnapping and disappearances of U.S. citizens who lived in
our border cities. That assessment will be the basis of the threat
portion of my testimony today.
The border threat is multi-dimensional and can be viewed as five
interrelated parts; Mexican Organized Crime; transnational gangs;
foreign criminals; foreign nationals from countries with a known al-
Qa'ida, Hezbollah and Hamas presence; and evolving public health
concerns.
For over a decade, U.S. law enforcement has successfully identified
the leadership and hierarchy of Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations
which at one time isolated their criminal activities to drug
trafficking in specific smuggling corridors along the southern border.
These organizations were referred to either by the name of the
organization, such as the Amado-Carrillo Fuentes organization, or
geographic location, such as the Juarez or Gulf Cartels. These cartels
engaged in other criminal activity such as violence in support of their
drug trafficking operations and therefore were not considered Poly
Crime Organizations similar to the La Cosa Nostra or Sicilian Mafia.
Now many of these same drug trafficking organizations dominate all
aspects of the drug trade; production, transportation, and distribution
and have expanded their operations to other crimes, such as the
lucrative human smuggling market where foreign nationals are charged
anywhere from $2,000 to $45,000 per person based upon their country of
origin.
The fact is that Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations of old have
evolved to the point that they are best characterized as Mexican
Organized Crime Families rather than drug cartels.
To protect and expand their criminal operations, Mexican Organized
Crime Families maintain a highly developed intelligence network on both
sides of the border and have hired former military commandos. The best
known group is comprised of former Mexican military commandos known as
Los Zetas whose trade mark is overwhelming violence and they are
universally feared by their adversaries and all levels of the Mexican
government. Once they were strictly hired killers and now they profit
from their own smuggling operations.
The employment of former military commandos has had a reverberating
impact along the Texas/Mexico border in particular, Nuevo Laredo, where
Organized Crime families are battling for the highly treasured I-35
corridor into the U.S. At one time, members or associates of Mexican
Drug Trafficking Organizations would drop the drugs or abandon their
vehicles when confronted by U.S. law enforcement. Similarly, human
smugglers would simply give up when approached or stopped on the
highway. The Mexican Organized Crime Families no longer tolerate such
compliant behavior and loads of both, drugs and humans, are protected
by direct confrontations, high speed chases and stand offs at the Rio
Grande River. Border Patrol Agents are shot at from across the river
and Troopers and Sheriffs' Deputies are challenged to duals with
automatic weapons by members and associates of Mexican Organized Crime
while others retrieve their drug contraband. Mexican Organized Crime
now employ new highway tactics in Texas and when Police Officers
attempt to stop a suspect vehicle they are rammed in a coordinated
attack by other vehicles providing counter surveillance.
Mexican Organized Crime Families have also corrupted certain
Mexican military units to transport drugs into the U.S. A Texas Ranger
investigation confirmed that this has occurred on at least one occasion
and that there have been other border incursions that the evidence
strongly indicates were done so by Mexican military units.
The Mexican Organized Crime families that directly impact Texas are
well known to U.S. and Mexico law enforcement. Osiel Cardenas Guillen,
Ignacio Coronel-Villarreal, Joaquin Guzman-Loera, Juan Esparragosa-
Moreno, Arturo Beltran-Leyva, Ismael Zamada-Garcia, Vicente Carrillo
Fuentes, and Benjamin Felix-Arellano.
The five Organized Crime Families of Coronel-Villarreal, Guzman-
Loera, Esparragosa-Moreno, Beltran-Leyva and Zamada-Garcia have joined
together to fight for control of the I-35 corridor in Nuevo Laredo.
This consortium has been referred to as the ``Alliance.'' The Cardenas
Guillen and Felix-Arellano families have joined forces to combat the
Alliance. The result is unrelenting violence in the streets of Nuevo
Laredo.
The second area of concern is transnational gangs who now work for
and with Mexican Organized Crime to conduct enforcement operations on
both sides of the border. They also conduct their own criminal
operations including retail drug distribution and human smuggling.
These gangs include the Mara Salvatrucha, aka MS-13, Mexican Mafia,
and the Texas Syndicate. MS-13 is the most problematic with
approximately 80,000 members internationally and approximately 10,000
members and growing in the U.S. They have long been associated with the
Mexican Mafia and are well known for their use of torture,
dismemberment, rape, and execution. Approximately 90% of U.S. MS-13
members are illegal aliens and depend upon the Texas/Mexico border
smuggling corridor to support their criminal operations around the
nation. The Texas Syndicate is a Texas prison gang whose members also
serve as mercenaries for Mexican organized crime on both sides of the
border and street level drug distributors in Texas cities.
The third aspect of the border threat is foreign criminals who come
to the U.S. seeking crime opportunities. As these violent criminals
cross the border, they rob, rape, extort, invade homes, and vandalize,
forcing Texas land owners off their property. At one time, illegal
aliens were non-threatening and appreciative when Texas land owners
left them water and food provisions. This is no longer the case as
Texans are now threatened by armed criminals on their own land.
Recently in Tyler, Texas, two illegal aliens shot a DPS Trooper five
times at point blank range after a traffic stop. When they were finally
captured, it was discovered that they were fully armed wearing bullet
proof vests and each had been arrested and deported to Mexico on two
separate occasions. Foreign criminals also prey on other illegal aliens
who rob, rape, kill, or abandon. On July 17, 2006, Victor Rodriguez was
sentenced to 20 years in prison for his involvement in the death of 19
illegal immigrants he was smuggling into the U.S. And on the same day,
three criminals from Mexico were sentenced for smuggling young women
and girls from Mexico to the U.S. and then using threats, deception,
physical force, and coercion to compel their services as prostitutes in
Houston area bars.
Since the events of 9-11, Americans have been appropriately
concerned about the ability of foreign nationals from countries with a
known al-Qa'ida presence to leverage Mexican Organized Crime
capabilities to enter the U.S. undetected. Mexican Organized Crime is
motivated by money and they do not vet paying customers. In fact, there
is no such thing as a ``no walk list.'' We even have a new term, Other
Than Mexican Nationals (OTMs) to better delineate this problem. When
assessing border crime it is important to recognize that International
Terrorism Organizations are well financed and the high paying customers
of Mexican Organized Crime are the least likely to be apprehended when
smuggled into the U.S. The Customs and Border Patrol Fiscal Year 2005
apprehension statistics illustrates well why all Americans should be
concerned about the criminal activity along the southern border.
In Fiscal Year 2005, 98.5% of all illegal alien apprehensions
occurred along the southern border and 85.84% of all the OTMs arrested
occurred on the southern border. Texas alone accounted for 87.12% of
the OTM apprehensions.
Crime along our southern border brings with it another threat that
we should closely monitor, disease. In Fiscal Year 2005, the Customs
and Border Patrol apprehended illegal aliens from 134 different
countries including several with known disease problems. As the specter
of pandemic flu looms, it will be increasingly important to secure our
borders from this public health threat as well.
Based upon the above assessment, Governor Perry ordered the
development and execution of an evidence-based strategy to assist the
Federal Government in securing our border and that it be done so with
the sense of urgency it warrants.
State efforts began in November of last year by first leveraging
the local law enforcement expertise of the 16 Border Sheriffs to
conduct increased patrols between the ports of entry in their Counties
funded by the State. In addition, Texas Department of Public Safety
Highway Patrol Troopers increased their patrols in the border area.
Governor Perry expanded the scope of Texas border security operations
in February, 2006, when he launched Operation Rio Grande which is
comprised of four essential components; increased patrol presence,
centralized command and control, centralized intelligence, and
leveraging technology. Governor Perry's objective is to decrease all
crime within the area of operation which includes all jurisdictions
within 100 miles of the 1,240 mile Texas/Mexico Border. This, in turn,
will decrease crime in other areas of Texas and the nation. It has long
been demonstrated, whether in a rural or urban setting, increased
visible patrols decreases all crime and is applicable to the Texas
border region. In addition to more ``boots on the ground'' the State is
conducting fully integrated, threat based, intelligence driven
operations to attack criminal activity and deny foreign criminals and
terrorists easy access to Texas and the rest of the United States. The
focus is on targeted, short duration, high-intensity operations in
predetermined hi-value areas. For example, in Operation Del Rio,
Mexican organized criminal activity ceased in a three county area along
the border and the crime rate in Val Verde County was reduced by 76%
and by 27% in Maverick County. Similar results were achieved in
Operation Laredo. The five county Laredo area operation realized an
overall crime rate reduction of at least 65%. The fact is these intense
operations work.
In Operation Del Rio, four Federal agencies, the Texas Army
National Guard, DPS and Border Patrol SWAT Teams, four separate
aviation components, four separate water patrol units, including the
Texas Parks and Wildlife, and seven different local law enforcement
agencies participated in this unified effort. The same level of
participation was evident in Operation Laredo and continued in
Operation El Paso. Before I continue, I would like to publicly commend,
on behalf of Governor Perry, the brave men and women of the Border
Patrol who serve as the cornerstone of all successful border
operations.
I am aware that there are many well-intentioned people who view
increased patrol presence along the border as a threat to law-abiding
citizens here legally. Some have even downplayed the presence of those
here illegally based on the fact that many are simply trying to feed
their families and survive economically. While we can all sympathize
with the desire, the fact is that you cannot look at someone who is
crossing the border illegally and determine whether that individual is
here merely seeking employment and opportunity, or to engage in
criminal, or even terrorist activity, to harm our citizenry. In a post
9-11 threat environment, it is imperative that those who cross our
border illegally are properly vetted.
The Texas Border Security Operations Center was established to
centralize the coordination of border enforcement activities and
operations in order to maximize the impact on the criminal
organizations and terrorists while at the same time leveraging all
available resources in a coordinated manner. The Texas Border Security
Operations Center also provides a centralized intelligence capability
providing a uniform view of the threat picture and operating
environment on a 24/7/365 basis. We have learned that our adversaries
have an extensive intelligence network and it is vitally important that
we do as well. In fact, I can assure you they are monitoring this
hearing today in Houston.
Our Nation's adversaries also leverage technology and so must we.
The technology plan for the Governor's strategy focuses on four
essential areas: establishment of a virtual neighborhood watch;
establishment of an integrated web-based information sharing tool for
all law enforcement personnel in Texas; radio interoperability capable
of supporting border enforcement operations; and the placement of live
scan fingerprint booking stations in every county in Texas. The border
is receiving many of these technologies on an expedited basis because
of the threat to public safety that exists there.
There has been an underinvestment in border security for decades
which is no longer acceptable in a post 9-11 threat environment.
Moreover, the scope and magnitude of the terrorism and crime threat to
our state and the nation requires immediate action leveraging local and
state expertise and resources. Governor Perry has announced that he
will work with the Texas legislature to obtain $100 million dollars in
state funding to support border security activities. The funding is
needed to support increased numbers of local commissioned officers
throughout the border region to include salary and benefits and the
necessary equipment for these officers to include vehicles and weapons
and air support.
Let me close by saying this: while it is the responsibility of the
federal government to enforce our immigration laws, it is wholly within
the purview of state and local law enforcement to address illegal and
criminal activity that occurs on Texas soil. And there are numerous
instances in which a state or local officer, in stopping someone for a
violation of our state law, determines that a person is in violation of
federal law by being here illegally.
This is unavoidable; not only along the border, but in cities and
towns all across Texas as law enforcement faithfully executes its
responsibilities. We make no apologies for implementing an aggressive
criminal apprehension and prevention effort that in effect helps
federal officials enforce our immigration laws even though that is not
the specific purpose of our operation.
Thank you. I would be happy to take your questions.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. McCraw, and I want to commend
you for your efforts at the State level and the governor for
your enforcement operations which should be a Federal
responsibility. I think you all have really stepped up to the
plate and you should be commended for that.
Our next witness is Colonel Malesky and the Chair now
recognizes you.
STATEMENT OF COLONEL RUSSELL MALESKY, COUNTERDRUG COMMANDER,
TEXAS NATIONAL GUARD
Colonel Malesky. On behalf of Major General Chuck
Rodriguez, I want to thank you for inviting us to provide
testimony for this panel.
As the commander of the counterdrug task force, I have been
involved with supporting law enforcement agencies at the local,
State and Federal agencies for about 16-1/2 years now. I want
to grab a Yogism here from Yogi Berra, who is the one who said
you can observe a lot by watching. I have been in a very unique
position as a member of the Armed Services serving for the
governor and the adjutant general as a member of the Texas
National Guard to watch law enforcement, observe how they do
their business, how committed they are to the job, and how
daunting the threat is to a small amount of protection to our
security.
By providing additional services through the Texas military
forces, the Texas Army Air National Guard, through the county
drug program, we provide force enhancement with regard to
providing aircraft, one vehicular airplane, some helicopters,
some folks doing investigative case and analytical support to
the various Interagencies, and in fact, one of those soldiers
is sitting beside Mr. Pena from immigration and Customs of
course. He is one of 223 on the counterdrug task force.
In addition to the counterdrug task force, I have some
limited oversight of the border support mission. One of the
other uniform service members, they are in the back of the
auditorium, who is the commander of the jump start mission,
which represents approximately 25 percent of 6,000 soldiers and
airmen from the National Guard who are working in support of
border protection. So both of those missions we put together
and call our law enforcement support cadre for the country.
Texas represents 10 percent of the National Guard's
counterdrug program. Congress capped that program back in 1990
at 4,000 soldiers and airmen. Today there are approximately
1,900 soldiers and airmen serving across the 54 States and
territories on that counterdrug program.
I would like to give you some facts, and it is the neat
thing about being in uniform is that we can stay away from the
politics and just stick to the facts.
That one RC-26 that flies out of 147th fire wing in the
last 10 months provided these numbers to me: 298.7 hours on the
southwest border, which is 60 percent of their assigned mission
hours. In that time, the results are the supported apprehension
of 5,430 pounds of marijuana, 30 pounds of meth, 1,122 pounds
of coke, 10 drug related arrests, and the byproduct, which we
cannot claim because we are a counterdrug program, are the
undocumented alien apprehensions of 173 bodies and 97 that were
not apprehended because we couldn't get people to respond to
the crossing and so on. Cash of $40,000, vehicles of eleven,
and this one stands out in my mind, 16 fully automatic empty
firearms cases in one recent takedown or weapons and 2,200
rounds of ammunition in that particular one.
That is just one element of the counterdrug task force in
the State. That one airplane flies 1,200-plus miles of the
border of Texas, and in this case, was able to fly the 200-mile
segment of the border over 4 hours when the crossings took
place, like a soda straw, as to focus in that one area. I
myself fly the airplane and have been on that mission when we
have been following crossings. While other sensors are going
off and the border patrol agents in that area are focused on
what we are looking at, there is further response with the
additional guardsmen supporting a jump start hoping we could
kind of help support law enforcement in getting a handle on
those numbers.
But the bottom line is the counterdrug task force is very
small, a very small footprint. The operation jump start
mission, slightly larger footprint on the southwest border.
Geared to shut down in 2 years as border patrol hires the
agents to replace those guardsmen who are in support roles to
them. So it is force enhancement, force multiplier.
The counterdrug program 17 years ago was stood up to being
a force enhancement, a force multiplier for just a couple of
years. Here we are 16 years later, still focused because over
those 16 years we have developed military unique skills that
work hand in hand with the Interagency partners of law
enforcement.
I am sure Mr. Pena would stand up since he has got a
guardsman in the room and support what the National Guard has
provided. Just 2 days ago, at one of the points there in
Falfurrias 4,000 pounds of marijuana was apprehended in a
tractor trailer. The guardsmen on the Operation Jump Start
mission helped support that. That marijuana in that case was
turned over to the DEA in Corpus Christi, where counterdrug
investigative and analytical support personnel like the
sergeant here are assigned to now further work that case for
the DEA.
So as the National Guard, we get the very unique
opportunity to cross the Interagency barrier with uniforms that
don't say DEA, Customs and border protection, FBI, narcotic,
DPS, or whatever. We are the Texas Air National Guard, and we
help in many ways bring the Interagency together through our
relationship.
As I close my testimony, I will end with a Yogism, the
future ain't what it used to be. That is another way of saying
in our realm tomorrow is a lot more scarier than it was
yesterday because I have had a chance to see it firsthand.
Thank you, sir.
[The information follows:]
Prepared Statement of Russell Malesky
Purpose and scope: Provide an overview of the Texas Military Forces
Joint Counterdrug Task Force (JCDTF) and demonstrate adaptability of
Counter Drug resources to Homeland Security (HLS).
1. The mission of the JCDTF is to provide highly trained and
experienced military personnel and equipment to support the Law
Enforcement Interagency effort as well as community
organizations to reduce supply and demand of and for illegal
drugs. The JCDTF currently consists of 148 Army National Guard
soldiers and 75 Air National Guard airmen on full time National
Guard Duty active duty status and seven Air National Guard
Active Guard Reserve (AGR) officers, all serving pursuant to 32
USC, under the Command and Control of the Governor and Adjutant
General of Texas, Major General Charles G. Rodriguez. These
personnel additionally serve in drilling/reserve status in
their military occupations while also in support to Law
Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) and Community Based Organizations
(CBOs).
a. The Texas National Guard provides CD support to the
Texas Department of Public Safety, U.S. Drug
Enforcement Administration, U.S. Postal Service, DHS-
CBP/ICE, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the
Internal Revenue Service, other Federal and State drug
law enforcement forces, interagency Task Forces, County
Sheriff's Offices, and local police departments
throughout Texas. We are a broad interagency support
Task Force detailed in an annual State Plan approved by
the Adjutant General, State Attorney General and
Governor. Activities can be categorized into three
major functional areas: Supply Reduction, Demand
Reduction, and oversight of the National Guard
Substance Abuse testing program. The commander of
Counterdrug also maintains over sight of the Texas
STARBASE and ChalleNGe programs and is appointed by the
Governor as Texas' Law Enforcement Support Office
(LESO) Coordinator to transfer surplus federal
equipment to State and local agencies. Specific program
mission categories include support to CBOs and
educational institutions, youth leadership development,
coalition development and support, information
dissemination, investigative case support, intelligence
analysis, linguist support, photo development and
interpretation, aviation and ground reconnaissance, and
marijuana eradication. All of these programs are funded
by a Fiscal Year 2006 (FY06) budget of approximately
17.0 million dollars with the exception of the
separately Federal and State funded ChalleNGe and
STARBASE programs in Galveston and Houston, TX.
b. The mission of the Drug Demand Reduction (DDR)
program is to organize and/or expand community efforts
to form coordinated and complementary systems that
reduce substance abuse in Texas. In FY05, TX-CD reached
more than 50,000 people in Texas with a drug prevention
message. Over 95% of these individuals are teenagers.
c. Supply reduction activities consists of a variety of
CD missions in direct support of local, State, and
Federal law enforcement throughout Texas. Providing
unique military-oriented skills, the program is clearly
a force-multiplier for LEAs. The types of support
provided are diverse, focusing primarily on
investigative and interdiction efforts. For FY05, the
JCDTF was involved in locating and seizing 1,277
marijuana plants, 1,610,731 pounds of processed
marijuana, 138,672 pounds of cocaine and 313 pounds of
methamphetamine, 32,627 doses of ecstasy and other
drugs for a total street value of $934,222,550.00. To
date in FY06, the JCDTF has been involved in locating
and seizing 20 marijuana plants, 198,245 pounds of
processed marijuana, 84,171 pounds of cocaine, 269
pounds of methamphetamine, 5,862 doses of ecstasy and
other drugs for a total street value of
$716,149,451.00.
(1) Investigative support is provided in
several different categories and helps tie
Federal, State, and local agencies together by
a network of Guardsmen spanning the interagency
effort. Case support primarily focuses on file
documentation and management, while LEA tasked
and supervised Guard intelligence analysts
employ advanced analytical skills to provide
the interagency effort with tactical
interdiction and investigative options.
d. As part of its supply reduction efforts, surface and
air reconnaissance/observation draws on unique military
skills and equipment that various LEAs do not possess.
Highly trained personnel and aviators monitor
activities in remote drug corridors to include the
Border. Rotorcraft and fixed wing aircraft with thermal
imaging equipment, night vision devices, and high-tech
communications equipment operate to provide invaluable
information and support to LEAs.
(1) The JCDTF operates four TXARNG OH-58
helicopters as part of its Counter Drug
Aviation Element (CDAE). These aerial
reconnaissance helicopters are equipped with an
infrared thermal imaging system, a daylight TV
camera, a law enforcement compatible Wulfsburg
radio, and a Global Positioning System. After
dark, they can be flown using Night Vision
Goggles as well as a 30 million candlepower
Nitesun. Additionally, they possess a video
downlink capability.
(2) The JCDTF tasks one ANG Fairchild RC-26
reconnaissance aircraft assigned to the 147FW,
Houston, TX. Capabilities of this aircraft
include a color TV imager with up to 900mm zoom
and a state of the art thermal imaging system
with remarkable clarity. Reconnaissance
accuracy is significantly enhanced by the RC-
26's moving map display and high-resolution
digital and color photo capability. The
aircraft can stay airborne for several hours at
a time and is ideally suited for aerial
detection and monitoring. The radio
communications suite includes secure voice
Global Wulfsburg and 800Mhz capabilities. In
times of National emergency, Counterdrug
Aviation Element (CDAE) (OH-58) and RC-26
aircraft provide critical command, control and
coordination to law enforcement and rescue/
recovery operations, such as during the
February 2003 Shuttle Columbia accident and the
September, 2005 Hurricane Katrina search and
rescue operation.
(3) The Special Observation Detachment (SOD)
conducts low visibility observation and
reconnaissance of Named Areas of Interest
(NAIs) in support of Federal, State and local
CD operations. (SOD) provides initial mission
planning and coordination, command and control,
field operators, and support personnel. (SOD)
can deploy a single operator, a small element,
or the entire detachment in support of the
approved request. These personnel can be
available within 2 hours of the request for
deployment anywhere in the state of Texas to
provide discreet photo, video, microwave and
thermal imagery while establishing its own
short range, secure voice VHF communications
net that quickly adapts to interface with law
enforcement VHF nets. (SOD) also trains LEAs in
military skills critical to CD operations
extremely applicable to Homeland Security.
e. The Program also provides oversight for National
Guard substance abuse testing as part of the Internal
Substance Abuse Prevention Program in Texas which
consists of over 20,000 soldiers and airmen. The
Counterdrug Commander manages the substance abuse
program for the Texas Army and Air National Guard. The
substance abuse staff assigned to the program provides
administrative and logistical support to units while
overseeing the execution of individual drug testing
programs. Counterdrug personnel also provide
qualification training and expertise to drug testing
personnel at the unit level.
f. The Texas Counterdrug President's Budget (PB) for
FY06 is $16.4 million. This budget is disbursed from
federal funding supporting all of the program's supply
and demand reduction activities to include 100% of the
223 service members' salaries. Every year the National
Guard Bureau disburses a Congressional supplemental at
their discretion. In the past, Texas has received a 10%
budget increase; this year Texas only received a 5%
increase to the budget.
2. Considerations for Future JCDTF Application: This year the
JCDTF was heavily depended upon to leverage the initiation of
the Operation Jump Start (OJS) mission although funding was
required to be kept separate. National Guard Bureau Legal
Counsel determined Operation Jump Start was not sufficiently
related to narcotics, thus, for fiscal law reasons, the two
missions must be kept separate. In years past the JCDTF has
supported the Border Patrol under a clear drug nexus along the
Southwest Border. The ``by-product'' of CD support involved
deterring illegal immigration and facilitating counter-
terrorism. Historical mission requests show that prior to OJS,
legal concerns were not emphasized that detoured Counterdrug
resources from supporting non-CD illegal activities as long as
original intent was CD focus. The OJS mission, though
separately funded, is already being partially measured
according to volume of additional illicit drug traffic seized.
The National Guard's current support of OJS is significantly
multiplying the effectiveness of USCBP and other law
enforcement agencies along the southern border with Mexico.
a. In closing, based on seventeen years of JCDTF
experience several key factors are evident: 1) the
capabilities brought through operational daily National
Guard activity support roles to LEAs; 2) unique
military skill sets and technology provided to LEAs
that otherwise would not be available; 3) and the
continually developing and evolving unique Counterdrug
domestic military adaptability built through a daily,
operational active duty synergistic support with the
Interagency effort has matured the Joint Army and Air
National Guard Counterdrug mission into a premiere
interagency planning, coordination and executing
support capability. Strictly defining JCDTF's mission
capability according to funding restrictions limits
Homeland Security, stalls the flexibility of funding
necessary to keep the mission continually adaptable,
and creates unnecessary legal impediments to commit
proven capabilities to requirements (broader yet
related somewhat to CD) that are critical during time-
sensitive scenarios. The Counterdrug mission can remain
the Counterdrug mission while adapting through
increased authority and further incremental funding for
it's law enforcement support role, to provide Homeland
Security through 1) Counterdrug, 2) Counter-Terrorism
and 3) Other assigned civil-military security measures
under local, State and Federal tasking modeled after
the highly successful CD mission. So that one agency is
not prioritized over another, percentages might be
assigned to support the various Interagency partners
who have come to depend on Counterdrug capabilities
according to what they are capable of doing. Today,
Counterdrug is a funding statement and not a
capability. It is now time to broaden explicitly the
allowable use of Counterdrug personnel and resources
for employment broadly against fast evolving threats to
our homeland brought on by adverse natural conditions
and sinister enemies, none who are bound by self
imposed funding application. The JCDTF capability
should be re-titled as National Guard Support to
Homeland Defense and Security.
Purpose and scope: Provide an overview of the Texas Military Forces
Joint Task Force Texas Border Support (JTFTX-BS) support to the United
States Border Patrol.
1. The mission of the JTFTX-BS is to provide highly trained and
experienced military personnel and equipment to support the
United States Border Patrol in five sectors along the
Southwestern Border of Texas. The five sectors are Rio Grande
Valley, Del Rio, Laredo, Marfa, and El Paso. Within the five
sectors are forty-three locations were the Texas Military
Forces are providing support to Border Patrol, but are not
engaged in direct law enforcement duties. The JTFX-BS currently
consists of approximately 1,500 Army National Guard soldiers
and Air National Guard airmen on full-time National Guard duty
status all serving pursuant to 32 USC, under the Command and
Control of the Governor and Adjutant General of Texas, Major
General G. Charles Rodriguez.
2. JTFTX-BS provides assistance to the Border Patrol in the
following missions: Clerical / Administrative, Law Enforcement
Communications Assistant (Dispatcher), Welder, Fleet Porter,
Control Room Operator, Mechanics, Supply NCO, Light Set
Servicing, Electronic/Technical Support, Camera Operator,
Sensor Support, Scope Truck, Sky Box / Sky Watch Tower
Operators, Security, Range Safety Officer / Armorer,
Engineering, Checkpoint Support, Criminal Analysis, Information
Analyst, and Entry Identification Team.
3. JTFTX-BS support to law enforcement has resulted in 165
United States Border Patrol agents being returned to duty
outside station headquarters.
4. With regards to the deployment of soldiers in assistance to
U.S. Border Patrol, apprehensions of Undocumented Aliens are
down in each of the five Border Patrol Sectors compared to the
same time in 2005 and 2004. There has been a considerable
increase in the seizures of narcotics in both the Rio Grande
Valley and El Paso sectors, as measured and reported by USCBP.
5. Each BP Sector is reporting a noticeable increase in the
effectiveness of their wheeled vehicle garages. Sectors are
reporting they are receiving vehicles repaired and back in the
field anywhere from 35% to 50% more quickly since the arrival
of the Texas National Guard in their sectors.
6. JTFTX-BS also is supporting the U.S. Border Patrol with
aviation and engineer support based on requests from the Border
Patrol Chief within each of the five sectors in Texas.
In closing the Texas Military Forces are having a positive effect on
the security of the Southwest Border of Texas. The relationship between
Texas National Guardsmen with the United States Border Patrol has been
excellent.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Colonel, and I want to thank you for
your efforts and the Texas National Guard. I had the good
fortune of working with your unit before I was elected to
Congress, and I want to applaud your efforts and I am fully
supportive.
Next, we will hear from our good friend from Laredo,
Sheriff Flores.
STATEMENT OF SHERIFF RICK FLORES, SHERIFF, WEBB COUNTY, STATE
OF TEXAS
Mr. Flores. I wrote a speech and told I had 5 minutes. I am
not going to go with my speech. I am going to speak from the
heart.
We have been having the battle with this type of terrorism
along our border, and I am saying we, our colleagues, the
Sheriffs Coalition, the Texas Border Sheriffs Coalition or the
Southwest Sheriffs Coalition, have been battling with narco-
traffickers and drug cartels for a very long time. We have been
dealing with these people for a very long time.
And I am going to qualify what Ms. Jackson-Lee said. I am
not concerned about the violence that is occurring in Nuevo
Laredo. What I am concerned about is that these people have
more resources than we do on this side. These people have
rocket propelled grenades. They have got automatic assault
weapons. They wear level four body armor and Kevlar helmets,
actually, what our people in Iraq are wearing, and we don't
have that type of equipment along the border.
We are first responders. Anytime somebody calls 9/11, it is
we, local law enforcement, who respond to the calls. It is not
border patrol. It is not ATF. It is not FBI, DEA. It is local
law enforcement who respond. We do not have the resources along
the border to protect our border or to continue to protect our
borders.
And she is absolutely correct, the violence is not in
Laredo. Thank God that we have it contained, but you know what,
these people are willing to make a quick buck with people who
are interested in coming to Mexico and use Mexico as a jumping
board to come into the United States of America. The country
that I love, that we all love Ms. Jackson-Lee, and I am
concerned about the fact that the people are making their way
through Mexico are people that are not interested in coming to
work.
Mexicans, and I will say this and make this clear, Mexicans
are not terrorists. Many, most come to work. It is the other
than Mexicans that we are concerned with, that I am concerned
with, and that these people are willing to pay narco-
traffickers to come into this country.
I have got a wife and two kids, and I work along the
border. Do you think that those people want my head on a plate?
Well, let me just tell you, in the 18 months that I have been
in office, we have confiscated $17 million worth of narcotics,
just the sheriff's department alone, $1.5 million in cash. And
if they really wanted, they could get to me, they could get to
Sheriff Jernigan and the rest of the sheriffs who are trying to
protect our borders and who are interrupting their business.
Thank you.
The Mr. Flores's prepared statement is maintained in the
committee file.
Mr. McCaul. Sheriff, thank you for your heartfelt, sincere
testimony. I want to personally thank you for what you do
everyday on the front lines in this great struggle and in what
I believe is a war, and as you know, in the bill we passed out
of the House, we do provide funding and resources for the
sheriffs.
Notes
Mr. Flores. Thank you.
Mr. McCaul. Next, the Chair now recognizes Mr. Alonzo Pena,
the Special Agent In Charge of U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement.
STATEMENT OF ALONZO PENA, SPECIAL-AGENT-IN-CHARGE, IMMIGRATION
AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Pena. Chairman McCaul, Representative Sheila Jackson-
Lee and the other Members, thank you for providing me the
opportunity to speak with you today about U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, better known as ICE, our efforts to combat
border violence in south Texas.
ICE is the largest investigative agency within the
Department of Homeland Security, and our mission is to protect
the American people by combating terrorism and other criminal
activities that cross our borders and threaten us here at home.
The men and women of ICE accomplish this by enforcing our
Nation's Immigration and Customs laws.
Our southern border is particularly vulnerable to cross-
border criminal activity committed by criminal enterprises
whose primary motive is to make money. The crimes we see,
murder, hostage taking, alien smuggling, contraband smuggling
and money laundering, are all methods that the criminals use to
gain and expand their market share to maximize profits of their
criminal enterprises.
At this time, I also would like to show a short video clip
of the 2003 arrest of Oziel Cardenas-Guillen in Matamoros,
Mexico, the border city located directly across the
international bridge from Brownsville, Texas. The video
provides a graphic image of the level of violence utilized by
the cartels across the border.
Mr. McCaul. Without objection, so ordered.
[Video shown.]
Mr. Pena. Thank you. ICE is acutely aware of the violence
along both sides of the border. In January of 2006, in direct
response to an increase in the violence, Secretary Chertoff
announced the creation of an ICE-led border enforcement
security task force, better known as BEST. The first task force
was established in Laredo, Texas, to address the growing
incidence of violence associated with cross-border smuggling.
The BESTs routinely develop intelligence-driven
investigations which focus on primary targets engaged in cross
border crime. The BEST in Laredo incorporates personnel from
ICE; Customs and Border Protection; Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Firearms; the Drug Enforcement Administration; Federal Bureau
of Investigation; the U.S. Marshal Service; police in Mexico,
Laredo police department and other key State and local law
enforcement agencies such as the Webb County Sheriff's
Department, who is represented here today.
This coordinated approach among Federal, State and local
law enforcement officers has led to significant enforcement
successes. For example, in January of this year, ICE agents
from our Laredo office, along with ATF agents, Laredo Police
Department Officers assigned to BEST, arrested several suspects
for Federal firearms violations and executed Federal search
warrants at two local residences and a commercial storage
locker, resulting in the seizure of 10 live hand grenades, nine
pipe bombs, a cache of fully automatic weapons to include AK-
47s, parts to manufacture automatic weapons, a silencer, 86
grenade casings and numerous other grenade components. In
addition to the weapons, methamphetamine and cocaine was also
seized at the residence.
Since the announcement of the BEST in Laredo, and in light
of its great success, ICE and Customs and border protection has
launched a second BEST in Arizona. We anticipate the additional
task forces will be established along the southwest border in
locations between 2006 and 2007.
ICE agents face numerous challenges in the battle to combat
crime and violence along the border. However, the violence
often extends beyond the border and into the interior of our
country. Transnational street gangs, often comprising foreign
born members, pose one of the biggest threats to the safety and
security of our towns and cities. Many of these violent gangs
actively engage in human contraband and human smuggling,
bribery, extortion, rape and murder.
In response to this threat, in February of 2005, ICE
initiated ``Operation Community Shield.'' As part of this
effort, ICE frequently partners with State and local law
enforcement and other Federal agencies, including ATF, Customs
and Border Protection and the FBI, to combat violent street
gangs.
To date, ICE's efforts in Community Shield have resulted in
the arrest of 369 transnational gang members in Texas and 3,354
nationwide, and the majority of these individuals are foreign
nationals, illegally present in the United States, and
approximately half of these apprehended have violent criminal
histories.
As I stated earlier, criminal enterprises are businesses
that engage in criminal activity to make as much money as
possible. ICE is uniquely equipped with the skills and
expertise to target these and focus our investigations on the
financial lifeblood of these violent criminal border
organizations. We aim to hit them where it hurts, and that is
their wallets, to undermine their ability to fund their
criminal activity and to employ their accomplices. The value of
assets seized in immigration related cases has increased
dramatically from little to none before ICE was created in
March of 2003 to $34.3 million in fiscal year 2006.
I hope my remarks have been helpful and informative, and I
thank you for inviting me, and I am glad to answer any
questions you may have.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Pena. I appreciate your efforts
as well.
[The statement of Mr. Pena follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alonzo Pena
Chairman McCaul, Ranking Member Etheridge and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for providing me the opportunity to speak with
you today about the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration
and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) efforts to combat border violence in
Texas and throughout the United States.
ICE is the largest investigative agency within the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS). Our mission is to protect the American people
by combating terrorism and other criminal activities that cross our
borders and threaten us here at home. The men and women of ICE
accomplish this by enforcing our nation's immigration and customs laws.
Working overseas, along our borders, and throughout the nations's
interior, ICE agents and officers are demonstrating that our merged
immigration and customs authorities constitute an effective tool
against those who attempt to, or succeed in, penetrating our borders.
Using these combined authorities, ICE has built a robust enforcement
program along the borders and within the nation's interior and is
working with our partners at U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to identify
criminal activities and eliminate vulnerabilities that pose a threat to
our nation's borders, as well as economic, transportation and
infrastructure security. However, to fully address these threats, we
need comprehensive immigration reform that increases border security,
establishes a robust interior enforcement program, creates a temporary
worker program, and addresses the problem of the estimated 11 to 12
million illegal immigrants already in the country.
Our southern border is particularly vulnerable to cross-border
criminal activity committed by criminal enterprises whose primary
motive is to make money. The crimes we see--murder, hostage taking,
robberies, drug smuggling and money laundering--are all methods that
criminals use to intimidate and/or dominate rival criminal groups and
law enforcement to maximize the profits from their criminal activities.
ICE is acutely aware of the violence along both sides of the
border. In January 2006, in direct response to this increased violence,
Secretary Chertoff announced the creation of ICE-led Border Enforcement
Security Task Forces (BESTs). The first task force was established in
Laredo, Texas to address the growing incidence of violence associated
with cross-border narcotics smuggling. With ICE and Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) as core partners, the BESTs routinely develop
intelligence-driven investigations that focus on priority targets
engaged in cross-border crime. The BEST in Laredo incorporates
personnel from ICE, CBP, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives (ATF), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA), U.S. Marshals Service, U.S.
Attorney's Office, and key state and local law enforcement agencies.
This coordinated approach among federal, state, and local law
enforcement officers has led to significant enforcement successes. For
example, in late January of this year, ICE agents from our Laredo
office, along with ATF agents and Laredo Police Department officers
assigned to BEST, arrested one suspect for federal firearms violations
after he sold a fully automatic AK-47-type assault rifle and
approximately 26 grams of cocaine to an undercover ICE agent. along
with this arrest, BEST agents executed a federal search warrant at a
residence and seized a cache of automatic weapons, parts to manufacture
automatic weapons, a silencer, and other firearms related items. The
agents also seized 1.5 pounds of methamphetamine, approximately one
pound of cocaine, and other paraphernalia related to drugs and guns.
The next day, BEST task force agents--acting on information from
the FBI--executed a federal search warrant for a commercial storage
locker used by the defendant's associates. Agents seized five grenade
shells, nine pipe bombs, 26 grenade triggers, 31 grenade spoons, 40
grenade pins, and other parts that are used to assemble explosive
devices.
A week later, ICE agents from Laredo, working with ATF agents and
Laredo police officers, executed a federal search warrant at a related
residence and seized 81 grenade casings, ten live grenades, two AK-47
assault rifles, on Uzi submachine gun, and miscellaneous items.
Following these seizures, BEST task force agents arrested a second
subject for federal firearms violations four days later.
Since the announcement of the BEST in Laredo and in light of its
great success, ICE and CBP have launched an additional BEST in Arizona.
We anticipate that additional task forces will be established in other
Southwest border locations throughout 2006 and 2007.
ICE actively investigates all manners of smuggling. In a recent
incident in Hudspeth County, Texas, several individuals wearing
military-style camouflage clothing and carrying long guns provided
protection for a cross-border narcotics smuggling attempt. At least one
vehicle employed by the smugglers was a military-style vehicle more
popularly known as a ``Humvee'' or ``Hummer.'' Regardless of the
affiliation of the individuals involved, the Hudspeth incident was
dangerous in light of the repeated and regular incidents of violence by
armed smugglers and the tensions this creates for U.S. law enforcement
agencies and citizens who live near the border.
ICE agents face numerous challenges in the battle to combat crime
and violence along the border. However, violence often extends beyond
the border and into the interior of our country. Transnational street
gangs, often comprising foreign-born members, pose one of the biggest
threats to the safety and security of our towns and cities. Many of
these violent gangs actively engage in human and contraband smuggling,
robbery, extortion, rape, and murder.
In response to this threat, in February 2005, ICE initiated
Operation Community Shield. Initially, Community Shield targeted the
MS-13 street gang, one of the largest and most violent gangs of its
kind. However, because of ICE's great success in combating MS-13, the
program as soon expanded to encompass investigation of all
transnational criminal street gangs. As part of this effort, ICE
frequently partners with state and local law enforcement and other
federal agencies--including ATF, CBP, and the FBI--to combat violent
street gangs.
To date, ICE's efforts in Community Shield have resulted in the
arrest of 369 transnational gang members in Texas and 3,354 nationwide.
The majority of these individuals are foreign nationals illegally
present in the United States, and approximately half of those
apprehended have violent criminal histories. Under Community Shield,
ICE has initiated the removal of those gang members who are illegally
present in this country or who have otherwise violated their
immigration status.
The violence associated with illegal immigration and our borders is
not limited to transnational gang members, however. It also affects
innocent victims who are smuggled into and throughout the United
States, and of course, those who die during their journey. In case
after case, smugglers and traffickers show an utter disregard for the
lives of those they exploit. Many try to flee poverty or abuse, only to
be forced to travel in squalid conditions without adequate food, water,
or even air. Moreover, their smugglers frequently subject them to
brutal abuse, forced labor, and sexual exploitation after arriving at
their destination.
In one human smuggling case in Houston, Texas, a smuggler
attempting to extort a smuggling fee dragged a relative of one of the
migrants to his death behind a speeding car. The smuggler then
threatened the migrants themselves with a handgun and, after a
struggle, his weapon discharged. Fortunately, ICE's investigation,
conducted in collaboration with the Houston Police Department, led to
the rescue of the smuggled migrants and the arrest of the smuggler. Of
note, the investigation disclosed that the gun used in this incident
had been used in another murder of an undocumented migrant in Texas.
In one particularly disturbing trafficking case in McAllen, Texas,
two smuggled women from Central America were found on the side of a
road beaten and without clothing. Their captors intimidated the victims
by firing bullets into the walls and ceiling as they raped them. ICE's
enforcement efforts led to the rescue of two additional victims and the
arrest of seven traffickers. The lead defendant was sentenced to 23
years imprisonment, one of the longest sentences ever obtained under
the Trafficking Victims Protection Act.
As I stated earlier, criminal enterprises are businesses that
engage in criminal activity to make as much money as possible. ICE is
uniquely equipped with the skill and expertise to target and focus
investigations on the financial lifeblood that sustains the violent
criminal border activities. We aim to hit them where it hurts--their
wallets--to undermine their ability to fund criminal activity and
employ their accomplices. The value of assets seized in immigration-
related cases has increased dramatically, from little to none before
ICE was created in March 2003, to $34.3 million so far in Fiscal Year
(FY) 2006.
From the start of FY 2005 to May 31, 2006, ICE human smuggling and
trafficking investigations yielded approximately 4,900 criminal
arrests, 2,400 indictments, and 2,500 convictions. Last fiscal year
alone, our drug investigations resulted in the seizure of more than
275,000 pounds of cocaine, 1 million pounds of marijuana, nearly 3,300
pounds of heroin, 3,400 pounds of methamphetamine, and thousands of
pounds of other smuggled drugs. These successes have disrupted violent
smuggling organizations by taking away their product and their profits.
While ICE is a relatively new agency, with newly integrated
authorities, many of our agents and officers have a long history in the
field, with extensive experience gained from previous federal law
enforcement service. We are leveraging the best of the former agencies'
expertise, cultures, and techniques to build ICE into a federal law
enforcement agency that is greater and more effective than the sum of
its parts. In case after case, our agents and officers put into
practice the powerful advantages that flow from our merged authorities
and use them on behalf of the American people. The net result is a
greater contribution to the Nation's national security and public
safety.
I hope my remarks today have been helpful and informative. Thank
you for inviting me, and I would be glad to answer any questions you
may have at this time.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McCaul. Next, I would like to introduce another
sheriff, a great American, Sheriff Jernigan from Del Rio,
Texas.
STATEMENT OF A. D'WAYNE JERNIGAN, SHERIFF, VAL VERDE COUNTY,
TEXAS
Mr. Jernigan. Good morning, Chairman, committee members. I
want to thank each of you for your service to our country and
what you all are doing.
My written testimony and its attachments provide you just a
thumbnail view of the organizations and their weaponry that is
currently engaged in the violent trade of illegal drugs and
human smuggling on the Texas/Mexico border.
Just recently in Val Verde County, illegal aliens were
apprehended during a burglary near the port of Langtry. One of
the aliens fled on foot and was apprehended by deputies and
agents of the Border Patrol. The alien who was apprehended
inside the residence was later identified as a career criminal
with a 24-page rap sheet. His criminal career included offenses
in Florida and Texas. His clothing was still wet from his
illegal entry, crossing the Rio Grande River.
June 7, 2006, just recently, saw an increase in the
violence in the city just across the river from Del Rio, Cuidad
Acuna. Armed subjects attempted to take a male subject who was
in the custody of Mexican police officers in their marked
police vehicle. A uniformed officer was killed and several
officers were wounded and one of the armed subjects, who was
identified by Mexican authorities as a narcotrafficker, was
also killed in the confrontation.
Prior to this incident, I had been visited by several
professional people from Acuna and elected officials from
Acuna, warning of the violence that they anticipated would be
occurring shortly in Acuna and warning us on the U.S. side; and
also they were pleading for help from the U.S., stating that
they could not trust their own officials. This violence
continues to grow as the cartels, as was testified earlier by
others, struggle for control of this area up and down the
river.
The Texas Border Sheriff's Coalition is very concerned
about the unique problems along our border that I have
addressed in my written testimony. The United States Border
Patrol is doing the best that they can with the resources that
they have been provided, but immediate help is needed for them
and for the protection of our country.
We have implemented Operation Linebacker, a second line of
defense in the protection of our country. We have conducted
several operations in concert with our Federal and State
partners.
Our governor, the Honorable Rick Perry, did not wait for a
peace officer to be killed along the border to take action. He,
just as the border sheriffs, is very much concerned about the
violence up and down the border. To date, he has provided
approximately $9 million to the border sheriffs to conduct
increased enforcement activities. This much-needed assistance
provided by Governor Perry has already produced measurable
results in those counties that have performed the operations,
but this assistance is only a stopgap measure.
Mr. Chairman, help is necessary if we are to see an
acceptable level of security exist on the border. The problems
along the border will continue to grow exponentially unless our
Federal Government does something about it soon. I question,
how many officers and how many citizens must die before our
Nation will act?
I have addressed many of the enforcement issues facing the
border today in my written testimony, but another crisis faces
us. The judicial system on the border is strained to failure.
In Val Verde County, for instance, the annual budget for jury
trials was just recently exhausted before the end of the fiscal
year, and an examination of the caseload of the United States
District Court for the Western District of Texas demonstrates
this crisis irrefutably.
I have attached a report that demonstrates the 10-year
record of civil filings within the Western District of Texas. I
have marked it as Attachment 6.
The number of filings of civil cases across the district
has remained fairly level with only some minor increases
consistent with population growth in other places.
If you examine the criminal filings, however, in Attachment
7 for the same period, an alarming trend is quite evident. The
two U.S. district courts on the border have seen dramatic
caseload increases with little or no population increase.
Attachment 8 shows the caseload of the two United States
magistrates in Del Rio. As you can see, each of their caseloads
equals the caseload of the other magistrates in the Western
District combined.
The other district courts in the Western District have seen
some small increases in their caseloads. What is not in these
statistics is the number of criminal subjects who are
apprehended with commercial quantities of drugs, but who fall
under the quantity threshold arbitrarily established by the
United States attorney's office.
These subjects who have been apprehended by authorities are
released without prosecution. Remember that only a percentage
of all drug and alien traffickers are apprehended, and then a
portion of those apprehended are released without prosecution
due to budgetary constraints up and down the border. The
criminals grow more educated by the system each time they are
handled.
We must restore justice to the border by immediately
providing additional district judges, magistrates and
prosecuting attorneys, as well as economic subsidies to the
affected State district courts and the prosecuting attorneys
that have become incapacitated by the increasing crime on the
border.
Mr. Chairman, I am convinced that by funding additional
deputy sheriffs on the border our Nation will accomplish a
cost-effective and immediate solution to the burgeoning scourge
of violence that is creeping north into our Nation. Along most
of the border, just as Sheriff Flores mentioned, it is a deputy
sheriff, our local police officer, who receives that first call
of suspicious activity and encounters subjects who may be
crossing the border only for a new and a better life in the
north or who may have far more sinister intentions. No matter
how much more efficient that we are made by the utilization of
emerging technology, it is still necessary that a trained and
experienced officer is available to respond to the identified
threat.
I thank you for the opportunity to testify here today and
appreciate what you all are doing for our country.
[The statement of Mr. Jernigan follows:]
Prepared Statement of D'Wayne Jernigan
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, it is an honor and a
privilege to be invited to appear before you to discuss strategies to
combat Criminal Activity and Border Violence along the United States
border and the Republic of Mexico.
On April 18th, 2005, Sheriff Sigi Gonzales sent out letters to the
16 Texas Sheriff's whose counties border the Republic of Mexico. The
letter invited us to a meeting to discuss unique problems that we face
along the border. This was done out of frustration in what we felt was
the inadequacy of our federal government to protect our border in
preventing a potential terrorist from entering our country. We felt
that as citizens of this great country, our almost 2,000 miles of
border was very porous, that many people whose intentions were unknown
were coming into our country. If their intentions were to commit acts
similar to or worse than what happened on September 11, 2001, then very
little was being done to stop them. All of us expressed the same
frustration since we had mentioned this many times to federal and state
legislators. We felt that perhaps speaking as one voice we would be
heard. We realize that we are a bi-partisan multi ethnic coalition of
Law Enforcement professionals. The crisis that we face on our border is
not a racial issue, or even one of politics. This crisis is a red white
and blue national security crisis.
On May 4th, 2005, we met in Laredo, Texas. As a result we formed
the Texas Border Sheriff's Coalition. The first and foremost priority
of our coalition is protecting all residents of this country against a
terrorist act without regard to race, sex, or ethnic origin. We
continue to believe that many persons have entered our country with
intentions of harming us. We are sincere when we tell you that we are
not blaming the agents of the United States Border Patrol but, rather,
we criticize the policies that they have been shackled with.
I want to make you aware that the Law Enforcement experience of the
member sheriffs of this coalition total almost 460 years including 101
years of experience as sheriffs. The oldest serving sheriff of this
coalition is El Paso County Sheriff Samaniego with 22 years. I have
attached the list of member sheriffs of the coalition with their years
of experience and have marked it as Attachment #1. I have served more
than 29 of the 42 years of my Law Enforcement career on the Texas/
Mexico border. We have seen the border become more violent and
criminally active than at any point in our careers. Our officers rarely
encounter the socio-economic illegal alien of the past, but routinely
encounter criminal illegal aliens.
I have been asked to briefly relate to you some of the problems
that we have encountered along the border, specifically the violence
along the border and incursions, among other matters.
All of us are concerned that the border with Mexico is being used
as the open door to this country. Most of the illegal immigrants from
countries of special interest that are apprehended are apprehended
along the southwest border. I have attached these lists and have marked
them as Attachment #3 [see page 43--46].
Through intelligence information we have also learned that several
murders in Laredo, Webb County, Texas, have been orchestrated by
members of drug cartels operating in both countries. These drug cartel
enforcers cross the Rio Grande River, commit their murders in the
United States, then head back to Mexico, again, via the Rio Grande
River. We have all seen in the media the reports of the murders in
Nuevo Laredo, 24 in the first 36 days of 2006. These murders are
connected to organizations in both Mexico and the United States. In
February, a Task Force in Laredo Texas confiscated Improvised Explosive
Devices as well as items used to make explosive devices. Two such
explosive devises of similar construction have been found in Val Verde
County. Border Patrol agents and deputy sheriffs have been shot at from
Mexico on a routine basis. Earlier this year a sniper in Mexico shot at
agents that were working along the banks of the river in the area of
the cities of Rio Bravo/El Cenizo. This continued, sporadically, for
three days. Agents reported seeing several individuals wearing military
style uniforms on a hill on the Mexican side, one of them was using
what was believed to be a high powered rifle with scope.
The Rio Grande Valley, Cameron, Hidalgo, and Starr Counties, have
continuous problems with pseudo-cops coming from Mexico to extort and
kidnap citizens in these counties. This area is the fastest growing
area in the nation. They have seen their share of terrorist activity as
it relates to the migration of many members of ruthless gangs that come
into this country for reasons other than legitimate employment.
Sometime last year, a woman was taken off an airplane at the McAllen,
Texas, airport. She had come in from Mexico, through the river, as her
clothes were still wet, and had a passport from Africa. She was from a
special interest country and had come in to Mexico using a passport
from a friendly country to avoid detection. Who knows what her
intentions were. Thanks to an officer at the airport she was taken off
the plane.
During this same time period, a high-ranking member of the Mara
Salvatrucha, or MS-13, was apprehended in the Brooks County area, also
in south Texas. He had entered the country illegally. This MS-13 member
is believed to have been responsible for the killing of close to 30
persons, or more, in a bus explosion in his native country. It is my
understanding that he had a lengthy criminal record in the United
States. This person, as many others, find it very easy to come into our
country through a very porous, wide-open, and unprotected border.
Twenty seven members of the MS-13 were apprehended entering the United
States in the Del Rio area of operations during the month of January,
2006.
We have received information that the drug trafficking
organizations immediately across our border are planning on killing as
many police officers as possible on the United States side. This is
being planned for the purpose of attempting to ``scare us'' away from
the border. The recent activities of the drug trafficking organization
operating in the Hudspeth, El Paso County areas have included threats
against the families of Deputy Sheriff's. In one incident subjects made
threats to the wife of a Hudspeth County Sheriff's Sergeant at their
home. The drug trafficking organizations have the money, equipment, and
stamina to carry out their threats. They are determined to protect
their illicit trade. It is my opinion that these drug trafficking
organizations may form an alliance with Islamo Fascist terrorist
organizations. The Department of Homeland Security recently issued
Officer Alerts warning their agents of such potential threats.
The cartels operating in Mexico and the United States have
demonstrated that the weapons they posses can and will be used in
protecting their caches. I have attached photographs showing some of
the weapons that these cartels possess. The photos have been marked as
Attachment #4.
Local, state, and federal officers have found many items along the
banks of the Rio Grande River that indicate possible ties to terrorist
organizations or members of military units of Mexico. Currency, and
clothing, are common finds. Recently, a jacket with patches was found
in Jim Hogg County, Texas, by agents of U. S. Border Patrol. The
patches on the jacket show an Arabic military badge with one depicting
an airplane flying over a building and heading towards a tower, and
another showing an image of a lion's head with wings and a parachute
emanating from the animal (lion). It is believed from an undisclosed
document that Department of Homeland Security translators concluded
that the patches read ``defense center'', ``minister of defense'', or
``defense headquarters''. The bottom of one patch read ``martyr'',
``way to eternal life'' or ``way to immortality''.
On January 28th, 2006, USBP Chief David Aguilar was asked by a
reporter from KGNS television station in Laredo, Texas, what the
outcome of the investigation of the jacket was. Chief Aguilar responded
that the patches were not from al' Qa'ida but from countries in which
al-Qa'ida was known to operate. He also stated that the investigation
was turned over to the proper authorities who had already concluded
their investigation. He knew nothing further.
On February 2nd of this year, deputies in Zavala County discovered
an 18'' duffle bag approximately 8 miles North of Zapata by the highway
right of way. This duffel bag had ``Armada de Mexico'' embroidered on
the bag. Inside the bag were several items that are commonly used to
maintain higher levels of physical exertion. Inside the bag, a bus
ticket with an origin of Veracruz, Mexico was found. I have attached
photographs of the duffle bag and marked it as Attachment #5.
Employees of our offices have also seen incursions into this
country of persons dressed in battle dress uniforms (BDUs), carrying
what officers believe to be automatic weapons, very clean cut, and in
very good physical condition. On March 3rd, 2005, several officers
assigned to do surveillance by the Rio Grande River by the Zapata/Webb
County line observed approximately 20-25 subjects dressed as indicated
above. The subjects were walking on a gravel road, coming from
riverbank, and marching in a cadence. The deputy observed these
individuals through his borrowed night vision goggles. These
individuals were carrying large duffle bags and walking two abreast.
They were each armed with assault rifles.
In the town site of Zapata, residents report subjects getting off
boats wearing BDUs, backpacks, and carrying weapons. The residents
describe them as soldiers.
In Val Verde County, two illegal aliens were apprehended during a
burglary near the Port of Entry. One of the aliens fled on foot and was
apprehended by Deputies and Agents of the Border Patrol. The alien who
was apprehended inside the residence was later identified as a career
criminal with a twenty four page rap sheet. His criminal career
included offenses in Florida and Texas. His clothing was still wet from
his illegal entry that night. For over a year, groups of male subjects
illegally crossed the river into the United States and burglarized
remote ranch homes. These subjects took items from the homes that they
burglarized, and would abandon the property at the next home that they
burglarized. The only items that they routinely kept were firearms.
During one burglary the subjects brought electric hair clippers with
them and cut their hair in a distinctive pattern. When theses subjects
would encounter law enforcement they conducted sophisticated escape and
evasion tactics to break contact. In one incident the subjects traveled
twenty miles a day on foot across harsh landscape. The last subject
apprehended in that group had traveled over eighty miles on foot before
his arrest. The subjects were always physically fit. It is my opinion
that these subjects were trained for escape and evasion.
June 7, 2006 saw an increase in the violence in Ciudad Acuna. Armed
subjects attempted to take a male subject who was in the custody of
Mexican Police officers in their marked Police vehicle. One uniformed
officer was killed and several were wounded. One of the armed subjects,
who was identified by Mexican authorities as a narco-trafficker, was
killed in the confrontation. This gunfight took place in the downtown
area of Acuna, several miles from the international port of entry.
Prior to this incident I had received information from several
professional people in Acuna telling me of armed confrontations
occurring in public places. This violence continues to grow as the
cartels struggle for control of the area. See attachment #2 which is
the newspaper story reporting the shootout. [See committe file.]
The Texas Border Sheriff's Coalition is very concerned about the
unique problems along our border. The United States Border Patrol is
doing the best that they can with the resources they have been
provided. Immediate help is needed for them and for the protection of
our country. We have implemented Operation Linebacker, a second line of
defense in the protection of our country. The problems along the border
are federal problems. Our governor, the Honorable Rick Perry, did not
wait for a peace officer to get killed along the border to take action.
He, just as we, is very much concerned. He has appropriated
approximately $9 million for Texas Border Sheriff's Coalition to
conduct increased enforcement activities. This much needed assistance
provided by Governor Perry has already produced measurable results, but
this assistance is only a stopgap measure. More help is necessary if we
are to see an acceptable level of security exist on the border. The
problems along the border will continue unless our federal government
does something about it soon. How many more officers must die like the
unfortunate Starr County correctional officer, who was assassinated
last month, before our nation will act?
I have addressed many of the enforcement issues facing the border
today in my written testimony, but another crisis faces us. The
Judicial system on the border is strained to failure. In Val Verde
County, the annual budget for jury trials will be exhausted in March,
only half way through the fiscal year. An examination of the caseload
of the United States District Court, Western District, demonstrates
this crisis irrefutably. I have attached a report that demonstrates the
ten year record of civil filings within the Western District of Texas.
It is marked as Attachment #7. The number of filings of civil cases
across the District has remained fairly level with only minor increases
consistent with population growth. If you examine the criminal filings,
Attachment 7, for the same period an alarming trend is evident. The two
District Courts on the border have seen dramatic caseload increases
with little or no population increase. Attachment 8 shows the caseload
of the two United States Magistrates in Del Rio. As you can see each of
their caseloads equals the caseload of the other Magistrates in the
Western District combined. The other District Courts in the Western
District have seen small increases in their caseloads. What is not
reflected in these statistics is the number of criminal subjects who
are apprehended with commercial quantities of drugs, but who fall under
the quantity threshold arbitrarily established by the United States
Attorney's office. These subjects who have been apprehended by
authorities are released without prosecution. Remember that only a
percentage of all drug and alien traffickers are apprehended, and then,
a portion of those apprehended are released without prosecution due to
budgetary constraints. The criminals grow more educated by the system
each time we handle them. We must restore Justice to the Border by
immediately providing additional District Judges, Magistrates and
Prosecuting Attorneys, as well as economic subsidies to effected State
District Courts and Prosecuting Attorneys who have become incapacitated
by the increasing crime on the border.
I am convinced that by funding additional Deputy Sheriff's on the
border, our nation will accomplish a cost effective, and immediate
solution to the burgeoning scourge of violence creeping North into our
nation. Along most of the border, it is a Deputy Sheriff who receives
the first call of suspicious activity and encounters subjects who may
be crossing the border only for a new and better life in the North, or
who may have far more sinister intentions. No matter how much more
efficient we are made by the utilization of emerging technology, it is
still necessary that a trained and experienced officer be available to
respond to the identified threat.
I want to express my most sincere appreciation for allowing us the
opportunity to appear before you and thank you for the work you do for
our country, the United States of America.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McCaul. Sheriff, thank you so much. Thank you for your
service, and as with Sheriff Flores, you are on the front lines
everyday and put yourself in harm's way. We all appreciate what
you do for this country.
I would also ask that anybody that has a BlackBerry or
electronic device, turn that off as it is causing some
disruption with respect to the testimony.
Having said that, the Chair now recognizes Mr. Quan for his
testimony.
STATEMENT OF GORDON J. QUAN, ESQ., FORMER MAYOR PRO TEMPORE,
AT-LARGE COUNCIL MEMBER, CITY OF HOUSTON, TX, AND DIRECTOR,
ASIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Mr. Quan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
opportunity to testify before you, to yourself, to
Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee, Congressman Gene Green and
Congressman Ted Poe.
My name is Gordon Quan. I was former mayor pro tem of the
city of Houston, an at-large council member and a Director of
the Asian American Chamber of Commerce. As Congress considers
new ways to look at national security, I would ask that it not
divert essential Federal responsibilities to our local
government.
Like many major cities across America, Houston has seen a
dramatic demographic change in the past 20 years. Roughly one-
third of our population is Hispanic, one-third Anglo, and other
third black and Asian. With 80 consulates in Houston, we have
the third largest consular corps in the United States. Our Port
of Houston ranks number one in foreign tonnage in the U.S. We
are truly an international city.
Since September 11, local law enforcement across the Nation
has improved security of our cities. In our city of Houston, we
spent over $15 million to secure the city since that tragic
day. We are providing security at the city's water plants,
airports, extra helicopter flights among other things. We are
also securing city hall and other soft targets such as local
temples and synagogues.
Let me say emphatically that the role of the local
government is clear. Local police have a responsibility to
cooperate with the Federal Government to apprehend specific
persons identified as having committed crimes and violated U.S.
immigration laws and who have been located by the Federal
Government. However, local personnel cannot be conscripted into
Federal service because the Federal Government has decided not
to fund and staff its immigration enforcement agencies to meet
the demands. This type of action can divert our shorthanded
local personnel from their primary responsibilities and
constitute a cost shift on to our local government.
I would also like to categorically state, and it was
pointed out in a recent editorial in the Houston Chronicle,
that we do not consider ourselves as a sanctuary city. The city
of Houston's police policy adopted in 1992, which I am sure
Chief Hurtt will address in more detail, states that
undocumented immigrant status is not in itself a matter for our
local police department. Unlawful entry is not treated as an
ongoing offense occurring in the presence of local police
officers.
Simply put, police officers may not stop or apprehend
individuals solely on the belief that they are in the country
illegally. This order serves our people well and is a model for
other cities as well. To say otherwise, I think, would cheapen
and demean the officers who have put their lives on the line
every day.
It is often said that Texans talk slow. Oftentimes we
pepper our speech with a little drawl, but by no means are we
stupid. We understand all too well that to force State and
local government to carry out what is essentially a Federal
function is unfair. Securing our borders is, first and
foremost, the responsibility of the Federal Government.
Therefore, I am asking the Members of Congress today to
dispense with rhetoric and provide the necessary resources to
secure our borders.
I believe everything that these gentlemen have said here.
On June 2, Rick Perry signed a memorandum of understanding to
deploy 2,300 National Guard troops to assist with the building
of a fence along our southern border, but just 2 days prior to
that the Department of Homeland Security announced it is going
to cut homeland security funding for Texas, the State with the
longest international border, by 31 percent over last year's
allocation. Governor Perry has said the funding disparity,
combined with continued Federal inaction, jeopardizes our
security and reinforces the belief that Texas must never wait
for Washington to act.
The governor has proposed plans to ask the State
legislature for additional funding for local enforcement along
the border and to provide border security operations, including
a virtual border watch program. This, again, is taking moneys
away from our schools and our roads, our highways, that we have
difficulties with funding already.
Second, I want to just say that also looking at how we
secure the border, criminalization of aliens has not proven to
be a deterrent. In 1996, Congress passed the Illegal
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which
sought to increase the number of criminal offenses which would
bar an individual from immigrating. Furthermore, it expanded
the definition of aggravated felony to include several offenses
for which a sentence of 1 year was imposed. Whether it is
served or not, whether it was probated or not. If you had a 1-
year imposition, that was an aggravated felon.
Despite these measures, there has been an increase in the
number of persons seeking to enter the country illegally. We
don't need laws that make aliens criminals. It would simply, as
Sheriff Jernigan said, clog our judicial system further and our
overcrowded jails. As you may know, Harris County is under a
mandate because of overcrowding, as it is already. Most of
these people, it has been said repeatedly, are only seeking a
better life in the United States.
Third, I would caution against efforts to preempt local and
State laws that bar law enforcement officers from assuming the
Federal responsibility of enforcing Federal immigration laws.
Efforts in Congress to withhold funds from States and cities
like Houston, that have routinely assisted the Federal
Government to apprehend, house and feed undocumented criminal
suspects in our city jails until the bureau of immigration
dispatches its officers to retrieve these suspects, is
unjustified.
More often than not, the staff reimbursement is less than
the financial burden by the local police departments, and as
has been said previously, staff funding is being zeroed out. So
here you are penalizing us for working with you, and you are
not reimbursing us.
In short, it is unfair to demand that the local governments
take on the responsibilities of the Federal Government. It is
unreasonable to mandate such responsibilities on State and
local governments without full fiscal support.
As a former local official and a lawyer practicing
immigration law for the past 29 years, I know all too well that
communication, visibility and trust are the foundations for
effective community policing. Victims of crime must know that
they can turn to the local police without threat that they will
be detained or deported simply because of their immigration
status.
In closing, I respectfully ask the panel to understand the
American public wants government to find effective tools to
combat illegal immigration. I submit that the most effective
tools are not preemption, unfunded mandates, deteriorated
community policing, and racial profiling. Rather, the most
effective tools are improved coordination, planning, training,
and technology.
Thank you for this opportunity to testify before you.
[The statement of Mr. Quan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gordon Quan
Thank you, Chairman McCaul (R-TX), Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee
(D-TX), and members of the Texas delegation for the opportunity to
speak with you today.
I am Gordon Quan, former Mayor Pro Tem and At-Large Council Member
from Houston, Texas and a Director of the Asian Chamber of Commerce of
Houston. As Congress considers new ways to improve the nation's
security, I ask that it does so without diverting essential federal
responsibilities onto local governments.
Like many major cities across America, Houston has seen a dramatic
demographic transformation in the past twenty years. Houston is roughly
one-third Anglo, one-third Hispanic and the remaining third Black and
Asian. With 80 consulates in Houston, we have the third largest
consular corps in the U.S. The Port of Houston ranks number one in
foreign tonnage in the U.S. We are truly an international city.
Since September 11, local law enforcement across the nation has
improved the security of their cities. In my city of Houston, Texas we
have spent more than $15 million more on securing the city since that
tragic day. We are providing security at the city's water plants,
airports, extra helicopter flights, among others. We are also securing
City Hall and ``soft targets'' such as local temples and synagogues.
Let me say emphatically that the role of local government is clear.
Local police have a responsibility to cooperate with the federal
government to apprehend specific persons identified as having committed
a crime and violated US immigration laws and who have been located by
the federal government. However, local personnel cannot be conscripted
into federal service because the federal government has decided not to
fund and staff its immigration enforcement agencies to meet demand.
This type of action can divert local personnel from their primary
duties and constitute a cost shift onto local governments.
Also, I categorically reject attempts to paint the local policy of
Houston as a ``sanctuary'' city. The City of Houston's policy, adopted
in June 1992, states that that undocumented immigration status is not,
in itself, a matter for local police action and unlawful entry is not
to be treated as an on-going offense occurring in the presence of a
local police officer. Simply put, police officers may not stop or
apprehend individuals solely on the belief that they are in the country
illegally. This Order has served the people and the law enforcement
community of Houston, TX well since its adoption. State and local
police officers continue to adhere to their sworn duty to protect and
serve the people of Houston. To characterize the policy and City of
Houston as a sanctuary city is an unfair characterization that cheapens
and demeans the officers who put their lives on the line everyday.
It is often said that Texans talk slow. Although we pepper our
speech with a drawl, we are by no means stupid. We understand all to
well attempts to force state and local governments to carry out what is
essentially a Federal responsibility. Securing our borders is first and
foremost the responsibility of the Federal government. Therefore, I am
asking the Members of Congress here today to dispense with the rhetoric
and provide the necessary resources to secure our borders.
On June 2nd, Gov. Rick Perry signed a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) authorizing the deployment of 2,300 National Guard Troops to
assist with the building of the fence along the southern border. Just
two days prior, the Department of Homeland Security announced it cut
homeland security funding for Texas--the state with the longest
international border--by 31 percent from last year. Governor Perry said
this funding disparity, combined with continued federal inaction
``jeopardizes our security and reinforces my belief that Texas must
never wait for Washington to act.'' The governor the proposed plans to
ask the Texas legislature for additional funding for local law
enforcement along the border and border security operations, including
a virtual border watch program. As a former local elected official who
had to decide on matters such as transportation, school, and public
health funding, I cannot help but think that state and local
governments are picking up tab for the Federal government's failure to
fund border security programs.
Second, I am also asking that we secure our border in responsible
ways. Criminalization of aliens has not served as a deterrent. In 1996
Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act which sought to increase the number of criminal
offenses which would bar an individual from immigrating. Furthermore,
it expanded the definition of aggravated felony to include several
offenses for which a sentence of one year or more was imposed, whether
actually served or probated. Despite these measures, there has
continued to be an increase in the number of persons seeking to enter
the country illegally. We don't need more laws that make aliens
criminals. It clogs our judicial system and jails with persons who are
really not criminals.
Third, I would caution against efforts to preempt state and local
laws that bar their law enforcement officers from assuming the federal
responsibility of enforcing federal immigration laws. Efforts in
Congress to withhold funds from states and cities like Houston that
have routinely assisted the federal government by apprehending, housing
and feeding non-documented criminal suspects in our city jails until
the Bureau of Immigration dispatches its officers to retrieve the
suspects. More often than not, the SCAAP reimbursement is less than the
financial burden assumed by the local police departments. In short, it
is unfair to demand that local governments undertake the federal
government's responsibilities. It is also unreasonable to mandate such
responsibilities upon state and local governments without full fiscal
support.
Fourth, as a former local elected official and immigration lawyer
with over 29 years of experience, I know too well that communication,
visibility, and trust are the foundation of effective community
policing. Victims of crime must know that they can call us without the
threat that they will be detained or deported simply because of their
immigration status.
In closing, I respectfully ask that this panel understand that the
American public wants the government to fund effective tools to combat
illegal immigration. I submit that the most effective tools are not
preemption, unfunded mandates, deteriorated community policing, and
racial profiling. Rather the most effective tools are improved
coordination, planning, training, and technology.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before this body.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Quan, and thank you for your
insight. And I happen to agree with you, this is a Federal
responsibility. The Federal Government for the past couple of
decades has failed in that responsibility; and I believe, as
you do, the time to act is now.
I would like to make the request again that anybody who has
a BlackBerry, please turn that off as it is disruptive to the
testimony.
And now I would like to recognize Mr. T.J. Bonner, who is
President of the National Border Patrol Council.
STATEMENT OF T.J. BONNER, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL BORDER PATROL
COUNCIL OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
AFL-CIO
Mr. Bonner. Thank you Chairman McCaul, Ranking Member
Jackson-Lee, other Members of Congress.
On behalf of the 10,500 frontline Border Patrol agents who
risk their lives day and night protecting our Nation's borders,
we thank you for the opportunity to present our views about
this very serious problem of crime and violence along the
Southwest border.
This is not an issue that affects just the border
communities. The crime and violence obviously spill over into
many communities throughout the United States. As people in
Houston know, and people in Los Angeles, all major and even
smaller cities are painfully aware of, people who come across
the border, intent on committing crimes, find easy pickings in
many of our communities.
When I came into the Border Patrol 28 years ago there were
about 2,000 agents, with a budget of a couple hundred million
dollars, and we apprehended about a million people crossing our
borders illegally. Our frontline agents estimated that for
every person we caught, two or three got by us. Twenty-eight
years later, there are about 12,000 Border Patrol agents, a
budget of close to $2 billion, and we still catch about a
million people, and we still estimate that 2 or 3 million
people get by us every year. We haven't made much progress
despite all of the expenditures.
It was a dangerous job back then. It is even more dangerous
now. The level of violent crime has risen dramatically.
Now, there has been offset in the property crimes, and I
think that fencing and more personnel along the border have
been responsible for driving down property crimes in some of
the border areas, but I don't think that we need to make a
choice between property crime and violent crime. I think that
with the proper strategies, we can put an end to both of those.
We know why most people come across the border. They are
looking for work. Probably 98 percent of those 3 or 4 million
people who cross the border every year are seeking employment.
If we do deny them that employment through proper enforcement,
proper laws, such as H.R. 98, which would create a counterfeit-
proof Social Security card, we could put the smugglers out of
business overnight, the people, smugglers, which would leave us
with the 2 percent, the criminals, the terrorists, that most
Americans are interested in stopping from coming into our
country.
In other words, 98 percent of the traffic is clogging up
probably 99.9 percent of our resources, not allowing us to
focus on the criminals and terrorists coming across. What we
are doing is essentially searching for the needle in the
haystack. What we need to do is to eliminate the haystack so
that we can focus on the needles, which would require a change
in the law enforcement strategies.
The drug smugglers should not be confronted with the choice
of taking out one or two law enforcement officers in order to
get away and escape justice. Their choice should be, do I go to
prison or do I try and shoot it out with 2-dozen heavily armed
law enforcement officers?
We need help along the border. It is becoming increasingly
violent, and part of the reason for that is the fact that the
cartels are now taking over much of the human trafficking. The
cost of smuggling has risen tenfold over the last several
years, which means that this is an extremely lucrative
enterprise for the cartels, and they are very interested in
making money. If we don't stop doing things the way we are
doing them now, there is no reason we should expect a different
result.
I appreciate the ranking member's introduction of H.R.
4044, which provides many of the tools that the Border Patrol
needs; I appreciate the provisions within H.R. 4437, which
contain many of the elements that are needed. But the missing
piece in both of these is the ability to crack down on the
employers. If we don't crack down on the employers, we are
going to continue to have a revolving door immigration policy.
Personally, I have caught the same group of people four
times in an 18-hour shift, and this is where our resources are
going. We are catching people in the cartels who exploit this
weakness. They will sacrifice a group of 25, 50 people, knowing
that it is going to consume the resources of the Border Patrol
for several hours as we try and round these people up, guard
them, process them, send them back to their country of origin;
and in the meantime, they are free to move loads of drugs and
who knows what else.
We need to change the way we are doing business if we
expect different results. And we need different results. Our
Nation is vulnerable in this post-9/11 environment. We simply
cannot afford to have open, porous borders any longer.
Thank you.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Bonner.
[The statement of Mr. Bonner follows:]
Prepared Statement of T.J. Bonner
The National Border Patrol Council appreciates the opportunity to
present the views and concerns of the 10,500 front-line Border Patrol
employees that it represents regarding the persistent problems of
criminal activity and violence along the border between the United
States and Mexico. Despite substantial increases in funding during the
past two decades for personnel, technology, and equipment for Federal
law enforcement agencies along the southern border, the levels of crime
and violence in that region remain unacceptably high. Although property
crimes along the border have fallen dramatically, there has been an
increase in violent crimes, including attacks against law enforcement
officers. Last year, the number of assaults against Border Patrol
agents more than doubled, with 778 reported incidents, compared to 374
the previous year. There have also been a number of armed
confrontations initiated against U.S. law enforcement officers by rogue
Mexican military and police units. Power struggles among some of the
drug cartels have transformed the city of Nuevo Laredo, Mexico into a
war zone where hundreds of people have been killed in the streets
during the past several years. While other border cities are not
experiencing this same level of violence, they are by no means immune
from this scourge.
Although there are several reasons for these emerging trends, the
Border Patrol's ``strategy of deterrence'' is undoubtedly one of the
primary factors responsible for these changes. Under this initiative,
the Border Patrol has concentrated its resources near large cities
along the southern border. Reinforced fences have been built in many of
those areas, and agents are stationed in fixed positions in close
proximity to the border. The theory behind this strategy is that people
will be discouraged from crossing the border illegally because of the
increased law enforcement presence. In reality, the number of people
apprehended crossing our borders illegally has remained fairly
constant. The strategy has merely caused the illicit traffic to shift
to other parts of the border where there are fewer law enforcement
resources. It has also induced more people to rely upon smugglers to
help them cross the border, which has resulted in a dramatic tenfold
increase in smuggling fees. In turn, this has caused more criminal
organizations to become involved in smuggling people. The propensity of
these organizations to utilize force as a means of achieving their ends
has caused an escalation in violent crimes along the border.
While there is an undeniable relationship between the rise in
violent crime and the decline in property crime, there is no need to
choose between the two, as a sensible border security strategy would
substantially reduce both of these types of crime. Unfortunately, the
current strategy focuses almost exclusively on the border, largely
ignoring the root cause of illegal immigration. As long as illegal
aliens can readily find employment in the United States, millions of
people will continue to violate our immigration laws every year. This
will ensure that the smuggling trade flourishes, greatly contributing
to crime and violence along our borders.
The enactment of H.R. 98, the ``Illegal Immigration Enforcement and
Social Security Protection Act of 2005,'' would eliminate the
employment magnet that lures so many people to our country, and would
also put human smugglers out of business almost overnight. No rational
person would pay a smuggler to help him or her cross our borders if the
odds of obtaining employment were remote. This would enable the Border
Patrol and other law enforcement agencies to concentrate their limited
resources on stopping criminals and terrorists from crossing our
borders.
It is important to note that this legislation differs markedly from
proposals that are premised upon the Basic Pilot Program. as the
Government Accountability Office reported last August, that system is
highly susceptible to identity fraud because it allows impostors to use
a separate, easily counterfeited document to assume the identity of the
legitimate owner of a Social Security number. No employment
verification system can be effective unless it utilizes a single
counterfeit-proof document that establishes the bearer's identity as
well as employment eligibility.
None of the other border security initiatives currently being
considered would be nearly as effective as the foregoing measure. For
example, fencing has not stopped people from illegally crossing our
borders. Despite the placement of several hundred miles of reinforced
border fences, illegal crossings have not subsided at all.
Apprehensions of illegal aliens have varied little since construction
of these barriers began fifteen years ago, and front-line Border Patrol
agents still estimate that for every person who is caught, two or three
manage to slip past them. While this type of fencing has helped reduce
property crimes in urban areas, most border cities that are not
adjacent to the Rio Grande already have such barriers, so further
reductions in property crimes are likely to be minimal. Moreover, such
fencing, combined with the static deployment of Border Patrol agents,
is partly responsible for the increase in assaults against these and
other law enforcement officers. It is also noteworthy that statistics
concerning the number of violent crimes committed against illegal
aliens traveling near the border are highly inaccurate, as they are
generally not reported unless the injuries are severe or the victims
are apprehended by the Border Patrol.
Similarly, technology alone is incapable of deterring people from
crossing our borders illegally. While the proper devices can serve a
useful purpose as extra eyes and ears, they are incapable of
apprehending a single person. Without adequate numbers of Border Patrol
agents available to respond to the intrusions detected by sensors and
cameras, thousands of people will continue to successfully slip across
out borders illegally every night.
Augmenting the size of the Border Patrol with temporary help until
additional agents can be hired and trained is not an effective solution
either. The experience to date with the National Guard deployment
indicates that Border Patrol has spent more hours training,
supervising, and guarding \1\ these troops than the number of hours
that are being spent patrolling the borders by the few agents who have
been reassigned from administrative to field duties. The proposal to
deploy armed guards with limited training as a stopgap measure would
create an entirely different set of problems, greatly increasing the
probability of unwarranted detentions and false arrests. Our
immigration laws are extremely complex, and those who are charged with
enforcing them need to receive the appropriate training in order to
properly discharge these duties. Simply stated, there are no shortcuts.
The only effective way to increase the size of the Border Patrol is to
hire and train additional agents, provide them with the tools that they
need to do their jobs, and ensure that they are paid and treated fairly
in order to be able to attract and retain the best and brightest
employees. H.R. 4044, the ``Rapid Response Border Protection Act of
2005,'' would achieve many of these goals, and should be enacted
without delay.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Since most of the troops assigned to perform tasks along the
border (such as building, maintaining and repairing roads and fences)
are unarmed, the Border Patrol is assigning agents to protect them
against assaults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In summary, solutions to the vexing problems of border crime and
violence will remain elusive as long as the current enforcement
strategies are pursued. Addressing these problems in a meaningful way
will require two dramatic changes. First, the employment magnet needs
to be eliminated, which will reduce the flow of illegal traffic across
our borders from a flood to a trickle. Second, reliable and cost-
effective technologies need to be utilized to detect border intrusions,
and sufficient numbers of law enforcement officers must be deployed in
a manner that enables large numbers of them to rapidly respond to each
incursion, minimizing the incentive for criminals to attempt to avoid
capture through violent means. Since both of these measures could
easily be implemented, there is no excuse for continuing to tolerate
high levels of crime and violence along our borders.
Mr. McCaul. We will now have questions from the members. I
will limit it to one round of questions, try to keep it as
close to 5 minutes as possible, and the Chair recognizes
himself for 5 minutes. I want to talk about several issues and
then put a question to the panel.
I remember when I worked in the Justice Department I had
the Mexican border in my jurisdiction, and the Border Patrol
told me about a policy that was relatively little known at the
time and it was called the catch-and-release policy. When they
explained it to me, they said, Well, what happens is, when we
have people coming from countries other than Mexico, South
America being a gateway to countries like the Middle East,
China, Africa, and we don't have enough detention space.
I said, Okay, so what do you do? We give them a notice to
appear at a hearing and we let them go.
I said, Well, how many of those people show up? About 10
percent if we are lucky.
In my view, that was probably one of the most dangerous
loopholes in our national security policy, and it was
unacceptable before 9/11. It is certainly unacceptable after
the events of September 11.
When I got elected to the Congress, one of the first things
I did was to author the Mandatory Detention Act, which calls
for the detention of all of the other-than-Mexicans crossing.
Now, the Mexicans who voluntarily returned, the OTMs gave
notice to appear. This bill would end the catch-and-release
policy; this bill is part of H.R. 4437.
The House bill provides help. It provides funding for the
sheriffs; it provides employer verification; it provides for
more Border Patrol agents; it provides for all the security
needs that we need in this Nation. And I call upon my
colleagues in the Senate to pass it.
Also, I have been working with Steve McCraw. I have
introduced a bill, the border area security initiative, which
calls for the Secretary of Homeland Security to designate
various areas along the border that are high-risk areas, and in
an integrated, multiagency, multitask force approach, work to
secure the border. It provides funding and it provides funding
to hire deputy sheriffs as well.
These are all important measures, and there are many more.
I want to thank everyone for being here, but I do want to
thank particularly the sheriffs and Mr. McCraw, whom I had the
great fortune to work with when he was at the FBI, working
counterterrorism, and I was at Justice; we worked together on
threat assessments then.
And I would like to know today from you, Steve, about your
view of the current threat assessment which, in my view, is
greater than it was when we were working together. I would like
to hear from both you and the sheriffs about your perception--
as you are on the front lines in this struggle, I would like to
hear your perception about the threat assessment; and then, if
you could elaborate, as you worked together on these
enforcement operations, how those exactly worked and what the
Congress can do to help you in that effort.
Mr. McCraw. Just quickly, Chairman, I couldn't agree with
you more in terms of the significance of the threat. Over a
year and half ago, the governor simply asked me what is the
most significant threat to Texas, and clearly, unfortunately, I
had to come back and report, a porous U.S. border with Mexico.
That was the most significant national security, but also
public safety threat as well. And, you know, that is without
question.
So the second part is what do you do, and fortunately for
us, we had some sheriffs who were thinking about that already
and already recognized through Operation Stonegarden, which was
supported by DHS homeland security grant funds that, hey, when
they get increased patrols in a threat period, between the
election in November and the inauguration in January of our
last election, something remarkable happened. More patrol
decreased crime, and leveraging, based upon the success of
that, simply is just more State resources.
And thank goodness for David Aguilar, the Chief of Border
Patrol, willing to work with all the border sector chiefs to
come together and work. Unlike the days of old where we built
investigative strategies, this is different. It is patrol-based
strategies, because as important it is to do the
investigations, there is no substitute when we are trying to
decrease crime to have patrol presence, to the extent we
leverage intelligence--and I can't state that enough--usually
intelligence, and command and control and coordination and
technology to support it.
But one key thing, if there is one thing we can get--and
the reason the governor has gone to the legislature and asked
them for $100 million; it is most appropriate, by Mr. Quan, to
bring that up--it takes away from something else that is a
matter of prioritization. We have wished, and he wished, he
didn't have to do that, but it is so important we help Border
Patrol and Customs--or excuse me, Customs and Border Patrol,
help secure the border that we need to do something now.
That is how we are doing it, and I will defer to the
sheriffs, Flores and Jernigan.
Mr. McCaul. If you could comment also on the statistics, I
think the three enforcement operations you ran, which is a law
enforcement operation, as I understand, was greatly successful.
Mr. McCraw. Again, it is like--it is not rocket science.
That is why I understand it, okay; and it is physics for
police, if you will.
We started off in Operation Del Rio, and I will let the
sheriff talk about it, but those numbers are pretty high in
terms of crime reduction.
Mr. Jernigan. Yes, Mr. Chairman and Members, during the
month of June, part of June, we conducted a special operation
in connection with Border Patrol and Customs and game wardens,
DPS, many other agencies; and as he mentioned earlier, using a
large number of uniformed officers, 24/7, throughout our
county.
Our crime rate during that time period the operation was
conducted was reduced by 67 percent just in our county alone,
which was a significant drop. We can't sustain that under
current budget restraints, but we were able to prove that a
uniformed presence in the area does prevent crime, does reduce
crime significantly.
Mr. McCraw. That is one of the reasons why we are looking
for more money, the governor is, because how do we sustain
these operations.
Sheriff Flores, obviously Operation Del Rio was built
around--`and Sheriff Jernigan, Operation Laredo, Webb County;
Sheriff Flores in terms of the five-county--we kind of expanded
to five counties in your area right, Rick?
Mr. Flores. Expanded to five counties and our initiative
was a little different than the President's. Our initiative was
to have a greater impact on arresting people and putting people
behind bars.
We learned a lot, and one of the most important things that
we have learned is that all of us--communicating together and
sharing intelligence, we can make a greater impact in helping
reduce the criminal elements or the criminal enterprises along
the border.
Interoperability is also very important. We lack
interoperability, but basically the gathering of intelligence,
communicating with each other was very, very important and very
successful.
We thank the governor's office for taking the lead on that
in getting these operations together so we could learn more
about us as an agency and working together collaboratively with
other law enforcement agencies.
Mr. McCaul. Well--and Sheriff.
Mr. Jernigan. I would like to add, Mr. Chairman, as a
result of this operation, Chief Randy Hill, Chief of the Border
Patrol for the Del Rio sector, and DPS and the Val Verde
sheriff's office agreed and have actually formed a joint
intelligence unit based at the Border Patrol to address some of
these issues. It has just been established, so we are all going
to be watching to see if it really works.
A couple of other issues that we are looking at besides the
joint intelligence efforts are the sheriff's office and the
Border Patrol are exploring the possibility of joining our
communications centers in one center, probably to be located at
the Border Patrol. We have technicians and others coming in the
next couple of weeks to evaluate that possibility, to see if it
will work. Off the cuff, I think it will improve our
communications between the multitude of Federal agencies in our
jurisdiction and within the county.
One other issue that we have initiated that has to do with
the heavy caseloads at the U.S. attorney's office: Many cases
not being prosecuted because of the threshold levels that have
been established. Through the governor's office we were able to
secure funding to establish a full-time prosecutor working at
the U.S. attorney's office to assist us in the additional cases
that are flowing in their direction.
Mr. McCaul. Well, thank you. I commend you for your efforts
and your success. As usual, Congress and those of us at the
Federal level have a lot to learn from States and locals.
And Steve.
Mr. McCraw. Chairman, we have concluded this week--we just
happened to coincidentally conclude Operation El Paso this
week. We will be doing an after-action report. We are going to
do it next Tuesday, and the preliminary statistics we are
getting back right now are 70 percent reduction in all crime.
And that is an important part. Remember, all crime, that
is, the home invasions--those are the things that the sheriffs
are held accountable for: home invasions, robberies, rapes,
murders. It is a very important statistic.
The only reason that number drops is because the bad guys,
Mexican organized crime, shut down their activities. There is a
direct correlation between when you reduce the smuggling acts
of these that come across the border and the amount of crime
they have to deal with in their particular counties.
Would you guys agree with that?
Mr. Flores. I agree.
Mr. McCaul. It is a great model for us to learn from.
I believe that the House bill, passed by the Senate, will
provide the support that you need.
And I would like to close with the issue I brought up
initially, and that is the catch-and-release policy. If
anything, we need to get this passed. It is absurd. You don't
have to look back too far in history to know that in 1992 a guy
name Ramzi Yousef came into this country and was given a notice
to appear at a hearing, failed to show up, conspired to blow up
the World Trade Center, fled the country, met with Khalid
Sheikh Mohammed, who turned out to be the mastermind of 9/11.
They discussed in the mid-1990s the flying of airplanes into
buildings.
As we recently saw in England, those plots are still
ongoing with airplanes. That is why this policy is so
important, and that is why it is so important that we pass
this.
I now yield to recognize the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms.
Jackson-Lee.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Let me thank you again, Mr. Chairman, and
thank you for allowing me to serve this morning on a
subcommittee that I am not on Homeland Security as the ranking
member and, therefore, allowing me, as well, to also be a fact
finder but to bring a sense of balance.
Mr. Pena, Mr. McCraw, Colonel Malesky, Sheriff Flores,
Sheriff Jernigan, Mr. Quan, Mr. Bonner, let me thank you for
the patriotic Americans that you are and for the service that
you have given. Both sheriffs know that we have spent a lot of
time together in Washington, D.C. I have even called the
sheriff before my Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security,
and Claims of the House Judiciary Committee.
We have heard your voices, and frankly my frustration, as I
listened to Mr. Flores, is the fact your life is still in
jeopardy, that we don't have the resources right now for you to
take advantage of.
So my frustration is not to suggest that it is not a
dangerous border--I know that; I have spent time there at
night--but obviously the hours that you spend, you are a living
witness, all of you are. So I think the challenge for us today
is to really call upon the Congress, to roll up our sleeves,
and if I had the--my, if you will, desires or the opportunity,
I would call the House back in and the Senate back in, because
I think it is important to note that there is a House bill and
there is a Senate bill.
Both of these bills have enforcement aspects because it is
a given, it is an obvious. I don't know if Yogi Berra had some
quote that it is all about obviousness. We understand that we
are confronting a new enemy.
My concern here today is that testimony that you have given
is welcoming for Houston to hear it, but it is already in our
congressional records. When you left us in June and July and in
the spring when you came up, your challenge to this Congress
was that it was necessary for us to go to work.
Well, we have gone to work, and might I say to the
chairman, I would like to join with him on his initial
legislation, because H.R. 4044, as he well knows, OTMs, other-
than-Mexicans, the problem with the catch-and-release was the
lack of detention beds. So the rapid response bill that I
authored that--Mr. Bonner, that you have supported or the
National Association of Border Patrol, gives you a 100,000
detention beds. It is not a pretty sight, but it does speak to
this whole question of security.
So I want to take you, if I might, in a series of rounds of
questioning that might be helpful for me to understand.
Sheriff Jernigan made a point that is valuable. We are
safer today in light of the terrorist plot that was discovered
in the last 2 weeks because of intelligence. That is the first
line of defense for you gentlemen that are here today, to get
the intelligence so that you can be in front of the violence,
if you will. And then, of course, it is the necessity of
providing the funding.
I have joined in, as we have, to help support sheriffs who
need a reimbursement in funding, because you are on the front
line as first responders, but I think the crisis is that--what
I am hearing is, is all local effort.
Immigration and the protection of the border and the
protection of the United States is a Federal responsibility. It
has to be. So let me simply--and I think I heard Mr. McCraw say
that there is going to be a $100 million request by the
governor of the State of Texas?
Mr. McCraw. Yes, ma'am, that is correct.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Let me ask you whether or not a format
such of this would be helpful as well: a provision in law that
would allow the governor of a State to declare an international
emergency at their border--and we have New Mexico and
California, among others--to go directly to the Secretary of
Homeland Security, who consults with the President of the
United States; and at that point the DHS dispatches 1,000
Border Patrol agents to that State that has declared an
emergency.
Would that be a vehicle that would be useful to the State
of Texas which you represent?
Mr. McCraw. The short answer is yes. One thousand more
Border Patrol agents, where do we sign up.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. So a format that would allow that
declaration would be a helpful format.
Mr. McCraw. Yes, ma'am.
One thing I want to caution, though: A declaration without
resources means nothing.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Absolutely. So that the connection is that
once you make the declaration, those 1,000 Border Patrol agents
would be dispatched, short of adding money in the other areas.
Mr. McCraw. Yes, ma'am, we would love to have that.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. That is a provision in H.R. 4044, which I
authored. And, frankly, I hope that at a conference--that is
what we are supposed to be doing--that we will be able to reach
that point of reconciliation and get a provision in the
conference that generates a bill that answers this immigration
issue comprehensively, border security and, as well, working
with the States for their security and immigration reform.
Let me also ask Mr. McCraw why I think it is important for
you to have these Federal resources. The governor is going to
be asking for 100 million. I know that you are tightening your
belt. I know what is happening to the State schools and our
health care system. I know that we are literally in a crunch,
and I am saddened to say that when it came to making a decision
about Federal funding for urban initiative grants under the
Department of Homeland Security, as Mr. Quan has said, we were
cut 31 percent under this administration.
But I do want to ask, with the effort that you have had at
the border, tell me why you need more resources. We know that
GAO investigators just went to the border, and they were able
to transport radioactive materials, enough to build two dirty
bombs, across borders in two locations, including Texas. If we
had a State effort by the governor--the question is, why didn't
we catch these individuals?
What is it that you would need if you were at the border?
The governor did expend funds, but yet these two individuals or
this group of individuals were able to come across with the
dirty bombs, and Texas did not catch it with the resources.
Mr. McCraw. I think if you will check, you will find they
went through the ports of entry. That is how they did it.
I will refer to Mr. Pena in terms of that--or you wouldn't
know, you are ICE. Forgive me. There is nobody here that is at
the port of entry. That is how they entered.
It doesn't matter. They could have gotten in a number of
different ways, certainly through the ports of entry, but in
between the ports of entry.
The fact is, the answer is, secure the border. If the
border is secure, that is the important point, because just
because people don't, you know--that is the most important
thing and that is where we will continue to focus and talk
about.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. You are absolutely right, and reclaiming
my time, your time was well spent in your answer. That was
basis of my question, that whether the governor spends $100
million of State funds, if we as a Federal entity don't fund
this at the highest amount, which is included in a
comprehensive view of this immigration question, then we are
begging the question, we are forcing States to spend their
money, and we still have people crossing the border with the
ability to create havoc.
Mr. Pena, what happened there? What do you need more to
help you in avoiding that kind of entry? And I know that you
are ICE, internal, but if you could suggest what might be
helpful if investigators were able to cross the border with two
dirty bombs.
Mr. Pena. Unfortunately, Congresswoman, I am not as well
versed on that incident that you referred to. I am familiar
with the previous--I think it was a Dateline that happened up
on the northern border.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. This is a GAO study. You can give your
best guess as to what kind of funding you would need to help
thwart that type of activity.
Would it be an intelligence funding increase? Would it be
more resources, more personnel?
Mr. Pena. You touched on it. It is comprehensive.
I think we need intelligence; I think some of the things
that are going on right now, as far as a coordinated effort,
which I think is demonstrated here, of how we are working
together in these task forces where there is not a
compartmentalizing of information anymore.
I think that 9/11 has opened the windows that every agency
realizes no one wants to withhold that piece of information
that could have helped the other agency detect the dirty bomb.
We are working closely together. We are sharing our
information. We are intelligence driven, working with our
foreign partners.
That is the other key, which I hope was noted in my
testimony about working with the Mexican Government. We do need
their cooperation to help us, and we have begun an initiative
where we are working closely with Mexico intelligence. We have
got to work with foreign governments, also.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. I think that is excellent and is part of
the comprehensive approach we are trying to take by meshing the
Senate bill and the House bill together. You cannot have
enforcement only because you must separate out the criminals
from those who are seeking to come into the country with legal
status or even those who are already here in the United States.
I think if we mesh that we become confused.
Let me just pose these questions quickly to Sheriff Flores
and Sheriff Jernigan. If you were to get, along with resources
at the border, more helicopters and power boats, both working
at the Border Patrol and you would have the opportunity to
utilize some of that equipment, helicopters, power boats, motor
vehicles, portable computers, radio communication, handheld
global positioning system devices, night vision equipment, body
armor, would that be helpful, in conjunction with the support
of the Border Patrol, getting that equipment as well?
Mr. Flores. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. And so that would be helpful as you are on
the border and assisting us in border security.
Mr. Flores. If I may add, one of the things that
distinguished Webb County from the other counties is that
Laredo is, if not the largest inland port in the Nation,
possibly in the world, we have got 60--to 70,000 commercial
trucks going northbound across our borders; and commercial
vehicle enforcement would be very, very important for us to be
able to have--to be able to inspect some of the truck traffic
that is crossing our bridges undetected. So technology is of
vital importance in addition to all the others.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Let me just say, that too is in H.R. 4044,
which I authored.
And let me just have my last question to Mr. Bonner if I
could. I just want to show you the comparison of what we have
had over the last couple of years, border security by the
numbers.
The average number of new Border Patrol agents added per
year in 1993 to 2000 was 642. Under this present Congress and
over the last years since 2001, it has been 411. INS fines for
immigration enforcement, 417 in 1999; present administration,
only three in 2004.
Seventy-eight percent fewer completed immigration court
cases. In 1995, we had 6,455 before the 1996 immigration bill;
and now in 2003, the very span of time that this committee and
this chairman are talking about, 2003 from 1999, we have gone
down.
My other poster shows the number of apprehensions at the
border has declined by 31 percent under this administration and
this Congress. In 1996 to 2000, you had 1.52 million; in 2002,
2004 you have had 1.5 million.
I would commend that the question is resources. Would you
want to analyze that, Mr. Bonner, why we have seen such a
drastic decrease and has the funding been equal to the needs?
Mr. Bonner. Obviously, the funding has not been equal to
the needs because our borders are still porous, and I think
there is enough blame to be spread around all over the place.
The question now is, when are we going to get down to
business and solve the problem and secure the border; and I
think that that is going to take both sides of the aisle to get
together in good faith and come up with solutions that really
work. I don't want to sit here and preach to the Members of
Congress, but the American public wants our borders secure. I
hear that every day from ordinary citizens who ask me, Why
aren't our borders secure; and I have to refer them over to
their lawmakers.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. So you want us to get to work and to
reconcile those two bills.
Mr. Bonner. I want the problem solved.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. We will get to work to reconcile those two
bills. Thank you very much.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you.
Mr. Bonner, we hear that message every day as well, secure
the border, and that is what we are trying to do.
The Chair now recognizes Judge Ted Poe.
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Bonner, preach on,
preach on. It is what you ought to be doing. Sometimes people
say Washington, D.C., is the only city in America surrounded by
reality. So you need to keep preaching. I would encourage you
to do that.
Several comments--most of my questions will be directed to
you, Mr. Bonner--I just tell you that so you can listen to what
I have to say--and also Sheriff Flores.
I understand there are 8,000 documents the Border Patrol
has to be versed in in determining whether a person from Mexico
or Canada or the Caribbean islands is lawfully from that
country when they come into our legal ports of entry.
Is that a fair statement?
Mr. Bonner. Those would be the Customs and Border
Protection officers, Border Patrol agents, most of the people
that we apprehend do not have any documents, but we run into
those situations where someone has some type of document; and
then we have to get on the radio and say, What the heck is this
thing, and generally we get sent off to those folks at the
ports of entry who have to be expert in this. And I don't want
to take up too much of your time, Congressman, but--
Mr. Poe. Let me cut you off then, Mr. Bonner. I want to
keep my 5 minutes.
At the lawful ports of entry, as you know, we have a
Western Hemisphere exception. If you are from Mexico, Canada,
the Caribbean islands, you can come into America without the
use of a passport. You can use everything from a baptismal
certificate on.
The 9/11 Commission recommended that the United States do
away with that absurd policy and for security reasons require
all people entering the United States to have a passport. It
would speed up the entry to the United States, but also it
could record who comes in and who leaves this country, which we
do not do in this Nation any longer.
The 9/11 Commission report recommendation has been
postponed, continues to be postponed, so that we do not have
the passport policy in this country. We have a passport, a
universal document legislation, that I have introduced. The
person has a visa with a photograph and a thumbprint on it.
Then when an individual goes to a business and wants to work,
that business uses this lawful visa as opposed to some Social
Security number that businesses are supposed to use, and then
we could prosecute the businesses that fail to or that continue
to hire illegals.
Do you think maybe using this 9/11 Commission report is
something that Congress ought to adopt, requiring everybody
entering the United States to have a passport so we know who
these people are? Just your opinion.
Mr. Bonner. Absolutely. As it stands now, if you speak
English, you can get into this country; because they ask you
where were you born, and if you can speak English well enough,
you can convince that inspector that you have a right to be
here. They don't want to know who you are, so you could be--you
could have committed a heinous crime the day before or the week
before and have an APB, but they are not asking you who you
are.
Mr. Poe. And I agree totally with you that the Federal
Government ought to prosecute the businesses that make a profit
in dealing in the cash economy, paying people illegally in the
country in cash; those people receive illegal money, and the
businesses profit. The Federal Government needs to prosecute
those.
That is well said. Good advice.
Detentions, as the chairman has mentioned, regarding OTMs,
those people from other nations that are coming here, captured,
released. I don't know why we can't use the abandoned military
bases. Homeland security has 10,000 FEMA trailers sitting up in
Hope, Arkansas, that were supposed to be used down here in the
gulf coast for the hurricanes, but FEMA has apparently some
regulation you can't take trailers to flood-prone areas. So we
never got the trailers for the refugees from Katrina and Rita,
another absurd policy.
But they are sitting up in Hope, Arkansas. Maybe those
could be pulled down to the border and used on a temporary
basis to house people that are OTMs from other nations. It is a
national security problem, as well as an economic security
problem, to allow unlawful entry into the United States.
I have a specific question regarding an incident that has
occurred with the Border Patrol, a couple of border agents
being arrested for, what I think, doing their job in West Texas
and being prosecuted for doing their job. Now they are getting
ready to be sentenced Friday for apparently shooting at some
drug dealer, and the Federal Government gave the drug dealer
immunity to prosecute the two border agents.
What is the policy of the Border Patrol on use of force and
apprehensions of people coming across the border illegally,
like drug dealers? Can you tell me what the policy is?
Mr. Bonner. The policy is that Border Patrol agents are
entitled to use deadly force to defend themselves or an
innocent third party. In that case, that is exactly what
happened. The drug smuggler wheeled around upon command to
stop, pointed a shiny object at them, and they opened fire.
They don't have to wait until someone shoots at them. They did
not violate policy.
Mr. Poe. I agree with you. It seems very ironic our Federal
Government seems to be on the wrong side in doing the
prosecuting in that particular case.
Sheriff Flores, I would like to ask a couple of questions
to you. Been down to the border and seen you a couple of times
and all the deputy sheriffs and the sheriffs in Texas. Once
again, we appreciate what you do.
And when y'all came to Washington, D.C., the 16 border
sheriffs walking down Pennsylvania Avenue, sheriffs from Texas,
you are stopping traffic, people are looking. Who are these
guys? The sheriffs are in town, 16 new ones.
But we thank you for what you do.
You have a person that used to work as a Texas Ranger
working for you by the name of Doyle Holdridge and he has made
a comment about what the border is like after sunset between
Nuevo Laredo and Laredo.
Would you like to comment on what Doyle Holdridge, his
comment?
Mr. Flores. His comment is and still is that ``It gets
Western,'' and his definition of ``Western'' is that, you know,
our deputies have to be on extremely high alert when they
travel into some of the communities in the south that are
situated along the Rio Grande because of the narcotrafficking
and the illegal smuggling.
Mr. Poe. Do you think that we have, as a nation, control of
our southern border.
Mr. Flores. We do not have control. We are doing the best
that we can with what we have, but we surely could use more.
Mr. Poe. Okay.
Mr. Flores. But we do have a pulse on the violence and some
control. We don't have a large spillover on this side, and I
think that definitely when we had our operations or have been
having our operations, the more vigilance and the more manpower
that we have along the border, these people tend to hunker
down.
Mr. Poe. Well, obviously, I think all of the departments
are doing--Federal and State, local, National Guard are doing
the best job our Federal Government will let them do.
Last question, Sheriff. In a perfect world, how would you
solve the border problem? How would you do it? If you could
preach to us, as Mr. Bonner wants to do, what would you preach
to the Federal Government on what we could do to secure the
southern and even the northern border?
Mr. Flores. I think Ms. Jackson-Lee pretty much had the
laundry list. We need additional manpower. We need more
technology. We need more resources allocated not only to
Federal agencies, but to local agencies.
We are first responders. County governments are a small tax
base. They don't have enough money to fund sheriff's
departments as they should, or I think they probably would
want, but that would be perfect in an ideal world.
More boots on the ground--
Mr. Poe. Probably more immigration judges, as well.
Mr. Flores.--and, of course interoperability to communicate
with each other. Post-9/11, we are still not interoperable in a
lot of places in the United States.
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Sheriff Flores.
I yield back Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you. I just want to add, it is amazing to
me that two Border Patrol agents who are doing their job,
getting fired at all the time on the front lines, with their
hands tied behind their backs, when they try to defend
themselves, end up getting prosecuted.
With that, the Chair will now recognize Mr. Green.
Mr. Gene Green. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And like my
colleagues, I want to thank both local law enforcement for
going what is really a Federal responsibility; and I just
regret we have to be here.
But in all honesty, both the House bill and the Senate bill
have the tools to deal with what you are having to address with
right now--the OTMs, the additional resources. The difference
is that the Senate bill deals with the 10 to 12 million we have
that are undocumented.
But I don't think any side--the Senate, the House--wants to
skimp on protecting our country, but the Senate bill does have
the same thing. That is what the conference committees are for.
If one side is better than the other, then the conference
committee ought to meet, but this one hasn't met and that is
our problem right now.
I wish I could say we will do it this year. In all honesty,
I don't see it happening this year, because with the shortness
of the time the Congress is in session in September and October
and the lame duck session. We want to do it; there is an
obligation to do it.
It is interesting though, Mr. McCraw; I don't know you, but
I served in the Texas legislature. The only time I heard your
name before was when I watched some things on trying to look
for the legislators in Oklahoma and New Mexico, and I hope we
have a lot better chance at this than we did that.
Mr. McCraw. Wrong person. I was working for the FBI at that
time.
Mr. Gene Green. Okay. Good. Different McCaul. Thank you.
Mr. McCraw. It is McCraw. That is close enough.
Mr. Gene Green. One of the things I would like to know is,
what are the rules of engagement on the Federal level and the
local level.
Sheriff Flores, if your deputies are fired on and cross the
international boundary, what is your standard operating
procedure? I would like to know the Federal agencies, the
Border Patrol, if someone fires at you from across the border,
what is your option?
Mr. Flores. You take cover.
Mr. Gene Green. You don't have the right to return fire.
Mr. Flores. Not right now; we are just--we pretty much
wait. And we have actually seen Border Patrol fire back and--
because they have been in many situations like we have been in,
but we have not fired back.
Mr. Gene Green. So local law enforcement, if you happen to
be in a neighborhood in South Laredo and you are along the
border, I mean, it could be Laredo, it could be El Paso, it
could be anywhere, you don't have the right under national law,
or is it State law, to be able to return fire.
Mr. Flores. Okay. If we are in the United States, you know,
we are going to go ahead and protect ourselves if we are in a
very difficult situation.
Now, if they are shooting from an international
countrySec.
Mr. Gene Green. Across the border.
Mr. Flores. Across the border.
--we are just different. We are very careful. We don't want
to cause any problems. We do notify law enforcement. We call
our dispatch. Dispatch calls Mexican law enforcement. We try to
get Mexican law enforcement to respond, but we do not take the
initiative to start firing back.
Mr. Gene Green. Well, I guess that bothers me, Mr.
Chairman, because frankly our law enforcement should be able to
protect themselves. And I know we don't want to cause an
international incident, but in all honesty, if somebody is
shooting, at your deputies or a Brownsville police officer or
anyone else, I think that--I mean, they ought to be able to
defend themselves.
I don't know what we need to do. I don't think that has
been addressed in any of the bills we have talked about, but I
am glad these Border Patrol agents have a right to return fire.
I also know that if you can't, if the country of Mexico
can't stop that from happening--and we have the same right to
protect our citizens; and law enforcement, particularly, ought
to be able to protect themselves. I am going to see how we can
work on changing that.
Sheriff Jernigan, in Val Verde County you talked about the
need for communication equipment so you can communicate with
other. Is it State and local law enforcement, or is it also to
work with Federal law enforcement?
Mr. Jernigan. Also, Federal, sir.
I did a recent study here a while back, trying to come up
with some figures on what it would cost if we did a
communications project for all the agencies, particularly on
the Texas border, and came up with a figure a little in excess
of $40 million. But we can't communicate right now between
various agencies.
Mr. Gene Green. In all honesty, we had that same problem in
Houston, in Harris County and the Houston Police Department;
and we are working at it. Even the Port of Houston that is in
our district, we are trying to develop the relationship between
all my local jurisdictions and the FBI and the Federal law
enforcement to do the same thing, because that is one of our
problems from 9/11.
Even in New York, the firefighters cannot communicate with
the police officers.
Mr. Flores. Well, I would like to say, if Washington was
interoperable, it would be great for all of us.
Mr. Gene Green. Wouldn't that be nice.
Mr. Flores. It is not a partisan issue. It is a red, white
and blue issue, and I think y'all need to spread that to your
colleagues and let them know that.
Mr. Gene Green. And I agree. I think interoperable would be
nice. We should be interoperable on lots of other issues other
than just communication equipment. I think that is something we
need to realize, that along the border between the Federal
agencies and the local agencies, they ought to be able to call
each other, instead of having to go through dispatch and get on
another system, because delay can mean injury or death.
One of the things I am amazed at, and a good friend of mine
and ours actually is Congressman Silvestre Reyes from El Paso.
He was the District Director of the Border Patrol for many
years, and I remember the controversy he had when he had to
hold the line in El Paso. I saw the number of petty crimes,
number of burglaries went down because of that effort. We know
that worked.
I know the Border Patrol for years has tried to implement
that along the border, but you have to have the people. It
doesn't do you any good to have a fence. Somebody has to watch
that fence; that is what is frustrating.
Are we still dealing with something that shows that it was
successful in El Paso in the early 1990s or the mid-1990s in
holding the line, you can do it, whether it is Laredo, or urban
areas particularly, but Laredo or El Paso.
Mr. Flores. In Laredo, I know. And I can't speak for Border
Patrol, but I know that their virtual technology has been
working. I know the governor is expanding on that, and I think
that is going to serve well to have additional cameras and
sensors along the border. We need to have more of that. And
again, I just can't overemphasize the importance of technology.
Mr. Gene Green. Again, it should be Federal funding instead
of having the local taxpayers or even the State taxpayers do
that.
Mr. Flores. Well, like I said, we don't have the money.
Mr. Gene Green. Mr. Quan, you mentioned in your testimony
the concern about punishing cities who may not particularly
make it an effort to be INS agents. I guess that bothers me
because in the city of Houston, we have a shortage of police
officers although--and we are doing overtime and everything
else. I don't know the numbers on the Federal funding, but do
you know from your years on the council--and maybe the chief
would know when he gets here--what impact that would have on
the city of Houston if all of the sudden we lost funding from
the Federal Government?
Mr. Quan. I don't have the exact numbers on that, Congress
Member, but in a recent discussion we talked about just the
fact that FEMA, we are asking reimbursement for the number of
police officers because of the additional people from Katrina
and Rita; and there are several millions of dollars.
If we are forced to try to look at criminal aliens in the
city of Houston, it is estimated we may need an extra 1,000
officers in the city. So where are we going to get that type of
funding? That is one-fifth of our force as it is right now.
So I don't have the figures on how much we get now, but
again, I don't think it comes close to reimbursing what the
costs are.
Mr. Gene Green. In all honesty, living in the city of
Houston, if my house were broken into, I would much rather the
cost and service time be much lower, and if I have somebody I
think is not here legally, I would be more than happy to call
the INS instead of the HPD.
Mr. Quan. That is what the mayor believes and most citizens
of Houston believe.
Mr. Gene Green. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McCaul. Gene, let me associate myself with your
frustration and concerns about law enforcement's inability to
respond once these cartels have gone back into Mexico.
I recently chaired a hearing on Neeley's Crossing in hopes
that the county would arrest cartel members and individuals
dressed in military uniform who crossed into the United States
and then fled back across the river. We saw on the videotape
law enforcement's inability to do anything, even though they
were being fired upon, and I think it is something we should
look into in this committee, and also I think it calls for a
greater need for cooperation with Mexico. I think that is
probably the answer to that.
The committee will now take a short recess of 5 minutes.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Chairman, this panel is leaving.
Mr. McCaul. Yes.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. May I just ask you to yield to me?
Mr. McCaul. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms.
Jackson-Lee.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Chairman, we have worked on a number
of committees together, but specifically the Homeland Security
Committee, and what I have gleaned from these witnesses is that
we have a drug cartel, violent problem at the border, mostly
dealing with drug smugglers, money launderers. And I hope maybe
that you will accept my invitation for a hearing at the border
on the depressed Colombian drug trafficking which has now come
to Mexico, which is the crux of the increased violence that you
all are facing. That is a more or less parallel but separate
issue which would include public enforcement officers and FBI
and others. And in order to be able to look at this in its
wholeness, I would hope we would be able to have that kind of
hearing and provide the necessary funding for that response as
well.
Mr. McCaul. I think that is an excellent idea, and the
Chair will take that into consideration. The committee will now
be taking a short recess of 5 minutes for the next panel.
[Recess.]
Mr. McCaul. The committee will come back to order.
First, I would like to thank Judge Martha Jamison for
opening up her courtroom to us today to hold this hearing. I
really appreciate all the hospitality, not only from the judge
but from the Harris County officials, sheriff's office, and all
of the Harris County officials who have made this possible here
today. I know it has not been easy. I know there have been
security concerns, and I certainly appreciate everything you
have done. Thanks so much.
With that said, we are going to go ahead and start into the
testimony. I will try to keep us on a fairly tight clock so we
can all move on. I understand there is an Astros game at one
o'clock, and some of you may be attending that.
With that being said, the Chair now recognizes Mr. Robert
Eckels, Judge Eckels, Harris County.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT A. ECKELS, COUNTY JUDGE, HARRIS COUNTY
Judge Eckels. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members. Again, I
will try to be brief. I have submitted previously written
testimony. We do welcome you to Harris County Civil Courthouse.
You are the first congressional hearing in our courthouse. We
are very happy to have you here. I wonder about Judge Poe not
being at the bench here. I will have to get used to this.
We welcomed Congressman Lee and Congressman Green earlier.
Like many other large communities in the United States, we
are relying on the Census Bureau to talk a little bit about
ourselves. And one of the high points, in 2005 we were
estimated to have a population approaching 3.7 million. That
was pre-Katrina. So I would estimate that Harris County now
pushes that 4 million number.
As you look at our population here, it is about 20 percent
growth rate over the decade. A large percentage of our
population, as has been earlier estimated, is immigrant
population and foreign-born population. We do have a very
international community and a large border presence through the
Port of Houston, in spite of the fact that we are not on the
southern border.
Houston, through our port, is a gateway to Mexico. We are a
larger Mexican port than any other Mexican port, at least in
terms of transporting goods through our port. It also makes us
more vulnerable to criminal activities. So we are particularly
interested in the issues regarding our community, and I
appreciate your being here today.
We did receive port security grant funding which has
enabled us to begin electronic surveillance and waterside
patrols which are currently in the planning side. We appreciate
that. We are partnering with the port in their grants, and the
Coast Guard as well, in working together, and I do want to
compliment the Coast Guard and the Homeland Security Department
for their efforts to work with us on our interjurisdictional
partners for security in both regions.
You asked me to focus on three efforts: the impact of
illegal immigration on the public school systems, health care
and our law enforcement and criminal justice systems.
I have become increasingly aware, as I have tried to
prepare this testimony, that it is very difficult to gather
information on the impact of illegal aliens and illegal
immigration with criminal activity because citizenship
statistics are not routinely gathered by most entities of the
State or local government.
It is standard practice, for example, in public health when
they are conducting case investigations--when we did a
reportable condition of communicable disease--to identify the
potential risk to the community and inform us of those risks
and track down the disease, ensuring that no one else is placed
at risk. In doing so, they do not get into the issue of
citizenship because that often impedes their ability to track
down people who might be carrying diseases in the community.
Paul Bettencourt, our tax assessor, had testified
previously to Congress and the Committee on House
administration about the noncitizen voting and the Federal
Election Integrity Act, and mentioned the possibility of having
a reliable national database, a citizenship database, and to
check for protocol on citizenship. Such a database would be
helpful to us as we deal with the other issues as well, not in
a deliberative service, but in the maintaining of the records
in the county on the people we deal with every day.
On public education and public schools, the Texas system of
independent school districts, again created by the legislature,
have been given primary responsibility in educating children in
our State. There are 26 ISDs wholly or partially within Harris
County.
We do operate our own educational program, an alternative
education in criminal justice, a charter school within our
detention centers for juveniles in Texas. The TEA and the local
independent districts provide the bulk of our education.
There are over a million children or people under 18 years
of age in Harris County. We are a relatively young county. They
break down in the State of Texas and in the Houston area, for
African American, about 21 percent; 41 percent, Hispanic; 31
percent, Anglo; 2 percent, Native American; and a little over 5
percent, Asian Americans.
So it is again difficult, or almost impossible, to gather
information about citizenship, and that goes back to the Plyler
v. Doe case. That is referenced in my written testimony. But
again that overturned a State law in Texas that prohibited
reimbursement of State and Federal to local districts for
children who were not ``legally admitted'' to the Texas
schools.
It established a principle of don't ask, don't tell in the
public schools. They cannot be denied a public education
because of citizenship status. There is no doubt that problems
have existed or have existed for generations in the classrooms
on providing services both for our local community as well as
for the alien community, both legal and illegal, but there is
also no way to deny that as a result of our work we have
educated many students who have come to this country and have
enriched our State and our Nation.
The starting point for gathering data for the education
levels, though, in our education citizenship status will be the
bilingual education programs. According to the TEA, about 14
percent, or 631,000 of students in Texas public schools, were
enrolled in bilingual or ESL programs. Some 25,000, or 8.4
percent of all teachers of these programs, and $965 million, or
4.2 percent, were spent on public education for these programs.
In our region, the region IV area, 17 percent of our
students were enrolled in bilingual or ESL programs. That is
slightly larger than that State average; 9.5 percent of the
teachers teaching those programs and over $332 million, or
close to 7 percent, was spent on those programs.
This has been trending upward in the past decade and
continues to do so. Again, they don't reflect the actual number
of undocumented students in the region IV schools, but they can
help the committee establish the growth.
We did learn after Hurricane Katrina that rapid growth can
be a problem for us in our schools. We continue to deal with
the planning issues that go with the growth of the population
and the immigrant population that hits our system, but it
complicates the process to have the folks coming in as the
schools try to plan, because you don't build a school
overnight. And again it is referenced in the written material,
but we would be happy to work with the committee and appreciate
your interest on that impact.
We find as we go through and look at education and social
services and health care and the criminal activities, they are
all interrelated, and as was mentioned in the earlier panel,
and draw resources that would otherwise be spent on services in
the community.
I am able to provide better data on the impact of illegal
or undocumented aliens on our public health care delivery
system. Harris County has prepared a report at the request of
the Harris County Commissioners Court which is referenced in
the material and has been supplied to the committee.
Essentially it talks about three cost centers: outpatient
care, inpatient care and undocumented workers patients, as well
as pharmacy-only care. We saw from 2002 to 2005 a 17.7 percent
increase of undocumented inpatients served and over a 50
percent increase in costs for the services rendered. The total
cost for inpatients for 2005 was over $82 million, and the 4-
year total was over $272 million.
During that same period, the District received payments and
reimbursements totaling $106 million, leaving $166 million that
had to be picked up by the local property taxpayers. Of this
undocumented population in our district, 83 percent were people
from Mexico, 6 percent from El Salvador and Guatemala; the
remaining 11 percent were from Great Britain, Canada, Haiti,
India, Iraq, Iran, Nigeria, Vietnam, Nicaragua, other countries
around the world.
When you look at outpatients, the outpatient clinical
activity grew from 177,000 in 2002 to 272,000, a 52 percent
increase during that same period. In 2005, they generated
approximately 18 percent of our outpatient visits. Again, costs
up to $38 million in 2005.
I would caution as you look at the outpatient numbers that
sometimes Federal policy tends to drive people out of those
services into inpatient services which are much more expensive.
So as you are addressing these issues, as we address these
issues, we need to be careful of the law of unintended
consequences and the impact sometimes we have as we try to cut
costs. Again, many times the outpatient visits are a public
health issue that, without that visit, it would spread other
diseases in the community.
Pharmacy-only patient visits also increased, and annual
pharmacy-only visits grew from 75,000 plus in 2002 to over
156,000 in 2005. Again, an increase of more than a hundred
percent. Costs grew at 125 percent, for a 4-year total of over
$19 million.
Payment reimbursement for that period was $2 million,
resulting in a net cost of $17.5 million for the district. That
undocumented population that sought district pharmacy-only
visits in 2005, of that group, 86 percent were from Mexico, 4.5
percent were from El Salvador and Guatemala; another 9.5 from
those countries I mentioned earlier.
The total cost for all of this for 2005 was $128,400,000.
We received payments and reimbursements of $31 million, a net
cost of over $97 million. Four-year reportable cost of $403
million, with reimbursements of $116 million. This is covered
in the written testimony.
In addition to the cost, though, of Harris County taxpayers
that you may not look at, 99 million-plus, or 85 percent, of
the reimbursed costs came in reimbursements from the TP30, a
Federal Medicaid program for emergencies. Those funds are, of
course, paid by the Federal taxpayers, so we are not
reimbursed. Our total amount, Harris County contributes a
second time to that Federal tax base as well.
Another finding that may be pertinent to your investigation
is how the $27 million in emergency Medicaid reimbursements
were used in 2005. Of the 11,000 births performed by the
district, 7,900 were to undocumented mothers. That is 71
percent of all the births and 80 percent of the emergency
medical reimbursements to the district.
Again, in perspective, our budget for 2002 to 2005 was
about $2.6 billion for the district, and so within this, this
is about 20 percent of our total budget.
Our criminal justice, I have to defer largely to the law
enforcement folks here. You have heard a lot of testimony about
that before. I do have in the written testimony reference to
the MS-13 gang. Mr. McCraw earlier talked about the MS-13 gang.
We worked with Joe Newhouse of the James Baker Institute.
And we are concerned that the MS-13 gang is much more than
a street gang. It is particularly vicious and well organized.
It is large. It has had earlier reports in Honduras from the
former Minister of Security, Consul General here, Oscar Avarez.
This gang is a very young gang. It started in Honduras; 77
percent of their initiates are 15 years and younger when they
are initiated into the gang; 62 percent are between 12 and 17
years old. We are seeing a lot of youth gang activity in this
community as well, but we are concerned as well that the human
trafficking of the gangs has become more profitable than the
drugs and look at that as a major security issue for our
community.
Our pretrial services department provides services that do
allow us to collect citizenship status as we look for bail
hearings. Over the past 4-year period, 19 percent of the
misdemeanor defendant interviews were of non-U.S. citizens.
About half of those, 51.2 percent, were undocumented or
illegal. Again, 10.2 percent of the total misdemeanors were
illegal aliens.
The numbers are similar for felonies, about 11.5 percent
for non-U.S. citizens; 52 percent were undocumented. Again,
similarly on combined misdemeanor felony trials. Sixty-plus
percent were from Mexico; 67 percent of those from Mexico were
in Harris County illegally.
Again, there is no real correlation between the illegal
aliens and the general population in reference to our justice
system, but you can look at the impact. Our region is estimated
to have between 400,000 and maybe 430,000, up 30,000 from the
year 2000 in the Houston region in 2005. And, absent any other
information, that is the best data we can get.
If there were a national citizenship database, I would urge
the Federal Government to allow local governments to have
access for us to decide how we could best use that database,
not perhaps in the denying of services but in the ability to
better deliver and target our services in the population we are
dealing with.
We again do have the concerns that were expressed earlier
about the porous borders, the jihadist Web sites that are
talking about the open border. Recently, there was a bomb in
Karachi in a stadium, but the pattern of that attack followed a
Web site that pictured the Dallas, Texas stadium in Irving
where the Cowboys play. It had suggestions about infiltrating
our borders and who to use for suicide bombers within the
stadium. It is a threat to the community.
So we do want to follow up with, again, we are very
concerned about those issues in our community. We have shared
the concerns with the other sheriffs in the community and
continue to work with them. Again, we will continue to work
through our intelligence with Major O'Brien and touch on this
with the sheriff's office with comments made by the U.S.
attorney's office about Hezbollah and Mexico and the arrests
this spring of Hezbollah operatives within that country.
I remain available for questions and defer again on most of
the law enforcement issues to the rest of the panel.
[The statement of Judge Eckels follows:]
Prepared Statement of Robert A. Eckels
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I am Robert Eckels. I
serve as the County Judge of Harris County, Texas and I would like to
welcome you and your staff to Harris County and to our new Harris
County Civil Justice Center. Since the ribbon-cutting ceremony this
past March, you are the first congressional committee to grace us with
your presence in this room.
For those who are not familiar with our system of government here
in Texas, a County Judge is the presiding officer of the five member
Commissioners Court, the governing body of the county. I represent all
the citizens of the third most populous county in the United States in
much the same way county executives do in other parts of our country.
Harris County is 1,756 square miles in area and, with our 2005
population estimate of just under 3.7 million, is more populous than 23
states. There are 34 municipalities within the county, including the
City of Houston, our county seat, the fourth largest city in the
country. More than 1.3 million people live in unincorporated Harris
County and rely on the county to be the primary provider of basic
government services.
Like other communities around the United States, we rely on the
U.S. Census Bureau to tell us about ourselves. On August 4, 2006 the
U.S. Census Bureau released its mid-decade statistics on growth
entitled ``State and County Characteristics Population Estimates--for
July 1, 2005.'' The official estimate for the population of Harris
County--3,693,050--is up 292,472 from the 2000 census.
From other Census Bureau reports about Harris County we learned
that our growth rate in the decade from 1990 to 2000 was 20.7%. In 2004
it was estimated that 29% of our population was under the age of 18. In
36.7% of our households a language other than English is primarily
spoken and 22.2% of our population was foreign born. The Census Bureau
does not ask about legal or migrant status of respondents in any of its
survey and census programs as there is no legislative mandate to
collect this information.
Just two months after the July 2005 estimate, Harris County
experienced a sudden influx of evacuees from Hurricane Katrina
estimated to be more than 300,000 new permanent residents. While this
was certainly not illegal immigration, that 10% increase in population
almost overnight coupled with the existing influx of illegal immigrants
pushes the resources of our community to the limits.
I applaud you for holding this hearing on Criminal Activity and
Violence Along the Southern Border here in Harris County because we are
heavily impacted, like major metropolitan areas all over our country,
by this kind of activity as well as by illegal immigration.
Although we are not located on the southern border of the Untied
States, the Port of Houston is our gateway to the Gulf of Mexico
enabling us to tremendously expand the commerce of our region and
state, but also making us vulnerable to criminal activity and violence.
We have been working with this committee, the Congress and the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security to provide a higher level of security
for the Port.
Harris County received funding under the FY2005 Port Security Grant
Program which will enable electronic surveillance and the initiation of
water-side patrols that are part of the region's plans for the first
stage of detection and mitigation against improvised explosive device
attacks along the Houston Ship Channel.
This will provide a first step towards inter-jurisdictional
partnering within the region and assist with the implementation of
regional security plans associated with the Port of Houston Authority,
Port Strategic Security Council, regional industry partners, Houston
Urban Area Security Initiatives and other homeland security-related
plans. This important first step will lead to additional steps to raise
the level of security along the Port. I certainly appreciate and
encourage this Committee's continued work in helping local governments
secure ports and other vulnerable infrastructure.
I will focus on three areas where you have requested information,
the impact of illegal immigration on public school education, health
care delivery and our law enforcement/criminal justice systems.
However, in preparing this testimony I have become increasingly
aware that gathering information on the impact of illegal immigration
and associated criminal activity and violence is made more difficult
because citizenship status statistics are not gathered by most entities
of local and state government.
For example, as standard practice, the Harris County Public Health
and Environmental Services Department (HCPHES) conducts case
investigations following notification of an occurrence of a reportable
condition, including certain communicable diseases. These case
investigations are intended to identify potential risks to the
community and inform the development of disease control measures that
may be needed to protect the community--that is, to ensure that others
are not placed at risk.
Because a person's full participation and disclosure are critical
during the investigation process, HCPHES must establish and maintain a
high level of credibility and trust with participants. If a participant
felt threatened in any way, he or she might choose to discontinue
participation, thus impeding the investigation and, as a result,
potentially putting others in the community at risk for exposure to the
communicable disease.
Therefore, HCPHES collects only the information that is necessary
to determine potential risks to the community and develop appropriate
recommendations for disease control. Because knowledge of residency
status does not contribute to these goals, HCPHES does not collect
information related to residency status during case investigations for
reportable conditions.
Recently, Paul Bettencourt, the elected Tax Assessor-Collector and
Voter Registrar for Harris County, testified before the House Committee
on House Administration about non-citizen voting and the Federal
Election Integrity Act of 2006. In his testimony, he reminded the
committee that the State of Texas amended its constitution in 1921 to
require that voters be U.S. citizens.
He went on to say that there is no reliable database that he can
check for proof of citizenship, but there could be at the federal
level. A national citizenship data-base could be used by entities of
local government, with sufficient safeguards in place to keep the data-
base secure, that would assist their efforts in identifying correctly
the citizenship status of individuals and better determine the impact
of illegal immigration on community resources.
PUBLIC SCHOOL EDUCATION
Texas has a system of independent school districts or ISDs and
charter schools created by the Texas Legislature that have the primary
responsibility for implementing the state's system of public education
and ensuring student performance. Each are political subdivisions of
the state, having an elected governing body and the authority to levy
and collect taxes and issue bonds to build infrastructure and to pay
operational expenses. Harris County has 26 ISDs wholly or partially
within the county.
The Texas Education Agency (TEA), our state's department of
education, is divided into 20 geographic regions, each served by an
Education Service Center (ESC). Harris County is in the seven-county
Region IV and Houston is its ESC. TEA keeps records on students, school
districts and expenditures among other information and I can provide
information for Region IV, but not easily for Harris County alone.
With so many of Harris County's population being younger than 18
years of age, 1,070,985 per the U.S. Census Bureau, one of the greatest
challenges we face is to maintain an adequate number of classrooms and
provide the classroom resources necessary to meet the needs of each
student. We have to be able to predict where the families of school age
children will be living in order to predict where classrooms will be
needed and if schools must be built. We must be able to hire
professional educators in sufficient numbers to maintain teacher-
student ratios to both meet our state's requirements and provide the
quality education our communities deserve.
In the State of Texas in the school year 2004-2005, there were
4,383,871 students in public schools from early childhood education at
age 3 to grade 12. In Region IV there are 962,286 students. The ethnic
break down of the students in Region IV is as follows:
African American 205,110 21.3%
Hispanic 400,271 41.6%
White 302,170 31.4%
Native American 1,622 0.2%
Asian/Pacific Islander 53,113 5.5%
--------------------
962,286
Gathering statistical data on the impact of illegal immigration on
education s almost impossible because ISDs are prevented by law from
gathering and disseminating that information. The United States Supreme
Court decided in Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982) that a Texas
statute which allowed the state to withhold state funds from local
school districts for the education of children who were not ``legally
admitted'' into the United States, and which authorized local school
districts to deny enrollment to such children, violated the Equal
Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
This ruling established the principle of ``Don't Ask-Don't Tell''
in public schools. Children cannot be denied an education because of
citizenship status and therefore there exists no reason to ask the
question and collect the data. There was a belief that children should
not be punished because of the actions of their parents and therefore
deserved the opportunity to receive an education and an opportunity to
become productive members of society.
While we cannot accurately quantify the impact that illegal
immigration has on public education in Harris County, there is no way
to deny that there is a substantial impact.
Based mostly on anecdotal evidence from administrators, teachers
and students who tell of their experiences with over-crowding, security
and discipline problems as well as substantial language barriers and
cultural differences that distract from the quality of education
received in the classroom, there is no way to deny that problems exist
and have existed for generations. There is also no way to deny that our
continued effort to educate any and all students who want an education
will enrich our county, our state and our country.
The starting point for providing an education is to overcome
language barriers that exist when students are English language
learners (ELL) in order to comprehend classroom instruction. The goal
of the state's Bilingual Education and English as a Second Language
(ESL) Programs are to enable ELLs to become competent in comprehending,
speaking, reading, and writing the English language and to succeed
academically in Texas public schools.
There is no direct correlation between citizenship status and
Bilingual Education/ESL Programs because children born in the United
States are citizens by birthright granted in the 14th Amendment to our
constitution, but they may be raised in a household where only Spanish
or another language is exclusively spoken. However, these programs may
provide an insight that will help approximate the impact that illegal
immigration has on public education.
According to TEA in the school year 2003--2004 (the most recent
data available), 631,534 or 14.4% of all students in Texas public
schools were enrolled in Bilingual/ESL educational programs. Some
25,000 or 8.4% of all teachers were part of these programs and
$965,336,115 or 4.2% of all funds spent on public school education was
spent on these programs.
In our TEA region, the numbers were slightly higher. Seventeen
percent of our students in Region IV were enrolled in Bilingual
Education/ESL Programs and 9.5% of teachers taught in these programs.
Of all funds spent by ISDs in Region IV, $332,600,000 or 6.8% was spent
on these programs.
These numbers have been trending upward in the past decade. In the
school year 1999--2000, 14.4% of Region IV students and 8.9% of
teachers were part of the Bilingual Education/ESL Programs while
$176,676,005 or 6.3% of all funds spent on public school education was
spent on these programs. In the school year 1994--1995, 12.3% of Region
IV students and 7.8% of teachers were part of the in Bilingual
Education/ESL Programs $126,365,532 or, again, 6.3% of all funds spent
on public school education was spent on these programs.
Again, these programs do not reflect the actual number of
undocumented students in Texas or Region IV schools, but these
statistics may assist the committee's efforts to begin to quantify the
impact that illegal immigration has on public education in the United
States. As we learned from the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, any kind
of rapid growth in our communities has a serious impact, whether that
growth is from disaster relocation or a rapid influx of immigrants. In
our schools planning for providing adequate resources for
infrastructure, teachers and teaching materials, we must also provide
additional security, transportation for students, breakfast and lunch
programs and extracurricular activities. We must also provide the
resources to deal with the special needs of students who have language
and cultural differences that prevent them from learning. While this is
not a job too big for us, it is certainly a continuous challenge that
is certainly exacerbated by illegal immigration.
HEALTH CARE
Fortunately, I am able to provide better statistical data to you on
the impact of illegal or undocumented aliens on our public health care
delivery system in Harris County. On April 4, 2006 the Harris County
Commissioners Court asked David Lopez, the President and CEO of the
Harris County Hospital District to provide a report on the use of the
Hospital District's facilities by undocumented residents of Harris
County for the most recent four-year period. We also asked for
information on the fiscal impact to the county for any uncompensated
costs that the taxpayers of Harris County would be asked to pay to
support the system. On June 9, 2006, Mr. Lopez provided the
Commissioners Court with a report of an analysis for the years 2002
through 2005. I have included that report as an attachment to my
testimony.
Briefly, I'll summarize the most important findings of the data
analysis that went into that report. The Harris County Hospital
District (District) is a political subdivision of the State and as such
it has the authority to tax property within Harris County to generate
necessary operational revenue. It is run by an appointed Board of
Managers. The Harris County Commissioners Court approves the District's
annual budget and sets the appropriate property tax rate to meet
expenses.
This report looks at three cost centers to determine the total cost
of services provided: undocumented inpatient care, undocumented
outpatient care and undocumented pharmacy-only care. The term
``undocumented'' refers to all non-U.S. citizens who have failed to
present appropriate documentation to establish U.S. citizenship when
either presenting for emergency care or applying for Harris County
Hospital District eligibility.
From 2002 to 2005 the District saw a 17.7% increase of undocumented
inpatients served and a 50% increase in cost for services rendered. The
total cost for undocumented inpatients for 2005 was $82,240,000 with a
four-year total (2002--2005) of $272,600,000.
During that same time period the District received payments and
reimbursements totaling $106,600,000 leaving an unpaid balance of
$166,000,000 that had to be paid by Harris County taxpayers. Of the
undocumented population discharged in 2005, 83% were persons from
Mexico; 6% were from El Salvador and Guatemala; and the remaining 11%
of the discharged were from either Britain, Canada, Haiti, India, Iraq,
Iran, Nigeria, Nicaragua, Vietnam or ``other.''
Looking at undocumented outpatients served by the District,
outpatient clinical activity grew from 177,981 visits in 2002 to
272,067 in 2005, representing a 52.8% increase during that time period.
In 2005, undocumented outpatients generated approximately 18% of
District total outpatient visits. The costs for outpatient clinical
services grew from $19,600,000 in 2002 to $38,400,000 in 2005,
representing a 96% growth rate.
Payments and reimbursements fell by $600,000 during that period,
leaving a growth in net cost of 111% for a total of $103,100,000 in net
costs for undocumented outpatient services rendered. Of the
undocumented population that sought District outpatient services in
2005, 86% were from Mexico; 4.5% from El Salvador and Guatemala; and
9.5% were from Britain, Canada, Cuba, Haiti, India, Iraq, Iran,
Nigeria, Russia, or ``other.''
Outpatient pharmacy-only visits are visits during which a patient
does not have an encounter with a provider and receives services only
at the pharmacy, e.q., prescription refills. Annual pharmacy-only
visits for the undocumented grew from 75,611 in 2002 to 156,637 in 2005
representing an increase of more than 100%. Costs grew at a rate of
145% from $3,100,000 to $7,600,000 for a four-year total of
$19,600,000.
Payment and reimbursement for that period was $2,100,000, resulting
in a net cost of $17,500,000 for the 4-year period. Of the undocumented
population that sought District ``pharmacy only'' visits in 2005, 86%
were from Mexico; 4.5% were from El Salvador and Guatemala; and 9.5%
were from Britain, Canada, Cuba, India, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Russia,
Vietnam or ``other.''
The total cost to the District for undocumented inpatient,
outpatient and pharmacy-only care for the year 2005 was $128,400,000.
The District received payments and reimbursements that amounted to
$31,000,000 for a total net cost of $97,300,000.
For the four-year period covered in the report, costs were
$403,500,000 while payments and reimbursements totaled $116,900,000
resulting in net costs of $286,600,000 that Harris County taxpayers
paid in the years 2002--2005 to provide health care services to
undocumented residents through the District.
In addition to the net costs that were borne by Harris County
taxpayers, $99,140,000 or 84.9% of the $116,900,000 in payments and
reimbursements the District received from 2002--2005 came from Type
Program 30 (TP30) a Federal Medicaid program for emergencies. Those
funds are, of course paid by federal taxpayers so part of that comes
from Harris County taxpayers as well.
Another finding that may be pertinent to your investigation is how
the $27,000,000 in Emergency Medicaid reimbursements was used in the
year 2005. Of the 11,000 births performed by the District, 7,900 were
to undocumented mothers. That represents 71.8% of all births and more
than 80% of the Emergency Medicaid reimbursements to the District.
To put these costs into perspective, the entire budget for the
District in the years 2002 through 2005 was $2,636,000,000 total
uncompensated care was $1,364,797,000 or about 51.7%. Total net costs
for undocumented patients of the District for that period was
$286,600,000 or 20.9% of the total uncompensated care for the four-year
period. That figure for uncompensated care for undocumented patients of
the District as a percentage of the total uncompensated care it
provides has remained relatively constant over the past 4 years, that
is right around 20%.
LAW ENFORCEMENT/CRIMINAL JUSTICE
I will defer to the others on this panel to provide you with most
of the information on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice since this
is their area of expertise. But I do want to give you my perspective on
criminal activity and violence attributable to illegal immigration. The
most dramatic increase in violence occurs with the formation and
proliferation of gangs in Harris County. Large metropolitan areas make
assimilation easier and greater numbers of victims to prey upon. We
continue to be concerned about what gangs are doing to the quality of
life in our county and vigilant in our effort to prevent this kind of
activity.
The James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice
University here in Houston is studying the most violent of these gangs
and provides the following information:
Harris County is a hub of activity for ``Mara Salvatrucha--13''
(MS-13) and reportedly a favorite area of operation for its
leader Eber Anibal Rivera Paz, aka ``El Culiche,'' aka Franklin
Jairo Rivera-Hernandez, aka Lester Rivera Paz. Rivera Paz was
arrested and tried in Houston. He received less than two years
for his illegal entry into the United States. Unfortunately,
when released from federal prison for deportation, Honduran
authorities were not notified, and he is again at large.
MS-13 is more than a street gang. Honduras considers MS-13 as
its top national security threat, and President Ricardo Maduro
of Honduras has framed the struggle against MS-13 and other
gangs as a fight for the life of his nation. Authorities say
the gang plotted to assassinate Maduro and kill the president
of Honduras' Congress with a grenade, and the gang did kidnap
and murder Maduro's son.
MS-13 is marked by its viciousness, brutality--initiation
rights, assassinations, and dismemberment--as well as its
paramilitary tactics. The gang participates in trafficking
drugs, arms and humans, with two primary criminal enterprises
being auto theft and weapons. Although originating in Central
American barrios of Los Angeles, MS-13 flourished in Central
America, and many gang members from Central America enter the
U.S. illegally.
The gang shows no fear of law enforcement and is known to booby
trap stash houses with anti-personnel grenades. Local law
enforcement have been involved in intense shootouts with MS-13
and recovered advanced weapons, such as AK-47s. During
Operation Community Shield in 2005, 14 MS-13 members were
arrested in Houston. The Zetas also are believed to have a
presence in Houston. Hopefully Houston will not become a future
battle ground between MS-13 and Los Zetas, as Nuevo Laredo has
been.
MS-13 is a far more dangerous gang than previous or current
rivals because of its large numbers and complex member network.
Members are typically more brazen than those from other gangs
because if they become wanted in the U.S. their gang can
arrange for their transportation across the border and
relocation in a 'friendlier' country, while additional members
are smuggled across the border.
MS-13 has now begun to target and fire upon U.S. border patrol
from the Mexican side. In El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and
Mexico members are known to threaten officials who interfere
with their business, typically with a verbal threat to kill
that official or their family.
The governments of these countries have been unable to
effectively defend themselves against this gang, and in return
this gang has been able to gain considerable political power.
This strategy of hi-jacking governments is now being used
against federal, state, and local governments in the United
States. In 2005 Los Angeles was investigating the gang, who, in
retaliation left a bullet on the lead detective's door.
The Harris County Pretrial Services Department provides services
that support informed, accountable pretrial release and detention
processes while neither unduly restricting a defendant's liberty nor
compromising the safety of the community. In performing this mission
the department interviews nearly 9 out of 10 defendants in the county
court system.
Pretrial Service workers are instructed to collect information
about citizenship status, because Harris County's bail schedule has
provisions for higher bail if a defendant is an illegal alien. It is
very likely that if illegal aliens are released without sufficient
bail, they would simply leave the area in order to avoid trial. The
defendant report may be the only source a magistrate or judge has to
make bail determination and to take proper preventative steps to assure
the defendant appears for trial.
In the past four-year period an average of 19% of Misdemeanor
Defendant Interviews were with non-U.S. Citizens. While 48.8% were
legal residents or legally permitted to be in the U.S., 51.2% were
undocumented and therefore illegally in this country. Of the total
Misdemeanor Defendant Interviews, 10.2% were with illegal aliens. The
number of illegal aliens who are defendants in misdemeanor cases in our
courts have been trending upward by about 2.16% per year.
Looking at Felony Defendant Interviews in that same time period,
11.5% of all interviews were with non-U.S. citizens of whom 52.82% were
undocumented, so that interviews with illegal aliens represented 6.7%
of all such interviews. Felony Defendant Interviews with illegal aliens
have also been trending upward by the same 2.16% per year.
Of all defendants of both misdemeanor and felony trials who were
non-U.S. citizens, 60.4% were born in Mexico, with 67% of those from
Mexico being in Harris County illegally. Most likely, those who were in
Harris County illegally entered from our southern border.
While there is no real correlation between the number of legal and
illegal aliens in the general population and those who are defendants
in the civil justice system, we could take a rather simplistic look at
our population of 3.69 million and calculate that about 310,000 might
be here illegally. Some estimates put the population of illegal aliens
in our region in 2005 at between 400,000 and 430,000 and those
estimates are up 30,000 from the year 2000. Absent any formal or
official way of knowing who is in the U.S. illegally, we must rely on
best-guess efforts to determine that number.
If there were a national citizenship data base I would urge the
federal government to authorize local governments to have the power to
decide when and where that data base should be used. In determining
citizenship status of a defendant in a trial or for a voter in
elections it would be an extremely valuable tool. However, as I
described in our public health area, using such a database might
inhibit or prevent the proper investigation of the courses of
communicable diseases in our community. I believe that we at the local
level can best determine when to apply citizenship status and when it
would not be in our best interest.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to thank you
again for allowing me to discuss our experiences and concerns regarding
criminal activity and violence along our southern border as well as the
impact of illegal immigration on our community. I will be delighted to
respond to any questions and I will continue to work with you and this
committee to mutually serve our constituents in any way possible.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Judge. I appreciate you being here.
I know your time is valuable. Those numbers are actually very
helpful to this committee.
Judge Eckels. They are exact in the written testimony, as
well as the backup from the hospital support staff.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you. I would like to note also that
Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal was here, had
to leave. His statement, however, will be made a part of the
record from this hearing and part of the Congressional Record.
[The statement of Mr. Rosenthal follows:]
A Report to the Congressional Sub-Committee on Investigations
AUGUST 16, 2006 Investigation of Criminal Activity and Violence
along the Southern Border
The Harris County District Attorney's Office estimates that
approximately 5,000 of the 102,775 thousand cases this office handled
in 2005 involved non-citizens. From January 1, 2006 to July 1, 2006
approximately, 7,000 more were added. These figures are dependent, and
based upon, what arresting officers report to us in a computer field
requesting citizenship status.
Perhaps a more telling figure can be derived from Harris County
Pre-Trial Services. They interview approximately 87% of the people
admitted to the Harris County jail (the other 13% make a bail bond
before they enter the jail population). I have attached tables compiled
by that agency. They show a steady rise in the percentage of un-
documented aliens from 2002 to 2005. Also included is the criterion
that the agency uses in making these determinations. Percentages
applied to cases filed show that of the approximately 13,000 non-
citizens handled in the Harris County Criminal Justice system in 2005,
approximately 7,200 were undocumented aliens.
There are additional difficulties in dealing with foreign persons
in our criminal justice system. There is no reliable information to
check regarding the criminal histories of aliens. Obviously, our plea
bargain recommendations and jury verdicts are influenced by a
defendant's criminal history. Not only are the records in foreign
countries often poorly kept, in many cases, we rely on the self-report
of a defendant for his country of origin and cannot be certain of which
country's data base to inquire.
For years before, the Automated Fingerprint Identification System
(AFIS), individuals could be, and were, arrested under several
different aliases. In point of fact, every two years foreign nationals
incarcerated in Texas prisons can apply to the governor to serve the
remainder of their sentence in their home country. The governor sends
those applicants convicted in Harris County to me for my recommendation
on their application. Nearly all have aliases; even allowing for the
Hispanic propensity for interchangeably using their mother or father's
surname.
Police agencies can tell you that the immigrant population under-
reports crimes. Often, this includes crimes committed by other
immigrants. It has been my personal experience that if undocumented
aliens become witnesses to crime, they often give false names and/or
addresses to the police and are not available as witnesses at trial.
Without witnesses, defendants are more difficult to convict.
I can also testify, that many people who commit crimes flee the
United States. Many of our neighboring countries to the South do not
have extradition treaties with the United States or refuse extradite
their own nationals. Countries that do have extradition treaties with
the United States, like Mexico, often attempt to make extradition
conditional on the maximum term of years we will seek upon conviction.
Completely unrelated, but something very close to my heart, is that
last year my 14-year-old daughter tested positive as being exposed to
Tuberculosis, a disease that was nearly wiped out of this country years
ago. She was required to take daily antibiotics for nine months. Her
diagnostic radiologist Dr. George Butrous, M.D. (a naturalized citizen
from Egypt), told me that medical journals document the fact that the
lack of health screening for illegal immigrants has re-introduced a
number of previously eradicated diseases into this country.
According to the Harris County Budget Director, the cost for
treating illegal immigrants in Harris County's tax supported hospitals
was 97.3 million dollars in 2005.
If the commission requests me to expound upon any of the
information given in this report, I will be happy to do so.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Harris County Pretrial Services
Agency Policy and Procedure Manual
Conducting an Interview with a Defendant
Citizenship and Legal Status
Harris County's bail schedule has provisions for higher bail if a
defendant is an illegal alien. The defendant report you prepare may be
the only source a magistrate or judge has to make this determination.
While you should check the ``hold'' screen and the Immigration and
Naturalization Service's (INS) ``detainer'' list to verify if INS has
placed a hold or is investigating the defendant's status, you need to
ask the defendant questions about his or her citizenship and legal
status. Incorrect information here could lead to a defendant's
unnecessary detention or failure to appear in court if the defendant
makes bond and then INS returns him to his country.
1. Ask every defendant whether he or she is a United States
citizen regardless of his or her answer to the question about
place of birth. Document the answer as Y (yes), N (no), or U
(unknown).
2. If the defendant says that he is a United States citizen,
you do not need to ask the question about legal status.
3. If the defendant says he is not a United States citizen, you
must ask the defendant about his legal status. Do not lead the
defendant by giving him options to choose from. You must use
open-ended questions such as:
What is your legal status?
Do you have legal status in the U.S.?
Do you have permission to be in the U.S.
legally?
In what country are you a citizen?
4. If the defendant indicates a legal status, inquire about the
type of document he has and the document's expiration date. Let
him provide the name of the document.
5. This Country's immigration laws are very complex. The
following list is not exhaustive but includes the documents
that INS encounters most frequently with people who are in this
Country legally. You should expect similar responses if a
defendant has legal status here.
Border Crossing Card_72-hour limit/ 50-mile limit.
Permit (i.e. Work Permit Card)--Granted while someone
is applying for legal status and is valid only until
the decision is made whether the person will be granted
legal status or not.
Temporary Resident Card_This card indicates someone has
applied for Residence Status. A person will only
receive this card if INS is certain that Residence
Status will be granted.
Resident Alien Card_(Previously known as the ``Green
Card'') This card confers a permanent legal status.
6. A Passport does not give a defendant legal status here. The
Passport's primary function is to establish a person's
identity. But you've probably heard the term, ``getting a
Passport stamped''. This stamp is actually a Visa. A person
needs both a Passport and a Visa to prove that he or she is
here legally.
7. A Visa is a stamp or a document, usually affixed to the
Passport, indicating a person has permission to enter the
country. In years past, the official stamp found in the
Passport usually represented the Visa. Today, a Visa will more
likely be a small document affixed to a page in the Passport or
it may be a separate document altogether that would accompany a
Passport. There are two types of Visa:
Non-Immigrant Visa--Conveys a specific date
and time of entry and exit and can be used for business
or for pleasure.
Immigrant Visa--A large packet of official
papers generated by the naturalization process.
8. Record the defendant's answer on the PTS8 screen.
9. Application for something does not confer legal status. If a
defendant is here legally, he or she will generally have the
documentation to prove it.
10. The experience of INS has been that if a person IS here
legally, he generally knows it! A young defendant however may
not know his status, but his mother or father should.
Non U.S. Citizen by Citizenship Status *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misdemeanor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 % 2003 % 2004 % 2005 %
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legal Resident 2,352 31.9% 2,798 33.7% 2,890 32.4% 2,813 30.3%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visa 452 6.1% 254 3.1% 253 2.8% 291 3.1%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WorkPermit 783 10.6% 949 11.4% 818 9.2% 836 9.0%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undocumented 3,560 48.3% 4,071 49.0% 4,705 52.7% 5,092 54.8%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unknown 222 3.0% 238 2.9% 263 2.9% 264 2.8%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 7,369 100% 8,310 100% 8,929 100% 9,296 100%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Felony
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 % 2003 % 2004 % 2005 %
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legal Resident 960 32.4% 1,147 34.0% 1,141 33.0% 1,129 30.6%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visa 180 6.1% 83 2.5% 83 2.4% 89 2.4%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WorkPermit 263 8.9% 303 9.0% 272 7.9% 282 7.6%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undocumented 1,491 50.3% 1,714 50.8% 1,848 53.4% 2,096 56.8%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unknown 73 2.5% 127 3.8% 118 3.4% 97 2.6%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 2,967 100% 3,374 100% 3,462 100% 3,693 100%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non U.S. Citizen As a Percentage of Complete Interviews Conducted *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misdemeanor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 % 2003 % 2004 % 2005 %
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Misdemeanor Defendant 39,656 42,017 46,485 49,613
Interviews
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non U.S. Citizen 7,369 18.6% 8,310 19.8% 8,929 19.2% 9,296 18.7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non U.S.Citizen; 3,560 9.0% 4,071 9.7% 4,705 10.1% 5,092 10.3%
Undocumented
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non U.S. Citizen; Place of Birth Mexico 4,830 12.2% 5,462 13.0% 5,852 12.6% 5,935 12.0%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non U.S. Citizen; Place of Birth Mexico; 2,949 7.4% 3,382 8.0 3,846 8.3% 3,987 8.0%
Undocumented
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Felony
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 % 2003 % 2004 % 2005 %
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Felony Defendant Inteviews 27,460 28,525 29,979 31,151
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non U.S. Citizen 2,967 10.8% 3,374 11.8% 3,462 11.5% 3,693 11.9%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non U.S. Citizen; 1,491 5.4% 1,714 6.0% 1,848 6.2% 2,096 6.7%
Undocumented
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non U.S. Citizen; Place of Birth Mexico 1,924 7.0% 2,279 8.0% 2,277 7.6% 2,422 7.8%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non U.S. Citizen; Place of Birth Mexico; 1,189 4.3% 1,375 4.8% 1,450 4.8% 1,600 5.1%
Undocumented
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Non U.S. citizen includes defendants who who stated that they
were not citizens or did not know if they were citizens and who
reported their place of birth outside the US. Information is self-
reported by the defendant during the pretrial interview.
Pretrial Services, March 2006
Mr. McCaul. Next, the Chair recognizes Major Michael
O'Brien with the Harris County Sheriff's Office.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL O'BRIEN, HARRIS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Mr. O'Brien. On behalf of Sheriff Tommy Thomas, I would
like to thank the committee for support of law enforcement and
their work on improving our Nation's security and tightening up
our borders.
The United States is considered a primary destination for
illegal immigrants from all over the world because of our
freedoms, our economy, and the ease of obtaining work here. As
a result, we have become a haven for organized crime involving
the smuggling and human trafficking of illegal aliens across
our border.
The impact of illegal immigration to Harris County has been
enormous and has placed a substantial strain on law enforcement
police resources. There is no argument that only a small
percentage of illegal aliens are in fact the criminal element.
Those that have become involved are considered to be part of
basically a cash-based underground economy that is operating
throughout the United States. These criminal organizations are
predominantly involved in smuggling, human trafficking,
kidnapping, drugs and money laundering, and for the most part,
these members are illegal immigrants themselves.
One of the most prevalent crimes involving illegal
immigrants in Harris County involves the human trafficking
factor. The difference between human trafficking and smuggling
involves the heinous treatment of these victims, which
basically equates to modern-day slavery. There have been
numerous instances where non-U.S. citizens, predominantly from
Mexico, have paid large amounts of money to be brought across
the border, only to be held for ransom and made to work for
extra fees prior to their release. If they can't pay, many
times their families are blackmailed for additional ransom
payments prior to their release. Some of these cases have even
included severe torture of these victims while the smuggler
sits on the phone talking to relatives, listening to their
screams of pain, trying to convince them to pay them additional
funds. If they can't pay, they are often locked in back rooms
and forced to work as prostitutes or in some other type of
confined labor. The outcome is that some of these illegal
immigrants become modern-day indentured slaves who have no
choice but to comply with the smugglers' demands.
One recent example of human smuggling involved the Walter
Corea human trafficking organization, in which their victims
were held in various locations throughout Harris County. In
this case, 98 women were smuggled across the border and made to
work as prostitutes to pay off fees. The investigation
determined that Corea and his gang were operating through a
network of bars and restaurants in the Houston Harris County
area which had been designated for smuggling women from Mexico
and South America. These women, some of them which were later
determined to be underage, were required to work as prostitutes
until they could pay off the smuggling fees to the bar owners
who had paid their way across to begin with.
This year-long undercover operation resulted in all 98
victims being taken into custody, along with the arrest of
Corea and 7 of his organizational members. This investigation
involved the largest number of victims for any single case of
human trafficking the United States to date, and this happened
in Texas and in Harris County.
In addition to our field investigative efforts, Immigration
and Customs enforcement agents are assigned to the sheriff's
office prisoner intake facility to assist deputies in
identifying illegal immigrants brought to the jail. Upon
booking at the sheriff's office processing center, all
prisoners, regardless of race, are asked if they are United
States citizens and their country of origin or their country of
birth. The subsequent data obtained is turned over to the
Federal Government's State criminal immigration assistance
program for partial reimbursement of the cost to Harris County
for handling the immigrants.
On average, the Harris County sheriff's office receives and
processes over 130,000 prisoners per year. Approximately 20 to
23 percent of these prisoners brought in are foreign born and
are non-U.S. citizens. These numbers, of course, are self-
reported, and it is safe to assume that the numbers would be
quite higher; but again, most of them are not going to tell us
for fear of being returned to their country.
The State criminal immigrant program database for the last
fiscal year estimated that 15 percent of the entire budget of
the Harris County sheriff's office was expended investigating,
arresting, processing, housing and providing medical attention
to illegal immigrants. This equates to a cost of over $41
million of our budget. SCAAP reimbursement back to Harris
County was just slightly over $2 million, or a mere 6 percent
of the total cost. The rest of that money was borne by Harris
County taxpayers to handle illegal immigrants.
Of those prisoners who report foreign birth, approximately
60 percent are Mexican born, and another 20 percent are from
South or Central America. Many, as I discussed earlier, do not
truthfully report their illegal status for fear of being
deported. It is virtually impossible with the financial and
manpower constraints of our office for us to investigate this
situation any further.
As you can see, the numbers are considerable, and they
constitute a significant drain on our financial resources. One
of the major problems faced by ICE, as well as local law
enforcement, is the lack of bed space. This was brought up
earlier by Mr. McCaul and, I believe, by Ms. Lee. Less than
20,000 beds throughout the whole United States is dedicated to
illegal immigrants. With that situation, what happens, as Mr.
McCaul brought up earlier, is that many illegal immigrants are
given virtually a summons to appear in court later. Most often,
they don't report and they disappear into our communities using
different identification.
The Harris County Sheriff's Office has been working
diligently with the Hispanic community to build trust and
provide excellent services. There have been numerous cases
where we have received invaluable information from the Hispanic
community which has resulted in arrests and convictions of
dangerous felons.
Sheriff Thomas supports stronger and more effective
security in our Nation's borders, and he does not condone
illegal immigration. The Harris County's Sheriff's Office does
not have a hand's-off policy regarding illegal immigration, and
we will promptly assist any Federal agencies requesting our
help. However, having deputies seek out and pursue illegal
immigrants based solely on the immigration status would
severely strain our already limited resources, as well as
hinder our efforts when we need community involvement and the
willingness for witnesses to come forward in solving crime.
The primary mission of the Harris County Sheriff's Office
is to provide a safe and secure environment for the residents
as well as the visitors to Harris County. We are working hard
to achieve these goals. We are sworn to protect all the people
that come here, and when we respond to an incident that is
determined to involve criminal activity, our policy is to take
action based on the enforcement of Texas law and not
immigration status. When appropriate, a law violator is
arrested, charged, and processed through our criminal justice
system.
Thank you for your time, for your efforts, and again, on
behalf of Tommy Thomas, we appreciate the work you are doing.
[The information follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael J. O'Brien
Representing:
Sheriff Tommy Thomas
Harris County, Texas
On behalf of Sheriff Tommy Thomas, I would like to thank the
committee for their support of law enforcement and their work to help
improve our nation's security. The United States of America is
considered a primary destination for illegal immigrants from all over
the world because of our economy, freedoms, and ease of obtaining work.
As a result, we have become a haven for organized crime involving the
smuggling and human trafficking of illegal aliens across our borders.
The impact of illegal immigration to Harris County and the
surrounding area has been enormous and has put a substantial strain on
law enforcement resources. While there is no argument that only a small
percentage of illegal immigrants are involved in criminal activity, the
many that are have become involved in what is considered a cash-based
organized crime underground economy. These criminal organizations are
predominantly involved in smuggling, human trafficking, kidnapping,
drugs and money laundering, and are mostly illegal aliens themselves.
In 2004, the Harris County Sheriff's Office was awarded a grant
from the Department of Justice to participate in the Human Trafficking
Rescue Alliance (HTRA), and over the last several years we have been
working closely with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), as well
as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), to identify illegal
aliens involved in criminal activity within our community. Multi-
jurisdictional task forces such as this alliance typically provide
greater access to resources and information, and establish a team-based
approach to investigations. Working side by side with Federal and other
local agencies, we have been successful in arresting and charging
suspects in some of the most serious crimes involving the terrorization
and virtual enslaving of many illegal immigrants.
One of the most prevalent crimes involving illegal immigrants in
Harris County involves Human Trafficking. The difference between human
trafficking and smuggling is the heinous treatment of the victims which
can equate to modern day slavery. There have been numerous instances
where non-U.S. citizens (predominantly from Mexico) have paid large
amounts of money to be smuggled over the border, only to be held for
ransom until they pay or work off additional fees. If they can't pay,
many times their families are blackmailed and ransom payments are
required for their release. Some of these cases have included severe
torture of the victim while the smuggler is on the telephone with
relatives so they can hear the screams of pain. If they still can't
pay, they are often locked in back rooms and forced to work as
prostitutes or in some other type of confined forced labor. The outcome
is that some illegal immigrants become modern day indentured slaves who
have no choice but to comply with the smugglers' demands.
One recent example of human trafficking involved the Walter Corea
Human Trafficking Organization which held their victims at various
locations in Harris County. In this case, ninety-eight (98) females
were smuggled across the border and made to work as prostitutes to pay
off their fees. The investigation determined that COREA and his co-
conspirators were operating a network of bars and restaurants in the
Houston-Harris County area dedicated to the smuggling of young Central
American females to serve as prostitutes and ``pony dancers.'' These
women, some of whom were determined to be under age, were required to
work until they could pay off their smuggling fees to the bar owners.
The women, and their families in their native countries, were
frequently threatened with bodily harm by COREA and members of his
organization unless they agreed to comply with instructions to work in
the businesses until the ``organization'' determined that all fees owed
were paid in full.
This year-long undercover operation resulted in all 98 trafficking
victims' being taken into custody, along with the arrest of COREA and
seven of his organization members. The investigation involved the
largest number of victims for any single case of human trafficking in
the United States to date.
In additional to field investigation efforts, Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) has agents assigned to the Harris County
Sheriffs Office prisoner intake and processing facility to assist
deputies and specifically identify illegal aliens. In the past eighteen
months, the Harris County Sheriff's Office and ICE agents have
positively identified over nineteen hundred and forty (1940) illegal
aliens who have been processed through our jail. On average, about 20
detainers are placed each week on illegal aliens.
Upon booking at the Sheriff's Office processing center, all
prisoners, regardless of race or ethnicity, are asked if they are
United States citizens and their country of birth. The subsequent data
obtained identifying illegal aliens processed through the Harris County
jail is turned over to the federal government's ``State Criminal Alien
Assistance Program'' for partial reimbursement of costs associated with
processing and handling illegal aliens.
On average, the Harris County Sheriff's Office receives
and processes approximately 130,000 prisoners per year.
Approximately 20-23% of the inmates received into our
custody report that they are foreign born and non-US citizens. These
numbers are self-reported (the ``honor system''), thus it is safe to
assume that the actual numbers are far greater.
The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) data
for the last fiscal year estimated that 15.22% of the entire budget for
the Harris County Sheriff's Office was expended investigating,
arresting, processing, housing and providing medical treatment for
illegal aliens. This equates to a cost of $41,390,425. SCAAP
reimbursement was in the amount of $2,693,977, or a mere 6.5% of the
total cost, the remainder of which was borne by Harris County
taxpayers.
Of those inmates who report foreign birth, approximately
60% are Mexican-born, and another 20% are from South and Central
America. Many do not truthfully report their illegal status in fear of
being deported, and it is virtually impossible with current financial
and manpower constraints for us to investigate further or improve the
system.
As you can see, the numbers are considerable and constitute a
significant drain on our financial resources. One of the major problems
faced by ICE, as well as local law enforcement, is the lack of bed
space to hold illegal aliens. Throughout the nation there are less than
20,000 beds dedicated to immigration violation offenders. Consequently,
illegal aliens involved in minor crimes are given the equivalent of a
summons and told to report to court. In most cases, these persons never
report and subsequently disappear into the community using different
forms of identification.
The Harris County Sheriff's Office is working diligently within the
Hispanic community to build trust and provide excellent services. There
have been numerous cases where we have received invaluable information
from within the Hispanic community that has resulted in the arrest and
conviction of dangerous felons. Sheriff Thomas supports stronger and
more effective security at our nation's borders, and does not condone
illegal immigration. The Harris County Sheriff's Office does not have a
``hands off'' policy regarding illegal aliens and we will promptly
assist a Federal agency requesting our help. However, having deputies
seek out and pursue illegal immigrants based solely on their
immigration status would severely strain our already limited resources,
as well as hinder our efforts and those of any local law enforcement
agency, when we need community involvement and willing witnesses to
help solve crime.
The primary mission of the Harris County Sheriff's Office is to
provide a safe and secure environment for the residents and visitors of
Harris County, and we are working hard to achieve our goals through the
use of increased community patrols, directed enforcement efforts, and
state of the art investigative tools. The foundation of any
organization is defined by its employees' honesty, moral standards,
compassion, sincerity, and caring attitude. We are sworn to protect all
the people we serve and our agency code of values includes such pillars
of character as Respect, Fairness, and Justice through Excellence and
Integrity. When we respond to an incident that is determined to involve
criminal activity, our policy is to take action based on the
enforcement of Texas law, and not immigration status. When appropriate,
the violator is arrested, charged, and processed through the criminal
justice system.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Major, and please give Sheriff
Thomas our best, and he is doing a great job. I think your
testimony demonstrates how the illegal aliens, at the hands of
traffickers, become the real victims here.
Next, I would like to recognize John Moriarty, the
Inspector General with the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice.
STATEMENT OF JOHN M. MORIARTY, INSPECTOR GENERAL, TEXAS
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Mr. Moriarty. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee,
thank you very much for the privilege of allowing me to testify
here today on the effects of illegal immigration on the Texas
prison system.
As of May 31, 2006, the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice had a population of approximately 152,000 inmates. Now,
this is also self-reported, with limited investigation, but out
of that number 11,606 claimed foreign birth; 10,376 claimed
foreign citizenship; 6,612 had Immigration and Customs
enforcement detainers; and 3,018 were known to have final
orders of deportation completed by ICE. The exact numbers of
offenders who are illegal aliens on any given day is unknown;
however, Immigration and Customs Enforcement is working to
provide that information to TDCJ.
The Department of Criminal Justice has an excellent and, to
our knowledge, somewhat unique working relationship with ICE,
from which the institutional hearing and removal program has
developed. The Department of Criminal Justice has constructed
office space for ICE staff at the Goree unit in Huntsville and
provides working space at other TDCJ facilities for their
staff. As inmates are admitted to TDCJ, possible illegal aliens
are identified and referred to ICE personnel. If ICE wants to
interview the inmate, the offender is brought to the
Huntsville, or other locations if appropriate, in order to
facilitate that interview.
Office space constructed for ICE includes administrative
courtrooms which connects via a video link to an immigration
administrative law judge here in Houston. The entire
administrative process of processing final orders of
deportation can be completed while the inmate is incarcerated
in TDCJ, thereby expediting the deportation of the offender
upon release. ICE staff is also provided with a list of all
TDCJ releases so that any offender not identified upon
admission may be reviewed prior to release.
During fiscal year 2006, the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice received $18.6 million from the Federal State criminal
alien assistance program as partial reimbursement for the cost
of housing illegal aliens. Any estimate of the cost of housing
illegal aliens in the Texas prison system must take into
account the lack of definitive data regarding the number of
illegal aliens, but TDCJ estimates the cost of housing illegal
aliens during fiscal year 2005 at $132 million. The cost of
housing an illegal alien was assumed to be the same as the
average cost of housing an inmate in TDCJ, which is $40.06 per
day.
My office is responsible for the criminal investigations
inside the Texas prison system. We work very closely with the
TDCJ security threat group staff that is responsible for the
monitoring of criminal organizations within the prison system
that could be a threat to the security of the Texas prison
system. Groups such as the Texas Syndicate, the Mexican Mafia,
MS-13, Barrio Azteca, and the PRM are active and operational
within the prison facilities. The prison gang that is primarily
composed of Mexican foreign nationals is the PRM. We currently
have 723 suspected or confirmed members in our facilities. The
PRM and the other security threat groups are actively engaged
in homicide, drug trafficking, extortion and aggravated
assaults. Removing these persons from our communities is an
important and necessary step.
We must also be aware that the ability of an inmate to
commit crimes, though limited, can and still does occur. My
office, on average, conducts 3,000 felony crime investigations
inside the fences of the TDCJ prison system. The prosecution of
these crimes puts pressure on the local, usually rural, court
systems in the communities where the prisons are located. This
is a good example of how the confinement of illegal foreign
nationals affects every community in Texas where a prison is
located. A cooperative effort between Federal, State and local
law enforcement is necessary to be successful in combating this
problem.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you again for this opportunity to
testify on this very important matter.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you for that testimony.
[The statement of Mr. Moriarty follows:]
Prepared Statement of John M. Moriarty
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you very much for
the privilege of allowing me to testify here today on the effect of
illegal immigration on the Texas prison system. As of May 31, 2006, the
Texas Department of Criminal (TDCJ) prison system had a population of
approximately 152,000 inmates. Of that number:
11,606 claimed foreign birth;
10,376 claimed foreign citizenship;
6,612 had Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
detainers; and
3,018 were known to have final orders of deportation
completed by ICE.
The exact number of offenders who are illegal aliens on any given
day is unknown; however, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement is
working to provide that information to TDCJ.
The Department of Criminal Justice has an excellent, and to our
knowledge somewhat unique, working relationship with ICE from which the
Institutional Hearing and Removal program has developed. The Department
of Criminal Justice has constructed office space for ICE staff at the
Goree unit in Huntsville, and provides work space at other TDCJ
facilities. As inmates are admitted to TDCJ, possible illegal aliens
are identified and referred to ICE personnel. If ICE wants to interview
the inmate, the offender is brought to Huntsville (or other locations
as appropriate). The office space constructed for ICE includes an
administrative courtroom which connects via a video link to an
immigration administrative law judge in Houston. The entire
administrative process of processing final orders of deportation can be
completed while the inmate is incarcerated in TDCJ, thereby expediting
the deportation of the offender upon release. ICE staff is also
provided with a list of all TDCJ releases so that any offender not
identified upon admission may be reviewed prior to release.
During Fiscal Year 2006 the Texas Department of Criminal Justice
received $18.6 million from the federal State Criminal Alien Assistance
Program (SCAAP) as partial reimbursement for the cost of housing
illegal aliens. Any estimate of the cost of housing illegal aliens in
the Texas prison system must take into account the lack of definitive
data regarding the number of illegal aliens, but TDCJ estimates the
cost of housing illegal aliens during FY 2005 at $132 million. The cost
of housing an illegal alien was assumed to be the same as the average
cost of housing an inmate in TDCJ ($40.06 per day).
My office is responsible for all criminal investigations inside the
Texas prison system. We work very closely with the TDCJ Security Threat
Group staff that is responsible for the monitoring of criminal
organizations within the prison system that could be a threat to the
security of the Texas prison system. Groups such as the Texas
Syndicate, Mexican Mafia, MS-13, Barrio Azteca and Partido
Revolucionario Mexicanos (PRM) and are active and operational within
our prison facilities. The prison gang that is primarily comprised of
Mexican foreign nationals is the PRM. We currently have 723 suspected
or confirmed members in our facilities. The PRM and the other security
threat groups are actively engaged in homicide, drug trafficking,
extortion, and aggravated assaults. Removing these persons from our
communities is an important and necessary step. We must also be aware
that the ability of an inmate to commit crimes, although limited, can
and does still occur. My office, on average conducts 3000 felony crime
investigations inside the fences of the Texas prison system. The
prosecution of these crimes put pressure on the local, usually rural,
courts system in the communities where the prisons are located. This is
a good example of how the confinement of illegal foreign nationals
affects every community in Texas where a prison is located. A
cooperative effort between federal, state and local law enforcement is
necessary to be successful in combating this problem.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you again for this opportunity to testify on
this very important matter. I would be happy to take any questions you
might have.
Mr. McCaul. The Chair now recognizes the Honorable Mr.
Adrian Garcia, council member of Houston, Texas.
STATEMENT OF ADRIAN GARCIA, MEMBER, CITY COUNCIL OF HOUSTON
Mr. Garcia. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and distinguished
members of Congress. I want to thank you for this important
discussion and welcome you to our great city.
I served as a member of the city council here in Houston
Texas, and I have also been appointed by Mayor Bill White as
the chair of the Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee.
And prior to my election to city council, I served as a Houston
police officer for nearly 24 years prior to my election to city
council. I started that public safety career in 1980, and
during my time with the Houston Police Department, I worked on
various assignments that included serving as the director of
the BEST anti-gang office that was charged with helping develop
public policy to fight against criminal street gangs in
Houston.
Today's session appears to focus on the impact of illegal
immigration on crime and what the role of local police should
be in the enforcement of immigration laws. I hope to offer a
perspective as a recent law enforcement practitioner. In my
time, I have met many people of different backgrounds. Many
spoke English, some did not. But when I needed to, I used my
home-grown bilingual skills to get the job done and enforce the
law. As a result, I was able to clear cases and make some
definite arrests and made many new friends.
During my time as a Houston police officer, I also became
involved with the National Latino Police Officers Association
and eventually became the president in 1998-2000 where this
same issue was a part of my agenda.
To the topic of today's discussion, no one disputes that
persons have entered the United States without permission and
have been arrested for violations of State criminal statutes.
However, given that a significant portion of my patrol career
took place in the area that I now represent as an elected
official, which has a Hispanic majority, and given that I like
putting bad guys into jail, I recall investigating more crimes
against Americans that were committed by Americans than I did
where illegal immigrants were involved.
While I did investigate crimes involving persons with
questionable immigration status, more have been witnesses
against the crooks I was trying to put in jail. I have also had
to investigate crimes of assault, theft, involving persons who
were hired to do the job of day laborers and then beaten when
they wanted to get paid.
I have also worked in an undercover capacity investigating
drug trafficking and other crimes. Some did involve
undocumented persons, but they were more often informants than
the targets of my investigation, and we welcomed their
assistance in those cases. I remember when I had to go to
Laredo, Texas to work with the DEA on a drug trafficking
investigation that originated here in Houston, and through
information from sources that were undocumented. When I arrived
in Laredo, it was shortly after DEA agent Ricky Camarena had
been kidnapped and was missing and presumed to be dead--which
regretfully turned out to be true--the targets of my
investigation were all U.S. citizens.
When I had responsibility of being the director of the BEST
anti-gang office, I dealt with the issue of Hispanic criminal
street gangs, including MS-13. They were subjects of criminal
activity in Houston, just as much as Caucasians, African
Americans, and many other Hispanics involved who were also U.S.
citizens. In fact, one of the first issues confronting me as
director was the fact that between 1994 and 1998 a significant
number of the gang-related homicide victims were Hispanic males
between the ages 15 and 19. Although we never researched to
find out the immigration status of these crime victims, I don't
recall the issue of whether them being undocumented or not of
being of concern.
However, my time was just as occupied with investigating
Bloods and Crips and white supremacists. Hispanics do not have
a lock on the criminal street gang trade.
In any case, it has been the trust and the dialogue that
cops have been able to establish with all persons as they do
their job. Without free-flowing information from all of
Houston's communities, our concern is with what could happen to
the clearance and successful prosecution rate that our area
currently enjoys.
However, when it comes to what the local few would like
street cops to do, we have vivid examples of failed attempts by
local police enforcing immigration laws in places like
Chandler, Arizona, where U.S. citizens were detained and nearly
deported mainly because they had communication difficulties.
As a result, this experience set the police department back
many years. It erased years of good work in developing
community relationships that are also necessary and essential
in investigating and solving and prosecuting crimes.
I have personally been involved in Houston's effort to have
a local police force for all of the people of Houston, and I am
concerned about seeing this progress erased. Street cops depend
on information to solve crimes. Without it, victimization would
go unreported and unsolved, leaving criminals on the street.
This statement does not mean that I don't believe that
immigration laws should be enforced. Quite to the contrary. I
do support the enforcement of all laws, but in this case, it
must be done by the appropriate agencies, and Texas State penal
code laws should be enforced by Texas police officers and
immigration laws should be enforced by immigration enforcement
authorities.
To the question as to what HPD is doing, I think Chief
Hurtt will elaborate in more detail, but I would just like to
state the following.
Are illegal immigrants committing crimes in Houston? Yes.
Are Houston police arresting illegal aliens? Yes, for criminal
violations of State and Federal laws. Does the Houston Police
Department share that information with immigration authorities?
Yes. Does the Houston Police Department do anything to hinder
the work of immigration authorities? No.
Further, the following are specific reasons why it is not
in the best interests of Houston to order local police to
become immigration law enforcers.
One, current Federal law requires that in order for local
law enforcement to receive Federal funding that the agency
demonstrate it has policies and procedures in place against
discrimination practices, effectively meaning that law
enforcement is equally applied to all persons without regard
for a person's color of skin, nationality, religion or gender.
Two, so as you contemplate mandating new requirements on
local law enforcement such as enforcing the immigration laws,
this would obviously require that we also follow the
nondiscrimination laws as we enforce any new law; meaning that
in order to demonstrate that local police are not enforcing
immigration law against persons solely because of their color
of skin or possible nationality, then we would have to order
the enforcement of such a law on all persons that local law
enforcement officers come in contact with and require
documentation, much like the racial profiling forms that
officers are required to fill out, that the officer is
enforcing the new law on everyone he or she comes into contact
with.
Three, the Houston Police Department is currently
undermanned by approximately 1,000 to 1,500 police officers
just in conditions that we are faced with today. Hiring those
officers will take many years and millions upon millions to get
the workforce strength to where we could comfortably handle all
of the priorities of the citizens of Houston. Asking local cops
to determine immigration status of all persons that they come
in contact with would adversely affect response times to
emergency calls of Houstonians more than our current manpower
shortage is affecting Houstonians.
Four, access to data is not currently effective. Today,
barely a fraction of known U.S. absconders are tracked in the
National Crime Information Center, NCIC, which is available to
local police. However, if an officer wants to verify a
passport, it would need to be during business hours, since
there is no direct link to State Department databases--if I
need to be corrected on that, I will stand corrected--making
this ineffective during nighttime and evening hours for street
cops.
Five, the lack of funding. Currently, the city of Houston
is trying to get out of the jail business, and the cost of
housing, feeding, and medically caring for immigration
detainees would adversely affect local taxpayers, especially
since the Federal Government does not have the best reputation
of reimbursing local communities for costs incurred in their
support of the Federal Government.
I do not believe that the Federal Government currently
reimburses the city of Houston for arresting and detaining
undocumented individuals that we have arrested. Currently, the
city of Houston is working to collaborate with our county
officials who are already strapped for space for the prisoners
that they have, adult and juveniles.
In closing, I respect the work needed to get this country
to a place that we feel good about security of our homeland.
There is much work to be done. However, I suggest that this
work will be extremely short-lived if we do not address the
issue of making sure that foreign countries that are
contributing to this issue of illegal immigration be encouraged
to develop effective domestic economic development policies in
their own countries.
In addition, I would like to offer a second dimension as a
first-generation American, the only one in my family born in
America. I am a person that today sits before you only because
my dad, who died shortly after seeing my election, was a
migracio. My dad helped to build the California rail lines, and
this earned him the right to emigrate to the U.S. with my mom
and brothers and sisters. Today the U.S. can look upon the
family of native-born and naturalized citizens and see a
retired cop, a police lieutenant, an attorney, a CPA,
commercial fleet sales manager and a victim of HIV/AIDS. In the
second generation, there will soon be military veterans,
doctors, artists, accountants. And just this Sunday, the newest
member of our family entered this world ready to contribute and
do her part to make this the greatest country in the world.
Thank you.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Garcia. Congratulations on the
new birth, and I appreciate your insight.
[The statement of Mr. Garcia follows:]
Prepared Staement of Adrian Garcia
Good morning distinguished members of Congress:
My name is Adrian Garcia and I am a member of the City Council of
Houston and as a member of Houston's City Council, I have also been
appointed to serve as the Chair of the Public Safety and Homeland
Security Committee. I am honored to be before you on this important
discussion and on that note I also wish to welcome you to our great
city and hope that you find your time here comfortable.
Prior to serving on Houston's City Council I served as a Houston
Police Officer for nearly 24 years and retired upon my successful
election to City Council. I started my public safety career in 1980 and
during my time in the Houston Police Department I worked various
assignments that included serving as the Director of the Mayor's Anti-
Gang Office, where I was charged with helping to develop public policy
in the fight against criminal street gangs in Houston.
Today's session appears to want to focus on the impact of illegal
immigration on crime what the role of local Police should be in the
enforcement of immigration laws. I hope to offer a perspective as a
recent local law enforcement practitioner given that I have worked as a
street cop. In my time, I have met many people of different
backgrounds, many spoke English some did not, and when I needed to I
used my family taught bilingual skills to carry out my job and enforce
the law--as a result I was able to clear cases and make significant
arrests and made many friends.
During my time as a Houston Police Officer, I became involved in
the National Latino Peace Officers Association and eventually became
the National President and served as National President from 1998-2000.
To the topic of today's discussion, no disputes that some persons
who have entered the United States have been arrested for violations of
state criminal statutes. However, given that a significant portion of
my patrol career also took place in the area that I now represent as an
elected official, which has a Hispanic majority; and given that I liked
putting crooks in jail, I recall arresting and investigating more
crimes against Americans that were committed by Americans than I did
where illegal immigrants were involved.
Where I did investigate crimes involving persons with questionable
immigration status, more have been witnesses against crooks I was
trying to put in jail.
I have also had to investigate crimes of assault and theft
involving persons who were hired to do a job and then beaten when they
wanted to get paid.
I have also worked in an undercover capacity investigating drug
trafficking and other crimes--some did involve undocumented persons but
they were more often the informants than targets of my investigations,
and we welcomed their assistance in those cases. I remember when I had
to go to Laredo, Texas to work with DEA on a drug trafficking
investigation that originated here in Houston through information from
sources that were undocumented. When I arrived in Laredo it was shortly
after DEA Agent Enrique Camarena was missing and presumed to be dead,
which regretfully turned out to be true. The targets of my
investigation were all US citizens.
When I had the responsibility of being Director of the Mayor's
Anti-Gang Office I dealt with the issue of Hispanic criminal street
gangs including MS-13. They were subjects of criminal activity in
Houston just as much as Caucasians, African Americans and many of the
Hispanics involved were also US citizens. In fact, one of the first
issues confronting me when I became Director was the fact that from
1994--1998, a significant number of the gang-related victims were
Hispanic males between the ages of 15--19 years. Although, we never
researched to find out the immigration status of these crime victims I
do not recall the issue of them being undocumented ever being an issue.
However, my time was just as occupied with investigating the
Bloods, Crips and the White Supremacists--Hispanics do not have a lock
on criminal street gang trade.
In either case, it has always been the trust and dialogue that cops
have been able to establish with all persons as they do their job.
Without free-flowing information from Houston's community, I am
concerned what could happen to the clearance and successful prosecution
rate that our area currently enjoys.
However, when it comes to what a vocal few would like street cops
to do we have vivid examples of failed attempts by local police
enforcing immigration laws in places like Chandler, Arizona where US
citizens were detained and nearly deported mainly because they spoke
with accents; couldn't speak English or could not prove their
immigration status. As a result, this experience set the police
department back many years and erased years of good work in developing
community relationships that are always necessary and essential in
investigating, solving and prosecuting crimes.
I have been personally involved in Houston's effort to have a local
police force for all the people of Houston and I am concerned about
seeing this progress erased, street cops depend on information to solve
crimes and without it victimization would go unreported and unsolved
and leave criminals on the streets.
This statement does not mean that I do not believe that immigration
laws should not be enforced, quite to the contrary, I do support the
enforcement of all laws but in this case it must be done by the
appropriate agencies and Texas State Penal Code Laws should be enforced
by Texas Peace Officers and Immigration Laws should be enforced by
Immigration Enforcement Authorities.
Are illegal aliens committing crimes in Houston? Yes. Are Houston
Police arresting illegal aliens? Yes, for the criminal violations of
state and federal criminal laws. Does the Houston Police Department
share that information with Immigration authorities? Yes. Does, the
Houston Police Department do anything to hinder the work of Immigration
authorities? No.
Further, the following are specific reasons why it is not in the
best interests of Houston to order local police to become immigration
law enforcers:
1. Current federal law requires that in order for local law
enforcement to receive federal funding that the agency demonstrate that
it has policies and procedures in place against discrimination
practices--effectively meaning that law enforcement is equally applied
to all persons without regard to a person's color of skin, nationality,
religion or gender.
2. In order to comply with the first rule, any new rule to would
require that we follow the first rule as we enforce the new rule--
meaning that in order to demonstrate that local police are not
enforcing the immigration law against persons solely because of the
color of their skin or possible nationality then we would have to order
the enforcement of the new rule on all persons that local law
enforcement officers come in contact with and require documentation
(much like the racial profiling forms that officers are required to
fill out) that the officer is enforcing the new rule on everyone he/she
comes in contact with.
3. The Houston Police Department is currently under manned by
approximately 1,000 to 1,500 officers, hiring those officers will take
many years and millions upon millions to get to the workforce strength
back to where we could comfortably handle all the priorities of the
citizens of Houston. Asking local cops to determine the immigration
status of all persons they come in contact with, today would adversely
affect response times to emergency calls of Houstonians more so than
how our current manpower shortage is already affecting Houstonians.
4. Access to data is not currently effective--today barely a
fraction of known US absconders are tracked through the National Crime
Information Center (NCIC), which is available to local police. However,
if an officer wants to verify a passport, it would likely need to be
done during business hours since there are no direct links to State
Department databases, making this ineffective during evening and
nighttime hours for street cops.
5. Lack of funding--currently the City of Houston is trying to get
out of the jail business and the cost of housing, feeding and medically
caring for immigration detainees would adversely affect local tax
payers. Especially since the federal government doesn't have the best
reputation of reimbursing local communities for cost incurred in their
support of the federal government. I do not believe that the federal
government currently reimburses the City of Houston for arresting and
detaining the illegal aliens that we have arrested?! Currently, the
City of Houston is working to get out of the jail business and
collaborate with our County Officials, who are already strapped for
space for the prisoners they have--adult and juveniles.
In closing, I respect the work needed to get this country to place
that we feel good about the security of our Homeland and there is much
work to be done. However, I suggest that this work will be extremely
short lived if we do not also address of the issue of making sure that
the foreign countries that are contributing to this issue are not
encouraged to better at developing effective domestic economic
development in their own countries.
In addition, I would like to offer a second dimension as a First
Generation American, the only American born of my family. I am a person
that today sits before you only because my father, who died shortly
after being able to see my election, was a ``bracero''. My dad helped
to build the California rail lines and this earned him the right to
immigrate to the US with my mom and brothers and sister, today the US
can look upon this family of native born and naturalized citizens and
see a retired cop, a Metro Police Lieutenant, an attorney, a CPA,
commercial vehicle fleet sales manager, and a victim of HIV-AIDS--in
second generation there are soon to be military veterans, doctors,
artists, accountants, and just this Sunday the newest member of our
family entered this world ready to contribute and do her part to
continue to make this the greatest country in the world.
Mr. McCaul. Next we have the Police Chief from Houston, Mr.
Hurtt.
STATEMENT OF HAROLD L. HURTT, CHIEF OF POLICE, CITY OF HOUSTON,
TEXAS
Mr. Hurtt. Thank you. Mr. Chairman and subcommittee
members, I sit here as a police chief for three border cities
in the past: Arizona, California, and now Texas. Let me say as
chief of Houston Police Department and also president of the
Major Cities Chiefs associations, that I appreciate and wish to
thank you for the honor and privilege of putting into the
Congressional Record law enforcement comments and concerns on
immigration prior to full enactment of any legislation this
important.
Let me begin by giving my reaction to a recent Federal
legislative amendment aimed at eliminating Federal law
enforcement funding for local police. In short, both myself and
chiefs of major cities across the country are dismayed by any
legislative action aimed at excluding the city of Houston and
other local jurisdictions from receiving needed Federal law
enforcement funds. These funds are needed to put more officers
on the streets of Houston, protect their neighborhoods,
investigate and prevent murders, rapes, assaults, robberies,
burglaries, and provide for homeland security.
The end result of any law enforcement funding exclusion
amendment, if it is applied to the Houston Police Department
and other communities like Houston, would be to make our local
communities less safe. In other words, these amendments would
have the opposite effect of their purported purpose.
Illegal immigration is an issue that affects our Nation as
a whole, and any solution should begin, first, at the Federal
level, with securing the borders and increasing enforcement by
Federal agencies. Local law enforcement of immigration law
raises complex legal, logistical, and resource issues for local
communities and their police agencies.
In an effort to clarify the city's reasoned and model
approach to this issue, I will provide the following statements
regarding the city's policy, why we oppose the position
represented by the Federal Fund Exclusion Amendment and protect
our citizens referendum.
The city of Houston does not have a sanctuary policy.
Currently, the police department is operating under general
order 500-5. You may see attachment A in the packet I have
provided for you. General order 500-5 was implemented in 1992
by then Police Chief Nuchia, who is currently serving as a
justice in the Texas judiciary's first court of appeals.
The general order includes the following provisions:
Number one, Houston police officers may not stop or
apprehend individuals solely on the belief that they are in
this country illegally. Officers shall not make inquiries as to
the citizenship status of any person, nor will officers detain
or arrest persons solely on the belief that they are in this
country illegally. Officers will contact the Federal
immigration authorities regarding the person only if that
person is arrested on a separate criminal charge other than a
class C misdemeanor, which would be like a traffic citation,
and the officer knows the prisoner is an illegal alien.
The department procedures are to accept and act upon
criminal immigration detainers issued by ICE. The police
department further clarifies to our officers that they are
allowed to take into custody any person who the Federal
authorities state is a criminal suspect and for whom they will
authorize detention directly into a Federal detention facility.
In addition, whenever the department has a person in
custody on other criminal charges, the department will not
release the person from custody for up to 24 hours after they
have received formal notice from Federal authorities that they
are wanted for criminal violations. The city is committed to
assisting ICE and any other Federal agencies, whenever possible
and reasonable, to enforce criminal violations in criminal
matters.
We will continue to enforce laws relative to criminal
violations against any and all persons regardless of their
immigration status. The department, and thus the city, does not
have a sanctuary policy as opponents of our policy have
alleged.
There are several issues that impact the State and local.
There are some restrictions why State and local law enforcement
cannot be involved in immigration enforcement.
In Texas, peace officers can only arrest a person without a
warrant in specific situations. Sections 14.01, 14.03 and 14.04
of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedures clearly define this
authority, and it is provided in Exhibit 4. These sections do
not authorize a Texas police officer to arrest a person without
a warrant for illegally entering the United States.
In opinion number H-1029, the Texas Attorney General
evaluated the authority of Texas peace officers under section
14.01, 14.03 and 14.04 and concluded that Texas peace officers,
under State law, do not have authority to arrest an individual
solely upon the suspicion that he has previously entered the
country illegally. That is under item number five.
Likewise, police officers are restrained by the
constitutional protections of the fourth amendment from seizing
or detaining a person without sufficient probable cause in
immigration situations. The Supreme Court further concluded
that the fourth amendment forbids officers from stopping or
detaining a person for questioning about their citizenship
unless on a reasonable suspicion that they may be aliens.
The Texas Code of Criminal Procedure also, under article
2.131 and 2.132, prohibits peace officers from engaging in
racial profiling. That is Exhibit 7 in your pack. An officer
cannot subject a person to police action merely on the basis of
their race, ethnicity or national origin.
The Supreme Court in the Brignoni-Ponce case also
specifically stated that a person's Mexican ancestry alone is
not reasonable grounds to stop the person and subject them to
questioning about citizenship. That is in Exhibit Number 6.
Mr. McCaul. If I can, we are on tight time. Please proceed,
but if you could try to summarize. Thank you.
Mr. Hurtt. Let me get, then, to the final points that I
would like to make on this whole issue. There are five points I
would like to make.
The Federal legislation amendments to exclude local
communities from receiving Federal law enforcement funding are
misguided and wrong; just as Houston's Protect Our Citizens
efforts to pass a charter amendment requiring Houston police
officers to conduct immigration investigations and enforce
immigration laws.
Both ignore the lack of clear legal authority for our
officers in the area of immigration enforcement.
They turn a blind eye to the legal restrictions against
warrantless arrests/detentions, racial profiling and fourth
amendment violations to which our officers must adhere and for
which the city would face legal liability if we allowed our
officers to violate them.
They are unconcerned and insensitive to the distrust and
fear of the police such enforcement would create in our
community.
Finally, they unreasonably call for required enforcement,
yet fail to identify how the city and local communities will
provide or generate the necessary resources to accomplish such
enforcement. What programs, projects and services would need to
be cut in order for us to do immigration enforcement?
What the city of Houston and all major cities need, along
with the Federal law enforcement authorities for that matter--
and it has been said here before--are more boots on the ground;
that is, more police officers and more Federal agents.
Thank you.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Chief.
[The statement of Chief Harold L. Hurtt follows:]
Prepared Statement of Harold L. Hurtt
Dear Sub-Committee Members:
I am writing to respond to your invitation to testify before your
sub-committee hearing on Wednesday, August 16th, 2006, at 9:30am, at
the Civil Courthouse 201 Caroline St., Houston Texas. First let me say
as Chief of the Houston Police Department (HPD) and also as President
of the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCC) that I appreciate and wish
to thank you for the honor and privilege of putting into the official
congressional record Law Enforcement's comments and concerns on
Immigration prior to the full enactment of any legislation on this
important subject. I will be submitting as an attachment to my
testimony today the MCC's Immigration Committee Recommendations for
Enforcement of Immigration Laws by Local Police Agencies (chaired by my
Deputy Director Craig E. Ferrell, Jr.), which were adopted on June 7th
by the MCC for inclusion in the official congressional record. I also
have additional attachments for the sub-committee members, but due to
their length I have been told they can not be part of the written
record.
Let me begin by giving my reaction to a recent federal legislative
amendment aimed at eliminating federal law enforcement funding to local
police. In short, both myself and chiefs of major cities across the
country are dismayed by any legislative action aimed at excluding the
City of Houston and/or other local jurisdictions from receiving needed
federal law enforcement funds. These funds are needed to put more
officers on the streets of Houston, protect our neighborhoods,
investigate and prevent murders, rapes, assaults, robberies,
burglaries, and provide for homeland security efforts. It seems clear
that some in Congress and the public fervently believe local police
should become involved in enforcing federal civil immigration laws.
Given these strong beliefs, we are left to wonder why the recent
legislative amendments were not written to provide increased federal
funding to local police to support such enforcement. Instead the
amendments have sought to eliminate funding and penalize not only the
City of Houston, but also Harris County, and other local and national
jurisdictions, which will be negatively effected by this amendment. The
end result of any law enforcement funding exclusion amendment, if it is
applied to Houston and other communities like Houston would be to make
our local communities less safe. In other words these amendments would
have the opposite effect of their purported purpose.
Illegal immigration is being hotly debated in Congress and in our
local communities. Opinions on how to address this complex issue differ
greatly and emotions run high. Extremes exist on either side of the
debate as represented by the recent mass demonstrations by immigrant
groups and their supporters and the funding exclusion amendment and the
referendum effort of the group Protect Our Citizens in Houston. Both
myself and chiefs of police in MCC representing first responders to
over fifty (50) million residents respectfully disagree with any effort
to eliminate federal law enforcement funding and in effort to create an
unfunded mandate. Illegal immigration is an issue that effects our
nation as a whole and any solution should begin first at the federal
level with securing the borders and increasing enforcement by federal
agencies.
Local enforcement of immigration laws raises complex legal,
logistical and resource issues for local communities and their police
agencies. The City of Houston's polices and those of most major cities
across America reflect the challenges and realities faced by a City and
police agency that is responsible for protecting and serving a diverse
community comprised of citizens, non-citizens, legal residents,
visitors and undocumented immigrants. The City's policies seek to best
protect and serve this diverse community as a whole, while taking into
account: the reality that the City does not have unlimited resources;
its officers are prohibited by state law from racial profiling and
arresting persons without warrants and without well established
probable cause; is subject to civil liability for violating such laws;
and has the clear need to foster assistance and cooperation from the
public including those persons who may be undocumented immigrants. In
an effort to clarify the City's reasoned and model approach to this
issue I have provided the following statements regarding the City's
policy and why we oppose the positions represented by the federal fund
exclusion amendment and Protect Our Citizens' referendum.
CITY DOES NOT HAVE A SANCTUARY POLICY
Currently, the police department is operating under General Order
500-5[See attached Exhibit 1]. General Order 500-5 was implemented in
1992 by then Chief Nuchia, who is currently serving as a Justice in the
Texas Judiciary's First Court of Appeals. The General Order includes
the following provisions:
Houston police officers may not stop or apprehend
individuals solely on the belief that they are in this country
illegally.
Officers shall not make inquiries as to the
citizenship status of any person, nor will officers detain or
arrest persons solely on the belief that they are in the
country illegally.
Officers will contact the [Federal Immigration
Authorities] regarding a person only if that person is arrested
on a separate criminal charge (other than Class C misdemeanor)
and the officer knows the prisoner is an illegal alien.''
The department has issued clarifications of our ``immigration''
policies and implemented changes to the department's enforcement
policies to increase cooperation between the department and federal
agencies on immigration matters that are criminal in nature. [Exhibit
2] In the summer of 2005, I directed Executive Assistant Chief Thaler,
Assistant Chief Perales and Deputy Director/General Counsel Craig
Ferrell to meet jointly with representatives of the U.S. Attorney's
office and I.C.E. to discuss the department's response to immigration
detainers. Based on those discussions, the department developed
procedures to accept and act upon criminal immigration detainers issued
by I.C.E. The police department further clarified that our officers are
allowed to take into custody any person who the federal authorities
state is a criminal suspect and for whom they will authorize detention
directly into a federal detention facility. In addition, whenever the
department has a person in custody on other criminal charges, the
department will not release the person from custody for up to 24 hours
after we have received formal notice from federal authorities that they
are wanted for criminal violations.
The City is committed to assisting I.C.E and any other federal
agency wherever possible and reasonable to enforce against criminal
violations and address criminal matters. The Houston Police Department
has always acted to enforce laws relative to criminal violations and
criminal matters, accepted criminal warrants and criminal detainers and
assisted in criminal investigations, regardless of whether they
emanated from other jurisdictions or arose out of federal or state
laws. Our officers are currently involved in various federal task
forces addressing criminal matters including violent criminal gangs.
Because we have and will continue to enforce laws relative to criminal
violations against any and all persons, regardless of their immigration
status, the department and thus the City does not have a ``sanctuary
policy'' as opponents of our policies have alleged. This is not only
the City's or the police department's opinion but also that of Robert
Rutt the Deputy Special Agent in Charge for Immigration and Customs
Enforcement [I.C.E]. In a recent Houston Chronicle article he stated
that ``Houston is not a sanctuary City. . .'' In the same article he
further acknowledged the police department's significant cooperation
with I.C.E. [Exhibit 3]
CONCERNS WITH LOCAL ENFORCMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAW
Local enforcement of federal immigration laws raises many daunting
and complex legal, logistical and resource issues for the City of
Houston and the diverse community it serves. Like other jurisdictions
our policy in this area must recognize the obstacles, pitfalls, dangers
and negative consequences to local policing that would be caused by
immigration enforcement at the local level.
LACK OF CLEAR LEGAL AUTHORITY
The federal government has clear authority over immigration and
immigration enforcement, but that is not true for local police officers
including the Houston Police Department. Federal law does not require
the states or local police agencies to enforce immigration laws nor
does it give the states or local agencies the clear authority to act in
the area of immigration enforcement.
Criminal vs. Civil Matters
Federal immigration laws involve both civil and criminal aspects.
The federal government and its designated agencies such as I.C.E. and
the Department of Justice have clear authority and responsibility to
regulate and enforce immigration laws regardless of whether or not the
process used for enforcement is criminal or civil in nature. The
federal agencies have the authority to determine if a person will be
criminally prosecuted for their violations of immigration laws or be
dealt with through a civil deportation process. Based on their
authority, training, experience and resources available to them, these
federal agencies and the federal courts are in the best position to
determine whether or not a person has entered or remained in the
country in violation of federal regulations and the applicability of
criminal or civil sanctions.
The authority of local police officers to act to enforce against
criminal acts is clear and well established. Our officers have no
authority to determine if a particular immigration violation would or
should result in criminal charges or be handled through purely civil
proceedings and regulation. This fact creates a gap in authority for
our officers who are generally limited to acting only in criminal
matters. Houston police officers do not become involved in purely civil
matters between disputing parties.
As stated above the Houston Police Department and its officers keep
their focus on criminal matters and violations. We assist the federal
agencies with all criminal matters including those that involve
immigration status, but the federal agencies must clearly state that
the matter relates to criminal violations by issuing criminal warrants,
criminal detainers or criminal holds.
State and Federal Restrictions on Authority to Arrest and Detain
State laws also restrict a local police officer's authority to act
even in criminal matters in such a way that it would prevent or hinder
the officer's ability to investigate, arrest or detain a person for
immigration violations alone. Federal agents are specifically
authorized to stop persons and conduct investigations as to immigration
status without a warrant. Local police officers are constrained by
local laws that deal with their general police powers such as the
ability to arrest without a warrant, and prohibitions against racial
profiling.
In Texas, peace officers can only arrest a person without a warrant
in specific situations. Section 14.01, 14.03 and 14.04 of the Texas
Code of Criminal Procedures clearly defines this authority. [Exhibit 4]
Section 14.01 states and officer can arrest a person without a warrant
who has committed an offense in the officer's presence or view. Section
14.03 defines specific situations in which an officer can arrest a
person without a warrant such as those involving an assault with
possible future injury, family violence, violations of protective
orders or interference with emergency calls. Finally, section 14.04
allows arrest without warrant if a felony has been committed and an
escape is likely and the officer does not have time to get a warrant.
These sections do not authorize a Texas peace officer to arrest a
person without a warrant for illegally entering the United States. In
Opinion No. H-1029, the Texas Attorney General evaluated the authority
of Texas peace officers under Section 14.01, 14.03 and 14.04 and
concluded that Texas peace officers under state law ``do not. . .have
authority to arrest an individual solely upon the suspicion that he has
previously entered the country illegally. . .''[See AG Opinion H-1029
attached as Exhibit 5]
Likewise police officers are restrained by the constitutional
protections of the Fourth Amendment from seizing or detaining a person
without sufficient probable cause in immigration situations. The United
State Supreme Court in the case of U.S. v. Brignoni-Ponce addressed the
ability of federal immigration agents to seize and detain a person and
subject them to an immigration status investigation. U.S. v. Brignoni-
Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, (1975). [Exhibit 6] The Court recognized the
broader authority of such federal agents to conduct such investigations
without warrant. However, the Court stated even with such broader
authority the Fourth Amendment still protected persons from being
randomly stopped by officers who have no reason to suspect the persons
of having violated any law. Id. At 883-884. The Supreme Court further
concluded that the Fourth Amendment forbids officers from stopping or
detaining a person for questioning about their citizenship on less than
reasonable suspicion that they may be aliens. Id. Houston police
officers lack the broader authority to conduct immigration
investigations that is given to federal immigration agents who can stop
a person and ask questions about citizenship without a warrant. Lacking
such authority, Houston police officers are still required to develop a
clear reasonable justification or probable cause for detaining a person
to investigate their immigration status.
Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 2.131 and 2.132 prohibit
peace officers from engaging in racial profiling. [Exhibit 7] An
officer can not subject a person to police action merely on the basis
of their race, ethnicity or national origin. Immigration enforcement by
H.P.D. officers would at a minimum result in increased complaints of
racial profiling since a major factor a person would most likely be
subjected to an immigration investigation by officers would be their
differing nationality, race or ethnicity. The Supreme Court in the
Brignoni-Ponce case also specifically stated that a persons ``Mexican
ancestry'' alone is not reasonable grounds to stop the person and
subject them to questioning about citizen. U.S. V. Brignoni-Ponce, 422
U.S. 873, 885, 886(1975).
RISK OF CIVIL LIBABILITY
In the past, local law enforcement agencies have faced civil
litigation and liability for their involvement in immigration
enforcement. For example, the Katy, Texas Police Department
participated in an immigration raid with federal agents in 1994. A
total of 80 individuals who were detained by the police were later
determined to be either citizens or legal immigrants with permission to
be in the country. The Katy police department faced suits from these
individuals and eventually settled their claims out of court.
Because local police officers currently lack clear authority to
enforce immigration laws, are limited in their ability to arrest
without a warrant, are prohibited from racial profiling and lack the
training and experience to enforce complex federal immigration laws, it
is more likely the City/police department will face the risk of civil
liability and litigation if we actively enforced federal immigration
laws.
UNDERMINES TRUST AND COOPERATION OF IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES
Major urban areas throughout the nation are comprised of
significant immigrant communities. In some areas the immigrant
community reaches 50--60 percent of the local population. Local
agencies are charged with providing law enforcement services to these
diverse populations with communities of both legal and illegal
immigrants. The reality is that undocumented immigrants are a
significant part of the local populations major police agencies must
protect, serve and police. The City of Houston faces the same
challenges.
Local officers have worked very hard to build trust and a spirit of
cooperation with immigrant groups through community based policing and
outreach programs and specialized officers who work with immigrant
groups. We have a clear need to foster trust and cooperation with
everyone in these immigrant communities. Assistance and cooperation
from immigrant communities is especially important when an immigrant,
whether documented or undocumented, is the victim of or witness to a
crime. These persons must be encouraged to file reports and come
forward with information. Their cooperation is needed to prevent and
solve crimes and maintain public order, safety, and security in the
whole community. Local police contacts in immigrant communities are
important as well in the area of intelligence gathering to prevent
future terroristic attacks and strengthen homeland security.
Immigration enforcement by local police would likely negatively
effect and undermine the level of trust and cooperation between local
police and immigrant communities. If the undocumented immigrant's
primary concern is that they will be deported or subjected to an
immigration status investigation, then they will not come forward and
provide needed assistance and cooperation. Distrust and fear of
contacting or assisting the police would develop among legal immigrants
as well. Undoubtedly legal immigrants would avoid contact with the
police for fear that they themselves or undocumented family members or
friends may become subject to immigration enforcement. Without
assurances that contact with the police would not result in purely
civil immigration enforcement action, the hard won trust, communication
and cooperation from the immigrant community would disappear. Such a
divide between the local police and immigrant groups would result in
increased crime against immigrants and in the broader community, create
a class of silent victims and eliminate the potential for assistance
from immigrants in solving crimes or preventing future terroristic
acts.
LACK OF RESOURCES
The budgets and resources of local police agencies are not
unlimited. Local police agencies struggle every year to find the
resources to police and serve their respective communities. Since the
events of September 11, local agencies have taken on the added duty of
serving as the first line of defense and response to terrorist attacks
for our country. These efforts on the local level to deter and prevent
another terrorist attack and to be prepared to respond to the aftermath
of an attack have stretched local resources even further. Since the
creation of the Homeland Security Department, federal funding for major
city police departments has been reduced given the added duties of
securing the homeland. Local agencies have also had to take on more
responsibilities in areas that have traditionally been handled by the
F.B.I. whose investigative resources are now more focused on counter-
terrorism efforts. Local agencies are forced to fill the gap left by
the shift of federal resources away from investigating white-collar
crimes and bank robberies; areas traditionally handled by federal
agencies.
Enforcement of federal immigration laws would be a burden that most
major police agencies would not be able to bear under current resource
levels. The cost in terms of manpower, facilities and equipment
necessary for local agencies to address the 8--12 million illegal
immigrants currently living in the United States would be overwhelming.
It is estimated that nearly half a million immigrants are in the
Houston area. The federal government, which has primary authority to
enforce immigration laws, has itself failed to provide the tremendous
amount of resources necessary to accomplish such enforcement to its own
agencies specifically charged with that responsibility. Local
communities and agencies have even fewer resources to devote to such an
effort than the federal government, given all the numerous other
demands on local police departments.
Immigration violations are extremely different from the typical
criminal offenses that patrol officers face every day on their local
beats. The law enforcement activities of local police officers revolve
around crimes such as murder, assaults, narcotics, robberies,
burglaries, domestic violence, traffic violations and the myriad of
other criminal matters they handle on a regular basis. The specific
immigration status of any particular person can vary greatly. A person
may not be a citizen but still be a legal resident, a recognized
refugee seeking asylum, a holder of a visa that may or may not have
expired or the person has illegally entered the country. The complexity
of the immigration laws is illustrated by the fact that the U.S. has 25
types of nonimmigrant visas, including A1 visas for ambassadors, B2
visas for tourists, P1 visas for foreign sports stars who play on U.S.
teams and TN visas for Canadians and Mexicans entering the U.S. to work
under NAFTA, and U visas for persons assisting in criminal
prosecutions. Given the complexity of immigration status, whether a
person is in fact in violation of the complex federal immigration
regulations would be very difficult if not almost impossible for the
average patrol officer to determine during an investigation on the
streets of Houston.
The Houston Police Department is currently working to put more
officers on the street to address crimes such as murder, rape,
robberies, assaults, narcotics, prostitution, burglaries, traffic
enforcement, etc. The City struggles continuously to find the resources
to address these policing needs. Spending Houston's limited police
resources on addressing the estimated tens of thousands of illegal
immigrants in our jurisdiction would decrease our ability to accomplish
normal policing and public safety goals. If officers were required to
enforce or even allowed to enforce immigration laws, a routine traffic
stop, which would have only resulted in a ticket, would become an
extended immigration investigation. If the officer develops the
probable cause to detain the person for immigration status
investigation and asks the person about their citizenship status the
person may lie or admit that they are a non-citizen. If the person lies
the officer must develop facts that would support a reasonable
suspicion that the person is a non-citizen in the country illegally.
If a person admits to being a non-citizen the fact remains that
being a non-citizen in this country is not in and of itself a violation
of any state or federal law. The officer would then have to develop
probable cause to believe the person who is a non-citizen either
entered the country illegally or has violated a visa or some other
condition for remaining in the country. Basing his immigration status
investigation solely on the person's non-citizenship/national origin
could violate the state law against racial profiling. The non-citizen
may claim to have misplaced or left his visa or residency card or some
other valid immigration documents at home or at their hotel room. A
traffic stop, which should have been brief, has now become an extended
immigration investigation reducing the available police resources to
address other policing needs. This very real scenario does not account
for the various other situations in which officers come in contact with
individuals who are witnesses, victims, or report crimes.
It should be noted that new immigration enforcement would not only
take from current police resources but would also require increases in
resources for enforcement. New resources would be needed to provide
equipment, infrastructure and additional officers and personnel for
enforcement as well as training for officers. New resources would also
be needed to house, feed and transport persons who are subject to
enforcement.
HOUSTON'S POLICY IS MODEL FOR OTHER JURISDICTIONS
The Houston Police Department has not sat on the sidelines but
rather has actively worked through its involvement in police
associations such as the International Association of Chiefs of Police
[I.A.C.P.] and Major Cities Chiefs [M.C.C.] to build consensus on the
issue of local enforcement of federal immigration law. The I.A.C.P. has
published articles and adopted a position statement on this issue,
which support Houston's policy. [See Exhibits 8, 9, 10] I am the
current M.C.C. president and my Deputy Director, Craig Ferrell, is
serving as M.C.C. general counsel. M.C.C. is an association of 57 Chief
Executive Officers of police departments located in jurisdictions with
over 1.5 million population or have a population over and employ more
than 1,000 officers. During M.C.C.'s recent summer meeting, its members
voted to adopt a position statement on this issue which, like I.A.C.P.,
voiced concerns and opposition to any requirement that local police
agencies enforce immigration laws. [Exhibit 11 and tendered with my
testimony to become part of this committee's official record]
In addition, on MCC's behalf Craig Ferrell recently attended a Law
Enforcement Roundtable Discussion regarding border security and
immigration hosted by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. [Exhibit 12]
During this meeting the issue of local law enforcement of immigration
was discussed. Attorney General Gonzales stated at this meeting that
the federal government is neither requesting nor requiring local
agencies to enforce immigration laws on their own and he acknowledged
that such enforcement is first and foremost a federal responsibility.
Attorney General Gonzales requested that local police department's to
partner with federal agencies to combat criminal immigration matters.
He specifically stated he was not asking local police agencies to wade
into the complicated area of ``civil enforcement.''
The issue of local law enforcement agencies enforcing federal
immigration laws became a prominent issue in the media and one debated
in the law enforcement community since the horrendous events of 9/11.
This issue has been further highlighted due to the current debate on
immigration reform taking place in congress. Local enforcement of
federal immigration laws raises many complex legal and logistical
issues as stated above for the City of Houston. The concerns raised
above are shared by other major law enforcement agencies throughout the
nation. Based on our work and discussions with other police agencies, I
can confidently state that the City of Houston's approach to this issue
is in line with the other major jurisdictions in the country and is
viewed as a model policy. [Also see 2 IACP Articles marked as exhibits
12 & 13 authored by Mr. Ferrell on this subject]
CONCLUSION
The federal legislative amendments to exclude local
communities from receiving federal law enforcement funding are
misguided and wrong; just as Houston's Protect Our Citizens
efforts to pass a charter amendment requiring Houston Police
Officer's to conduct immigration investigations and enforce
immigration laws.
Both ignore the lack of clear legal authority for our
officers in the area of immigration enforcement.
They turn a blind eye to the legal restrictions
against warrantless arrests/detentions, racial profiling, and
Fourth Amendment violations to which our officers must adhere
and for which the City would face legal liability if we allowed
our officers to violate them.
They are unconcerned and insensitive to the distrust
and fear of the police such enforcement would create in our
community.
Finally, they unreasonably call for required
enforcement, yet fail to identify how the City and local
communities will provide or generate the necessary resources to
accomplish such enforcement. What programs, projects and
services would Protect Our Citizens suggest the City cut from
the current budget to fund new immigration enforcement?
Why would our federal legislators not seek to increase federal
funding to support the call for local immigration enforcement rather
than passing amendments aimed at eliminating all federal funding for
local law enforcement needs. Their energies, time and monies would be
better spent trying to assist the City of Houston and local communities
meet our current law enforcement needs rather than creating new
unfunded mandates. What the City of Houston and all major cities need,
along with the federal law enforcement authorities for that matter, are
more police officers and more federal agents!
Mr. McCaul. I am going to hold them strictly to 5 minutes
as we are running short on time.
Chief, just very quickly, when you make an arrest in the
city of Houston and you determine that the person is here
illegally, do you refer that to the Immigration and Customs
Enforcement?
Mr. Hurtt. Yes. That is on the booking slip as a person
that is put into the county jail, that Immigration is notified.
Mr. McCaul. What if it is a routine traffic stop.
Mr. Hurtt. No.
Mr. McCaul. Of course, we know one of the hijackers was
stopped on a routine traffic stop. Do you have any--what kind
of database do you have to check once you have--we have had
various illustrations of people being pulled over, like Tim
McVeigh, for instance. I think State troopers, police on the
ground making traffic stops, is a very good technique to
prevent crime and terrorism. Do you have any sort of database
that is checked in a traffic stop to determine if this person
is on a watchlist, for instance.
Mr. Hurtt. If an officer feels it necessary to check a
person for warrants, they can run them through NCIC, yes.
Mr. McCaul. I would like to just, with my limited time,
focus on the facts and the cost of illegal immigration in this
State and particularly in this county, and just if I could get
some numbers to summarize the testimony, particularly from
Judge Eckels and Major O'Brien and Mr. Moriarty, on the cost of
incarceration.
Let me start first with the numbers of illegals
incarcerated in the State of Texas, and then we will go to
Harris County.
Mr. Moriarty. We have 11,606 that claim foreign birth.
Again, the technology issue is an important issue for us also
as far as the State prison system goes, because we do not have
access to anything to verify that person's citizenship. Now, by
the time they come to us, they are obviously convicted felons.
So we are dealing with a different issue than the Chief or some
of the other persons that testified here today.
Mr. McCaul. So it is difficult to verify obviously, these
are the people who actually admit, and what is the cost to the
State for incarceration of illegals.
Mr. Moriarty. The ones that we know about, the 10,376 that
claim foreign citizenship, our estimated cost is the same as
housing inmates at $40 a day. So that would be $132 million in
costs to the State of Texas a year for the known. Now, again,
it is self-reporting like we talked about.
Mr. McCaul. It is self-reporting, so the number is probably
higher than that.
Mr. Moriarty. That is correct.
Mr. McCaul. Has that increased since last year--or the year
before, I'm sorry?
Mr. Moriarty. This program, again, we have worked in close
contact with ICE, but the numbers may increase steady because I
don't think the investigative efforts have changed to determine
that citizenship status.
Mr. McCaul. If I can pose the same questions to Harris
County officials on the incarceration, the numbers.
Judge Eckels. The percentages, I have the national average,
of the total misdemeanor defendant interviews, 10.2 percent
were for illegal aliens, of which 6.7 were for felonies.
Mr. McCaul. What was the percentage? I didn't hear you.
Judge Eckels. The pretrial services department--in their
interviews--misdemeanor defendants, 19 percent were non-U.S.
citizens, 51.2 percent of that were undocumented and 10.2
percent were--
Mr. McCaul. What about the felony.
Judge Eckels. Felony, there was 11.5 percent were
undocumented, 6.7 percent of all felony interviewed were
undocumented. Both of those are trending upward, a little over
2 percent in a year in our community.
Mr. McCaul. Do you have any additions to that.
Mr. O'Brien. Out of the over 130,000 prisoners we process a
year, 20 to 23 percent are undocumented aliens, which equates
to approximately 26,000 prisoners. Out of our budget of about
$260 million, with the greatest percentage going to jail
functions, $41 million of that is going to handling
undocumented or illegal immigrants.
Mr. McCaul. So $41 million in Harris County are going
towards incarceration of illegal.
Judge Eckels. That does not include, I would caution the
committee, Mr. Chairman, the cost to the courts, the
prosecutors, the probation officers. The system is much more
expensive.
Mr. McCaul. The whole criminal justice system burden is far
greater than that.
Mr. O'Brien. That is just the enforcement side.
Mr. McCaul. And we can't really quantify that right now.
Lastly, health care, if you could just again, and also tell
me whether these rates have increased over the last several
years or not. In terms of incarceration, have we seen an
increase?
Mr. O'Brien. Oh, steadily.
Judge Eckels. We are currently--we have complied with the
Justice Commission jail standards with our current, and we
recently opened our new facility, but we are in the design
phase now for handling that process. It is a partnership with
the city to help us improve the efficiency. With that we will
be over 1,000 new beds.
Mr. McCaul. Do you know what the increase would be.
Judge Eckels. Our current capacity is just under 10,000;
9,200 or 9,600.
Mr. O'Brien. I believe you are at 96,500..
Mr. McCaul. Judge, lastly, health care. What would be the
cost to health care that the illegal immigrants receive.
Judge Eckels. Total health care costs and total cost of
undocumented inpatient, outpatient, in pharmacy care for the
year 2005 was $128,400,000. This is detailed in that report I
gave you earlier.
Mr. McCaul. It is over $128 million, and of that, the--
Judge Eckels. The district received payments and
reimbursements that amounted to $31 million, net costs of
$97,300,000 for 2005. Over the 4-year period, net cost
$286,600,000 medical reimbursements.
Mr. McCaul. And out of that, how much are the Feds
reimbursing and how much does Harris County bear.
Judge Eckels. That is after reimbursement.
Mr. McCaul. After reimbursement.
Judge Eckels. Reimbursements, the total cost for the 4-year
period, $403,500,000. Reimbursement totaled $116,900,000. Net
cost to Harris County, $286,600,000. Of that $116 million
reimbursement, $99,140,000, or 84.9 or almost 85 percent, was
TP30, a Federal Medicaid program that is federally funded.
Mr. McCaul. I think those numbers speak for themselves in
terms of the burden on the taxpayer.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Jackson-Lee.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Chairman, you place those of us who
are part of this fact-finding effort in somewhat of a difficult
posture in the shortening of time of our witnesses and, I
believe, me remaining as the only member of the minority.
However, I hope that we will be able to find the facts.
Let me first start out by thanking all of you for your
service in the way that the city and the county has worked
together. I want to commend you Judge Eckels, Major O'Brien,
Mr. Moriarty, certainly council member Garcia, Chief Hurtt, and
the mayor who have worked together. I am reminded of how we
unified around the evacuation, albeit faulty, as it related to
Hurricane Rita, and how we bonded and worked together on the
receiving of Hurricane Katrina survivors. This county and this
city are to be commended, and we thank you very much for it.
This is a fact-finding process, and it is not humorous and
it is not open to quick remarks because there are many points
that need to be put on this record that can be answered by the
present leadership of the United States Congress.
I notice that the State criminal alien assistance program,
Major O'Brien, has approximate funding of $5.8 billion for
calendar year 2001 and 2004. The top four States, including
Texas, is $1.6 billion to incarcerate criminal alien and
reimbursed staff through fiscal years 2002 and 2003. The State
of Texas received some reimbursement. Do you recall that?
Mr. O'Brien. No, ma'am. The only figures I have are the
last fiscal year's figures with me, which we spent over $41
million, and we were reimbursed about $2.5 million, or roughly
6 percent.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. You need more resources and this State is
a very large State. You were reimbursed only $2.5 million.
Mr. O'Brien. I don't feel it is the county's responsibility
or the citizens of Harris County to fund illegal immigrants.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. I agree. So you were reimbursed not a lot
of money.
Mr. O'Brien. Six percent.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. I agree with you. You are speaking to the
choir, and what I am trying to say to you is that we had State
criminal alien assistance program dollars upwards of $5.8
billion. The State of Texas spent about $1.6 billion. But let
me inform you that this provision is now zeroed out in the
President's budget. So where you got 6 percent in the last
fiscal year or two, you get zero this year. These are the
problems that we are confronting that can't be answered by
these hearings.
Let me share this point on our health care, and I think
this is an important point and I would like to ask unanimous
consent, Mr. Chairman, to add this to the record: The Texas
Criminal Justice Coalition Geared Towards Leadership
Initiative.
Mr. McCaul. Without objection, so ordered.
[The information is maintained in the committee file.]
Ms. Jackson-Lee. That makes the following points. Though
immigrants pay $1.5 million annually to Medicare payroll taxes
and most health care insurance programs, they receive only half
as much care as other families. Immigrants are not swamping the
U.S. health care system and use it far less than native-born
Americans: The American Journal of Public Health. Thirty
percent of immigrants use no health care at all during the
course of the year, and immigrants count for 10.4 percent of
the U.S. population with only 7.9 percent of the health
spending.
The Harris County hospital system has done an excellent
job, and we applaud them for being a front line of health first
responders. But let me set the framework.
Judge Eckels, if you would respond to this dilemma that we
face. Most uninsured in the U.S.A. are mostly white, 19 to 39.
They earn between 20--to $60,000. They work in small
businesses, and in the city of Houston, 100,000 small
businesses do not pay health insurance, and therefore,
obviously, open up their employees to the health crisis that we
face. Does the hospital system also have an increase, or have
you seen an increased utilization by individuals who are
underinsured or uninsured and are working?
Judge Eckels. Yes.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. And in the course of that, do you have a
percentage of how that has increased over the years.
Judge Eckels. I do not have that number. The total increase
put before me today may be in the more detailed report I
provided for you. I will get that number.
We have seen a continuing increase in our total budget,
again the percentages remain about the same, and I have an
increase on the illegal population, but it is by no means a
problem unique from that illegal population. It is a problem of
the community of the uninsured population of Harris County. Our
numbers are probably not the same as the Nation's on the
percentage of Anglo versus Hispanic or African American or
Asian, because we have a higher percentage of minority
population in the Harris County region.
But it is a problem that is subject to a whole different
debate in committee hearings on the problems of health care.
The pure costs of illegal population detracts from our ability
to deal with some of those other issues with the local
population, with the communities that you and I both serve.
I should also compliment you on your efforts on this and
will continue to work on the health care issues on the broader
issue of starting a penetration of the market of health care,
our health insurance. I hear lots of statistics about no
insurance, but that does not mean no health care, because they
get health care. It is just you and I paying for it through our
property taxes and Federal taxes.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. But the question, or at least the basis of
your response, is that we are suffering from lack of funding
across the board.
Judge Eckels. It is a crisis in health care today, not only
for the Harris County hospital district, for the for-profit and
nonprofit hospitals, and often it is Federal policy that drives
people into the ER, the most expensive place to provide
services. I cannot lay the entire blame on the feet of the
illegal population, no, ma'am. That is a problem that is
aggravated by the illegal population, but certainly the total
problem is not the population. A more comprehensive solution is
required for that.
Mr. McCaul. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Thank you very much. I would like to pose
these questions to both Council Member Garcia and Chief Hurtt.
Might I add into the record, Mr. Chairman, the Major Cities
Chiefs Association--and I am going to ask Chief Hurtt to list
the cities because I don't have them here--their statement that
indicates that the nine-point position statement that is
expressing their opposition to utilizing local resources, and
these are the major cities of the Nation for Federal
immigration enforcement. So the idea of zeroing out the SCAAP
funding partly would be a problem for you in terms of
detention, and the idea of not having law enforcement
reimbursed for any work that they did that would involve
Federal responsibility would be a problem. But I understand
that you are suggesting not only would it be a problem in terms
of your resources but it would literally undermine your ability
to do your job on the ground for the citizens of Houston.
Would you both respond to any pressure, might I say, Mr.
Chairman, that they are operating under an amendment that has
said that Houston would lose funding if they didn't
aggressively engage in going out and seeking individuals who
might be nonstatus.
Councilman Garcia. I am sorry, I ask unanimous consent to
submit this into the record.
Mr. McCaul. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
Submitted by Harold Hurtt
M.C.C. IMMIGRATION COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATIONS
For Enforcement of Immigration Laws by Local Police Agencies
Adopted by: Major Cities Chiefs
June 2006
Prepared By:
M.C.C. IMMIGRATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
Craig E. Ferrell, Jr., (M.C.C. General Counsel),
Chairman of Immigration Committee, Houston Police Department
Leroy D. Baca, Los Angeles County Sheriff?s Department
William J. Bratton, Los Angeles Police Department
Ella M. Bully-Cummings, Detroit Police Department
Raymond W. Kelly, New York City Police Department
Gil Kerlikowske, Seattle Police Department
Richard Miranda, Tucson Police Department
Robert Parker, Miami-Dade Police Department
Richard D. Wiles, El Paso Police Department
M.C.C. NINE (9) POINT POSITION
STATEMENT
ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION
LAWS BY LOCAL POLICE AGENCIES
A. STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Illegal immigration is a problem that faces our nation and society
as a whole and one, which must be dealt with at the national level. It
is absolutely critical that our country develop a consistent unified
national plan to deal with immigration and this plan must include the
critical component of securing our borders to prevent illegal entry
into the United States.
Since the horrendous attacks of September 11, 2001, local law
enforcement has been called upon to do its part in protecting the
nation from future terrorist attacks. The response of local law
enforcement to the call to protect the homeland has been tremendous.
Today, local police agencies stand as the first line of defense here at
home to prevent future attacks. Local law enforcement?s unending
efforts include providing additional training and equipment to
officers, increasing communication and coordination with federal
agencies, gathering, assessing and sharing intelligence, modifying
patrol methods and increasing security for potential targets such as
power plants, airports, monuments, ports and other critical facilities
and infrastructure. Much of these efforts have been at a high cost to
local budgets and resources.
The federal government and others have also called upon local
police agencies to become involved in the enforcement of federal
immigration laws as part of the effort to protect the nation. This
issue has been a topic of great debate in the law enforcement community
since September 11. The call for local enforcement of federal
immigration laws has become more prominent during the debate over
proposed immigration reform at the national level.
Major city police departments have a long undeniable history of
working with federal law enforcement agencies to address crime in the
United States whether committed by citizens, visitors, and/or illegal
immigrants. Local police agencies have not turned a blind eye to crimes
related to illegal immigration. They have and continue to work daily
with federal agencies whenever possible and to the extent allowable
under state criminal law enforcement authority to address crimes such
as human trafficking and gang violence which have a nexus with illegal
immigration.
How local agencies respond to the call to enforce immigration laws
could fundamentally change the way they police and serve their
communities. Local enforcement of federal immigration laws raises many
daunting and complex legal, logistical and resource issues for local
agencies and the diverse communities they serve. Some in local law
enforcement would embrace immigration enforcement as a means of
addressing the violation of law represented by illegal immigration
across our borders. Many others recognize the obstacles, pitfalls,
dangers and negative consequences to local policing that would be
caused by immigration enforcement at the local level.
It is important for Major Cities Chiefs [M.C.C.] as a leader and
representative of the local law enforcement community develop consensus
on this important subject. The purpose of this position statement is to
evaluate and address the impact and potential consequences of local
enforcement of federal immigration laws and highlight steps, which if
taken might allow local agencies to become involved in immigration
enforcement. It is hoped that this statement will help to draw
attention to the concerns of local law enforcement and provide a basis
upon which to discuss and shape any future national policy on this
issue. In this regard it is absolutely critical that M.C.C. be involved
in all phases of this debate from developing this official position
statement to demanding input and involvement in the development of any
national initiatives.
B. OVERVIEW OF IMMIGRATION AND IMMIGRANT STATUS
The federal government has the clear authority and responsibility
over immigration and the enforcement of immigration laws. With this
authority, the federal government has enacted laws, such as the
Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA), that regulate a person's
entry into the United States, his or her ability to remain in the
country, and numerous other aspects of immigration. The federal
government has given federal agencies such as Immigration and Customs
Enforcement [I.C.E.] the specific authority to investigate a person?s
immigration status and deport individuals who have no legal status or
authority to be in the United States.
Under the current immigration laws there exists various immigration
status classifications. The immigration status of any particular person
can vary greatly. The most common status classifications include the
following:
1) Legal Immigrants are citizens of other countries who have been
granted a visa that allows them to live and work permanently in the
United States and to become naturalized U.S. citizens. Once here, they
receive a card, commonly referred to as a ``green card'' from the
federal government indicating they are permanent residents. Some legal
immigrants are refugees who fear persecution based on race, religion,
nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political
opinion in their home countries. Refugees are resettled every year in
the United States after their requests for asylum have been reviewed
and granted.
2) Nonimmigrant Visa Holders are persons who are granted temporary
entry into the United States for a specific purpose, such as visiting,
working, or studying. The U.S. has 25 types of nonimmigrant visas,
including A1 visas for ambassadors, B2 visas for tourists, P1 visas for
foreign sports stars who play on U.S. teams and TN visas for Canadians
and Mexicans entering the U.S. to work under NAFTA. Visa Holders are
allowed to stay in the U.S. as long as they meet the terms of their
status.
3) Illegal Immigrants are citizens of other countries who have
entered or remained in the U.S. without permission and without any
legal status. Most illegal immigrants cross a land or sea border
without being inspected by an immigration officer. Some person falls
into illegal status simply by violating the terms of a legal entry
document or visa.
4) Absconders are persons who entered the United States legally but
have since violated the conditions of their visa and who have had a
removal, deportation, or exclusion hearing before an immigration judge
and are under a final order of deportation and have not left the United
States.
Currently there are between 8-12 million illegal immigrants living
in the U.S., with another estimated 800,000 illegal immigrants entering
the country every year. These immigrants by their sheer numbers have
become a significant part of local communities and major cities in our
nation. Some major urban areas estimate that their immigrant
communities, regardless of immigration status, comprise 50%-60% of the
local population and other areas report similar trends. The reality for
major local police agencies throughout the nation is that the
communities they serve and protect are diverse and include significant
immigrant communities including documented and undocumented immigrants.
C. CONCERNS WITH LOCAL ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS
Local police agencies must balance any decision to enforce federal
immigration laws with their daily mission of protecting and serving
diverse communities, while taking into account: limited resources; the
complexity of immigration laws; limitations on authority to enforce;
risk of civil liability for immigration enforcement activities and the
clear need to foster the trust and cooperation from the public
including members of immigrant communities.
1) Undermine Trust and Cooperation of Immigrant Communities
Major urban areas throughout the nation are comprised of
significant immigrant communities. In some areas the immigrant
community reaches 50-60 percent of the local population. Local agencies
are charged with protecting these diverse populations with communities
of both legal and illegal immigrants. The reality is that undocumented
immigrants are a significant part of the local populations major police
agencies must protect, serve and police.
Local agencies have worked very hard to build trust and a spirit of
cooperation with immigrant groups through community based policing and
outreach programs and specialized officers who work with immigrant
groups. Local agencies have a clear need to foster trust and
cooperation with everyone in these immigrant communities. Assistance
and cooperation from immigrant communities is especially important when
an immigrant, whether documented or undocumented, is the victim of or
witness to a crime. These persons must be encouraged to file reports
and come forward with information. Their cooperation is needed to
prevent and solve crimes and maintain public order, safety, and
security in the whole community. Local police contacts in immigrant
communities are important as well in the area of intelligence gathering
to prevent future terroristic attacks and strengthen homeland security.
Immigration enforcement by local police would likely negatively
effect and undermine the level of trust and cooperation between local
police and immigrant communities. If the undocumented immigrant?s
primary concern is that they will be deported or subjected to an
immigration status investigation, then they will not come forward and
provide needed assistance and cooperation. Distrust and fear of
contacting or assisting the police would develop among legal immigrants
as well. Undoubtedly legal immigrants would avoid contact with the
police for fear that they themselves or undocumented family members or
friends may become subject to immigration enforcement. Without
assurances that contact with the police would not result in purely
civil immigration enforcement action, the hard won trust, communication
and cooperation from the immigrant community would disappear. Such a
divide between the local police and immigrant groups would result in
increased crime against immigrants and in the broader community, create
a class of silent victims and eliminate the potential for assistance
from immigrants in solving crimes or preventing future terroristic
acts.
2) Lack of Resources
The budgets and resources of local police agencies are not
unlimited. Local police agencies struggle every year to find the
resources to police and serve their respective communities. Since the
events of September 11, local agencies have taken on the added duty of
serving as the first line of defense and response to terrorist attacks
for our country. These efforts on the local level to deter and prevent
another terrorist attack and to be prepared to respond to the aftermath
of an attack have stretched local resources even further. Since the
creation of the Homeland Security Department, federal funding for major
city police departments has been greatly reduced. Local agencies have
also had to take on more responsibilities in areas that have
traditionally been handled by the F.B.I. whose investigative resources
are now more focused on counter-terrorism efforts. Local agencies are
forced to fill the gap left by the shift of federal resources away from
investigating white-collar crimes and bank robberies; areas
traditionally handled by federal agencies.
Enforcement of federal immigration laws would be a burden that most
major police agencies would not be able to bear under current resource
levels. The cost in terms of personnel, facilities and equipment
necessary for local agencies to address the 8-12 million illegal
immigrants currently living in the United States would be overwhelming.
The federal government which has primary authority to enforce
immigration laws has itself failed to provide the tremendous amount of
resources necessary to accomplish such enforcement to its own agencies
specifically charged with that responsibility. Local communities and
agencies have even fewer resources to devote to such an effort than the
federal government given all the numerous other demands on local police
departments.
0Local police agencies must meet their existing policing and
homeland security duties and can not even begin to consider taking on
the added burden of immigration enforcement until federal assistance
and funding are in place to support such enforcement. Current calls for
local police agencies to enforce immigration come with no clear
statement or guarantee to provide adequate federal funding. Local
agencies also fear that the call for local enforcement of immigration
laws signals the beginning of a trend towards local police agencies
being asked to enter other areas of federal regulation or enforcement.
3) Complexity of Federal Immigration Law
Federal immigration laws are extremely complicated in that they
involve both civil and criminal aspects. The federal government and its
designated agencies such as I.C.E. and the Department of Justice have
clear authority and responsibility to regulate and enforce immigration
laws. It is these federal agencies who have the authority to determine
if a person will be criminally prosecuted for their violations of
immigration laws or be dealt with through a civil deportation process.
Based on their authority, training, experience and resources available
to them, these federal agencies and the federal courts are in the best
position to determine whether or not a person has entered or remained
in the country in violation of federal regulations and the
applicability of criminal sanctions.
Immigration violations are different from the typical criminal
offenses that patrol officers face every day on their local beats. The
law enforcement activities of local police officers revolve around
crimes such as murder, assaults, narcotics, robberies, burglaries,
domestic violence, traffic violations and the myriad of other criminal
matters they handle on a regular basis. The specific immigration status
of any particular person can vary greatly and whether they are in fact
in violation of the complex federal immigration regulations would be
very difficult if not almost impossible for the average patrol officer
to determine. At this time local police agencies are ill equipped in
terms of training, experience and resources to delve into the
complicated area of immigration enforcement.
4) Lack of Local Authority and State Law Limitations of Authority
The federal government has clear authority over immigration and
immigration enforcement. Federal law does not require the states or
local police agencies to enforce immigration laws nor does it give the
states or local agencies the clear authority to act in the area of
immigration.
Laws in their respective states define the authority of local
police officers. The authority of local police officers to act to
enforce against criminal acts is clear and well established. However,
federal immigration laws include both civil and criminal process to
address immigration violations. It is within the authority of federal
agencies such as I.C.E. and the Department of Justice to determine if
an immigration violation will be dealt with as a criminal matter or
through a civil process. Given the complexity of the immigration laws,
it would be difficult for local police agencies to determine if a
particular violation would result in criminal charges or purely civil
proceedings and regulation. This duality in immigration law creates a
gap in authority for local police officers who generally are limited to
acting only in criminal matters.
In addition state laws may restrict a local police officer?s
authority to act even in criminal matters in such a way that it would
prevent or hinder the officer's ability to investigate, arrest or
detain a person for immigration violations alone. Federal agents are
specifically authorized to stop persons and conduct investigations as
to immigration status without a warrant. Local police officers may be
constrained by local laws that deal with their general police powers
such as the ability to arrest without a warrant, lengths of detention
and prohibitions against racial profiling.
An example of this conflict between the civil nature of immigration
enforcement and the established criminal authority of local police
exists in the federal initiative of placing civil immigration detainer
notices on the N.C.I.C. system. The N.C.I.C. system had previously only
been used to notify law enforcement of strictly criminal warrants and/
or criminal matters. The civil detainers being placed on this system by
federal agencies notify local officers that the detainers are civil in
nature by including a warning that local officers should not act upon
the detainers unless permitted by the laws of their state. This
initiative has created confusion due to the fact that these civil
detainers do not fall within the clear criminal enforcement authority
of local police agencies and in fact lays a trap for unwary officers
who believe them to be valid criminal warrants or detainers.
5) Risk of Civil Liability
In the past, local law enforcement agencies have faced civil
litigation and liability for their involvement in immigration
enforcement. For example, the Katy, Texas Police Department
participated in an immigration raid with federal agents in 1994. A
total of 80 individuals who were detained by the police were later
determined to be either citizens or legal immigrants with permission to
be in the country. The Katy police department faced suits from these
individuals and eventually settled their claims out of court.
Because local agencies currently lack clear authority to enforce
immigration laws, are limited in their ability to arrest without a
warrant, are prohibited from racial profiling and lack the training and
experience to enforce complex federal immigration laws, it is more
likely that local police agencies will face the risk of civil liability
and litigation if they chose to enforce federal immigration laws.
D. M.C.C. NINE (9) POINT POSITION STATEMENT
Based upon a review, evaluation and deliberation regarding the
important and complex issue of local enforcement of federal immigration
laws, the members of M.C.C., who are the 57 Chief Executive Officers of
police departments located within a metropolitan area of more than 1.5
million population and which employs more than 1,000 law enforcement
officers, hereby set forth our consensus position statement, which is
comprised of nine crucial components.
1) SECURE THE BORDERS
Illegal immigration is a national issue and the federal government
should first act to secure the national borders to prevent illegal
entry into the United States. We support further and adequate funding
of the federal agencies responsible for border security and immigration
enforcement so they can accomplish this goal. We also support
consideration of all possible solutions including construction of
border fences where appropriate, use of surveillance technologies and
increases in the number of border patrol agents. Only when the federal
government takes the necessary steps to close the revolving door that
exists at our national borders will it be possible for local police
agencies to even begin to consider dedicating limited local resources
to immigration enforcement.
2) ENFORCE LAWS PROHIBITING THE HIRING OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
The federal government and its agencies should vigorously enforce
existing immigration laws prohibiting employers from hiring illegal
immigrants. Enforcement and prosecution of employers who illegally seek
out and hire undocumented immigrants or turn a blind eye to the
undocumented status of their employees will help to eliminate one of
the major incentives for illegal immigration.
3) CONSULT AND INVOLVE LOCAL POLICE AGENCIES IN DECISION MAKING
Major Cities Chiefs and other representatives of the local law
enforcement community such as the International Association of Chiefs
of Police and local district attorneys and prosecutors should be
consulted and brought in at the beginning of any process to develop a
national initiative to involve local police agencies in the enforcement
of federal immigration laws. The inclusion of local law enforcement at
every level of development would utilize their perspective and
experience in local policing, address their concerns and likely result
in a better program that would be more effectively implemented.
4) COMPLETELY VOLUNTARY
Any initiative to involve local police agencies in the enforcement
of immigration laws should be completely voluntary. The decisions
related to how local law enforcement agencies allocate their resources,
direct their workforce and define the duties of their employees to best
serve and protect their communities should be left in the control of
state and local governments. The decision to enter this area of
enforcement should be left to the local government and not mandated or
forced upon them by the federal government through the threat of
sanctions or the withholding of existing police assistance funding.
5) INCENTIVE BASED APPROACH WITH FULL FEDERAL FUNDING
Any initiative to involve local police agencies in the enforcement
of immigration laws should be an incentive based approach with full
federal funding to provide the necessary resources to the local
agencies that choose to enforce immigration laws. Federal funds should
be available to participating local agencies to cover the costs
associated with enforcement such as expenditures on equipment and
technology, training and educational programs and costs of housing,
caring for and transporting immigrants prior to their release to
federal authorities.
6) NO REDUCTION OR SHIFTING OF CURRENT ASSISTANCE FUNDING
The funding of any initiative to involve local police agencies in
the enforcement of immigration laws should not be at the detriment or
reduction directly or indirectly of any current federal funding or
programs focused on assisting local police agencies with local policing
or homeland security activities. Local police agencies are currently
working on strained budgets and limited resources to meet local
policing needs and strengthening homeland security and in fact need
increased funding and grant assistance in these areas. Merely shifting
or diverting federal funding currently available for local policing and
homeland security activities to any new immigration enforcement
initiative would only result in a detrimental net loss of total
resources available to local police agencies to police their
neighborhoods and strengthen homeland security.
7) CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITY AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
The authority of local police agencies and their officers to become
involved in the enforcement of immigration laws should be clearly
stated and defined. The statement of authority should also establish
liability protection and an immunity shield for police officers and
police agencies that take part in immigration enforcement as authorized
by clear federal legislation.
8) REMOVAL OF CIVIL IMMIGRATION DETAINERS FROM THE N.C.I.C. SYSTEM
Until the borders are secured and vigorous enforcement against
employers who hire illegal immigrants has taken place and the concerns
regarding lack of authority and confusion over the authority of local
agencies to enforce immigration laws and the risk of civil liabilities
are adequately addressed, M.C.C. strongly requests that the federal
agencies cease placing civil immigration detainers on N.C.I.C. and
remove any existing civil detainers currently on the system. The
integrity of the system as a notice system for criminal warrants and/or
criminal matters must be maintained. The inclusion of civil detainers
on the system has created confusion for local police agencies and
subjected them to possible liability for exceeding their authority by
arresting a person upon the basis of a mere civil detainer.
M.C.C. would encourage the federal agencies to seek federal
criminal warrants for any person they have charged criminally with
violations of immigration laws and submit those criminal warrants on
the N.C.I.C. system so the warrants can be acted upon by local police
officers within their established criminal enforcement authority and
training.
9) COMMITMENT OF CONTINUED ENFORCEMNT AGAINST CRIMINAL VIOLATORS
REGARDLESS OF IMMIGRATION STATUS
M.C.C. member agencies are united in their commitment to continue
arresting anyone who violates the criminal laws of their jurisdictions
regardless of the immigration status of the perpetrator. Those
immigrants, documented and/or undocumented, who commit criminal acts
will find no safe harbor or sanctuary from their criminal violations of
the law within any major city but will instead face the full force of
criminal prosecution.
--------------------------
Major Cities Chiefs Association
Sun Valley, Idaho
June 7, 2006
The President of the Major Cities Chiefs Association and Houston,
Texas Police Chief Harold Hurtt announced today the adoption of nine
recommendations for the United States Congress and the President to
assist in resolving the immigration crisis facing America today. The
Major Cities Chiefs Association, comprised of the largest police
agencies in America, are the first responders to over fifty million
residents. We are very concerned that the public policy under
consideration does not take into full account the realities of local
law enforcement in dealing with this issue on the ground. The
foundation of the nine point position statement is five key concerns
with local police enforcing federal immigration law. These concerns
are:
1. It undermines the trust and cooperation with immigrant
communities which are essential elements of community oriented
policing.
2. Local agencies do not possess adequate resources to enforce
these laws in addition to the added responsibility of homeland
security.
3. Immigration laws are very complex and the training required
to understand them would significantly detract from the core
mission of the local police to create safe communities.
4. Local police do not posses clear authority to enforce the
civil aspects of these laws. If given the authority the federal
government does not have the capacity to handle the volume of
immigration violations that currently exist.
5. The lack of clear authority increases the risk of civil
liability for local police and government.
Given these concerns the Major Cities Chiefs are recommending that
Congress and the President adopt the following nine points:
1. Securing the borders must be a top priority.
2. Enforcement of the laws prohibiting the hiring of illegal
immigrants.
3. Consulting and involving local police agencies when
developing any immigration initiative is imperative if the
initiative is to involve local agencies.
4. Federal law must not mandate local enforcement of federal
law--all law enforcement initiatives must be completely
voluntary
5. There should be no reduction or shifting of current federal
funding for state and local programs to pay for new immigration
enforcement activities
6. Any initiative involving local police agencies should be
incentive based
7. The authority and limitation of liability for local law
enforcement officers and police agencies must be clear.
8. Civil immigration detainers must be removed from the NCIC
system
9. MCC members are united in their commitment to continue
arresting anyone who violates the criminal laws of their
jurisdictions regardless of the immigration status of the
perpetrator.
Most local police agencies have adopted policies of not inquiring
about immigration status of individuals that are reporting crimes or in
other encounters unless the person is suspected of committing a crime.
Those policies have developed over the past 25 years because of law
enforcement's commitment to provide protection to everyone within their
jurisdiction and more recently because of state and federal laws
prohibiting racial profiling. In addition, the federal government does
not have the capacity to deal with the estimated 12 million illegal
immigrants in the US today. As Congress and the President wrestle with
these difficult issues it is important that national policy reflect a
clear understanding of the enormous challenges that local police face
in dealing with illegal immigration.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. I thank the chairman.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Congresswoman Lee. And as I made the
point in my comments, that Federal funding that law enforcement
receives right now requires nondiscrimination policies and
practices. If we were to be placed under a mandate, a Federal
mandate to enforce immigration law, then I could foresee the
chief of police having to institute a broad process like we do
with racial profiling so that officers, number one, have to
enforce the immigration law on every person that they come in
contact with. So now, you know, a simple ticket that, you know,
maybe takes 10, 15, 20 minutes to write is now an hour. And
then where do they go to ask the question?
Then that officer has got to not only go through that
process but now he has got to document the fact that he is
enforcing the second law so that he is in compliance with the
first law.
I see that as being entirely impractical for the street
cops to do in the city of Houston because it would be a
disservice to those folks that are needing emergency response
or general police presence in the community.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Chief Hurtt.
Chief Hurtt. Congresswoman, what is being incurred by the
Houston Police Department and other police departments across
the country is a lack of resources to do the job. Right now, as
the council member stated, we are 1,000 members short in the
Houston Police Department. If we took on this issue of doing
enforcement of immigration or just providing normal police
service--because right now in the city of Houston there is
anywhere between 10--to 50,000 to 100,000 undocumented people
believed living here--there are no resources, local or Federal,
for us to provide policing services to that population. We do
that with the resources that we have here.
Now, if we are going to do enforcement, I would need just
1,000 officers to do that. If we are going to do immigration
enforcement, I would need maybe 2,000, 2,500 more officers to
do that enforcement.
So those are the strains that it would put on the system as
well as ICE. In my dealing with ICE and Federal agencies, like
the Chair stated, when you stop people--and if we did stop
everyone and ask them if they are an undocumented individual, I
doubt very seriously the Federal Government would have the
resources to respond and take those people off our hands. I
know they don't have the beds because they have 1,800 beds in
this State and 10,000 in the country. It cannot be done.
Mr. McCaul. The gentlewoman's time has expired. Judge Ted
Poe.
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to get back on the subject. The subject is not
immigration. The subject is not lawful immigration or
immigrants. The subject is crime committed by illegals in the
United States and especially in this area. So, gentlemen, I
want to address that specific issue.
I do want to thank all of you for being here. Councilman
Garcia, you know I am not in your city, but I still call you my
councilman because I appreciate the things you have done. It is
great, with my background and yours, to see people in law
enforcement take the step to go into politics. God bless you,
but I appreciate you doing that and great success I hope in
your future career.
Judge Eckels, how many illegals are there in Harris County?
Judge Eckels. Between 400 and 430 are the best estimates
that we have for this region. Some estimates are on the high
side, but that is the estimate, is that population is at least
430,000.
Mr. Poe. Major O'Brien, I want to specifically ask you, if
you know, of the illegals in the county jail, how many of them,
percentage-wise, are OTM, other than from Mexico.
Mr. O'Brien. Sir, I don't have that, but I do have the
figures that typically 60 percent are Mexican and 20 percent
are South or Central America. So that would leave 20 percent
being from other areas.
Mr. Poe. All right. How about in the State prison system.
Mr. Moriarty. The majority are Mexican descent, of the
Mexican nationality, but I don't have the numbers here.
Judge Eckels. Congressman, just on a percentage basis, if
it reflects the hospital district, where we have a much better
record, it runs just under 10 percent or other than Mexico of
illegal population.
Mr. Poe. Of the people that go through the hospital
district.
Judge Eckels. Hospital system is slightly under 9.5 Mexico
that are other-than-Mexico illegals in the population.
Mr. Poe. It is obvious that local government is now saddled
with the costs of illegal entry into the United States, but, on
the issue of crime, I will ask the chief, if you could help us
solve the problem on the Federal basis, how could the Federal
Government, whose responsibility is border security, the
failure to protect the border allows people to illegally come
into the United States, to stop in Houston, Texas. Why not? And
they commit crimes. How could the Federal Government help you
and the city of Houston to have a safer community.
Mr. Hurtt. Number one, as we talked about probably all
morning, the fact that additional resources, additional
officers--as you know, in the middle 1990s, it was believed
that between 80 to a hundred thousand officers were put on the
streets of America through the COPS program and Federal
funding, and crime went down. That program that put those 80 to
a hundred thousand officers on the streets of America has now
been reduced by 85 percent. A lot of the grant has been
eliminated. And we understand that a lot of that money has to
go to Federal agencies for homeland security and support the
war. We are very supportive of that. But, at the same time, we
have forgotten about the needs of the State and local law
enforcement. Because we are battling the gangs, we are battling
the drugs, we are battling the alcoholism and the same problems
that we had in the 1990s, and if you ask me what do we need, we
need financial assistance from the Federal Government.
Mr. Poe. Last question to Councilman Garcia. With your
extensive background being with gangs over the years, explain
to me, if you would, how failure to secure the borders has
promoted gang activity here in the Houston area, if it has.
Mr. Garcia. There has been an impact in MS-13 and other
criminal street gangs that have come from various parts of
Latin America as well as from Europe and Asia and other
countries.
Mr. Poe. For the record, MS-13 originated in what country.
Mr. Garcia. In El Salvador.
Mr. Poe. Go ahead.
Mr. Garcia. The challenge is, one, that we do a great job
arresting these guys when they are gang banging on our streets.
The problem that I have seen firsthand in my travels
through Guatemala, as an example, is that when we deport them
we are deporting them to a third-rate law enforcement, you
know, entity in those respective countries. They don't have a
handle with them. So the fact that you have poor border
security and you have an active deportation process, all you
are doing is creating a place where they can rest up, get going
again and come right back. It just has empowered the overall
subculture of the criminal street gang network.
So it is important that good border security be present,
obviously, but it is also important through our programs like
easy tap that we make sure that agencies in other countries
that we are funding are being given the expertise, the
resources, the equipment to make sure that they are handling
and can handle these violent individuals when they are deported
back home.
What I have just seen is they get back--it took me 30 days
to convince the National Police of Guatemala to take me into
some of their ghettos. Because they don't patrol them. They are
afraid; and after about an hour there, I understood why. I
wanted to get out of there myself.
So there are challenges, and it does perpetuate one to the
other.
Mr. Poe. Thank y'all once again.
Judge Eckels. Congressman, one number that you asked for I
did find here. Of all defendants of both misdemeanor and felony
trials who were non-U.S. citizens, 60.4 percent were born in
Mexico. 67 percent, about two-thirds of those from Mexico, were
in Harris County illegally, which will make that about half of
the total number of non--U.S. citizens legally and illegally.
Mr. Poe. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, and Ms. Jackson-Lee has appealed to
the Chair for 30 seconds. I will grant that, but hold your feet
to the fire.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Thank you. Your generosity is
overwhelming. That is how Texans work together. There are two
gentlemen over there and one is holding on.
Mr. McCaul. Your 30 seconds is expiring.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Let me just ask a direct question to Chief
Hurtt. We understand that the Governor has asked for a hundred
million dollars, again, out of very paltry State funds, to go
to the border and is needed, but what effect does that have on
you? Do you understand any of those funds will come to you for
immigration work and law enforcement or is that, as we say,
borrowing from Peter to pay Paul?
Chief Hurtt. To my knowledge, none of that fund is directed
to the city of Houston for law enforcement purposes.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask
unanimous consent to impose into the record the Secure America
9/11 Commission security recommendations report that has been
authored by the minority of Homeland Security.
I would ask unanimous consent--
Mr. McCaul. Without objection.
[The information is maintained in the committee file.]
Ms. Jackson-Lee. I ask unanimous consent that an Effective
Criminal Justice Coalition University Leadership Initiative be
added to the record.
Mr. McCaul. Without objection, so ordered.
[The information is maintained in the committee file.]
Ms. Jackson-Lee. I ask, finally, the 9/11 report by the 9/
11 Commission that has given F's to risk-based homeland
security funding, meaning that cities like Houston have been
deprived of homeland security based on risk, I ask unanimous
consent that be added.
Mr. McCaul. Without objection.
[The information is maintained in the committee file.]
Mr. McCaul. The gentlewoman's time has expired, I believe.
I just wanted to end on the note that when--I worked in the
Attorney General's office, and the presence of gangs, MS-13,
Mexican Mafia, many of whom are illegal not only on the streets
but, as you know, in TDCJ and the prison system and they work
very actively there and they are a threat.
I want to thank the witnesses for appearing here today.
Your testimony has been very insightful and very helpful to
this committee.
With that having been said, I will excuse the witnesses and
call our third panel.
[Recess.]
Mr. McCaul. The committee will now come to order.
We have our third and last panel. I want to thank the
witnesses for being here. We are going to try to keep our
comments limited, but we understand we have a couple of
personal stories that I want you to take your time with that
and not feel restrained time-wise.
Mr. McCaul. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Steven Stone,
Texas State trooper, to testify.
STATEMENT OF STEVEN MICHAEL STONE, TEXAS STATE TROOPER
Mr. Stone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and committee members,
for allowing me to share my story with you; and I will try to
paraphrase as much as possible.
On March 22, 2006, I conducted what started out to be a
routine traffic stop in Smith County. I stopped a pickup truck
for speeding. Initially, the pickup truck did not want to stop,
continued for some distance before doing so.
When the vehicle finally pulled over to the shoulder of the
roadway, I walked up and observed two Hispanic males inside the
pickup truck. These Hispanic males were identified as Ramon
Ramos and Francisco Saucedo at a later time.
I asked Ramos to exit the vehicle. In doing so, I found an
open container of alcohol in the vehicle. Further investigation
was conducted, and Ramos was found have a small bundle of
marijuana contained in his coat.
As Ramos was being placed under arrest, Saucedo began to
exit the vehicle. Saucedo was instructed twice to get back in
the vehicle. However, he continued to exit and was not
compliant.
Saucedo was again instructed for a third time to get back
into the vehicle. At this time, I felt threatened and drew my
weapon and pointed it at him. It was at this time that I heard
gunshots and felt an intense pain in my left shoulder. My
vision had gone black, but I could still hear myself yelling
and sounds of more gunshot.
When I regained my vision, I was lying in a ditch looking
up at Mr. Ramos, and Mr. Saucedo shooting down at me. I
attempted to fire back at Ramos and Saucedo, but I was unable
to do so. Ramos and Saucedo fired numerous rounds down into the
ditch where I was lying before jumping in their vehicle and
driving off, leaving me for dead.
I had been hit two or three times in the neck, two times in
the chest, one time in the left side of my back. One of the
bullets that hit me in the chest rode just under the skin and
exited near my neck. The bullet that went into my back
fractured my shoulder blade and shattered my collarbone before
exiting the top of my left shoulder. Despite these injuries, I
was able to make my way back to my patrol vehicle and radio for
help. I was able to give a brief description of the suspect
vehicle and its direction of travel.
When backup arrived, I was transported to the hospital by a
Smith County sheriff's deputy in a patrol car.
While I was being transported to the hospital, Tyler Police
Department, with the help of a Tyler citizen, were able to
begin pursuing the suspect vehicle. Ramos and Saucedo led Tyler
police units on a high-speed chase through the city of Tyler.
Ramos and Saucedo shot at pursuing police units with automatic
gunfire with total disregard for the officers or the civilians
who sat innocently in their cars as the pursuit passed by.
The pursuit ended when the suspects lost control of their
vehicle and collided with another vehicle on the shoulder of
the roadway. Ramos and Saucedo were both charged with 14 counts
of aggravated assault on a public servant.
Ramon Ramos just recently pled guilty to all 14 counts and
was charged with two life sentences to be served consecutively.
Investigation showed that Ramos had been criminally deported
from the United States on two different occasions prior to this
on Federal weapon and drug charges. Ramos had been living
illegally in the United States for approximately 3 to 4 years
prior to the 22nd of March 2006.
On the night of the shooting, Ramos and his partner were in
possession of body armor, a rifle modified for automatic fire,
a handgun modified for automatic fire, two or more handguns,
numerous knives, drugs and alcohol; and, at the time of this
report, Mr. Saucedo still has not gone to trial.
Mr. McCaul. Sir, I want to thank you for your testimony,
your service to this State, your courage in what you did and
your courage to come before us here today and testify; and we
are very glad you are here to testify.
Mr. Stone. Thank you, sir.
[The statement of Mr. Stone follows:]
Prepared Statement Steven Stone
On March 22, 2006 I conducted what started out to be a routine
traffic stop. I had stopped a blue pickup truck on TX 31 in Smith
County for speeding. The pickup was occupied by two Hispanic males who
were later identified as Ramon Ramos and Francisco Saucedo. After
asking Ramos to exit the vehicle an open container of alcohol was found
in the front seat of the pickup. Further investigation was conducted
and Ramos was found to have a small bundle of Marijuana inside one of
his coat pockets. As Ramos was being placed under arrest, Saucedo began
exiting the vehicle. Saucedo was instructed twice to get back into the
vehicle; however, he continued exiting the vehicle.
Saucedo was again instructed to get back into the vehicle; however,
this time, I drew my duty weapon and pointed it at him. It was at this
time that I heard gun shots and felt an intense pain in my left
shoulder. My vision had gone black, but I could still hear myself
yelling and the sounds of more gun shots. When I regained my vision I
was lying at the bottom of a drainage ditch and was looking up at Ramos
and Saucedo, but was unable to do so. Ramos and Saucedo fired numerous
rounds down into the ditch where I was lying before jumping into their
vehicle and driving off; leaving me for dead.
I had been hit two or three times in the neck, two times in the
chest, and one time in the left side of my back. One of the bullets
that hit me in the chest rode just under the skin and exited near my
neck. The bullet that went into my back fractured my shoulder blade and
shattered my collar bone before exiting the top of my left shoulder.
Despite these injuries I was able to make my way back to my patrol
vehicle and radio for help. I was able to give a brief description of
the suspect vehicle and its direction of travel. When backup arrived, I
was transported to the hospital in the back of a Smith County Sheriff's
patrol car.
While I was being transported to the hospital, Tyler Police
Department, with the help of a Tyler citizen, had begun pursuing the
suspect vehicle. Ramos and Saucedo lead Tyler Police units on a high
speed chase throughout the city of Tyler. Ramos and Saucedo shot at
pursuing police units with automatic gun fire with total disregard for
the officers or the innocent civilians that sat innocently in their
vehicles as the pursuit passed by. The pursuit ended when the suspects
lost control of their vehicle and collided with another vehicle on the
shoulder of the roadway. Ramos and Saucedo were both charged with 14
counts of aggravated assault on a public servant.
Ramon Ramos just recently pled guilty to all 14 counts and was
charged with two life sentences to be served consecutively.
Investigation showed that Ramos had been criminally deported from the
United States on two different occasions because of federal weapon and
drug offenses. Ramos had been living illegally in the United States for
approximately 3 to 4 years prior to March 22, 2006. On the night of the
shooting, Ramos and his partner were in possession of body armor, a
rifle modified for automatic fire, a handgun modified for automatic
fire, two or more handguns, numerous knives, drugs and alcohol.
At the time of this report, Saucedo has not been to trial.
Mr. McCaul. Next, the Chair now recognizes Mrs. Carrie Ruiz
for her testimony.
STATEMENT OF CARRIE RUIZ
Mrs. Ruiz. Thank you for having us here today.
This is my husband Lucio, and we are the parents of 17-
year-old Felicia Ruiz. She was murdered October 30, 1999, by an
illegal alien from Venezuela who had been here since he was 4
years old. His mother, Stella Rosa Salazar, is still here in
the U.S., right here in Houston illegally; and she helped him.
She sent his passport to Miami, Florida, after he murdered our
daughter where he went, and some friends had it there, and they
gave his passport to him. His father flew down from Venezuela,
picked him up and took him back. He left Houston on November
17.
Felicia was murdered October 30, and we buried her November
3rd. She was ambushed by Salazar and Felisa Muerta and J. Lewis
Ferrill. She was beaten, her throat was cut, and she was
stabbed over 39 times. She was our only daughter and our pride
and joy, and she was a good-hearted girl. She never bothered
anybody. She loved to talk on the phone. She had a lot of
friends.
But Salazar and Muerta wanted her to join a gang, and she
refused to do that. She also helped the gang task force
officers by ID'ing a gang member, and in the process some way
it got back. It got back to Salazar and them, and they murdered
her for that reason, for retaliation.
So, you know, it is been real tough on my husband and I.
And what we don't understand is that Salazar had been here
since he was 4 years old, and he spoke very good English, but
nobody knew that he was from Venezuela. When he was taken down
to homicide and questioned after he killed Felicia, he had cuts
and bruises and things on his hands, and they took a picture of
it, and they took a picture of him, and they took his
statement, and then they let him go. They didn't ask him if he
was a citizen, American citizen or where he was from. They had
no way of knowing that.
When he walked out that door, he was gone. About a week or
so later, the murder warrant came out on him; and he was
already gone. He had already left for Venezuela.
It is just--it has been--it is just something that my
husband and I, we don't understand. I mean, we all know about
Venezuela. We all know that Chavez and the United States don't
mix. We all know that. We know everything about that. But the
bottom line is, if these illegals are going to come into the
country, come into America from Venezuela or El Salvador or
wherever they come from and there is a no extradition to these
countries, then if they commit felony murder here like Salazar
did and then they go back to their countries to hide, to avoid
prosecution, then the government needs to step in.
There should be some kind of clause with these countries
with these no extradition laws so that the American authorities
can go in there and get these criminals and bring them back to
stand trial for murder here in the U.S.
Because they are protected here. Their rights are protected
here. Then they commit murder, they go back to their country,
and then they are protected there. So where is the justice for
the victim? Where is the justice for my daughter, for our
daughter and for all the other families who have had children
or loved ones murdered by illegal aliens? Where is the justice?
Because there is not any.
It has been 7 years--going on 7 years, and Salazar has been
in Venezuela. The FBI knows he is over there. They have been
keeping up with him. But we finally had to turn to Congressman
Green to help us because we were getting nowhere. The FBI
couldn't find ways to get him. There was no extradition, you
know, and so we finally asked him to help us. So he got with
the Ambassador of Venezuela, and the Ambassador of Venezuela
told him that there is a 1922 treaty with the United States and
Venezuela that is still in effect, the document that they
needed to try to bring Salazar out of there.
But we have had everybody, the homicide detectives, FBI,
everybody involved in this. Except one person has refused to
help us, and that is our own district attorney, Chuck
Rosenthal, and why I can't figure it out. His reasoning does
not make any sense to our family.
Even the district attorney on our daughter's case that
handled the trial agreed to give the Ambassador of Venezuela
all the documents he needed, agreed to go along with it. But
Chuck Rosenthal overruled him and refused to let that happen
because he said that it would show favoritism, you know, for us
to be able to get him back and him only do 30 years because
Venezuelan law requires that he would be able to only do 30
years.
We weren't happy with that. We didn't like the fact that
Salazar could only get 30 years, but we were willing to accept
it because we would rather see him in a Texas prison answering
for what he did to Felicia instead of being over there living
his life and never answering for it, and if we don't do
something now we may never get him back.
So, you know, it is tough. We love her. We miss her. We
think about her every day. I think about the pain and the fear
she went through.
I think about the three people being on top of her that
night. I think about Salazar hit her so hard that they said her
feet flew up in the air, and she landed in a fetal position.
And when she came to, she tried--she fought like hell to stay
alive, but she couldn't because there were three of them on top
of her. Muerta was cutting her throat and Salazar grabbed a
knife and he stabbed her and stabbed her until I guess he got
tired of stabbing her.
They went to walk away, and when they looked back, her body
must have moved or jumped, and they went back and flipped her
over, and they kept standing on her until she stopped moving.
And then they walked away like it was nothing, and they left
her in that cold, empty field.
Yes, the borders need to be secure; and, yes, you need to
do something about this. All these illegals over here, all you
hear about, oh, they are so good for the economy, so good for
this. But what about the ones that come over here and they
don't get jobs and they do commit violent crimes and the first
thing they do is dash back over to where they come from? They
want to reap all the benefits from the U.S., but at the time,
when they commit felony murder or something, then they want to
run back and be protected in their countries, and that is
wrong.
Not all of them are over here to get a good job and to work
and support their families. There is lot of them over here that
do come and commit violent crimes, and it is wrong, and we do
need to do something about it.
We need Congressman Green's help and everybody's to be able
to get Salazar back.
What about his mom? I mean, I would like to know why she is
still walking these streets when she helped him leave here,
when she aided and abetted him in this homicide by helping him
get out of the country. INS don't pick them up. They don't do
anything. They haven't gotten her. She always stays a step
ahead of the detective, every time, when they try to find her.
When they do finally catch up with her, she moves on somewhere
else.
It is tough, and I am sorry I was crying, but it just makes
it makes me and my husband so upset because we want justice for
our daughter. We are not satisfied with just the two that are
in prison. We want Salazar brought back here and for him to
answer for what he did to Felicia.
This was a retaliation killing. She was a beautiful young
girl with a lot of hopes and dreams. My husband will never get
to walk her down the aisle, will never get to see her have
grandkids, all the things that we looked forward to when we get
old. He took all of that away from us, and he took everything
away from her and that is wrong.
He should not be allowed to be protected by Venezuelan law.
You know, like I said, he was here since he was 4 years old,
and nobody ever knew. He went to school here. Hell, he spoke
better English than I do, you know.
And what they say, the police officers can't stop and ask
them and all the kind of stuff and it takes so much time to do
that. Well, you know what? Hey, okay, but what if one of these
people they are stopping is wanted for a violent murder here in
the U.S.? What? You just going to let them go because you are
not going to bother to ask who they are or where they are from?
So I don't know. It is hard.
Mr. McCaul. Let me express my heartfelt sympathy on behalf
of myself and the committee for what you had to go through. As
a father of four daughters, I can't imagine the pain that you
must be experiencing every day, and you are a victim every day
when you have to remember this. That is why I thank you for
coming forward to testify to tell your story. It takes a lot of
courage.
Mrs. Ruiz. We appreciate it very much. I am sorry about
crying and everything, but I just--you know, she was a
beautiful girl, and I just want everybody to see what they took
away from us.
Mr. McCaul. Let me also pledge my support to assist you in
bringing Mr. Salazar to justice.
Mrs. Ruiz. Thank you.
Mr. McCaul. I know I speak for the other members standing
here as well. Thank you for coming forward.
Mr. McCaul. Next, the Chair now recognizes Mr. Dennis
Nixon, the chairman of the International Bank of Commerce.
STATEMENT OF DENNIS E. NIXON, CHAIRMAN, INTERNATIONAL BANK OF
COMMERCE
Mr. Nixon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
committee.
My name is Dennis Nixon. I am CEO and chairman of the
International Bank of Commerce, also known as IBC Bank. I am
also a resident of Laredo, Texas, a city on our southern border
where I have lived and worked for 36 years.
Today, I am also speaking as chairman of the Alliance for
Security and Trade, a Texas-based coalition that is focusing on
improving the security of our country while helping ensure the
free flow of business and commerce, protecting American jobs,
and thus ensuring our prosperity.
There has been a lot of discussion here today on the crime
and violence that is associated with illegal immigration. There
is no doubt that we have problems along the borders, as well as
the interior of this State and the country.
I believe that in order to make any headway in reducing
crime caused by illegal immigrants, we need to reduce the
number of immigrants who enter this country illegally. That may
sound simplistic and obvious, but the problem lies in our
search for solutions. Illegal immigration is not a border
issue. It is a national issue.
Those who are focused on enforcement only, a feel-good
security solution, are doing this country more harm by pushing
an agenda that sounds warm and fuzzy but, in reality, undercuts
our economy and makes us more vulnerability. The build-a-wall-
and-throw-them-out mentality is, in essence, a denial of
admission agenda that is anti-immigrant, antitourist and
anticommerce.
We cannot continue to abuse our neighboring countries
through excessive border security, sending a ``don't come''
message when all these visitors want to do is spend money and
add value to our economy. We live in a global economy, and we
must recognize that we cannot continue our prosperity by
isolating ourselves from the world and abusing the
relationships that have been built over the last several
decades. NAFTA has been a huge success. We don't want to turn
back on the enormous value that this agreement has added to our
economy and our quality of life.
If security and terrorism is the real concern, then why
should we treat the northern and southern border differently?
It makes no sense to focus all our attention on the southern
border and leave the Canadian border insecure. After all, the
Canadian border is twice as long as the southern border and has
represented more terrorist threats in the past than the
southern border.
Considering how far apart the House and Senate are on this
issue, will we ever find the sweet spot that solves the problem
and is acceptable to all parties involved? I believe the answer
can be found in connecting the dots.
We know that approximately 5--to 600,000 people enter this
country illegally each year. Setting arbitrary caps on the
number of workers will not reduce the flow of illegal
immigrants. Employer sanctions won't solve the problem. They
will keep coming, because our economy creates a need for their
work. Failure to recognize this need makes the consequences
clear: continued illegal immigration, stagnation resulting from
tight labor markets, more outsourcing because businesses will
go where the labor is, and ensuring an underclass of illegal
workers.
What is our goal here? Is it to apprehend the criminals or
prevent the crimes from ever occurring? As long as our focus is
on enforcement, not prevention, the cycle will never end unless
we start treating the problem and not just the symptom.
A Border Patrol officer's worst nightmare is that a 9/11-
type terrorist will slip into this country under his or her
watch. The scenario is possible if we spend all of our time
chasing down people who come here to wash dishes and mow lawns
so they can feed their families.
Let us route those who want to come here through legal
channels and by doing so we can weed out the criminals. That
way the only ones crossing the border illegally are more likely
to be the ones that mean us harm. This will allow our Border
Patrol to make better use of their resources and catch the bad
guys.
There has been a lot of talk about Laredo and other border
communities during these hearings across the country, much of
which has been mischaracterized and misunderstood. We have
crime like any other city, and no one disputes the violence
across the border. But contrary to what you heard about Laredo,
Texas, it is not a war zone. It is not high noon, and we are
not at the OK corral. I feel just as safe walking downtown near
our bank headquarters five blocks north of the border as I do
at my ranch, which is eight miles north of the Rio Grande.
We cannot allow a few opportunistic law enforcement
officials to mischaracterize the problems any more than we can
say no border at all. All things in life work best with proper
balance.
Workers are coming to this country because our economy
would collapse without people to fill the vacant jobs. Across
this country, we are experiencing labor shortages that are
about to get worse if we don't got the problem fixed.
Our national unemployment rate is 4.8 percent, one of the
lowest levels in our Nation's history. For all practical
purposes, we are at full employment in this country; and that
includes all of the employed unauthorized workers.
This tight labor market makes it difficult for many
businesses to find good workers. Across this country we have
jobs that are going unfilled, and I can say without hesitation
the problem exists at IBC Bank. We have a large number of
authorized positions we have not been able to fill.
Recently, Florida citrus growers announced that many of
their groves may go unharvested because of the scarcity of
workers there.
Several weeks ago, an Oklahoma saddle maker lost 50 of his
75 employees in a raid by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
This is one of Sulphur, Oklahoma's, largest employers.
If the workers were hired with forged documents, then we
clearly need a system that people with expertise in saddle
making don't need to have expertise in verifying documents.
This system must be accurate, fast and efficient. If the saddle
maker knowingly hired illegal workers, then that is wrong, and
he broke the law. Either way, it proves that workers are hard
to come by in this tight labor market, and we need an
immigration system with a guest worker program that works.
Destroying this business has done no one any good.
Business will go where the labor is, and if we don't want
jobs to go south of the border or overseas through outsourcing
then we must be willing to import enough workers to keep the
jobs here. We can't have it both ways, and as a country we need
to make up our mind which direction we are going.
The country needs a stable workforce so that business can
grow, prosper and create more jobs. However, hurdles lie ahead
that could prevent a stable workforce.
The baby boomers are on the leading edge of retirement, and
it is estimated that over the next 10 to 20 years 82 million
baby boomers will retire and be replaced by 67 million new
workers, resulting in a shortage of 15 million workers.
At the same time, the U.S. fertility rate is projected to
fall below replacement level; and in a report released last
November to Congress, the Congressional Budget Office made it
patently clear that unless native fertility rates increase most
of the growth in the U.S. labor force will come from
immigration by the middle of the century.
The failure to provide enough workers to satisfy our demand
for labor means many businesses will be forced to fight for the
small pool of available native workers by bidding up wages.
That will have significant and long-lasting consequences for
our economy, including stagnation at some point. Because our
population continues to age, and when the baby boomers retire
and our native fertility rates decline, we will increasingly
run short of willing and able workers. This action will likely
force many companies to outsource their jobs in order to grow
their business, but many who have no choice will suffer extreme
hardship in terms of accomplishing their business goals. The
hotel, food service, construction, and agricultural industries
are just a few that will suffer as a result of their inability
to find workers in such a tight labor market.
Across Texas, police departments in cities like San Antonio
and Dallas and Houston are facing manpower shortages as
positions go unfilled. I foresee a similar situation with our
Armed Forces. A tight labor market will cause a ripple effect
in the economy, including competitive pressure that could mean
young Americans might be more likely to choose a job in the
private sector instead of one in the military, resulting in
reinstitution of the draft.
One way to stop illegal immigration is to relieve the
pressure on the border by creating a guest worker program that
will supply us the workers we need, bring them through legal
channels, and help us keep better track of who is in this
country and why.
When we installed fences in southern California, we treated
the symptoms. While illegal crossings decreased in the urban
areas, overall illegal immigration continued to increase. In
the end, we diverted immigrants from safe crossing points only
to watch them die in the desert. In the process, we destroyed
circularity. People no longer come and go. They stay in the
United States, and they bring their families.
Let's not make the same mistake in our approach to fixing
the immigration system. An enforcement-only approach will only
continue to encourage illegal immigrants to go around the
system or stay in the shadows.
I believe Mayor Bloomberg said it best. ``It is as if we
expect border control agents to do what a century of communism
could not: defeat the natural market forces of supply and
demand and defeat the natural human desire for freedom and
opportunity.''
That is why we must focus on the problem, which is making
sure we provide enough workers to supply the labor demand that
will keep our country strong. That will result in a reduction
in crime and give our law enforcement agencies the time to hunt
down the bad guys, instead of spending a disproportionate
amount of their time looking for the next generation of
construction workers.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Nixon.
[The statement of Mr. Nixon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dennis E. Nixon
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my name is Dennis and I am
the CEO and Chairman of International Bank of Commerce, also known as
IBC Bank. I'm also a resident of Laredo, Texas, a city on our Southern
Border where I have lived and worked for 36 years.
Today, I am also as chairman of the Alliance for Security and
Trade--a Texas-based coalition that is focused improving security
efforts of our country, while helping ensure the free flow of business
and commerce, protecting American jobs, and thus assuring our
prosperity.
There has been a lot of discussion here today on the crime and
violence that are associated with illegal immigration. There is no
doubt that we have problems along our borders as well as in the
interior of this state and country.
I believe that in order to make headway in reducing crime caused by
illegal immigrants, we need to reduce the number of immigrants who
enter this country illegally. That may sound simplistic and obvious,
but the problem lies in search for solutions. Illegal immigration is
not a border issue, it's a national issue that emanates deep from
within the heartland.
Those who are focused on an enforcement-only, a feel-good security
solution, are doing this more harm by pushing an agenda that sounds
warm and fuzzy, but in reality, undercuts our economy making us more
vulnerable.
The ``build-a-wall and throw-them out'' mentality is in essence
a``denial-of-admission agenda'' that is anti-immigrant, anti-tourist,
and anti-commerce.
We can not continue to abuse our neighboring countries through
excessive border security sending a ``don't come'' message when all
these visitors want to do is spend money and add value to our economy.
We live in a global economy and we must realize that we can not
continue our prosperity by isolating ourselves from the world and
abusing the relationships that have been built over the last several
decades. NAFTA has been a huge success, we don't want to turn our back
on the enormous value that this agreement has added to our economy and
our quality of life.
If security and terrorism is the real concern, then we should treat
the Northern and Southern Border the same. It makes no sense to focus
all our attention on the Southern Border and leave the Canadian Border
insecure. After all, the Canadian Border is twice as long as the
Southern Border and has represented more of a terrorists' threat in
past than the Southern Border.
Considering how far apart the House and Senate are on this on this
issue, will we ever find the sweet spot that solves the problem and is
acceptable to all parties involved?
I believe the answer can be found in connecting the dots.
We know that approximately five to six hundred thousand people
enter this country illegally each year. Setting arbitrary caps on the
number of workers won't reduce the flow of illegal immigrants. Employer
sanctions won't solve the problem. They will keep coming because our
economy creates a need for their labor. Failure to recognize this need
and create a program that works makes the consequences clear:
Continued illegal immigration;
Stagnation from a tight labor market; and
More outsourcing because business will go to where the
labor is.
Insuring an underclass of illegal workers
What is our goal here? Is it to apprehend the criminals? Or prevent
the crimes from ever occurring? As long as our focus is on enforcement
and not prevention, the cycle will never end unless we start treating
the problem--and not just the symptom.
A border patrol officer's worst nightmare is that a 9/11-type
terrorist will slip into this country under his or her watch. That
scenario is possible if they spend all of their time chasing down
people who are coming here to wash dishes and mow lawns so they can
feed their families.
Let us route those who want to come here--through legal channels
and by doing so, we can weed out the criminals. That way, the ones
crossing the border illegally are more likely to be the ones that mean
us harm. This allow our border patrol to make better use of their
resources to catch the bad quys.
There has been a lot of talk about Laredo and other border
communities during these hearings across country--much of which has
been mischaracterized or misunderstood. We have crime like any other
city, and no one disputes the violence across the border, but contrary
to what you may have heard--Laredo Texas is not a war zone. It is not
high noon and we are not at the O-K Corral. I feel just just as safe
walking downtown near our bank headquarters five blocks north of the
border, as I do at my ranch eight miles north of the Rio Grande.
We cannot allow a few opportunistic law enforcement officials to
mischaracterize the problems anymore than we can say we need no border
security at all. All things in life work best with proper balance.
Workers are coming to this country because our economy would
collapse without people to fill vacant jobs. Across this country, we
are experiencing labor shortages that are about to get worse if we
don't fix the problem.
Our national unemployment rate is 4.8 percent, one of the lowest
levels in our nation's history. For all practical purposes, we are at
full employment in this country and that includes all of the employed
unauthorized workers.
This tight labor market it difficult for many businesses to find
good workers. Across this country we have jobs that are going unfilled
and I can say without hesitation, that problem exists at IBC Bank--we
have a large number of authorized positions we have not been able to
fill.
Recently, Florida citrus growers announced that many of their
groves may go unharvested because of the scarcity of workers there.
Several weeks ago, an Oklahoma saddle maker lost 50 of his 75
employees in a raid by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This was
one of Sulphur, Oklahoma's largest employers. If the workers were hired
with forged documents, then we clearly need a system so that people
with expertise in making saddles do not need expertise in verifying
documents. That system must be accurate, fast and efficient.
If the saddle maker knowingly hired illegal workers, then that was
wrong and he broke the law. Either way, it proves that workers are hard
to come by in this tight labor market, and we need an immigration
system with a guest worker program that works. Destroying this business
does no one any good.
As I mentioned, business will go to where the labor is and if we
don't want jobs to go south of the border or overseas through
outsourcing, then we must be willing to import enough workers to keep
the jobs here. We can't have it both ways, and as a country, we need to
make up our mind.
The country needs a stable work force so that businesses can grow,
prosper and create more jobs. However, hurdles lie ahead that could
prevent that stable work force.
The baby boomers are on the leading edge of retirement and it is
estimated that over the next 10 to 20 years, 82 million baby boomers
will retire and be replaced by 67 million new workers, resulting in a
shortage of 15 million workers.
At the same time, the U.S. fertility rate is projected to fall
below ``replacement'' level. And in a report released last November to
Congress, The Congressional Budget Office made it patently clear that
``Unless native fertility rates increase. . . .most of the growth in
the U.S. labor force will come from immigration by the middle of the
century,"
European fertility rates have been steadily falling for the past
two decades. In countries like Spain and Italy, one-child families are
getting closer to being the norm. That means the growth of our labor
force is going to come from immigrants, and the children of immigrants
from this hemisphere.
The failure to provide enough workers to satisfy our demand for
labor means many businesses will be forced to fight for the small pool
of available native workers by bidding up wages. That will have
significant long lasting consequences for our economy, including
stagnation at some point because as our population continues to age,
the baby boomers retire and our native fertility rates decline, we will
increasingly run short of willing and able workers.
This action will likely force many companies to outsource their
jobs in order to grow there business, but many who have no choice will
suffer extreme hardship in terms of accomplishing their business goals.
The hotel, food service, construction and agricultural industries are
just a few that suffer as a result of their inability to find workers
in such a tight labor market.
Across Texas, police departments in cities like San Antonio, Dallas
and Houston are facing manpower shortages as positions go unfilled.
Police officials in those cities cite the perfect storm of baby-boom
retirements combined with a younger generation that is shying away from
police work.
I foresee a similar situation with our armed services. A tight
labor market will cause a ripple effect in the economy including
competitive pressure that could mean young Americans might be more
likely to choose a job in the private sector over one in the military.
And if the military can't sign up enough volunteers with carrots,
it might resort to sticks and bring back the draft as a way to ensure
our armed services are adequately staffed.
An enforcement-only approach that limits migration in the name of
homeland security could very well be what poses the greatest threat to
our volunteer military.
The United States has always been a super power because of our
economic stability and strength. After all, the best homeland security
is economic security.
That's why it's so important we get this right.
One way to stop illegal immigration is to relieve pressure on the
border by creating a guest worker program will supply us the workers we
need, bring them through legal channels, and help us keep better track
of who is in this country and why.
When we installed fences in Southern California, we treated a
symptom. While illegal crossings decreased in the urban areas, overall
illegal immigration continued to increase. In the end, we diverted
immigrants from safe crossing points only to watch them die in the
desert. In the process, we destroyed circularity. People no longer come
and go--they stay in the U.S. and they bring their families.
Let's not make that same mistake in our approach to fixing the
immigration system. An enforcement-only approach will only continue to
encourage illegal immigrants to go around the system or stay in the
shadows.
I believe Mayor Bloomberg said it best. ``It's as if we expect
border control agents to do what a century of communism could not:
defeat natural market forces of supply and demand and defeat the
natural human desire for freedom and opportunity.''
That's why we must focus on the problem, is making sure we provide
enough workers to supply the labor demand that will keep our country
strong. That will result in a reduction in crime and give our law
enforcement agencies the time to hunt down the bad guys instead of
spending a disproportionate amount of their time looking for the next
generation of construction workers.
Thank you.
Mr. McCaul. The Chair now recognizes a good friend, Jaime
Esparza, the District Attorney from El Paso.
STATEMENT OF JAIME ESPARZA, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, EL PASO, TEXAS
Mr. Esparza. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I
appreciate the opportunity to speak to you.
Let me first applaud you for allowing the victims of crime
to speak just before me. As a prosecutor and, I know, judge,
you have seen this as well, that voice is not heard loud enough
in our Texas courtrooms. So I am very glad that you allowed
that to happen, and I am proud to sit with them here at the
table.
With all due respect to Trooper Stone and Mr. And Mrs.
Ruiz, I am going to take a different perspective, though,
because I would like to talk to you a little bit about El Paso
and my view of the world.
I appreciate this opportunity to address you today
regarding criminal activity and violence along the southern
border. My perspective comes from being the chief State
prosecutor for 14 years of a large county jurisdiction, three-
county jurisdiction, along the U.S.-Mexico border. It is
estimated that between 2.1 to 2.4 million people inhabit the El
Paso-Juarez borderplex. Approximately 1.65 million of those
reside in the Ciudad de Juarez, Chihuahua.
There are over a hundred thousand legal crossings into the
U.S. through El Paso area bridges each day, resulting in
approximately 35 million crossings per year. El Paso's
population almost doubles on a daily basis with those people
from Juarez crossing to shop, study, worship, visit and work.
This nuance makes the city unlike any other cities in Texas
in that it is a primary corridor for the flow of goods and
services. The ebb and flow of these populations presents a
unique and direct set of challenges for law enforcement and
prosecutors in the region.
The millions of annual crossings might suggest a like
criminal activity, but based on national comparisons of
criminal activity on the U.S. side of the El Paso-Juarez
borderplex, El Paso is consistently ranked as one of the three
top safest cities for a city of its size in the Nation.
Currently, we are the second safest city in the country for a
city our size.
It is a mistake to equate this distinction with the
conclusion that the border is not violent. While the city of El
Paso side of the border had three narcotics-related homicides
from 2003 to 2005, the Ciudad Juarez side of the same border
had 260 narcoexecutions during the same period. For the rest of
the border, my jurisdiction, which is primarily desolate and
sparsely populated, the Border Patrol is probably the best
source for firsthand information, confirming the violent
conditions that exist there. The most extreme and frequent
violence, though, I believe is attributable to the drug trade.
As many recognize, the Texas-Mexico border, and
particularly my jurisdiction in El Paso, Texas, remains a main
corridor for the entry of illegal drugs into the United States;
and despite much success in the interdiction and prosecution
efforts, these harmful drugs continue to be a big problem in
our country.
The consensus is that 170 tons of marijuana and two tons of
cocaine that were seized in 2005 in the West Texas corridor are
but a fraction of the contraband that make it through
undetected. The destination cities for the drugs that were
seized appear to include Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, Detroit,
Houston, Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia, San
Francisco, St. Louis, Toledo and Washington, D.C.
The primary criminal threat to the entire country stemming
from the portion of the U.S.-Mexico border, that southern
border that is my jurisdiction, I believe is drugs.
Today, there is much discussion about State and local
agencies acting as a second line of defense in the enforcement
of Federal immigration laws. While the Federal, State and local
governments all have a valid interest in the enforcement of
Federal immigration laws, Texas State and local law enforcement
agencies can only provide assistance for such enforcement on a
very limited basis due to the constraints of Texas statutory
criminal law, budgetary issues and sound public policies.
In my community, we work in partnership with the Federal
Government through various initiatives such as the Southwest
Border Prosecution Initiative and SCAAP, the State Criminal
Alien Assistance Program. These initiatives differ from the
current discussion where State and local agencies are asked to
share the primary enforcement responsibility of Federal
immigration laws with the Federal Government.
As of 2001, the Federal Government created the Southwest
Border Prosecution Initiative as a reimbursement program to
counties that assisted with the prosecution of lower-level
Federally initiated drug cases. This reimbursement program was
designed to facilitate an efficient use of limited resources
available to prosecute drug traffickers entering the country.
However, during the last 2 years, the program has not received
the funding needed to sustain this initiative. El Paso County
has received only 50 cents in reimbursement for every dollar
bill under this program this past year.
The SCAAP program, the State Criminal Alien Assistance
Program, moneys that are received by my jurisdiction are also
tenuous. We received $357,000 in the 12-month period ending
June of 05. In the preceding 12-month period, we received even
less, $150,000. We believe these amounts fall far short of the
actual costs which are borne by the taxpayer in my
jurisdiction.
Based on this experience with the funding shortfalls in
comparative efforts between the Federal and local governments I
am doubtful that full funding would be secure for cooperative
effort for the enforcement of Federal immigration laws.
Many communities in this Nation, certainly including border
communities, have a significant immigrant population. Police
and prosecutors have worked hard to build trust and cooperation
with immigrants and immigrant communities to assist them as
victims of crime and to obtain information from them in
prosecuting crimes they have witnessed. Focusing on illegal
immigrants and enforcement of immigration law against them
would deter, undermine and negatively affect the trust and
cooperation between police and prosecutors and immigrant
communities. In fact, if we sustain the same level of
cooperation that is previously experienced, I don't believe
that would occur. In my opinion, it would lead to crimes
against immigrants not being reported, and these immigrants
would likely not come forward regarding crimes they have
witnessed.
Furthermore, my grave concern is that it leaves the door
open for these communities to be preyed upon at will and also
puts thought to the rise of organized gangs purporting to
protect illegal aliens due to the void left by the failure of
trust in police and prosecution agencies who are mandated to
protect all persons, legal or illegal, residing in this
country.
Presently, in my community, much attention has been focused
on the local sheriff. His policy to provide reinforcement to
Federal immigration law and law enforcement efforts I know has
brought attention in our community. I know of instances where
the sheriff's policies have led to crimes against illegal
aliens not being reported. This is alarming because it could
lead to lawlessness in the community and hinder the prosecution
of those who endanger the public.
This is simply not good for society as a whole. This gives
rise to the potential for significant disruption of the entire
criminal justice process. The disruption could likewise provide
organized criminal gangs the ability to exploit immigrant
communities. Immigrant communities could easily turn to rogue
criminal gang units to provide them with the protection they
seek instead of traditional law enforcement agencies.
There are many instances where it is vital that Federal,
State and local law enforcement agencies should collaborate and
form partnerships. In that regard, there are cases where the
primary arresting agencies are Federal law enforcement officers
and State prosecutors who accept those cases for prosecution
and the Federal Government reimburses local governments for the
criminal justice costs, as in the case of the Southwest Border
Prosecution Initiative. The Federal Government also reimburses
local government for the cost of housing jailed inmates who are
charged with State criminal offenses and are illegal aliens.
However, it is not a good idea for State and local agencies
to share the primary responsibility for the enforcement of
Federal immigration law. Clearly, the enforcement of
immigration law should remain the function of the Federal
Government due to the legal constraints in the State of Texas,
budgetary concerns and, most importantly, because of sound
public policy.
In closing, I don't know if the judge will ask me this
question, but I will put what I hope the answer is. I don't
really know what the answer is, but part of my career I was
chairman of the southwest border HIDTA, and I know you are
aware of the HIDTA. There are many throughout the country, but
when it started there were only five. Houston was one of the
first ones, and the southwest border was one of the first ones
on both sides. Now it has proliferated, and I think it is
political.
But you shouldn't look at the investment the Federal
Government has made in those HIDTAs. You have created through
those HIDTAs collaboration. You have made Federal agencies work
together with State and local agencies. You make those agencies
vet their programs. You make sure that the outputs and the
outcomes, the successes or nonsuccesses, are reviewed all the
time. Because I think if you are going to attack this problem--
it is not just resources. Because that is always--I am sure
everybody asks you that and tells you just send me more money.
It is not just resources. It is going to require cooperation.
It is going to require collaboration, and there is only one way
to do that.
I think that is the infrastructure you have created through
HIDTA. Maybe HIDTA is not the vehicle you use here, but you
have invested in intelligence centers. You have invested lots
of money to put agencies together, boots on the ground.
I agree with Chief Hurtt. You put boots on the ground, but
you do it in a coordinated way, a way that somebody vets the
process to make sure that those programs will work or at least
if they don't work we know what we expected, and then, if it
doesn't happen, we move on and we change our strategy.
Thank you for your time.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Jaime.
[The statement of Mr. Esparza follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jaime Esparza
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
I appreciate the opportunity to address you today regarding
criminal activity and violence along the southern border. My
perspective comes from being the chief state prosecutor for 14 years of
a large three-county jurisdiction along the U.S./Mexico border.
It is estimated that between 2.1 to 2.4 million people inhabit the
El Paso/Juarez borderplex. Approximately 1.65 million of those reside
in Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua. There are over 100,000 legal crossings
into the U.S. through the El Paso area bridges each day resulting in
approximately 35 million crossings per year. El Paso's population
almost doubles on a daily basis with Juarenses crossing to shop, study,
worship, visit, and work. This nuance makes this city unlike any other
in Texas in that it is a primary corridor for the flow of goods and
services. The ebb and flow of these populations present a unique and
direct set of challenges for law enforcement and prosecutors in the
region.
The millions of annual crossings might suggest concomitant criminal
activity. But based on national comparisons of criminal activity on the
U.S. side of the El Paso/Juarez borderplex, El Paso is consistently
ranked as one of the top three safest cities of its size in the
nation--currently, we are the second safest city. It is a mistake to
equate this distinction with a conclusion that the border is not
violent. While the City of El Paso side of the border had 3 narcotics-
related homicides 2003 through 2005, the Ciudad Juarez side of the same
border had 260 narco-executions during the same period. For the rest of
the border in my jurisdiction, which is primarily desolate and sparsely
populated, the Border Patrol is the best source for first-hand
information confirming the violent conditions that exist there. The
most extreme and frequent violence is attributable to the drug trade.
Primary Criminal Threat along the U.S./Mexico Border:
As many recognize, the Texas/Mexico border, and particularly my
jurisdiction in El Paso, Texas, remains a main corridor for the entry
of illegal drugs into the United States, and despite much success in
interdiction and prosecution efforts, these harmful drugs continue to
be a big problem in our country.
The consensus is that the 170 tons of marijuana and 2 tons of
cocaine that were seized in 2005 in the West Texas Corridor are but a
fraction of the contraband that made it through undetected. The
destination cities for the drugs that were seized appear to include
Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, New York City,
Philadelphia, San Francisco, Saint Louis, Toledo, and Washington D.C.
The primary criminal threat to the entire country, stemming from the
portion of the border that is in my jurisdiction, is drugs.
Today, there is much discussion about state and local agencies
acting as a second line of defense in the enforcement of the federal
immigration laws. While the federal, state, and local governments all
have a valid interest in the enforcement of federal immigration laws,
Texas state and local law enforcement agencies can only provide
assistance for such enforcement on a very limited basis due to the
constraints of Texas statutory criminal law, budgetary issues, and
sound public policy.
Enforcement of federal immigration laws by Texas state and local
peace officers would be made primarily through an encounter with a
peace officer that escalates into a warrantless arrest. In Texas,
warrantless arrests are authorized only in limited circumstances and
are governed primarily by Chapter Fourteen of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. Amores v. State, 816 S.W.2d 407,413 (Tex.Crim.App 1991). In
fact, the issue of the authority for local peace officers to arrest
illegal aliens without a warrant has come before the Attorney General
of Texas who has issued an opinion that such arrests can only be made
if a particular state warrantless arrest statute is satisfied. Op. Tex.
Att'y Gen. No. H-1029 (1977). A Texas peace officer may not arrest
without a warrant an alien solely upon the suspicion that he has
entered the country illegally. Op. Tex. Att'y Gen. No. H-1029 (1977).
It is also doubtful that a Texas peace officer could simply detain an
illegal alien for federal authorities if no arrest was being made and
turn that person over to federal authorities. This is because once the
original purpose for the stop is concluded, the detention must end.
Davis v. State, 947 S.W.2d 240, 245 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997). A detention
may not be unnecessarily prolonged solely in hopes of finding evidence
of some other crime. The stop may not be used as a ``fishing expedition
for unrelated criminal activity.'' Davis v. State, 947 S.W.2d at 243.
And, of course, Texas state and local law enforcement officers may not
engage in racial, ethnic, or nationality profiling. Tex. Code Crim.
Proc. Ann. arts. 2.131 and 2.132 (Vernon 2005). Thus, it is quite clear
that Texas state and local law enforcement officers may not stop or
apprehend persons solely because of any belief that the person is in
this country illegally, Federal immigration authorities should only be
contacted if the local law enforcement officer has arrested a person on
a criminal charge and the officer knows the person is an illegal alien.
Status of Funding from the Federal Government for State and Local
Assistance along the U.S./Mexico Border:
In my community we work in partnership with the federal government
through various initiatives such as the SWBPI (Southwest Border
Prosecution Initiative) and SCAAP (State Criminal Alien Assistance
Program). These initiatives differ from the current discussion where
state and local agencies are asked to share the primary enforcement
responsibility of federal immigration laws with the federal government.
As early as 1998, myself and district attorneys along the southwest
border from Brownsville, Texas, to San Diego, California, formed a
coalition to alert the federal government that some of the poorest
border counties were shouldering the financial burden for assisting the
federal government with the prosecution of federally referred drug
cases that were apprehended at the U.S./Mexico ports of entry and
border checkpoints. For years it was the practice of state and local
law enforcement and prosecutors to adjudicate the cases at a huge
expense to the counties and municipalities, in effect double-taxing
border residents. United States Attorneys and District Attorneys are in
agreement that the partnership between federal, state, and local law
enforcement offers efficiency and flexibility in the successful
prosecution of these federally initiated drug cases. As of 2001, the
federal government created the SWBPI (Southwest Border Prosecution
Initiative) as a reimbursement program to counties that assisted with
the prosecution of lower-level federally initiated drug cases. This
reimbursement program was designed to facilitate an efficient use of
the limited resources available to prosecute drug traffickers entering
the country; however, during the last two years, the program has not
received the funding needed to sustain this initiative. El Paso County
received only fifty cents in reimbursement for every dollar billed
under the program.
The SCAAP (State Criminal Alien Assistance Program) monies that are
received by my jurisdiction are also tenuous. We received $357,000 in a
twelve-month period ending in June of 2005. The preceding twelve-month
period we received even less: $150,000. We believe these amounts fall
far short of the actual cost, which are borne by the taxpayers in my
jurisdiction.
Based on this experience with funding shortfalls in cooperative
efforts between federal and local governments, I am doubtful that full
funding would be secured for a cooperative effort for the enforcement
of federal immigration law.
Public Safety Concerns
Many communities in this nation, certainly including border
communities, have a significant immigrant population. Police and
prosecutors have worked hard to build trust and cooperation with
immigrants and immigrant communities to assist them as victims of
crimes and to obtain information them in prosecuting crimes they have
witnessed. Focusing on illegal immigrants and enforcement of
immigration law against them would undermine and negatively affect the
trust and cooperation between police and prosecutors and immigrant
communities. In fact, it is doubtful that enforcement of immigration
laws against immigrant communities would sustain the same level of
cooperation as previously experienced. In my opinion it would lead to
crimes against immigrants not being reported, and these immigrants
would likely not come forward regarding crimes they have witnessed.
Furthermore, my grave concern is that it leaves an open door for these
communities to be preyed upon at will and also could foster the rise of
organized gangs purporting to protect illegal aliens due to the void
left by the failure of trust in police and prosecution agencies who are
mandated to protect all persons, legal or illegal, residing in this
country.
Presently, in my community, much attention has been focused on the
local Sheriff and his border coalition and their policy to provide
reinforcement to federal immigration law enforcement efforts. I know of
instances where the Sheriffs policies have led to crimes against
illegal aliens not being reported. This is alarming because it could
lead to lawlessness in the community and hinder the prosecution of
those who are a danger to the public. Too many resources and efforts
have been committed to establish and practice community policing across
this nation, and these positive effects are being reversed today due to
the latest policies of the coalition of sheriffs in Texas. This has led
to the underreporting of crimes committed in communities with large
immigrant populations. Simply the perception by immigrant communities
that law enforcement is ``out to get them'' creates a chilling effect
on cooperation with local law enforcement. This is simply not good for
society as a whole.
This gives rise to the potential for significant disruption of the
entire criminal justice process. This disruption could likewise provide
organized criminal gangs the ability to exploit immigrant communities.
Immigrant communities could easily turn to rogue criminal gang units to
provide them with the protection they seek instead of traditional law
enforcement agencies.
There are many instances where it is vital that federal, state, and
local law enforcement agencies collaborate and form partnerships. In
that regard, there are cases where the primary arresting agency are
federal law enforcement officers, and state prosecutors accept these
cases for prosecution and the federal government reimburses local
government for the criminal justice costs, as in the case of SWBPI. The
federal government also reimburses local government for the cost of
housing jail inmates who are charged with state criminal offenses and
are illegal aliens. However, it is not a good idea for state and local
agencies to share the primary responsibility for the enforcement of
federal immigration law. Clearly, enforcement of immigration laws
should remain the function of the federal government due to legal
constraints in the State of Texas, budgetary concerns, and most
importantly because it is sound public policy.
Mr. McCaul. We will have one round of questioning, try to
limit it as brief as possible.
I do want to thank the victims who appeared here today to
testify. Officer Stone and the Ruizes, I know how difficult it
must be to retell the story and relive the agony and the pain
that you experienced firsthand and that you experienced
firsthand through your daughter's untimely death. As I
mentioned earlier, I will pledge all my support to work with
you to help bring this murderer, Mr. Salazar, to justice.
Mrs. Ruiz. Thank you so much.
Mr. McCaul. I personally sat down, as a prosecutor, with
victims, but also, as a Congressman, I sat down with families
of 42 U.S. citizens who had been kidnapped in Nuevo Laredo. I
had to talk to the parents like yourself who lost their
daughters. They said, help me, Congressman. What can you do to
help me? As a Member of Congress, I have never felt so
powerless, but I pledged to help them in any way I can.
We are dealing with foreign nations, and it is very
difficult. Extradition is a difficult thing to achieve. Again,
42 U.S. citizens, 42 parents who have lost their children to
this violence which has come into our country, I believe that
is unacceptable, and we need to do something about that in this
country and in this Congress.
I just had a quick question about your particular story.
Mr. Salazar was taken into custody for questioning?
Mrs. Ruiz. Yes.
Mr. McCaul. Okay. How long was heSec.
Mrs. Ruiz. They came--actually, he showed up at our house
after our daughter was murdered, and he was trying to tell us
that he didn't kill her, and we knew that he did. So we called
the police. An HPD officer came out, and we told him we
believed him to be involved in our daughter's murder, a
suspect, and so they took himSec. the officer called Homicide,
and they told him to bring him in and they took him to
Homicide. I guess he was probably down there maybe a couple of
hours, if that long.
Mr. McCaul. Do you know if any check was made as to his
legal status in this country.
Mrs. Ruiz. No, no. And I have spoken with Lieutenant Walker
with Homicide who is handling our daughter's case.
Mr. McCaul. Had that check been made and his status
verified that he was here illegally? He could have been
detained and possibly could have prevented him from leaving
this country.
Mrs. Ruiz. Yes, but nobody checked. Nobody bothered to
check. And, you know, by the time the warrants did come out and
they did go out to look for him, he was long gone. As a matter
of fact, the apartment complex where he lived told Homicide
that the mother and him moved out in the middle of the night
and so--
Mr. McCaul. I am so sorry. This is another example of our
failed immigration policies resulting--
Mrs. Ruiz. You know what is so bad about it, Mr. McCaul, is
that Salazar ended up going to Miami, like I said, and his
mother did send his passport to people there and she got it to
him. But the fact that his father was able to fly from
Venezuela, because he worked for a Venezuelan oil company, so
he flew down from there to Miami in a company plane and picked
him up. Now he was going to take Muerta with him, but because
she was born here she couldn't go. They wouldn't let her. So
she got on a bus and she went back to San Antonio, and she turn
herself in 2 months later. But Salazar got on that plane, and
his father knew and took him back to Venezuela, and he has been
there ever since.
Mr. McCaul. You have two former prosecutors up here who
will be looking into this. I appreciate you coming forward
today and telling your story, and Mr. Stone as well.
Jaime, I just had a couple--hold the line in El Paso is, in
my view, a tremendous success. Would you agree with that?
Mr. Esparza. I agree. Congressman Reyes, back then Chief
Reyes, it was a great idea. If you look statistically--I didn't
talk about that because of time, but if you look statistically,
our crime rate is one of the othersSec.
Mr. McCaul. Which is one of the reasons why I guess there
is such a low crime rate, right.
Mr. Esparza. Right. We dropped radically. If you went by El
Paso just this afternoon and you went along the border, which I
happen to drive to work every day, you would see the Border
Patrol, their vehicles, I don't know, mile, quarter of a mile,
whatever it is and they watch it vigilantly.
Mr. McCaul. There is a law enforcement presence on the
border where it actually does work. You got results, rightSec.
Mr. Esparza. I think it has made a big difference, yes.
Mr. McCaul.--in El Paso. Of course, you put the finger in
the dike, and it comes out elsewhere. You wouldn't deny there
is violence all along our southern border.
Mr. Esparza. No, I wouldn't.
Mr. McCaul. You would agree to that.
Mr. Esparza. I would agree there is.
Mr. McCaul. I am interested. Because I, like you, value
these collaborative task forces. Whether HIDTA, which I worked
with you, joint terrorism task forces seem to work well. In the
post-9/11 world, there is no reason why we should not be able
to work together to prevent terrorism. That is just my view, as
some of you worked in that field, but it has to be done in an
integrated way that works. I think we have had models that seem
to work, whether it be HIDTA or the JTTF.
I introduced legislation, the Border Area Security
Initiative, that tries to create a similar framework that would
designate high-risk areas where you would have a collaborative
arrangement between Federal, State and local, including the
sheriffs, but you would have supervision and you would have
accountability. I would ask that you take a look at that bill
and give me your comments on that legislation. Obviously, it
would be after the hearing.
Mr. Esparza. I am a big believer in what HIDTA does. I am
not sure if all of the committee has had an opportunity to tour
what the HIDTAs are doing, but they invest a lot in
intelligence. They spend a lot of time on different task
forces. But I think the most important thing they do is,
instead of just sending a pile of money to one agency, you send
it to a group and force us to get along. The fact of the matter
is we don't always get along.
As a group, when I sit--when I used to sit either as the
chairman of the Southwest Border HIDTA or as chairman of the
West Texas HIDTA, we had to discuss what the strategy would be,
we had to decide whether or not we were going to spend our
limited resources in that area or not, and we took a vote. Not
everybody was happy, not everyone left the table smiling, but
we worked together, and we were forced to, and in that
environment you understand it.
Plus, you leverage. I believe you leverage the use of local
and State officials in a really smart way. It is a smart use of
your money to do that.
It is exactly the same model that the Southwest Border
Prosecutor Initiative does as well. It is allowing State
prosecutors to prosecute these low-level drug dealers.
It is a smart use of your money. It is less expensive. We
take care of them. You do reimburse us, but a lot of the
Federal Government--what I think a Federal prosecutor ought to
be going after is the big guy. I don't mind going after the
little guy. We have got to work together. I think that is the
next idea.
Mr. McCaul. I look forward to visiting with you some more
about that.
My time has expired.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Sheila
Jackson-Lee.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Let me offer to Mr. Stone and the Ruiz
family a collective offer of sympathy and thank your
Congressperson, Congressman Green, whose district you are in,
for his leadership and offer, as a member of the House
Judiciary Committee, we deal with a number of the criminal
extradition cases, to be able to join in.
I think it is important to note, and it gives you little
comfort, that all of us have been frustrated by the extradition
laws, and I would encourage your district attorney to accept
the offer of providing the documentation so that Members of
Congress can give the added support to the diplomatic role that
we play, working with ambassadors, to encourage the Ambassador
from Venezuela to act on his request.
As I offer this evidence, it certainly will not be of
comfort to the loss of a beautiful daughter, but this is the
frustration we face, and I ask the chairman unanimous consent
to put in the record an article about France postponing
extradition. This is an epidemic.
Mr. McCaul. Without objection.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. This has to do with Ira Amhoff who
murdered a young lady many, many years ago, and he still lives
free in France that long ago. So this is an extradition
question.
I would also raise the dilemma, because as I was looking
over the various provisions, when someone is in custody--and I
am going to pose this question to Mr. Esparza. When police have
someone in custody and have arrested someone and brought them
from wherever they are, the perpetrators of this violent murder
crime of this beautiful young lady, there is no prohibition now
to prohibit any law enforcement from asking about status, is
that not correct?
Mr. Esparza. Once they have a State charge, they are free
to ask them their citizenship, their status, if they like, but
my reading of the law is they are not allowed to approach
someone and simply ask them their status without something more
than some unreasonable suspicion.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. No, that is what I am saying. If you are
now in custody.
Mr. Esparza. The answer is yes.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. No prohibition.
Mr. Esparza. No prohibition.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. So my understanding is that this
individual had been brought into custody.
Mrs. Ruiz. No, he had been brought in for questioning.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. He was in custody; and, therefore, in
questioning they could have asked.
Mrs. Ruiz. They could have asked.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. In questioning, Mr. Esparza, I don't
believe there is any prohibition. You are in for questioning,
that question could be asked because it related to an alleged
criminal offense.
Mr. Esparza. I believe they should have done that. I am
sure Judge Poe ruled on that matter many times, but I believe
they could have done that.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Stone, let me also thank you for your
service.
One of the, if you will, programs that I am a big supporter
of is the Cops on the Beat program and, of course, the--what we
call the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants, and I
believe will come to law enforcement agencies like yourself.
Are you familiar with those programs?
Mr. Stone. To be honest with you, ma'am, I am not.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. It adds extra police, extra DPS. Would
that help, by adding more local police, more DPS, funding from
the Federal Government to be utilized for more local police and
more local DPS officers? Would that be helpful.
Mr. Stone. Ma'am, I think in all scenarios more manpower is
always helpful.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. You agree with boots on the ground.
Mr. Stone. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. One of the terrible aspects of your
tragedy is that individual had come back over and over again.
Mr. Stone. Yes, ma'am. He had been criminally deported
twice prior.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. So the real question is that, when someone
is found to be criminally deported, what happens on the other
side? Why wasn't that person incarcerated? Why wasn't that
person tried for some violation? This is the frustration we
have in dealing with the barriers, countries that are around
our area. I think that when we talk about immigration we need
to separate out the bad guys and the lack of response to bad
guys from issues that I think Mr. Nixon is speaking of.
Mr. Nixon, might I just pose this question on what we do
with this whole issue of 12 million undocumented? Remember, we
are talking about comprehensive immigration reform, and I think
one of your quotes was that you feel it is safe in Laredo,
which I tried to distinguish from Nuevo Laredo versus Laredo,
as you have ever experienced. You walk to your bank or around
your bank, and you also feel safe on your ranch. Then how do we
distinguish having a comprehensive reform plan, if you will, to
address the question of the present status of immigration in
our country and secure the border?
Mr. Nixon. Well, I think you have to start by putting in
place a comprehensive program that allows people that want to
come here to work that we need to have here working.
I don't think anybody makes a need for these workers. In
fact, if we provide them attractive citizenship, which people
don't like the word amnesty--I don't particularly like the word
amnesty. I do like the word ``awarded'' citizenship. Someone
comes in and registers, does not have a criminal record, abides
by our laws and wants to work in a citizenship capacity, then
we should permit them to be here because they are coming
because of the demand for their work. I think we mix all the
good with bad is when we have a problem trying to manage that
process.
So in our efforts to what should be--what you heard here
today, I think if we allow this many of these people to enter
our system and separated them from these people who come to
commit crime, we have a much more manageable process. We can
employ our resources more effectively to deal with a much
smaller group of people.
I think in any society there is a certain percentage of bad
people. It doesn't matter what type of background you are.
There is a percentage of the bad. So I think we have to
separate the willing worker, person who wants to be a good
citizen and come here and register and get them out of that pot
that we are trying to manage that is too big and cumbersome.
Our borders are too long and our resources are too small to be
able to deal with. We just have to face up to reality.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Nixon.
Mr. Esparza, what would happen if we had an amendment in
place that would, in essence, take Federal funding away from
any jurisdiction that the Federal Government could claim was
not asking the questions or going out aggressively throughout
the city and bringing in individuals?
Mr. Esparza. Well, we rely heavily on Federal funding not
just in the criminal system. In El Paso, I am sure I could make
a whole line of people who benefit, agencies who benefit, lots
of our community that benefit from Federal funding that is
provided by the government; and if they were to take that from
us certainly it would impact my community seriously.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. You have already testified that there is
certainly no prohibition that someone is in custody to ask
those questions. I would also imagine if you are familiar with
the language that says if there was any sort of documenting
process that the criminal background of the individual would be
checked. Possibly the perpetrators that did this dastardly act
either on Mr. Stone or the beautiful daughter of the Ruizes
would have been discovered. Documenting or attempting to
document weeds out the offenders, the criminals, the
individuals who are here to do harm. Would that not have been a
possibility?
Mr. Esparza. It could have been a possibility, but I would
just--on behalf of my community, I think it is bad policy to
have State and local police officers enforcing immigration law.
They could have asked--in the scenario you asked me, they could
have asked that question, because I do believe they were in
custody and maybe even to the level of an arrest. So they could
have asked that question. But there is just too much trust
between the community and the police and the most important
issue of protecting each other, and if we start to enforce
immigration law versus the Border Patrol, the Federal agencies,
I think that it is extremely detrimental to our community.
Mr. McCaul. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Let me follow up.
I agree with you. The question I posed was not what you
just answered, which we have an agreement, but I wanted to be
able to give an answer to those victims who can't understand
why we didn't catch or hold those individuals. If there was a
documentation process, the proposed legislation indicates no
criminal background and, therefore, if that was a process and
people got into the process, individuals with criminal
backgrounds would obviously be detected. That is on the Federal
side. So my question to you is that would be a more helpful
process if you knew who was here and who was undocumented by
way of detecting or having for them to represent what their
backgrounds were. That is the Federal system.
Mr. Esparza. Yes, ma'am, that would help.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. That would be a helpful process.
Mr. Esparza. Yes, ma'am.
Mr. McCaul. The Chair now recognizes the judge.
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Esparza, good to see you. Compliment you on your work,
working here, of course, in Harris County and then moving out
West and doing a great service for the people in El Paso, but
it is good to see you.
I want to thank all of you for being here. I am going to
start on this end and, in as much time as I have got, I am
going to go through all the witnesses.
Trooper Stone and the Ruiz family, sympathies from
everybody.
Just a couple of issues, Trooper Stone. When I got to
Congress, as Mr. Esparza has pointed out, victims don't have a
lobbyist in Washington, D.C. It is not one of those items
people get interested in. So I started the Victims Rights
Caucus made up of Members of the Republican party and the
Democratic party. Because criminals don't ask whether persons,
a victim, is a Democrat or Republican. They just do what they
do, as you know.
So victims is a tremendous important issue to me based on
my background as a judge for 22 years and then prosecuting
outlaws right here in Harris County. I want to commend you on
the work that you do and all the troopers in Texas do.
But it seems to me if governments--foreign governments
continue to promote illegal entry into this Nation, then people
like yourself and the Ruiz family who become victims of crime
should be able to sue in our Federal courts those foreign
governments and have a cause of action against those
governments for reparations, that those governments ought to
pay at least financially for failure to secure their own
citizens in their nation.
So we are going to work on that project. The Victims Rights
Caucus is promoting that idea where you have a cause of action
against the nations of the individuals who committed these
crimes against you.
And to the Ruiz family, I, like the chairman here, have
four kids, three of them girls, one of them a son, have four
grandkids; and we have got one in the hopper, so to speak. No
parent ever wants to see the death of their child, ever. That
is the absolute worst thing that could happen to any parent
anywhere in the world. So our sympathies are with you.
And I suggest, just immediately, Andy Quan is here from the
Mayor's Victims Service. You ought to talk to him, see if you
can get this thing moving here in the county.
We will see what we can do on the Federal law. We will
bring the outlaw back, and he will be tried, and he will meet a
Texas jury for the crimes he has committed. But thank you for
being here and sharing that true story about the impact of
crime by illegals that are in the United States.
And that is the issue. It is not immigration. It is not
lawful entry. It is not the legal immigrants. It is the people
that are here illegally. And you have described in a very
simplistic, powerful way how they come here and they flee back
to their haven and nothing seems to happen. The Federal
Government has a responsibility to work on that specific issue
as well.
Mr. Nixon, I was kind of stunned by your comments. I have
been down to Laredo. I have been with Sheriff Flores and his
deputies. You disagree with what he has to say about your Webb
County community, I assume. I doubt if you are tracked and
followed by GPS when you go to work, that your kids have to be
taken to school by bodyguards, as many of the deputies do in
south Texas because they are fearful of the drug cartels doing
crimes against them.
But I recall, of course, that you are in the banking
business; and your bank, like many other banks, stands to make
a lot of money off of people illegally in the United States
that ship money back to their country. So this isn't a Chamber
of Commerce meeting. This is an issue that has to deal with
criminal conduct by illegals in the United States.
So I was quite surprised by your analysis of the no crime
in Laredo, the standard Chamber of Commerce statement that we
heard while we were down there. But the sheriffs, nonpartisan,
concerned about the safety of their citizens, seemed to take a
completely different position.
I have been all up and down the Texas border. I, like Ms.
Jackson-Lee, have been to California and other States and you
know the sheriffs all say the same thing. There is crime on the
border, both sides, worse on the other side, but it is
happening in America, too.
So I will investigate more of your statements that you have
made in writing to try to see where I can find out how can you
differ so much from the border sheriffs, the Border Patrol, all
Federal agencies. Every law enforcement group in the United
States takes a different position than you, the banker, takes
from Laredo, Texas.
But we certainly have to work with other nations to get the
criminals that flow back and forth from our open borders
captured and put them in jail wherever they belong.
But, once again, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank all of these
witnesses for being here, especially this family, and Trooper
Stone for the great work you do. We all appreciate what you do.
One thing that I have learned today, though, it seems to be
universal, across the board, with this panel and the other two
panels, nobody trusts the Federal Government to do what they
are supposed to be doing; and hopefully we can resolve that
problem. So thank you very much.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Chairman, a question was posed to the
witness, and I assume Congressman Poe would like an answer. He
hasn't yielded to give Mr. Nixon an opportunity to respond. It
is a fact-finding hearing.
Mr. McCaul. Would the gentlelady yield to the Chair.
Mr. Poe. So do you disagree with Sheriff Flores about the
safety of Laredo, Texas? That was the question.
Mr. McCaul. The witness may answer.
Mr. Nixon. Yes.
Mr. McCaul. Is that your answer.
Mr. Nixon. I live in Laredo, Texas, and lived there for 36
years; and I frequently move about my community. I am a high-
profile person, and I would be a target of crime. I don't
believe I am unsafe.
I do believe that crime exists in every city in America. We
are no different than any other city. We need to enforce the
laws. We need to protect our citizens as well. But we are
mixing two issues up in one pot, and I think they need to be
separated. The people who are here and want to work and earn a
living I think should have a right and try to--
Mr. Poe. I agree we ought to separate the issue of legal
immigration from criminals that come here who are illegally in
the country. I agree with that.
I yield back the remainder of my time to the Chair.
Mr. McCaul. The Chair thanks the members and the
subcommittee and the witnesses.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Chairman, before we finish, I have
some articles I need to put in the record.
Mr. McCaul. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. McCaul. I want to thank the witnesses for being here to
testify and particularly the victims who are here today.
The record will be held open for 10 days, if you get
additional questions from the members to respond to.
Mr. McCaul. Without objection, the subcommittee stands
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:38 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]