[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
INNOCENCE FOR SALE:
DOMESTIC MINOR SEX TRAFFICKING
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM,
HOMELAND SECURITY, AND INVESTIGATIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 26, 2014
__________
Serial No. 113-80
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
87-330 WASHINGTON : 2014
____________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (toll-free). E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia, Chairman
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., JOHN CONYERS, Jr., Michigan
Wisconsin JERROLD NADLER, New York
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT,
LAMAR SMITH, Texas Virginia
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ZOE LOFGREN, California
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
DARRELL E. ISSA, California STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
STEVE KING, Iowa Georgia
TRENT FRANKS, Arizona PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico
LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas JUDY CHU, California
JIM JORDAN, Ohio TED DEUTCH, Florida
TED POE, Texas LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois
JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah KAREN BASS, California
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania CEDRIC RICHMOND, Louisiana
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina SUZAN DelBENE, Washington
RAUL LABRADOR, Idaho JOE GARCIA, Florida
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas HAKEEM JEFFRIES, New York
GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island
DOUG COLLINS, Georgia
RON DeSANTIS, Florida
JASON T. SMITH, Missouri
[Vacant]
Shelley Husband, Chief of Staff & General Counsel
Perry Apelbaum, Minority Staff Director & Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., Wisconsin, Chairman
LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas, Vice-Chairman
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT,
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama Virginia
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico
TRENT FRANKS, Arizona JUDY CHU, California
JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina KAREN BASS, California
RAUL LABRADOR, Idaho CEDRIC RICHMOND, Louisiana
Caroline Lynch, Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
MARCH 26, 2014
Page
OPENING STATEMENTS
The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., a Representative in
Congress from the State of Wisconsin, and Chairman,
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and
Investigations................................................. 1
The Honorable Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Virginia, and Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and
Investigations................................................. 2
The Honorable Bob Goodlatte, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Virginia, and Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary 4
The Honorable John Conyers, Jr., a Representative in Congress
from the State of Michigan, and Ranking Member, Committee on
the Judiciary.................................................. 5
WITNESSES
Michael T. Harpster, Acting Deputy Assistant Director, Criminal
Investigative Division, Branch 1, Federal Bureau of
Investigation
Oral Testimony................................................. 8
Prepared Statement............................................. 10
Withelma ``T'' Ortiz Walker Pettigrew, Human Rights Project for
Girls
Oral Testimony................................................. 16
Prepared Statement............................................. 19
Christopher Heid, Corporal, Child Recovery Unit, Maryland State
Police
Oral Testimony................................................. 24
Prepared Statement............................................. 26
The Honorable Donna Quigley Groman, Supervising Judge, Kenyon
Juvenile Justice Center, Los Angeles County Juvenile
Delinquency Court
Oral Testimony................................................. 29
Prepared Statement............................................. 31
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
Prepared Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr., a
Representative in Congress from the State of Michigan, and
Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary..................... 5
APPENDIX
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
Prepared Statement of Tina Frundt, Founder, Courtney's House..... 54
INNOCENCE FOR SALE:
DOMESTIC MINOR SEX TRAFFICKING
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 26, 2014
House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
Homeland Security, and Investigations
Committee on the Judiciary
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m., in room
2141, Rayburn Office Building, the Honorable F. James
Sensenbrenner, Jr. (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Sensenbrenner, Goodlatte, Gohmert,
Coble, Bachus, Forbes, Scott, Conyers, and Bass.
Also Present: Representatives Poe and Jackson Lee.
Staff present: (Majority) Allison Halataei, Parliamentarian
& General Counsel; Sarah Allen, Counsel; Alicia Church, Clerk;
and (Minority) Ron LeGrand, Counsel.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. The Subcommittee will come to order.
Before making an opening statement, let me reiterate the
position of the Chairman and the Committee about non-
Subcommittee Member participation, which is as follows.
A Judiciary Committee Member who is not a Member of a
Subcommittee may attend a hearing and sit on the dais. That
Member may also ask questions of the witnesses, but only if
yielded time by a Member of the Subcommittee who is present at
the hearing. It will remain the policy of the Committee that we
do not allow Members to participate in our hearings if they are
not Members of the full Judiciary Committee.
Without objection, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Poe, and
the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Jackson Lee, will be permitted
to sit on the dais for this hearing and may ask questions of
the witnesses if yielded time by a Member of the Subcommittee.
And without objection, so ordered.
I yield myself 5 minutes.
We are honored today to have a varied and distinguished
panel of witnesses here to discuss a difficult, but critically
important, topic, the growing crisis of minor sex trafficking
in the United States. Now, let me say that this is something I
do not think has received enough congressional and public
attention. There is a study that has been done by the FBI that
says that over 290,000 American youth are at risk of becoming
victims of sex trafficking, and that includes one out of seven
runaways from home.
These kids, and I will call them kids, are usually between
12 and 14 years, and what is happening here is that their
innocence is being bought and sold for the profit of criminals.
And it is something that we have to get public attention to,
that we need to legislate more strictly and firmly against. And
law enforcement has to be given more tools to be able to track
down those who are responsible for this heinous and disgusting
crime, prosecute them, and to put them behind bars.
Now, as a result of technology advances, the growth of the
Internet and mobile smart phones have greatly facilitated
people who want to perpetrate these crimes. So using the
Internet for law enforcement purposes I think is absolutely
essential. There have been online advertisements as the primary
platform for buying and selling sex with minors, and there have
been almost 3,000 minor victims that were advertised online for
this disgusting practice. That, too, has to stop, and those who
put these advertisements online have got to be prosecuted.
Online advertisements for prostitution have created about
$45 million of revenue last year, you know, again revenue used
in the furtherance of a crime and in the furtherance of selling
the innocence of minors for a profit. And I hope that Ms.
Pettigrew, who is a survivor of this crime, who has
courageously dedicated herself to shining a light on this dark
issue, she can help us better understand the unique needs of
minor victims of sex trafficking because not only do we have to
go after those who perpetrate the crime, but we have to give
all the counseling that is necessary to bring the victims back
to being able to live a normal, functional, and productive
lifestyle.
So this is really an important hearing. It is something
that I think that the Subcommittee should devote much of its
time and energy to for the rest of this Congress.
And it is now my pleasure to recognize for his opening
statement the Ranking Member, Mr. Scott of Virginia.
Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
convening this hearing. While many Americans know that children
are sold for sex overseas, too many believe that our country is
immune. There remains a tragic reality and growing problem here
as well. We must understand the term ``domestic minor sex
trafficking'' is the commercial exploitation of children
through prostitution, pornography, and sexual performance. It
is the sex slavery and rape of children for profit.
In its 2006 report, Shared Hope International reminded us
that the status of a sex trafficked child is that of a victim,
not a criminal. We are talking about some of the most
vulnerable, the traumatized, exploited children in need of
specialized services and understanding. We need to train law
enforcement officials to correctly identify the trafficked
children as victims and treat them accordingly. Categorizing
sex trafficked children as criminals prevents them from
receiving the care they need and re-victimizes them by
arresting and charging them for criminal acts done against
their will. It also complicates the prosecution of the real
criminals, the pimps and johns.
A victim-centric approach is essential to properly crafting
the delivery of services for survivors of sex trafficking.
Nationally, an estimated 450,000 children run away from home
every year, and it is estimated that one out of three teens on
the street will be lured toward prostitution within 48 hours of
leaving home. This means that statistically, about 150,000
children are lured into prostitution each year, and some
estimates put that number closer to 300,000.
These children come from all races, ethnic groups, and
religious backgrounds. They span all gender identities, ages,
and socioeconomic classes, and they come from abusive
households. One study found that almost 60 percent of minors
arrested for prostitution in Las Vegas had been molested by
family members or were victims of sexual assault, and three-
fourths had run away from home prior to arrest.
The trafficked children are often exposed to many immediate
and long-term harms, including violence and intimidation,
homelessness, addiction to drugs, unplanned pregnancy, impaired
health and life span, decreased lifetime earnings, and welfare
dependency. These harms come at a cost to the State and local
governments, which increases the length of time an individual
is exploited by sex traffickers.
Four years ago, this Subcommittee held hearings on this
very issue. Now, 4 years later, the need for a comprehensive
victim-centric approach to dealing with sex trafficking of
children remains. Survivors of these heinous crimes need
shelter and rehabilitative services tailored to their unique
needs.
Of more than 2,200 children trafficked annually in New York
City, only 20 beds exist to shelter the survivors. And we need
to increase funding for a national crime information center so
we can improve the database on missing and exploited children.
More importantly, we need to do more to rescue these
children in the first place. Since its inception more than 10
years ago, the FBI's Innocence Lost Initiative has rescued more
than 3,100 child victims and initiated about 2,100 cases
resulting in 1,400 convictions of sex traffickers. Now, let us
put that in perspective. That is 31 children rescued over a 10-
year period compared to an estimated 150,000 to 300,000 victims
added every year. I commend the FBI and its partners and the
U.S. Department of Justice and the Center for Missing and
Exploited Children for their rescue efforts. However, this gap
remains too large. I am hoping that our witness from the FBI
will be able to tell us what is needed to increase the number
of rescues.
Now, representatives from Craigslist testified at a
previous hearing about the company's decision to remove its
adult services section. At that time, we understand that the
real issue was not Craigslist, but rather the issue was and
still is the extent of the Internet's role in facilitating the
sex trafficking of children.
What we have learned is much like drug trafficking, when
one kingpin falls, another is standing in the wings waiting to
take over. And such has been the case with the Internet.
Craigslist removal of adult services only made it easier for
other sites to facilitate sex trafficking.
Some argue that legislation would curtail or otherwise
limit such websites' ability to promote these services, but we
can and must take more immediate action. We can certainly
enforce the laws that are already on the books to prosecute sex
traffickers and johns. We also need to improve underlying
social conditions so children do not become victims in the
first place. Among other things, we can do this by educating
parents about the dangers of Internet predators, and we can
help rescued children to get their lives back by providing them
with safe housing, schooling, physical and mental health
services, and, if appropriate, reuniting them with their
families.
Human trafficking is the second fastest-growing criminal
industry in the world, and the United States has a real
opportunity to lead the way against domestic minor sex
trafficking through a comprehensive victim-centric approach on
the issue. Societal costs of the domestic sex trafficking
industry is too great to be ignored.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. The Chair now recognizes the Chair of
the full Committee, the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Goodlatte.
Mr. Goodlatte. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very pleased
to take part in this important hearing on the growing scourge
of sex trafficking of minors in the United States. When
criminals exploit children for their own financial gain or
personal pleasure, they rob them of their innocence and destroy
their childhood. Pimps and the adults who purchase these
services, both more accurately referred to as traffickers,
sexually exploit children through street prostitution and in
adult strip clubs, brothels, hotel rooms, and other locations.
It goes without saying that no child should be subjected to
this horrifying and inhumane violence. Sadly, it happens across
the country every single day. The demand for the prostitution
of children and other forms of commercial sexual exploitation
of minors is steadily growing. While some traffickers are
individuals working for themselves, minor sex trafficking is
more often perpetrated by broader criminal syndicates or gangs
that have realized it is more profitable to prostitute a child
than to commit other crimes. For example, drugs can only be
sold once, whereas minor children can be sold multiple times
each day. Because of this growth, it is estimated that human
trafficking in the United States is now a $9.8 billion
industry. We must work together to put this detestable industry
out of business.
We have a distinguished panel of witnesses here today to
discuss this difficult subject. I hope to hear about some of
the recent successes in this area. For example, just this
February, the FBI worked with State and local law enforcement
to arrest more than 45 traffickers in a sting operation at the
Super Bowl. Even more importantly, this operation rescued 16
juveniles, some as young as 13 years old. I commend everyone
involved in this endeavor.
I also hope to hear from our witnesses about what Congress
and the States can do to help further combat this crime. I am
particularly interested in hearing about how Federal law
enforcement can better address the online facilitation of minor
sex trafficking which has helped to fuel this crime in recent
years. I also hope to hear about how the various States handle
minor victims, including whether and why victims are often
treated as criminals themselves, and how the States ensure that
victims receive the critical services they need to move on from
their trauma.
Congress has passed a number of bills to address the crisis
of minor sex trafficking in the United States, but our work
clearly is not done. This hearing will help us determine what
more can be done to end these terrible crimes, and I thank all
of you for being here today, and look forward to hearing from
our witnesses. And I yield back to the Chairman.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. The Chair now recognizes for an opening
statement the Chairman emeritus of the full Committee, the
gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers.
Mr. Conyers. Thank you, former Chairman Sensenbrenner. I
just join in welcoming the witnesses, particularly Ms.
Pettigrew with the Human Rights Project for Girls.
Victims, not criminals. Customers should be prosecuted.
Services for victims not sufficient. We held a hearing similar
to this 4 years ago, and so we are confronted with new
legislation, enforcement of existing laws. And, of course, the
traditional strategy is on the victims and not on the
customers, and that Judge Poe of Texas has a bill that I think
may help us in that regard.
There also is the aspect of many of those exploiting
children have them commit other crimes involving drugs, and
robbery, and other criminal activities. And so, this is a
hearing that I think we can get to the bottom of this. It is
great to have Judge Groman with us today, too, because she is
working with us on a daily basis.
I will put the rest of my statement in the record and yield
back my time.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Without objection. Without objection,
all Members' opening statements will be put in the record.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Conyers follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr., a Representative
in Congress from the State of Michigan, and Ranking Member, Committee
on the Judiciary
Today's hearing examines the growing epidemic of minor sex
trafficking, an absolutely abhorrent practice, that each year entraps
more than 100,000 minors--roughly between the age 12 and 14--into
prostitution or child pornography.
Although these children come from all socio-economic classes,
races, and genders, they all share in common their vulnerability.
As we begin our focus on this issue, it must be recognized that
these children are victims; they are not criminals, and they should not
be treated so.
Predators seize upon the insecurities and weakness of these
children, whether they are runaways and shelter youth, kids in foster
care, or just ``throwaways'' who have been emotionally and
psychologically neglected their whole lives.
As such, they are particularly vulnerable to pimps, predators, and
sex traffickers through violence, coercion, and fraud.
And, when children who have fallen prey to the sex trade are
treated as criminals rather than victims, this just further compounds
their injuries.
They become very afraid to seek help, particularly from law
enforcement because of the risk that they will be treated as criminals
rather than victims.
Instead of criminalizing what these children do, we must ensure
that they are recognized for what they: victims.
Second, much more needs to be done to improve how we assist these
horribly exploited children.
They are physically traumatized, often being sold for 10 to 15 sex
acts per night. One child may be raped more than 5,000 times in a
single year.
The extent of the resultant emotional and psychological trauma they
endure is hard to fathom.
These victims--in order to regain their lives--must receive
specialized counseling, educational services, and housing to ensure
their physical and mental rehabilitation.
Without these specialized programs, these young boys and girls
often run away to return back to their abusers because of the unique
trauma bonding that occurs between the victim and the trafficker.
Yet, there are far too few shelter beds available nationwide to
provide for the unique needs of children crushed by the commercial sex
trade.
We owe it to these youngsters and to our society to help them
overcome the horrors that they have been put through.
Lastly, we must consider how technology and the Internet have
enabled the minor sex trafficking business and what this industry can
do to help law enforcement stop this crime.
After our last hearing on minor sex trafficking in 2010, Craigslist
shut down its ``adult services'' section, which was a primary source of
online advertising for the commercial sex trade for both adults and
minors.
However, this may have been a Pyrrhic victory. Online sex
trafficking has continued, but now in a more dispersed fashion.
For example, Backpage.com has roughly 70% of the market share of
Internet advertising for the sex trade.
It is critical that effective ways for law enforcement to
collaborate with these companies be developed so that the perpetrators
of these heinous crimes are ultimately brought to justice.
We must also consider how to rein in the use of decentralized
advertising and foreign-based entities that increasingly disseminate
this advertising.
And, we must also explore how to better educate minors to avoid
online predators. More than ever, pimps and traffickers are using
social networking sites to coerce and cajole vulnerable children into
the sex trade by preying on their insecurities.
To conclude, I hope that this will be the beginning of a larger
discussion that will include human trafficking and labor trafficking.
For now, however, I am sure that we can come together in a
bipartisan manner to address the evils of juvenile sex trafficking and
to find ways that will improve the lives of the far too many children
who have already been exploited.
We have addressed similar issues in the past, and we should look to
such legislation for guidance. For instance, we should consider
effectuating a national standard of care for victims of juvenile sex
trafficking, just as past Congresses have for victims of domestic abuse
and sexual assault, to ensure that the these youths receive proper
care.
Portions of Mr. Poe's bill will also serve this cause well, as it
recognizes the need to greatly improve services to children affected by
the scourge of sex trafficking by setting up a revenue neutral fund to
provide them aid and creates block grants for sex trafficking
deterrence.
We should also take steps to curb demand by assisting state and
local agencies enforce laws that are already on the books when it comes
to dealing with ``johns'' who patronize minors, as this is a key
component in fighting the exploitation of minors. However, we must be
careful in creating new federal laws and mandatory minimums in this
area, as new federal mandatory minimums for ``johns'' may lead to
unintended consequences.
Tomorrow, the Task Force on Over-Criminalization will be holding a
hearing on the over-federalization of criminal laws, and this is just
such an instance where state laws that are in place may be just as, or
even more effective, in combating demand when they are enforced than a
new federal mandatory minimum.
I know that we can work together to bring an end to the evils of
juvenile sex trafficking, and I look forward to hearing the testimony
of our witnesses.
__________
Mr. Sensenbrenner. And without objection, the Chair will be
authorized to declare recesses of the Subcommittee during votes
in the House.
It is now my pleasure to introduce our witnesses today. Mr.
Michael Harpster is the acting deputy assistant director for
Criminal Investigation Division Branch 1 of the FBI. In this
position, Mr. Harpster leads one of the largest and most active
branches in the FBI, which includes crimes against children,
the transnational organized crime east and west sections, and
the violent criminal threat section.
Prior to being appointed as acting deputy assistant
director, Mr. Harpster worked at FBI headquarters as section
chief of the Violent Crimes Against Children Section. He has
had program management responsibility for 69 child exploitation
task forces, and all matters related to crimes against children
in all of the FBI field offices.
He earned his bachelor of science degree in criminal
justice and his master's degree in public administration from
Northeastern University.
Ms. Withelma T. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew is a second-year
student at Trinity Washington University. She currently serves
on the National Foster Care Youth and Alumni Policy Council and
is a member of the board of directors for the Human Rights
Project for Girls. From the ages of 10 to 17, Ms. Ortiz Walker
Pettigrew survived being subjected to criminal sexual
exploitation in the United States. She now uses her experience
to teach, lead, and educate on needed reforms to address minor
sex trafficking, including in the child welfare, juvenile
justice, and mental health systems.
She is a daily mentor to other young people who have
similarly been forced into this modern day form of slavery. In
2013, Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew was listed as one of Time
magazine's 30 people under 30 changing the world. She has
lectured at many venues, and has shared her story at a national
level as one of Glamour magazine's 2011 women of the year. Most
recently, she has trained law enforcement in conjunction with
the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and has
contributed in the launch of the U.S. Senate Caucus to Combat
Human Trafficking.
Corporal Chris Heid is a corporal with the Maryland State
Police, who has been assigned to the Child Recovery Unit for
the last 3 years. This unit investigates critically missing
children, issues amber alerts, and investigates human
trafficking primarily as it relates to juveniles. He is also a
member of the FBI's Child Exploitation Task Force. He has been
a member of the Maryland State Police for 20 years and has held
a variety of assignments, including road patrol and other
investigative positions. He is based out of Columbia, Maryland.
The Honorable Donna Quigley Groman is the supervising judge
of the Kenyon Juvenile Justice Center for the Los Angeles
County Juvenile Delinquency Court. She has served as a lawyer
and a judge in the field of juvenile law for approximately 28
years.
Judge Groman is active in judicial education and serves as
faculty to the Center for Judicial Education and Research in
California, teaching juvenile delinquency law and related
topics through judges statewide. She has worked on issues
related to domestic minor sex trafficking, successful re-entry
from probation facilities, reducing the school to prison
pipeline, and school discipline.
She earned her bachelor's degree in economics from SUNY-
Stony Brook and her juris doctorate from the American
University Washington College of Law.
The witnesses' written testimony will be entered in the
record in its entirety without objection. I ask that the
witnesses summarize his or her testimony in 5 minutes or less.
You will see the green, yellow, and red lights in front of you.
I think you all know what they mean.
So I would like to recognize Mr. Harpster first. Mr.
Harpster, the floor is yours.
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL T. HARPSTER, ACTING DEPUTY ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR, CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE DIVISION, BRANCH 1, FEDERAL
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Mr. Harpster. Good morning, Chairman Sensenbrenner, Ranking
Member Scott, distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. I am
pleased to be here with you today to discuss the Federal Bureau
of Investigation's efforts to combat child sex trafficking.
It is nearly unthinkable, but every year thousands of
children become victims of crime, whether it be sexual
exploitation by prostitution on the Internet, or kidnapping,
violent acts, and sexual abuse. Over the last several years,
the FBI, State and local law enforcement, and the public have
become more informed about the methods used to exploit
children, and the vulnerabilities the perpetrators seek out.
More incidents of these crimes are being reported than ever
before, and technology has greatly improved law enforcement's
ability to identify those who exploit our children.
Between 1996 and December 2013, the number of child
exploitation cases opened throughout the FBI increased
substantially from just over 100 to more than 7,000. To combat
this threat, the FBI's Violent Crimes Against Children Program
utilizes a victim-centered and intelligence driven
investigative model.
Our strategy involves using multidisciplinary teams to
investigate and prosecute crimes that cross legal,
geographical, and jurisdictional boundaries. Through the FBI's
69 child exploitation task forces, task force members employ
strong partnerships between law enforcement, social service
agencies, and non-profit organizations in order to gather the
local intelligence needed to identify national level
enterprises responsible for the exploitation of child victims.
This year marks the 11th anniversary of the FBI's most
prominent initiative established to address sex trafficking of
children within the United States. Through the Innocence Lost
National Initiative, the FBI, working with nearly 400 partner
agencies, designs enforcement operations specifically to
identify and recover child victims. To date, these operations
have resulted in over 2,100 cases, 1,400 convictions, and the
recovery of 3,100 children.
These victims come from all socioeconomic backgrounds and
are often targeted because of individual vulnerabilities. In
some cases, these vulnerabilities are not easily apparent to
others. In many cases, though, victims live within an abusive
or troubled family dynamic. Some come from families with very
limited resources, are runaways, or are foster youth, or those
within the juvenile justice system. In the hands of their
traffickers, these individuals will be subject to numerous
sexual assaults and continued abuse.
It is important to note the FBI does more than investigate
those who exploit victims of trafficking. The FBI's Office for
Victim Assistance along with victim specialists from the United
States attorney's offices and other non-government victim
assistance service providers are involved in all stages of the
coordination and execution of our enforcement operation in an
effort to address the immediate and long-term needs of these
victims.
In addition to our domestic operations, the FBI coordinates
the Violent Crimes Against Children International Task Force.
It is a select cadre of international law enforcement experts
working together to formulate and deliver a dynamic global
response to incidents of child exploitation through the
establishment and furtherance of strategic partnerships, the
aggressive engagement of relevant law enforcement, and the
extensive use of liaison operational support and coordination.
Through this task force, we are working closely with our
global partners to reduce the vulnerability of children to acts
of sexual exploitation and abuse, which are facilitated through
the use of computers, identify and rescue child victims,
investigate and prosecute sexual predators who use the Internet
and other online services to sexually exploit children,
regardless of their geographical location.
The FBI's effort to combat child sex trafficking represents
a multi-faceted approach to a multi-faceted problem. As a
result, our efforts span from investigation to prosecution and
are supplemented by an array of investigative training,
outreach, and victim services carried out by a wide range of
components. Simply put, we are proud of the work we do in this
area and look forward to continuing to have a leading role in
the government-wide fight against child sex trafficking.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I will now
be happy to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Harpster follows:]
__________
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Thank you very much, Mr. Harpster.
Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew?
TESTIMONY OF WITHELMA ``T'' ORTIZ WALKER PETTIGREW, HUMAN
RIGHTS PROJECT FOR GIRLS
Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew. I want to say thank you so
much, Chairman, and to the Subcommittee and the members of the
audience for allowing me to be here today.
Suffering, isolated, helpless and tired, at the age of 15,
the concrete box that represented myself in Zenoff Hall, the
largest juvenile facility in Las Vegas, Nevada seemed no less
invasive than the horror of the streets. As much of a real
physical confinement that it was, it was not all too different
than the mental confinement that I endured from my pimp. I was
interrogated for hours on end, reminded that my opinions did
not matter, and locked in like a dog in a kennel. Unless I was
saying the answers to the questions that they wanted to hear,
my voice was irrelevant. Skip ahead a few years later, I spent
my 17th birthday within the juvenile walls in the State of
California.
Both times I was faced with charges of solicitation and/or
prostitution, a crime that as a minor who was not of legal age
to consent to sex, could not seriously be charged to commit.
But yet, there I was facing them. I comprehended this as yet
another system that failed me. This became familiar as I was
raised experiencing most of my life in the foster care system,
which is where I learned to accept and normalized being used as
an object of financial gain by people who were supposed to love
and care for me, got used to various people controlling my
life, and lacked opportunities to gain meaningful relationships
and attachments. No one cared and no paid much attention, so I
was considered a problem child with multiple moves and
histories of sexual abuse.
At the age of 10 years old, after enduring multiple years
of various types of abuse within the system, my vulnerabilities
made me a target for a devious man, my exploiter, trafficker,
or otherwise known as pimp, to sexually exploit me starting on
the streets, then the Internet, and ultimately anywhere. After
being repeatedly beaten, tortured, and manipulated, I became
more afraid of him than any other human being on this planet.
So any time I came in contact with law enforcement, I knew I
had to protect him to protect myself. Plus, every time I
encountered law enforcement, I was treated like I was the
criminal.
While in detention, I was so hurt and baffled that I was
the one who was locked up. It seemed like they always wanted to
detain me and my pimp, both people of color, instead of
focusing on the buyers who were adults and primarily White. No
one seemed to care about them. It hurt that even when I
released, I knew the cycle would continue because buyers were
always going to get what they wanted, and they would get to
walk away. Some of them would even pay more knowing I was an
adolescent.
I endured years of sexual trauma and humiliation from all
points, including the buyers and johns. And then I was re-
traumatized every day in detention while having to be watched
naked while I showered. No one ever assessed me or even asked
me what got me there, and there were no rehabilitation services
offered. I just sat locked in a box being interrogated and
talked down to.
Many of the young people I mentor and have advocated on
behalf of have dealt with situations like the one I have
expressed. Many have transitioned between and intersected
throughout systems, primarily the child welfare, mental health,
and juvenile justice systems. One young survivor explained to
me in her words, ``I don't feel good about any time I came in
contact with law enforcement.'' She echoes, ``They treated me
like a criminal and used their authority and superiority to
look down upon me. The way they talked about me was degrading,
as if they felt that they were so much better, and they didn't
even know my situation.''
She tells me about the first day that she went on lockdown.
``They wanted me to cut my hair, and that was the one thing
that my pimp did let me have.'' She said, ``I hated the way the
staff treated and talked to me, like I was a penitentiary
prisoner when I was just this teenager.'' She goes on to say
that ``I was 16. I should've been checked in by a nurse
counselor, offered some type of wraparound services. Instead,
little to no services were provided to me.''
Both these stories express how attention has been spent
detaining young victims. Yes, necessary advancements have been
made nationwide, especially in criminalizing traffickers and
pimps, but there is so much more to be done in regard to
fighting demand and providing alternative gender-specific and
trauma informed services to children rather than detention.
Detention just does not equal prevention. If we continue to
lock up victims as we are now, they will not get services that
they need. Rather than detention, we should be trying to
meaningfully engage the young person in self-exploration
activities that promote healthy self-esteem. Locking up victims
does not help or prevent them from being exploited.
But if for some reason a victim is detained, it should be
ensured that they receive trauma-informed therapeutic services
through counseling and other means while they are in custody,
or preferably through a community-based program. Alternatives
to detention for these youth should be instituted.
Then later, after care programs, separate from probation,
should be instituted that are non-incriminating and strength
based to assist with educational, vocational, and self-
exploration needs. Giving them opportunity to self-explore
gives them power and healthy self-esteem, which is necessary in
helping survivors rebuild their lives.
In addition, organizations and governing bodies serving
this population should at minimum have one survivor on staff to
help navigate and advise on effective practices. By expanding
and providing access to programs like the Family Justice
Center, alternative facilities can house survivor advocates who
can be present from the initial point of contact with the
victim.
And that is why bills like the Justice for Victims of
Trafficking Act are so important because it not only provides
alternatives to detention and trauma-informed services for
youth, but it finally goes after the buyers of child sex.
Importantly, more must be done to focus on the root cause
of the issue, that people are buying children for sexual
purposes. This is not prostitution, and it should never be
referred to as such. This is child rape, and those who purchase
these children for sex should be viewed and punished as child
rapists. Buyers should not get away with it as they do every
day as of now. Just as it is expressed that it not okay to sell
children in our country, we need to make it clear that it is
not okay to buy them either.
It is my hope today that the Federal Government can
acknowledge your influential role in helping to end the demand
for sex with minors by prioritizing and aiding investigation
and prosecution of buyers, and to help ensure that survivors
are getting more access to the services that they desperately
need.
I would like to thank the Human Rights Project for Girls,
the Subcommittee, and the audience for taking the time to
receive my contributions. And thank you to all who work on
behalf of our Nation's most vulnerable children.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew
follows:]
__________
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Thank you.
Corporal Heid?
TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER HEID, CORPORAL,
CHILD RECOVERY UNIT, MARYLAND STATE POLICE
Mr. Heid. Good morning. Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Committee, I would just like to say on behalf of the Maryland
State Police what an honor it is to be here before you today. I
would also like to say thank you to Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew
for being here to share her story as a survivor.
The Maryland State Police Child Recovery Unit's primary
responsibility is missing and abducted children. One of the
missions is to assist local, State, and Federal agencies with
the most critical cases or with a nexus to Maryland. Our unit
works closely with the National Center for Missing and
Exploited Children to post information about missing children
and actively investigates cases of missing and exploited
children.
Since 2011, our unit has taken a more active role in human
trafficking investigations in the State. Unlike most vice
units, our unit focuses all of our attention on locating
juvenile victims of human trafficking. The two troopers that
are in the unit are part of the FBI's Child Exploitation Task
Force, and the task force provides an integral part in the
investigation by providing us with additional funding and
manpower.
Our unit treats every girl as a victim. Our unit is not
interested in arresting the girls in prostitution. The goals of
our unit is to locate juvenile victims, offer assistance to
adult victims, and to arrest and prosecute the traffickers and
pimps.
Our unit works hard at building and maintaining a working
relationship with the local non-government organizations that
provide resources to victims of human trafficking. The unit has
found that these resources provide valuable assets, most
importantly to the victim, but also by being an advocate for
the victims and their families. There are times when the Child
Recovery Unit has reached out to these groups to locate
placement for homeless children or children who might need
placement for just a period of time.
Additionally, our unit has worked with the Maryland
Department of Juvenile Justice and the local non-government
organization, Turnaround, to identify possible victims of
juvenile sex trafficking. This is accomplished by screening
children within our local juvenile detention facilities.
Victim service is a fundamental part of our unit. Once a
child victim is located, we work hard to establish and build a
rapport with those victims. Whether it is having lunch with a
child in placement or making a phone call to another victim,
our unit tries hard to maintain contact with all victims,
especially throughout the judicial process. The unit has also
had success in keeping contact with adult victims who have come
forward on occasion and provided information on additional
victims or traffickers down the line that we were able to
follow up on.
Since 2011, our unit, with the assistance of the FBI Task
Force, has made contact with over 300 girls involved in
prostitution. These contacts resulted in children being
rescued, victims getting assistance, and traffickers being
arrested. In 2013 alone, our unit made contact with 184 girls,
of which 11 were juveniles.
When conducting human trafficking investigations, it is
essential to cooperate with outside organizations. Our unit
receives assistance from Backpage.com, which is primarily the
main area that these girls are posting ads. Backpage actually
is very cooperative with us in providing quick responses to
subpoenas, and they do act immediately to assist us with
juvenile human trafficking investigations.
While speaking with traffickers in Maryland, it is apparent
that there is a concern in their world of this task force. It
has been said by several traffickers that they are careful to
not use juveniles because of the stiff Federal penalties that
apply. With that being said, the penalties for trafficking of
adults are not as severe. While we are making significant
strides in Maryland, there is still so much more than can be
done.
A need in Maryland, and presumably nationwide, is for more
training for the initial responders to missing child cases and
human trafficking or prostitution investigations. A good amount
of our missing child cases end as a recovery at a hotel. There
are various clues that can be found that point to human
trafficking that probably are not very obvious to the
responding officer. As human trafficking cases increase, so,
too, should training to identify these trends.
In the 3 plus years that the Maryland State Police Child
Recovery Unit has been investigating human trafficking cases,
we have come a long way, but clearly there is still much
further to go. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Heid follows:]
__________
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Thank you, Corporal.
Judge Groman?
TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE DONNA QUIGLEY GROMAN, SUPERVISING
JUDGE, KENYON JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER, LOS ANGELES COUNTY
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY COURT
Judge Groman. Good morning, Chairman Sensenbrenner, Ranking
Member Conyers, Ranking Member Scott, Committee and
Subcommittee Members. Thank you for inviting me to testify
today. My name is Donna Quigley Groman, and I am the site judge
for the Compton Juvenile Delinquency Court in the County of Los
Angeles. I am here today on behalf of the National Council of
Juvenile and Family Court Judges, which is one of the Nation's
oldest and largest judicial membership organizations serving
judges and other professionals in the juvenile and family
justice system.
Our juvenile court system is confronted by the crisis of
domestic sex trafficking. I have been working on this issue
locally and nationally since 2010, and have assisted in
creating Los Angeles County's collaborative court, the STAR
court, which is a court dedicated to youth charged with
prostitution related crimes.
The children arrested for prostitution related offenses
have come via several paths. They may have been coerced or
lured by gangs. They may have run away from abusive foster care
placements or were recruited from group homes and coerced into
sexual exploitation. Some may be lesbian/gay/bisexual/
transgender youth who have fled unaccepting homes or have been
thrown out of unaccepting homes. Some are trafficked by a
family member or enter into a relationship with a pimp because
of challenges encountered in their own homes. What many of
these youth have in common is a history of child sexual abuse,
early childhood trauma, and involvement in the child welfare
system.
These youth are not criminals. They are children who are
being abused by sex traffickers. They deserve the same
protections and resources to which child victims of sexual or
child victims of physical abuse or neglect are entitled.
Child victims of sexual abuse are comforted by assurances
that they are not responsible for the abuse. Child victims of
commercial sexual exploitation deserve the same assurances. The
criminalization of commercial exploitation of children holds
these children responsible for not preventing their
exploitation. Our society should not punish these young victims
of crime who as children are legally incapable of consenting to
sex acts. These children are desperately in need of safe
housing, food, clothing, other basic necessities, counseling,
medical care, mental health services, and to be reconnected
with education.
Traffickers are known to specifically target vulnerable
foster youth. Approximately 1.6 million children run away from
home every year in the United States. These children are at
risk of child sexual exploitation due to their mental,
physical, and financial vulnerability. Moreover, trafficking
takes a disproportionately heavier toll on minority youth.
In 39 States across this Nation, youth who are victims of
commercial sexual exploitation face criminal charges. The
dangers of incarceration, which include exposure to criminally
sophisticated youth, the attachment of the stigma of being
labeled a criminal, potential sexual and physical abuse while
in custody, are cruel responses to a social problem. The mere
exposure to the juvenile justice system leads to poor
educational outcomes, including dropout and a much higher
chance of leading a criminal lifestyle as an adult.
The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court judges
opposes the criminalization of victims of child sexual
exploitation and supports development and implementation of
humane and appropriate laws and policies that are in line with
the Federal definition of a child victim of human trafficking.
The National Council promotes the development of specialized
services and resources for child victims, including the
development of non-detention triage facilities and specialized
placement options which are equipped to effectively address the
unique trauma suffered by victims of child trafficking.
The National Council is further dedicated to promoting the
exercise of judicial leadership to convene local stakeholder
and community groups in an effort to improve and enhance system
responses to the needs of child victims of sex trafficking. The
National Council is developing a curriculum for juvenile and
family courts and will make this training accessible to judges
around the country.
Judicial education is underfunded and legislation that
includes funding should consider judicial education as a
purpose area in order to make change happen around the country.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Judge Groman follows:]
__________
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Thank you very much, Judge. The Chair
recognizes himself for 5 minutes.
First of all, let me say that this is probably one of the
most interesting hearings that we have had before the
Subcommittee in my time as Chair of it. Every one of you has
spoken to this problem from a different perspective, and what I
can say is that we really need to adopt an all of the above
type response to this.
A lot of this, of course, will require changes in State
legislation, particularly in the 39 States that still
criminalize child prostitution. And I think we have to make a
big difference in the law between child prostitution and adult
prostitution. I do not think that adult prostitutes who legally
know what they are doing, should have the same type of sympathy
as the child prostitutes.
So I think that we should look at this from both a supply
standpoint and a demand standpoint. We do need to deal with
getting at the traffickers and getting at the pimps. We also
need to get at the johns or the customers, those who are
exploiting these children for their own pleasure. And I think
that that is going to be more of an activity that law
enforcement is going to have to be more engaged in. And when we
look at the demand side, the customers, I think, are going to
have to be zeroed in, too.
When we are talking about victims, I agree with you, Judge
and Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew, that we have to treat juvenile
victims differently. And I think one of the reasons why we have
to treat them differently is we need to encourage them to
testify against those who have enslaved them. And having their
first contact with law enforcement be something that is more
humane and less daunting I think will encourage more credible
testimony for when a john or a trafficker ends up appearing in
a criminal court. And having these young victims testify in
front of a jury, it would be very, very hard if that testimony
sounds sincere and from the heart and wanting to get at this
problem and get rid of it. And, as a result I think that a
triage rather than a juvenile justice response, at least
immediately, I think is necessary.
Now, I would like to ask in my remaining time, Ms. Ortiz
Walker Pettigrew, if you think that better reporting of
children who go missing right from the get-go is essential to
trying to stop this trade. I was one of those that put together
the Missing Children's Act back in 1982 and putting in statute
amber alerts. But in order for either of those activities to
become active, there has to be a report that ends up getting
put out on the Internet, may be an amber alert issue. How
critical do you think that doing that would be?
Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew. Well, I definitely want to say
thank you for bringing up that perspective. I think it is very
critical in understanding specifically, as Honorable Groman has
expressed, a lot of the young people come from child welfare
system and things of that sort.
From my experience and from my experience both as a young
person living in the system and as a professional, there are
different things that happen. Oftentimes specifically in group
homes, young people are not reported missing based on the fear
that the funding will get cut off and then they will return
again, and then they will have to go through the process all
over again.
So I definitely think that that is something that we do
need to highlight as far as specifically young people who come
from systems because I can say from my knowledge, understanding
the lack of, I guess, attention that is put on young foster
children, that when they go missing the exploiters actually
rely on that as a safety guard. They know that nobody is
looking for them, that there are not posters out here looking
for these young children. And so, they know that they can
continue to get away with this.
And it is sad that this already vulnerable population of
young people in child welfare do not get the special attention
that they need when they do come up missing. And, I think that
we have heard from different perspectives and looking in our
history in criminal crimes and all that.
Foster children are very vulnerable. And so, making sure
that we alert people when they go missing, making sure that it
is public, making sure that we do have an opportunity to give
amber alerts for these young people. Just sadly enough, I can
say that that does not seem the case as of now.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Thank you very much. My time has
expired. The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott.
Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Harpster, can you
tell us what charges can be brought against a 40-year-old who
pays for sex with a 14-year-old?
Mr. Harpster. We could use State or local laws through our
task forces, or we could use 1591 sex trafficking, a Federal
offense that carries a minimum mandatory.
Mr. Scott. Of what?
Mr. Harpster. Pardon me, sir?
Mr. Scott. Mandatory minimum of what?
Mr. Harpster. So under 14 would be 15 years. Between 14 and
17 would be a 10-year minimum mandatory.
Mr. Scott. Are fines involved?
Mr. Harpster. There are, sir, yes.
Mr. Scott. Now, when you catch someone in this situation,
what charges are actually brought?
Mr. Harpster. For the customers, sir, in what you
described?
Mr. Scott. Right.
Mr. Harpster. We would hope that 1591 would be brought, and
that can happen. We work in liaison with our State and local--
--
Mr. Scott. Wait a minute. When you have some of these
roundups like you had at the Super Bowl, what charges are
brought?
Mr. Harpster. Correct. So let us take the last operation
cross country where we had 151 pimps that were arrested. We
would work with local----
Mr. Scott. Not pimps, johns.
Mr. Harpster. Johns. So that number I do not have here
right now, sir. But I will tell you this, that when we are
working with or State and locals, we look at the johns, at the
customers, and we choose the best mechanism to remove them from
the street, because the Federals always come in later down the
line. So when we are doing a criminal enterprise, that john may
be included.
Mr. Scott. You have a roundup. It is kind of hard to have a
prosecution without a john involved. When you have a
prosecution, what charges are brought against the johns?
Mr. Harpster. As I said earlier, sir, working with our
State and local, we would look at the johns for what the best
charges are that time. The initiative when we are out there,
our number one----
Mr. Scott. What charges are typically brought?
Mr. Harpster. It would be a pandering charge or a
prostitution charge, soliciting. If they cross State lines, we
do a Mann Act.
Mr. Scott. What happened to that 15-year mandatory minimum
case?
Mr. Harpster. If it is going to be----
Mr. Scott. Have you ever brought a 15-year mandatory
minimum charge against a john?
Mr. Harpster. Yes, sir.
Mr. Scott. How often does that happen?
Mr. Harpster. Just last week we had a plead out in Sioux
Falls where we arrested nine johns for soliciting under age
victims, and the last one did plead. There are eight more to
go. Just the week before that, we had a reverse operation in
Savannah where they were also charged.
Mr. Scott. And what did the one plead guilty to?
Mr. Harpster. 1591, sir. It was a 15-year mandatory.
Mr. Scott. And so, we can expect when these roundups occur
that the johns will be charged with crimes that carry 10- to
15-year mandatory minimum sentences.
Mr. Harpster. When the facts are present and working with
the DoJ, U.S. attorney's office, and the rest of the
prosecutors, we could expect that.
Mr. Scott. You get these websites that have people that are
apparently soliciting. Do you ever do stings to catch johns?
Mr. Harpster. Yes, sir.
Mr. Scott. And then what do you charge them with?
Mr. Harpster. The 1591. If we were doing it from a Federal
perspective, we would charge the 1591. The one in Sioux Falls--
--
Mr. Scott. There is a TV program that that I am sure you
are aware of.
Mr. Harpster. Yes, sir.
Mr. Scott. And the end shows these guys getting, like, 3
months and 6 months, maybe as much as a year. What happened to
the 15-year mandatory minimum charge?
Mr. Harpster. I am not sure about the TV show if the
Federals were involved at that level, sir.
Mr. Scott. Well, are you doing these?
Mr. Harpster. We have issues with that kind of TV show, so
that is kind of----
Mr. Scott. I mean, not the TV show, but, I mean, do you
post stuff or chase down and try to catch people?
Mr. Harpster. Yes. During reverse sting operations, we
would use the Internet or postings to attract customers for
under age----
Mr. Scott. And then people who respond to these postings,
what can they expect at the end?
Mr. Harpster. They will hopefully expect to be prosecuted.
That is where we are at. With the sting operators that are
aimed at the johns, with our Innocence Lost Initiative, we are
aimed at recovering victims.
Mr. Scott. Judge Groman, how often do you see johns being
hauled into court on charges that carry 10- to 15-year
mandatory minimums?
Judge Groman. I am actually in a juvenile court assignment,
so I do not see adults being prosecuted, but I could speak in
general terms. In Los Angeles, those prosecutions are very few
and far between.
Mr. Scott. What would it take, Mr. Harpster, to get you to
bring these charges more routinely against johns? It would
have, it would appear, to have a significant deterrent effect
if people thought they were looking at 10 to 15 years in prison
for soliciting sex with teenagers.
Mr. Harpster. It would require from a national level for us
to redirect our resources. Currently we are aimed at recovering
victims and getting those victims the services that they need.
We also do sting operations, but it is not our number one
priority at this time.
So we can, when appropriate, aim our resources at reverse
sting operations and arrest those johns and work in
coordination with State and locals. We hope that when we go and
we give training that they will carry on that type of
opportunity outside of the task forces and the Federal
initiatives that we run.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. The time of the gentleman has expired.
The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Forbes.
Mr. Forbes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I want
to thank first you and the Ranking Member for holding this
hearing. Thank all of you for being here.
Director Harpster, I know that the 2005 Trafficking Victims
Protection Reauthorization Act required a number of studies,
and I was wondering if you could just help us with the accuracy
of the data that you have to do those studies. And if you do
not have the accuracy, is partial information enough to get you
the kind of input that you need?
Mr. Harpster. So the issue we currently are dealing with is
the issue of accurate data. Lots of numbers between 100,000 to
200,000 of child victims out there. There are 50 different
States that handle victims 50 different ways. In the State of
New Jersey, for example, they will not even write reports on
child victims for fear that it would basically re-victimize
that person. That is an issue for us when we are trying to
collect data.
Through our task forces and through our training with the
State and locals, we have created a NCIC database, which is the
only database of its kind. And it is specifically aimed at
collecting those non-arrest situations, which would not be
reported in NCIC.
So with hopefully the database coming up, we use that
through our intelligence, through other NGOs and social
services where they have that information where they actually
see those people in their facilities, or see those people come
through for services. We can use those numbers to come to a
better guestimate.
Mr. Forbes. Okay. Mr. Chairman, I would like to defer the
balance of my time to Judge Poe from Texas with the Chair's
permission.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Without objection, the gentleman from
Texas is recognized.
Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding
and the Chairman for holding this hearing. And thank all four
of you for being here. I think it is interesting how you are
seated. We have the law on one end. We have the judge on the
other end. We have the victim sitting in between the police. I
think that is good. It means a lot.
To continue what you said, basically should be our focus.
The kids are not for sale, period, under any circumstances
ever. There are three people, if you will, in this tragedy, in
this crime. There is a victim. On the other end is the slave
master, trafficker, and then there is also the demand. I do not
call those people johns because, you know, John was a good guy
in the Bible. I call them child abusers because that is what
they are, child abusers. I would like to address each one of
those and get some answers from you on some specific questions
in the remaining time.
Starting with the children, how is it possible that we
could have a phrase of ``juvenile prostitution?'' How could
that exist? Under the law, a child cannot consent to sex. It is
not prostitution to me. Judge, can you help me out with that?
Is that a term that we should not be using anymore, ``juvenile
prostitution?"
Judge Groman. I think that is an awful term. You know, the
problem is that sometimes we see children in our juvenile court
that come in with other charges, so they are not always being
charged with that unspeakable term. So they are coming in on
charges of petty theft, or battery, or criminal threats. There
are a whole host of different charges that they come to our
court with.
Mr. Poe. Reclaiming my time, I only have a couple of
minutes. But the phrase ``child prostitution,'' as a jurist do
you think that is a phrase we should not be using under the
law?
Judge Groman. Absolutely.
Mr. Poe. We have in this country, I understand, through
Shared Hope, there are 300 beds for children who are
trafficked, 300 beds, child traffic victims. On the other hand,
according to the SPCA, we have 5,000 shelters for animals. Not
quarreling with that. I have got three Dalmatians. I got one of
them from Dalmatian Rescue. But I think we need to focus on the
victim first. Rescue the victim and find a place to house them.
We have two different standards, international victims that
come into the United States that are trafficked here and
domestic victims moved from across the country. International
victims, I understand, can apply for certification under HHS
and receive certain services that a domestic trafficked victim
cannot receive and cannot receive that certification.
Do you think, Judge, we ought to change that so that
victims can be treated alike whether they are international or
domestic?
Judge Groman. There is an absolute need for safe housing
for these young people. And absolutely there should be no
discrepancy whether they are internationally trafficked or
domestically trafficked.
Mr. Poe. Thank you.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. The gentleman's time has expired.
The gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers.
Mr. Conyers. Thank you, Chairman Sensenbrenner. I begin by
commending Ms. Walker Pettigrew for her insight and actual
courage of coming forward, putting a face on this problem, and
then going on to become a professional in the field yourself. I
am very respectful of what you have done in bringing this
subject forward.
Now, Corporal Heid, police officer, how often are johns
arrested and charged, and how often are they let go from just
your general experience?
Mr. Heid. With what we do in my own unit, the Maryland
State Police Child Recovery Unit, we are only going after
looking for young girls. We are out there looking for the
missing girls, the abducted children, and the juvenile victims.
For instance, if we are working a case and we get wind that
a 17-year-old girl might be missing and she might be involved
in prostitution, we are there to recover that girl. We are not
going to sit and wait and watch another john walk into that
room. So our focus is solely to get that girl out. If we can
build a case down the line, we will build a case down the line.
But we are not going to sit and wait and watch another john
walk into a room to re-victimize a young lady.
To answer your question, we do not arrest johns, the
Maryland State Police. We take part with the FBI if they do a
joint operation, and we do a reversal sting where we are
putting out ads, bringing johns in. I have been a part of that.
Mr. Conyers. Okay. Let me ask you, what is the race of most
of most johns, and what is the race for most victims?
Mr. Heid. I think in my experience in Maryland, most of the
johns are White males, and there is a mixture of the females,
the girls--Black, White--in Maryland.
Mr. Conyers. I wanted to get the color question in here
because I think if we do not, we will not get a real clear
picture. Would you add anything to this, Ms. Pettigrew?
Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew. Just as I said in my testimony,
I believe this as to be true in my understanding or my
knowledge, again, as a person who has experienced it as well as
a professional working with other young victims.
Mr. Conyers. Now, you were, in fact, victimized again when
you were arrested and interrogated. What thoughts or proposals
would you make to law enforcement to help them treat victims
more appropriately?
Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew. I very much thank you for
asking that question. I definitely think that, one, that young
people should have a survivor advocate with them present any
time that they are interrogated or questioned as a witness
because I think that there is something to be said as far as
having a supporter who has been a survivor. But even separate
from that, even if it cannot be someone who has the experience
of a survivor, someone who is trained in understanding the
trauma and the situational circumstances of survivors who can
stand in and be a survivor advocate during the interrogation
and the questioning. I just do not see that happening all too
often in a nationwide perspective.
Mr. Conyers. And in your experience and those who you have
mentored, what alternatives to detention are most appropriate
for victims?
Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew. I definitely think when we talk
about, you know, detaining, like I said, I do not think
detention is prevention. I think that the alternative to
detention could really be looking into community-based
programs. And basically instead of sentencing young people to
serve a certain amount of time in detention, we can start to
sentence them to engage in self-exploration activities and
things of that sort so that they have the ability to really
gain the services and the skills needed to make the best out of
their life and to fight the pressures in the situations that
are coming around them in their environment.
Mr. Conyers. Thank you so much, and I commend all of the
witnesses, Mr. Chairman, for their contributions.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Yes, thank you. The gentleman's time has
expired.
The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Goodlatte.
Mr. Goodlatte. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Harpster, can
you explain how the FBI works in conjunction with State and
local law enforcement to investigate and prosecute traffickers?
What is the Federal role in the crime, and are you more focused
on broader criminal enterprises?
Mr. Harpster. So if I can start with the middle question,
what is the Federal role, we see our role as bringing people
together. So with our Federal funding that we have, we like to
go out and create task forces. We have 69 child exploitation
task forces which have almost a thousand members from 400
different agencies.
With these task forces, we have the ability to go after the
issue on the local level and the national level. So our task
forces made up of local detectives and agents will work a case
in California and they will address that issue for that area of
responsibility.
Mr. Goodlatte. Let me ask you about that. Is the FBI only
involved when the trafficker crosses State lines, or do you
work with State and local law enforcement to combat intra-State
trafficking as well?
Mr. Harpster. Yes, we work on intra-State trafficking. For
us, the trafficker does not have to leave the State to be
charged with a sex trafficking offense.
Mr. Goodlatte. Thank you. Good. What is the FBI doing to
combat the online promotion of minor sex trafficking?
Mr. Harpster. It is an issue we are aware of, an issue we
are working on. If you bring up Backpage, we have identified
over 100 such sites as those that will promote child sex
trafficking, and we use technology to thwart that as well. So
not only do we look at and monitor them, at the same time our
intelligence units will go out there around special events
where we can expect an increase in online posting. We will
obviously scrub harder those sites to get those leads.
Mr. Goodlatte. Ms. Pettigrew, you have been working with
victims of minor sex trafficking for a number of years now.
Thank you for that good work. What have you learned from this
process that might help Congress understand the problem, and
what can we do to better protect and help victims?
Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew. Again, a lot of what I said in
my testimony is going to answer that question. I think
definitely the first thing that I noticed is that we cannot
just remove young people and expect the problem to go away. So
there are a lot of amazing opportunities and services that are
provided that allow young people to live in like the country.
I think that those are amazing ideas and amazing programs.
Yet the problem is that they do not allow young people to re-
assimilate into the community and environments that first got
them in the position in the first place. And so, I think that
we need to do more in regards to when we are working in
residential treatment with young people and young victims in
balancing their re-assimilation into their mainstream
community.
Also I think that, again, what I stated earlier is that
really we have to give them power. We have to allow them to
understand the law is on their side to be able to assist them
with facing their exploiter and things of that sort. We also
have to let them know that there are services to help them, but
we first and foremost need to understand that we cannot help
them if we are still labeling them as prostitutes. And
secondly, we have to understand that it really is going to take
them understanding that they have capabilities to be able to
fight back.
Mr. Goodlatte. Good. Let me go on to Judge Groman. Much of
the discussion regarding minor sex trafficking focuses on
pimps, ignoring that this is a marketplace equally fueled by
the adults that purchase children for sex. Why do States treat
minor victims as criminals or at least delinquents, and does
this not imply that there is some moral equivalence between
minors and the adults that exploit them?
Judge Groman. With regard to the criminalization, I think
one of the reasons that criminal laws are still on the books is
because the juvenile justice system has been the only system
that has been working with these young people. And so, there is
a great deal of concern if prostitution is decriminalized, that
there is not going to be a child welfare system that is
equipped and prepared to take over the role of working with
these young people. So I think it is very, very important that
we place the responsibility on child welfare to work with these
young people.
Some of the laws in States do not allow child welfare to
intervene where the trafficker or the customer is not apparent,
or other caretaker. So when you are involved with third persons
who are trafficking young people, child welfare laws or child
welfare agencies do not believe that they have the ability to
intervene in that situation. And so, that needs to be changed.
Child welfare agencies should be the primary agency
responsible so that juvenile justice does not have to continue
to provide the services and support for these young people.
Mr. Goodlatte. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. The time of the gentleman has expired.
The gentlewoman from California, Ms. Bass.
Ms. Bass. I will yield 30 seconds of my time to the
Chairman.
Mr. Scott. Thank you.
Ms. Bass. The Ranking Member, I am sorry.
Mr. Scott. Mr. Harpster, you mentioned 1591. That is
trafficking. Since minors cannot consent, do you ever charge
them with just rape?
Mr. Harpster. I do not have the----
Mr. Scott. Would you do that in the future?
Mr. Harpster. I have to get back to you on that. I am
trying to look through the elements of 1591 in my head, and I
do not want to say or assume it is in there that the sexual
contact is part of that offense. I am not sure on that, sir. I
will get back to you on that one.
Mr. Scott. Well, I mean, since a minor cannot consent, it
ought to be a straight rape charge, and we would like to start
bringing those. If you could get back to us. Thank you. I thank
the gentlelady.
[The information referred to follows:]
Ms. Bass. Thank you very much. Well, first of all, I want
to thank all of the witnesses for their time and their
expertise and dedication to this issue. I have to tell you, I
have seen Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew testify a number of times.
And the point that she makes consistently, which is the child
welfare system really prepared her to be a victim. And the
child welfare system is our responsibility, so we have to
repair that.
Judge, I think you eloquently said that we currently hold
children responsible for not preventing their own exploitation.
I wanted to ask Corporal Heid, when you are recovering the
girls, do you keep stats on the ones that are connected to the
child welfare system? Do you have stats on that?
Mr. Heid. Yes. We would have that at our office, yes.
Ms. Bass. And do you know what they are off hand?
Mr. Heid. I would say the vast majority, I mean, percentage
wise, probably 90 plus percent we do get assistance. There are
times depending on which county we are in that we----
Ms. Bass. No, they are from the child welfare system. Is
that what you mean?
Mr. Heid. I am sorry. I thought you meant referring them
after the fact.
Ms. Bass. No, no, no, no. I am asking how many of the girls
that you recover were foster kids.
Mr. Heid. I am sorry. We have had several. The majority of
them are not.
Ms. Bass. Do you track that data?
Mr. Heid. Yes. Yes.
Ms. Bass. Okay. Can you get back to me and let me know?
Mr. Heid. Sure.
[The information referred to follows:]
Ms. Bass. Because I am concerned in talking to the FBI in
Los Angeles, they know it is 40 percent, but they think that is
way under reported. And so, I think one of the things that we
need to do is keep better data on that because that, again, is
our system. I mean, you know, when those kids are put in child
welfare, we are responsible for them. We are the parent.
Mr. Heid. Correct.
Ms. Bass. You know, I really do think that we have to
address the language. It kills me to hear ``johns'' and
``customers'' used for child molesters. And I think as long as
we use that language, we normalize it in a way. And the only
way we are going to break past that is if we label it for what
it is. And also the term ``prostitution,'' which has been said
a number of times. We have to change that language in order to
change our mentality.
Mr. Harpster, I wanted to know when you were dealing in law
enforcement agencies, how difficult is it for you to get them
to see the girls as victims and not as criminals?
Mr. Harpster. It is an issue we are dealing with. We have
had relationships with the National Association of Chiefs of
Police where we are actually developing roll call videos for
them. We are doing training with the national school resource
officers as well to get them to be able to identify them as
victims as opposed to just people on the----
Ms. Bass. Well, and I want to know if you think that there
is more that we can do. I am very proud to be a co-sponsor with
Judge Poe and his efforts in his legislation, and also on the
Ways and Means Committee, Subcommittee Chairman Reichert. We
have legislation. I have legislation that I am working on
specifically around the child welfare issue.
And, Judge, I would just ask you, child welfare has
difficulty with child molestation. If somebody beats up a kid,
is that considered child abuse?
Judge Groman. Well, it is child abuse, but whether child
welfare can intervene really depends on whether the abuser is a
parent or caretaker. And if not, then they do not have the
ability under the current state of laws, at least in the State
of California, to intervene.
Ms. Bass. Okay. Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew, I mean, your
description of being incarcerated was just heartbreaking
frankly. One problem that I have heard you say before and other
people is that when girls are first brought in, it is difficult
for them to break away from the pimp. And so, when you were
saying that you thought community-based services are needed, do
you think it is ever appropriate to hold a girl against her
will so that she can at least have a few days to break out of
the psychology?
Ms. Ortiz Walker Pettigrew. I can definitely see that
perspective, and I think it definitely is back onto an
individual based situation. If there is no other, if it is the
last resort, and you are doing it in the efforts of just,
again, trying to keep the young person safe. I mean, again, our
options are limited.
I do think that we need to more mindful in holding young
people against their will because all we are doing is replacing
what the exploiter or the pimp does. So then it puts us in the
same proximity of the relationship that we have with that young
person as that pimp does.
And so, just understanding that we need to extend these
services. We need to extend these opportunities for these
programs because they need to build connections and
relationships elsewhere outside of the ones that they have with
their pimp because oftentimes that is the strongest
relationship in their lives.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
The gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Bachus.
Mr. Bachus. Thank you. Ms. Ortiz, she mentioned----
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Could the gentleman turn his----
Mr. Bachus. I am sorry. Ms. Ortiz Pettigrew Walker, she
mentioned having to shower with male guards watching her.
Recently in Alabama we had a case with similar charges in our
women's prisons that that was going on. Is that a common
occurrence?
Judge Groman. Well, when you are talking about detention in
a penal facility, yes, it is a common occurrence. And I think
that is probably the biggest problem here is we are detaining
children in penal facilities that are meant for young people
who are a danger to the community. And so, those are all things
that are inherent in being in a penal facility where you lose
your privacy, danger of being abused in the custody arena.
So I think where we really have to work with these young
people is if they are going to be in a secure setting, it
should not be a penal setting. It should be more of a hospital
therapeutic setting just as we have children who are dangers to
themselves because of mental health concerns. Those are the
types of settings that should be used in a secure manner and
not penal facilities.
Mr. Bachus. Now, what about adult women? I mean, you know,
should they be exposed to that? I mean, they are prisoners,
but, I mean, I guess they lose their civil rights.
Judge Groman. I just think that is the nature of custodial
facilities for people who are being held on criminal charges.
Mr. Bachus. Okay. Let me ask Acting Director Harpster, FBI,
how many total agents are there investigating crime? Just give
me a ballpark figure.
Mr. Harpster. I am sorry, sir?
Mr. Bachus. Total agents in the field.
Mr. Harpster. Total agents? Currently we are about a little
over 400. That is not including task force members.
Mr. Bachus. Now, you are talking about in your division?
Mr. Harpster. I am talking about the FBI as a whole.
Mr. Bachus. As a whole.
Mr. Harpster. As a whole.
Mr. Bachus. Four hundred?
Mr. Harpster. That is the agents, 400. Total number is
about 900. We have got about 500 task force officers. That is a
rough estimate, but about that.
Mr. Bachus. You are talking about all Federal agents
nationwide?
Mr. Harpster. I am talking about FBI, sir.
Mr. Bachus. FBI, that is what I am saying. FBI.
Mr. Harpster. Yes. Yes.
Mr. Bachus. Okay. I would have just thought it was quite a
bit more than that.
Mr. Harpster. The SACs have the ability to, you know, flex
their, we call it FSL or staffing to a threat. So if there is a
large incident going on or the threat is high, they can move
people back and forth.
Mr. Bachus. Okay. Are there priorities within the FBI? I
have heard domestic terrorism is a priority. Public corruption
is a priority. Is there some list of priorities or is there a
checklist or anything about----
Mr. Harpster. So the director has made it clear that
children are his number one priority along with
counterterrorism. So within our program, we have priorities--
child abductions, child sex trafficking, child pornography
production and manufacturing. But it is at the top of the list.
Mr. Bachus. You know, I noticed in a statement by the
director and actually by an FBI agent in Alabama that the two
priorities were public corruption and domestic terrorism. You
know, they did not mention human trafficking, and I do not know
if that was an oversight or what. But is there any printed
priority?
Mr. Harpster. There is. When Director Mueller came in, the
overall priority would be counterterrorism, and then I
believe----
Mr. Bachus. Could you share that information or supply that
to the Committee?
Mr. Harpster. Sure, I would be happy to.
[The information referred to follows:]
Mr. Bachus. How many agents are devoted to human
trafficking? Any solely devoted to that?
Mr. Harpster. Yes, that is a separate branch, so my comment
would be a guess. But I will include that information for you,
sir.
Mr. Bachus. So you are not in that branch?
Mr. Harpster. That is correct. Human trafficking comes
under the Civil Rights Section.
Mr. Bachus. All right. Sexual exploitation, that is your
branch?
Mr. Harpster. Correct, sir.
Mr. Bachus. How many agents are involved in that as their
sole responsibility?
Mr. Harpster. Under my program, again that 400 number comes
in.
Mr. Bachus. How many?
Mr. Harpster. Four hundred, sir.
Mr. Bachus. How many agents are there nationwide in the
FBI?
Mr. Harpster. Approximately 12,000, I believe.
Mr. Bachus. Oh, that was my question when you responded
with 400. I am sorry. So there are 12,000 agents, but 400 are
devoted----
Mr. Harpster. That number will go up and down, but those
are the ones that are devoted.
Mr. Bachus. To sexual exploitation.
Mr. Harpster. And that will change from month to month as
well.
Mr. Bachus. Do they do something else other than sexual
exploitation?
Mr. Harpster. Those would be the ones who are assigned to
the Crimes Against Children. So it could----
Mr. Bachus. Okay, 400 of the 12,000?
Mr. Harpster. Yes.
Mr. Bachus. Okay.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. The time of the gentleman has expired.
The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Gohmert.
Mr. Gohmert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank all of our
witnesses. As a father of three girls, it breaks my heart to
hear the testimony and to think that any children would be
treated as you have, Ms. Pettigrew. Having been a judge, I have
sentenced people a lot longer than 15 years for doing what has
been done.
I applaud the efforts. I think we should do more. I think
that my friend on the other side, Ms. Bass, is right. We ought
to properly characterize who are the victims and who are the
perps.
But I want to yield my time to a man that has a bill, Ted
Poe, at this time for the rest of my time.
Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman, Judge Gohmert, for
yielding. I know how valuable time is when we are in these
hearings and how you like to ask a lot of questions, so I
appreciate that a great deal.
There was a hearing last week in Houston put on the
Homeland Security. And my friend, Ms. Jackson Lee and Mike
McCaul hosted that, and I was there. And we learned a lot of
things, but we learned that Houston, Texas, according to the
testimony, is the hub of international trafficking into the
United States, that kids, boys and girls, are smuggled to
Houston from all over, and they are sent throughout the fruited
plain. It is a tragedy.
Director Harpster, I want two numbers. How many people have
been prosecuted who are in the situation of being the customer
in a prostitution enterprise, whether it is for rape, or
whether it is for being a customer? How many have the FBI
prosecuted in the last year?
Mr. Harpster. I apologize, sir. I do not have that number
with me, but I will get it for you.
Mr. Poe. How many people have the FBI prosecuted who are
international sex tourism criminals? They go from the United
States and they go to some other country for sex tourism, and
it is with a minor. How many of those people have been
prosecuted in the last year?
Mr. Harpster. We have a child sex tourism initiative which
comes under my program.
Mr. Poe. Just the number. I just want a number.
Mr. Harpster. Again, I do not want to give you the wrong
number. I want to give you an accurate one, and I will get to
that to you. But it is----
Mr. Poe. Not very many.
Mr. Harpster. It is all relative, sir.
Mr. Poe. Not very many. Furnish that to the Chairman and to
the Ranking Member if you would as the protocol requires under
the rules.
If I understand it correctly, in sex tourism, if a person
goes from the United States to Costa Rica, you have to prove
their primary purpose for going there to prosecute them was for
sex tourism. Is that correct?
[The information referred to follows:]
Mr. Harpster. No.
Mr. Poe. So you can go down there on a business operation,
and then you can be involved with a child and then a person
could be prosecuted even though their primary purpose was not
sex tourism, is that correct?
Mr. Harpster. If the evidence is developed that you either
had a conspiracy to have sex with that child or have sex with a
child, that is a chargeable offense.
Mr. Poe. I understand when I was there, I was told by the
government and by the shelter that around 80 percent of the
people going to Costa Rica for sex tourism are from the United
States. Would you argue with that or not?
Mr. Harpster. I would not argue with the fact that Costa
Rica is a destination for child sex trafficking.
Mr. Poe. Okay. I want to be careful in my numbers because
sex tourism or prostitution with adults is legal, but it is not
legal with children in Costa Rica, is that correct?
Mr. Harpster. In Costa Rica, I believe the age of consent
is 14 years old.
Mr. Poe. All right. I think the system, in the remaining
time, our system I think does fairly well to go after
traffickers. We are not doing too good with the victim on the
other end. I want to center on the person in the middle, and
you are going to get me that number, how many people have been
prosecuted.
Congress, in my opinion, needs to send a clear and
convincing message that the days of boys being boys is over in
the United States when it comes to sex, child abuse rather,
with children.
What about the RICO statute? Have you used the RICO statute
to go after the child abuser, Mr. Harpster? You will get back
with me on that.
Mr. Harpster. I will get with you on that.
Mr. Poe. Okay.
Mr. Harpster. I know we do use----
Mr. Poe. Do you think it is a good idea?
Mr. Harpster. We use the Child Enterprise Act, which is
similar to the RICO for conspiracy for both the customer and
also the pimp as well. So we have used that in that past.
Mr. Poe. Do you agree with me that we should quit calling
the child abuser, the guy in the middle, anything but a child
abuser, rapist, terminology?
Mr. Harpster. I would concur with you, sir, that, yes, that
is true.
Mr. Poe. All right. And, Judge, I want to ask you one last
question on victims. I think we have talked a little bit about
victims, not enough. Do you see that there is a whole range of
services that need to be provided for victims, and one way we
can do this is when the police capture these traffickers or the
child abusers, Federal judges are allowed to impose some type
of fee on them that goes into some kind of fund that eventually
goes to services, whether it is law enforcement, NGOs, or
county services? Do you think that is a pretty good idea or
not?
Judge Groman. Yes, there are actually a number of States
that are using those funds for that purpose. Housing is a huge
priority, and if those funds are used to provide supportive
housing for these young people, I think that that is very
important.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. The time of the gentleman has expired.
That concludes the questioning by Members of the Subcommittee.
All time that has been allocated to the Members of the
Subcommittee who are present has expired.
So without objection, the Subcommittee hearing is
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record