[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
TERRORIST ENTRY THROUGH THE
SOUTHWEST BORDER
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION INTEGRITY,
SECURITY, AND ENFORCEMENT
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2023
__________
Serial No. 118-43
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
53-550 WASHINGTON : 2023
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chair
DARRELL ISSA, California JERROLD NADLER, New York, Ranking
KEN BUCK, Colorado Member
MATT GAETZ, Florida ZOE LOFGREN, California
MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
TOM McCLINTOCK, California HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin Georgia
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky ADAM SCHIFF, California
CHIP ROY, Texas ERIC SWALWELL, California
DAN BISHOP, North Carolina TED LIEU, California
VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin J. LUIS CORREA, California
CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
BEN CLINE, Virginia JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
LANCE GOODEN, Texas LUCY McBATH, Georgia
JEFF VAN DREW, New Jersey MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
TROY NEHLS, Texas VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
BARRY MOORE, Alabama DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
KEVIN KILEY, California CORI BUSH, Missouri
HARRIET HAGEMAN, Wyoming GLENN IVEY, Maryland
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas BECCA BALINT, Vermont
LAUREL LEE, Florida
WESLEY HUNT, Texas
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION INTEGRITY, SECURITY,
AND ENFORCEMENT
TOM McCLINTOCK, California, Chair
KEN BUCK, Colorado PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington,
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona Ranking Member
TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin ZOE LOFGREN, California
CHIP ROY, Texas J. LUIS CORREA, California
VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
JEFF VAN DREW, New Jersey SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
TROY NEHLS, Texas DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
BARRY MOORE, Alabama ERIC SWALWELL, California
WESLEY HUNT, Texas Vacancy
CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Majority Staff Director
AMY RUTKIN, Minority Staff Director & Chief of Staff
C O N T E N T S
----------
Thursday, September 14, 2023
Page
OPENING STATEMENTS
The Honorable Tom McClintock, Chair of the Subcommittee on
Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement from the State
of California.................................................. 1
The Honorable Pramila Jayapal, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee
on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement from the
State of Washington............................................ 3
The Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member of the Committee on
the Judiciary from the State of New York....................... 4
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Committee on the Judiciary
from the State of Ohio......................................... 6
WITNESSES
Todd Bensman, Senior National Security Fellow, Center for
Immigration Studies
Oral Testimony................................................. 7
Prepared Testimony............................................. 9
Charles Marino, Former Senior Law Enforcement Advisor, Department
of Homeland Security
Oral Testimony................................................. 24
Prepared Testimony............................................. 26
Alex Nowrasteh, Vice President for Economic and Social Policy
Studies, Cato Institute
Oral Testimony................................................. 35
Prepared Testimony............................................. 37
Chief Rodney Scott, Distinguished Senior Fellow for Border
Security, Texas Public Policy Foundation
Oral Testimony................................................. 49
Prepared Testimony............................................. 51
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC. SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
All materials submitted for the record by the Subcommittee on
Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement are listed
below.......................................................... 81
A letter from Ohio Immigrant Alliance, Sept. 7, 2023, to the
Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Committee on the Judiciary
from the State of Ohio, and the Honorable Jerrold Nadler,
Ranking Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State
of New York, submitted by the Honorable Pramila Jayapal,
Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity,
Security, and Enforcement from the State of Washington, for the
record
TERRORIST ENTRY THROUGH THE SOUTHWEST BORDER
----------
Thursday, September 14, 2023
House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security,
and Enforcement
Committee on the Judiciary
Washington, DC
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in Room
2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Tom McClintock [Chair
of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives McClintock, Jordan, Buck,
Biggs, Tiffany, Roy, Spartz, Van Drew, Moore, Hunt, Jayapal,
Nadler, Correa, Escobar, Ross, and Swalwell.
Mr. McClintock. The Subcommittee will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a recess
at any time.
I want to welcome everyone to today's hearing on Terrorist
Entry Through the Southwest Border. I will now recognize myself
for an opening statement.
Three days ago, we marked the 22nd Anniversary of the
Taliban-backed terrorist attack on the United States. Two weeks
ago, we marked the 2nd Anniversary of the administration's
surrender to the Taliban, turning over billions of dollars of
military equipment and releasing more than 5,000 of the most
dangerous terrorists on the planet from Bagram-Parwan detention
facility. On January 20th, we will mark the 3rd Anniversary of
the Biden Executive Orders that opened our borders to the world
by halting construction of the border wall, rescinding the
remain in Mexico policy, and forbidding ICE from enforcing
court-ordered deportations.
Since that day, more than 5.7 million illegal aliens from
over 160 countries have illegally crossed our border. Mr. Biden
has released over 2.6 million of them, a population larger than
the entire State of New Mexico, into the United States in
violation of our immigration laws. While the Border Patrol has
been overwhelmed by this unprecedented mass illegal migration,
another 1.7 million known got-aways have entered as well. That
is an additional illegal population the size of West Virginia.
Now, since we have no access to most foreign criminal data
bases, we know little of the foreign criminal records of these
2.6 million illegal immigrants as they have been released into
our communities and of course, we know nothing of the 1.7
million got-aways.
We know from a recent GAO report that many have already
disappeared into our communities without a trace. Of 981,000
alien records they surveyed they found that, ``addresses for
more than 177,000 were either missing, invalid for delivery, or
not legitimate residential locations.''
According to the GAO, the lack of valid addresses means
that ICE, ``cannot locate migrants to enforce immigration laws
including to arrest or remove individuals who are considered
potential threats to national security.''
Of much greater concern, of course, is the 1.7 million
known got-aways, people the Border Patrol has observed entering
this country, but could not stop because our resources are
overwhelmed.
Under the open border policies of the Democrats, if you
illegally enter this country, seek out a Border Patrol agent
and make a false asylum claim, you will almost certainly be
released into our country. You will get taxpayer-funded travel
wherever you want to go and lots of free stuff including cash,
food, free medical care, and even education. After six months,
you can get work authorization and when your asylum claim is
finally heard and denied, years from now, and you are ordered
deported, that deportation order most likely won't be enforced.
So, why would 1.7 million illegal aliens want to invade the
Border Patrol? The only two reasons I can think of are that
they are either hiding criminal records or they are conducting
criminal acts. We do know that among those aliens the Border
Patrol has apprehended, the number of suspected terrorists has
increased exponentially. In 2021, we stopped 15 of them. That
was five times the number encountered in 2020 and as many as we
had stopped in the four previous years combined. By 2022, that
number grew to 98 and in the first 10 months of this year that
number has already grown to 146, a tenfold increase in two
years.
In June, FBI Director Chris Wray testified before this
Committee that there has been an uptick in ``known or suspected
terrorists coming across the Southern border,'' and that ``the
Southern border represents a massive security threat.'' Those
are his words, a massive security threat.
In August, we learned that a foreign national with ties to
ISIS helped smuggle over 120 nationals from Uzbekistan, Russia,
Georgia, and Chechnya into the United States through the
Southwest border. Russian reports indicated that the FBI was
``scrambling to find the smuggled individuals since the Biden
Administration had released them into the U.S.'' Of course,
this begs the question if illegal aliens are so carefully
vetted, as Mr. Mayorkas has repeatedly assured this Committee,
why would the FBI be scrambling to find them? Clearly, very bad
actors are entering our country through our open Southwest
border and I am afraid something terrible is brewing, either a
coordinated terrorist attack by elements that have entered over
the last few years, or the kind of cartel violence that has now
become so common in Mexico.
Now, the Democrats' witness will tell us not to worry our
pretty little heads about this, it hasn't happened yet. Well,
that is precisely the attitude that the 9/11 Commission
excoriated as the catastrophic failure public policy that made
us vulnerable to such a horror on 9/11.
Our other witnesses though have a very different
perspective. They have seen first-hand what is happening at the
border and they are desperately trying to sound the alarm
before it is too late. I hope that we will all heed their
warnings today. With that, I am pleased to recognize the
Ranking Member for five minutes.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Welcome and good morning
to our witnesses.
It appears that this Subcommittee has found a new angle to
have the same border hearing that we have had six times already
this Congress, another hearing where we hear the same tired and
untrue talking points about the Southern border and actions by
President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas. I am not going to
repeat them because guess what, these claims by my Republican
colleagues, actually, empower smugglers to convince desperate
migrants to pay for their services.
When I read the CNN article that came out at the end of
last month about migrants from Uzbekistan crossing the Southern
border with the help from somebody allegedly linked to ISIS, I
wanted to learn more. Everyone on this panel wants to keep
Americans safe and the idea that individuals with ties to
terrorists might be crossing our border and intending to do our
country harm is deeply concerning. This potential issue is one
that should be approached with an eye toward gathering the
facts and information so that we can act accordingly.
Unfortunately, that is not what this hearing is about. This
hearing appears to be nothing more than political theater with
little new information. What bothers me the most is that my
Republican colleagues use these hearings to weaponize the
emotions of the American public to score cheap political points
as we head into the next election. This is not about telling
the truth or getting to the facts. This hearing is purely
intended to scare the public, to demonize immigrants, and to
score cheap political points as we head toward that next
election.
If the majority was serious about getting to the facts on
this issue, instead of holding this hearing, the Subcommittee
would have first let the Department of Homeland Security and
Federal Bureau of Investigation give Members a classified
briefing on the topic, something that both the FBI and DHS has
offered to provide us. My understanding is that the FBI and DHS
have even offered specific dates on when this briefing can take
place in the near future. Instead, the majority is once again
holding a hearing with no government witnesses, not a single
government witness where we will hear a lot of innuendo,
hearsay, and scary-sounding rhetoric intended to play politics
on the issue of immigration. This is not the way to conduct
oversight, especially over a national security issue that
belongs in a classified setting. This is not a serious hearing
intended to gather facts and get to the truth, but while we are
here, I think it is important for us to get some facts out
there.
(1) In the last 48 years going back to 1975, the number of
Americans killed by a terrorist who crossed the Southern border
unlawfully is zero. That is right. Not a single American has
been injured or killed by a terrorist who crossed our Southern
border without authorization. So, don't fall for Republican
fearmongering.
(2) The only foreign-born terrorists who cross the Southern
border unlawfully were three brothers from Macedonia who came
to the United States while Ronald Reagan was President. Twenty
years later, they were arrested while planning an attack in New
Jersey. Our systems worked then, but you certainly won't hear
Republicans on this Committee raise either of those facts.
(3) Yes, there has been an increase in the number of migrants
apprehended who are on the ``Terrorist Screening Data Set.''
These people have been apprehended and they receive additional
vetting and interviews from DHS as a result. There is also
coordination with the FBI on the appropriate action that should
be taken when responding to these individuals. If it is
determined that these individuals pose a serious threat to
national security or public safety, they may be denied
admission, detained, removed, or turned over to another agency
for prosecution as appropriate.
All of this could have been discussed with a classified
briefing, but that is not the path that the majority chose
because they are not interested in the facts. As is my refrain
every single time we have these hearings, if the majority was
at all serious about addressing immigration in America, they
would be working with us to pass bipartisan immigration reforms
that would finally update our outdated immigration system so
that we have real legal pathways for people to enter the United
States, to be with their families, to escape terrible
situations in their countries, and to contribute to our
economy, our communities, and our country. That is what would
decrease the number of people coming to the Southern border.
That is what would allow Border Patrol agents to focus on true
security threats. That is what would allow more people to go
through detailed vetting before ever coming to the United
States. That is how we can improve our national security.
Instead, some Republicans have openly said that they want
to defund the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI. Last
year, almost every one of them voted against the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Bill which provided additional funding to ports
of entry for nonintrusive inspections to combat smuggling of
people and drugs, modernization, and additional staffing.
Unfortunately, we have another hearing today that prioritizes
cheap political points and outrage over action. So, let the
show begin.
Mr. McClintock. Just to correct the record, we did request
a classified briefing from DHS and the FBI on this subject and
they said the earliest they could get to it was September 29th
and we look forward to them meeting that request.
I see that the Chair of the Full Judiciary Committee is
here and I would recognize him for five minutes for an opening
statement.
Mr. Nadler. Well, thank you for elevating me to Chair
again. I hope that is true next year.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. On Monday, we commemorated the 22nd
Anniversary of the horrific attacks on September 11th. None of
us will ever forget the terror of that day or the bravery of
the first responders who rushed toward danger to save countless
lives. To so many people, the wounds from 9/11 still feel
fresh. The grief and pain is ever present.
Among the many ways that our lives changed after the events
of that terrible day, September 11th served as the catalyst for
a sea change in our immigration system. The 19 hijackers who
carried out the attack came to this country legally on visas.
In response to the intelligence failures that allowed them to
enter, plan, and execute the attacks, we created the Department
of Homeland Security. This led to massive increases in funding,
vetting, and enforcement within the immigration system. As a
result, immigration became inextricably linked with national
security.
While in many ways we are safer today, there are also many
problematic aspects to this approach, not the least of which is
that asylum seekers are too often treated like criminals by our
government. However, one thing is certain, the Federal
Government is deeply focused on keeping Americans safe from
threats domestic and foreign and attacks by foreign-born
terrorists on U.S. soil since 9/11 are vanishingly rare. I am
sure that my Republican colleagues will do their best to scare
people into believing that the next 9/11 is just around the
corner. This time, they will claim, it will be planned by
someone who snuck over the Southwest border. The fact remains
that there has never been a successful attack planned by
someone who illegally crossed our Southwest border.
Even the cherry-picked examples that we will likely hear
about today tell a story about the rigorous vetting done by DHS
and our intelligence agencies to keep us safe. For example,
much has been made about recent reports that asylum seekers
from Uzbekistan were aided by a smuggler with ISIS sympathies.
What we know about those alleged ties is precisely because of
investigative work done by intelligence agencies in
coordination with immigration enforcement agencies working
together, as they should, in a case like this.
The FBI is continuing to identify and vet this group of
individuals even after the National Security Council stated
publicly that there is no indication that any of the people who
actually entered the U.S. have any connection to a foreign-
terrorist network.
Of course, we won't learn anything new about these migrants
today. That is because this slap-dash hearing was pulled
together to make headlines, not progress. As has become
commonplace in this Subcommittee, there are no government
witnesses today, no one who can provide a thorough accounting
of what the government is currently doing to address potential
threats. Yet, DI and DHS have offered to provide Members of the
classified briefing about this incident, but the classified
briefing doesn't get anyone a spot on Fox News.
So, here we are, about to commence yet another hearing to
demonstrate just how unserious my colleagues are about fixing
the problems plaguing our immigration system. If they wanted to
improve things, they would have joined the Democrats when we
appropriated hundreds of millions of dollars to provide new
technology inspection systems and CBP offices to the border in
last year's omnibus spending bill. Not a single Republican
Member of this Committee voted in favor of that bill.
Now, many of them want to defund DHS, DOJ, and the FBI or
else they will shut down the government. These extreme MAGA
priorities are dead wrong, and the American people are
watching.
I thank the witnesses for appearing in front of us today
and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman yields back. The Chair
recognizes the arrival of the Chair of the House Judiciary
Committee. Mr. Jordan is recognized for an opening statement.
Chair Jordan. Well, I will be brief. I thank you, Mr.
Chair. Thank you for doing this hearing. I just wanted to
respond to the Ranking Member of the Full Committee's statement
that no one from the government is here to give us answers. We
have been asking for answers from those guys for I don't know
how long. We wrote to Secretary Mayorkas before he came in
front of this Committee seven weeks ago. We wrote to him the
week before saying, hey, here are questions we want you to be
prepared to answer. This is like the professor telling you hey,
these are the questions I am going to ask you on the exam. He
came to the Committee and wouldn't answer the questions.
We asked him multiple--we asked him a question, not even on
the terrorist issue. We asked him a simple question. We said
how many of the over two million people who have been accounted
on the border, how many of them have been adjudicated and when
removed from the country? He wouldn't answer the question. Mr.
Gaetz asked him. Mr. Roy asked him. I asked him a couple of
times. Finally, I said is the number greater than zero? He
would agree to that, but he wouldn't tell us the number.
We then followed up with a letter to him. What's the
answer? Still no response. So, the idea that we don't want
answers and someone from the government can give them to us is
baloney. We have tried and tried and tried. That is why we are
probably going to have to do some compulsory resources to get
some--try to get some answers for the American people.
Appreciated the leadership of the Subcommittee Chair on so many
important issues that have been in front of this Committee and
I would yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Thanks. Without objection, all other
opening statements will be included in the record, and I will
now introduce today's witnesses.
Our first witness will be Mr. Todd Bensman. Mr. Bensman is
the Texas-based Senior National Security Fellow for the Center
for Immigration Studies. Prior to that, he led counterterrorism
intelligence for the Texas Department of Public Safety's
Intelligence and Counterterrorism Division. He has written
about and routinely reports on the U.S. border crisis. Mr.
Bensman holds an MA in Security Studies from the Navy Post-
Graduate School, Center for Homeland Defense and Security, and
an undergraduate degree in Journalism from Northern Arizona
University.
Our second witness will be Mr. Charles Marino. Mr. Marino
is a national security expert who served as Senior Law
Enforcement Advisor to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano from
2009-2011. He was a career Secret Service officer during three
different administrations. He is a graduate of the National War
College in which he received an MS in National Security
Strategy and is currently Adjunct Professor at the University
of South Carolina.
The minority, of course, gets to choose a witness. They did
not choose any administration officials, but we have with us
today at their invitation Mr. Alex Nowrasteh, do I have that
right?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Nowrasteh.
Mr. McClintock. Nowrasteh. Thank you.
Mr. Nowrasteh. Thank you for asking.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Nowrasteh is the Vice President for
Economic and Social Policy Studies at Cato Institute. He has
written on the economic impacts of immigration on the economy.
Mr. Nowrasteh received a BA in Economics from George Mason
University and an MS in Economic History from the London School
of Economics.
Then, finally, returning to the Subcommittee is Chief
Rodney Scott who served 29 years in the United States Border
Patrol before retiring as Chief of the Border Patrol in August
2021. During that time, he held numerous leadership positions
at various stations and sectors along the Southwest border, as
well as several leadership and specialized assignments at U.S.
Customs and Border Protection Headquarters.
I want to welcome all our witnesses and thank them for
appearing today. I will begin by swearing you in. Will you
please rise and raise your right hand?
Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the
testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best
of your knowledge, information, and belief so help you God?
Let the record reflect that the witnesses have answered in
the affirmative. Thank you. Please be seated.
Please know that your written testimony will be entered
into the record in its entirety, so accordingly, we will ask
you to summarize your testimony in five minutes.
Mr. Bensman, we will begin with you.
STATEMENT OF TODD BENSMAN
Mr. Bensman. Thank you for holding this hearing about the
national security consequence of the worst mass migration
crisis ever to have stricken America. The consequence of this
threat is the threat of terrorist entry over that border and
evidence demonstrates the mass migration crisis has elevated
that threat as I will explain.
After 9/11, DHS developed border counterterrorism programs
that did prevent terrorist infiltration into the United States,
a threat by the way that the 9/11 Commission expressly warned
about. Programs established in 2004, perhaps aided by sure
luck, have thwarted numerous border crossers for 20 years as I
documented in my book ``America's Covert Border War.''
The sole illegal entrant who has carried out an attack
since
9/11 was a Somali who sympathized with ISIS and crossed
illegally at San Ysidro and was released and went on later to
strike Edmonton, Alberta, and Canada in 2017. The ongoing
border crisis has rendered those counterterrorism programs
unviable now. One of the most impactful of those systems
directed Border Patrol agents to tag migrants as special
interest aliens if they hailed from listed countries where
terrorist groups operated. ICE would detain special interest
aliens until Federal agents could interview and debrief them as
part of enhanced security investigations. Derogatory results
led to many deportations which kept Americans safe.
A recent CNN report, however, revealed just the latest
evidence that this interview program has broken down. DHS went
into red alert after discovering a human smuggler tied to ISIS
had brought at least a dozen Uzbekistani special interest
aliens over the border. They were all quickly freed into the
interior like most other illegal immigrants of late without
being interviewed. We know this because CNN also reported that
U.S. authorities mounted a nationwide manhunt for the
Uzbekistanis so that they now could conduct the interviews.
This episode is only the latest revealing failures in our
border screening systems. If you won't believe me, review the
July report of DHS's Office of Inspector General which detailed
how Yuma Sector Border Patrol agents accidentally freed a
Colombian national on the terror watch list. Authorities found
the man in Tampa two long weeks after he was accidentally
released. Why did this happen? The IG blamed the mass migration
chaos for the alien's release. Yuma agents let him go because
they, and I quote:
We're busy processing an increased flow of migrants. Because
the increase in Yuma apprehensions had created pressures to
quickly process migrants and decrease the time available to
review each file.
Expect those screening programs to be degraded indefinitely
because vast numbers of special interest aliens are currently
pouring through the Darien Gap between Colombia and Panama.
Usually, 10,000 migrants or less pass through the Gap. In 2023,
however, 300,000 plus have gone through the Gap, and whereas
only 3,000 or 4,000 special interest aliens among them reached
our Southern border annually, The Daily Caller just reported
that 75,000 came in just the last nine months.
DHS cannot possibly vet or even interview a fraction of
these numbers, raising the terrorism risk. Whereas about 20
aliens on the Terror Watch List were caught at the Southwest
border in prior years, since this crisis began in 2021 through
the end of July, Border Patrol apprehended an almost
implausibly large number of them, 258 as of now. Those Watch
List at 258 are just the ones Border Patrol managed to catch.
Border Patrol failed to apprehend a record-breaking 1.8 million
migrants who slipped into the interior.
Mass migration related system failure is indicated in
Mexico, too. In July 2021, Mexico released a Watch List of
Yemeni to clear their overcrowded detention centers and that
set off another manhunt. I don't know if he was ever found.
The case of a Lebanese Venezuelan who cross from Matamoros
to Brownsville in December 2021, who was flagged on the FBI
Watch List, is another one. Against FBI recommendations to hold
the Venezuelan, ICE ordered his release on grounds that he
might catch COVID. Last I heard, he was in Detroit pursuing an
asylum claim. These incidents above and others described in my
written testimony reveal the system is blinking red, so fingers
crossed.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bensman follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Thank you for your testimony.
We will next hear from Mr. Marino.
STATEMENT OF CHARLES MARINO
Mr. Marino. Thank you, Chair McClintock, Ranking Member
Jayapal, and Members of the Committee. Thank you for the
opportunity to appear today to testify about this important
topic.
On the heels of the 22nd Anniversary of the horrific
attacks against this country on September 11, 2001, we are all
reminded of the sacred responsibility that the U.S. Government
has to safeguard the homeland by creating and implementing
effective policies to prevent another such act of terrorism. It
is in this spirit that I served within the Department of
Homeland Security to help protect this country for two decades
under both parties and continue my work in national security
today as an Adjunct Professor at the University of South
Carolina where I teach future generations the important process
of developing comprehensive national security strategies.
While the current volume of threats against the United
States are undoubtedly robust in number, they are also more
diverse and originate from more places than at any time in our
history. While the threat environment is constantly evolving,
what must remain consistent is the indisputable need for both
border security and immigration enforcement as essential
strategic elements necessary to prevent bad actors from
entering the country in the effort to best secure the homeland
and ensure the sovereignty of the United States. This is most
certainly not happening now.
So, it is disappointing that I appear before you today to
State the obvious. The border and immigration policies of the
Biden Administration have made the country less safe since 9/11
by directly undercutting the very purpose for creating the
Department of Homeland Security under the 2002 Homeland
Security Act and by further subverting the statutory
responsibilities of the Border Patrol, ICE, and practically
every other agency has with protecting the homeland.
After the U.S. Government was criticized for a failure of
imagination by the 9/11 Commission, our government promised all
Americans that never again, never again would the country fall
victim to future terrorist attacks on its soil. Despite that
promise, it is blatantly obvious that the Biden Administration
is suffering from the same failure of imagination that took
place then and foolishly under estimating how easily our
adversaries, including terrorist groups, can and will exploit
our open borders with the help of the Mexican cartels to kill
innocent Americans. We must do something before it is too late.
We are all aware of the catastrophic amount of fentanyl
entering our country killing approximately 70,000 Americans per
year and the unprecedented level of human trafficking, modern-
day slavery, as well as the unsustainable influx of
undocumented migrants that fleece Americans of their resources
without paying back into the system. We must also start paying
attention to the imminent terrorist threat that the cartels and
others pose to the country. After all, if the cartels will work
with China to kill thousands of Americans via fentanyl,
shouldn't we assume that they would also work with other
adversaries and terrorists for the right price to facilitate
illegal entry into the country? If anyone is not thinking this
way, let me respectfully suggest they start immediately.
With almost 200 migrants on the Terror Watch List which
have been apprehended while trying to sneak across the border,
the natural question is so how many on that list have made it
in?
Recently, more than a dozen Uzbekistan nationals smuggled
in by a suspect with connections to ISIS were released into the
United States with some missing, just as many of those from the
Afghanistan withdrawal debacle who were ushered on to our soil
without thorough vetting. While I was in my role at DHS, these
types of situations were always on top of our minds and would
have been cause for alarm. It is time to allow law enforcement
to do their jobs and reestablish deterrence through
enforcement. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Marino follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Thank you for your testimony.
Next, we will hear from Mr. Nowrasteh.
STATEMENT OF ALEX NOWRASTEH
Mr. Nowrasteh. Chair McClintock, Ranking Member Jayapal,
and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for
the opportunity to testify.
Over many decades, the Cato Institute has produced original
research on immigration and sober evaluations of the realistic
threat of foreign-born terrorism. Terrorism is a serious topic,
so serious that we should focus laser-like on data and facts.
We cannot let ourselves be distracted by fiction or
speculation. This focus on data and facts requires looking at
the past, which is the source, of course, of all data about
terrorism.
The title of this hearing is ``Terrorist Entry Through the
Southwest Border.'' When I first heard that was the title, my
reaction was, what terrorist entry through the Southwest
border?
Zero people have been murdered in attacks committed by
terrorists who entered as illegal immigrants. Zero people have
been murdered--injured in attacks committed by terrorists who
entered illegally. Zero attacks have been carried out by
immigrants who entered illegally.
Now, nine terrorists have entered the United States
illegally since 1975. Five of them illegally crossed the U.S.-
Canada border; one was a stowaway on a ship, and three of them,
Dritan Duka, Eljvir Duka, and Shain Duka, entered illegally
through the U.S.-Mexico border in 1984. At the time of entry,
Dritan Duka was five years old; Eljvir Duka was three years
old, and Shain Duka was one year old. In 2007, they were
convicted as part of the Fort Dix plot, which was broken up by
law enforcement during the planning stage.
Zero asylum seekers who became terrorists entered through
the U.S.-Mexico border. Thirteen terrorists have entered as
asylum seekers and they are responsible for nine murders and
about 669 injuries and attacks on U.S. soil since 1975, but
none of them crossed the Southwest border.
There have been zero attacks by illegal border crossers who
were flagged by the Terrorism Screening Data base, also called
the Watchlist. Federal prosecutors have not filed charges
related to a terrorist plot on U.S. soil against anyone who
entered between a port of entry and who was flagged by the
Watchlist.
Almost all individuals listed in the Watchlist are not
terrorists. Data released by the Washington Examiner showed
that 25 out of the 27 Watchlist hits encountered by Border
Patrol in the first months of 2022 were citizens of Colombia.
If they were even members of a foreign terrorist organization,
they are likely members or former members of the Revolutionary
Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), FARC offshoots, or other
insurgents in Colombia. There has never been a terrorist attack
committed on U.S. soil by these Colombian foreign terrorist
organizations. There is no publicly available evidence that
they have ever intended to target the U.S. homeland in a
terrorist attack, and no foreign-born person from Colombia has
ever committed, planned, attempted, or been convicted of
attempting to commit terrorism on U.S. soil.
Special Interest Aliens, or SIAs, are a supposed terrorism
concern along the U.S.-Mexico border. DHS has a fancy
definition of SIA, but the reality is that the SIA designation
is a label for illegal immigrants from a country that could
have terrorists, and nothing more. SIA is not a meaningful
metric to understand the threat of terrorism along the border
or anywhere else.
Although terrorists who cross the U.S.-Mexico border have
never murdered or injured anyone in a terrorist attack on U.S.
soil, there is, of course, a chance that a foreign-born
terrorist could cross the U.S.-Mexico border and commit an
attack at some point in the future. It's got to be above zero.
A way to reduce that threat is to vastly expand the legal
immigration to diminish the numbers of illegal immigrants down
to very low levels. Such a liberalization and deregulation of
immigration would allow Border Patrol Agents to focus their
efforts more fully on deterring security threats, instead of
trying to centrally plan international labor markets.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nowrasteh follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Thank you for your testimony.
Finally, we hear from Chief Rodney Scott. Chief Scott?
STATEMENT OF CHIEF RODNEY SCOTT
Chief Scott. Chair, Ranking Member, Members of the
Subcommittee, good morning.
I would like to share with you three critical facts that I
learned while serving as a Border Patrol Agent.
The most critical fact is that border security is national
security. It's not a political talking point. It's a fact.
Over my career, I was honored to participate in the
transition from an uncontrolled, chaotic Southwest border to a
border that was, arguably, more secure than ever.
Unfortunately, I also witnessed the rapid and systematic
destruction of decades of improving border security in just the
first few weeks of the Biden Administration. To be blunt, the
systematic destruction of border security and the predictable
consequences scare the hell out of me, and they should scare
you, too.
As a young, frontline agent, I routinely observed smugglers
coordinate distractions to get illegal aliens past the Border
Patrol. A common distraction was as simple as a couple of very
fast, teenaged males making a highly visible illegal entry, and
as agents shifted to chase that bait, the real group of illegal
aliens would rush across the border through the gap that was
created.
This same tactic was used by drug smugglers. Agents would
respond to a group of illegal aliens or a vehicle illegally
entering, and as soon as they responded, a more significant
load of narcotics would come through just out of their reach.
Mexican drug cartels over my career have increasingly
asserted control over all crossings between the ports of entry.
Their sophisticated tactics and techniques continually improve,
but the basic concept remains the same: Create a distraction
too good for agents to ignore, and then, exploit the gap that
it has created.
Any alien with something to hide will routinely pay to
evade law enforcement, to be in that second wave. That's the
second critical fact, that the most serious threats to America
are more commonly in that second wave.
People don't understand that U.S. law enforcement records
checks/searches U.S. data bases. Crimes committed by a foreign
national outside the U.S. rarely appear in these data bases.
That's the third critical fact, that records checks are just a
tool to support a meaningful interview.
Earlier this week, America paused to remember 9/11
terrorist attacks. The 9/11 attack had a profound impact on my
understanding of border security. In the years following, I was
honored to represent Customs and Border Protection on several
interagency teams, and we were tasked with improving America's
antiterrorism capabilities.
Then, we knew that terrorist organizations were going to
increasingly seek to use operatives that were unknown. We could
not rely solely on records checks.
CBP improved situational awareness through intelligence and
expanded capabilities of officers and agents, so that they
could solicit information and determine intent through
effective interviews. Additionally, Border Patrol improved
surveillance and doubled down on deterring illegal immigration,
and it was working.
Fewer illegal entries and an expanding smart wall system
bought agents more time. With more time to invest in
interviews, the benefits cascaded quickly. The agents were able
to identify imposters, fraudulent families, gang members,
various criminals, and even potential terrorist ties that
records checks had not revealed.
In contrast, every single border security and immigration
action that the Biden Administration has taken has resulted in
an increase in illegal immigration, overwhelming CBP
capabilities, and surrendering control of our Southwest border
to the cartels. Every illegal alien released into the United
States is free advertisement for the cartel and ensures an
endless wave of customers to overwhelm agents.
Of great concern is the increasing number of Border Patrol
encounters with illegal aliens on the National Watchlist. From
2017-2020, Border Patrol encountered 14 illegal aliens on that
Watchlist. From 2021-2023, that number jumped to 263--with 149
of these being in just this year alone. This is a serious
national security threat, but it only represents the known.
What threats were in the 1.7 million known got-aways? What
about the unknown got-aways?
Compounding this threat, overwhelmed officers and agents no
longer have time to conduct meaningful interviews. The Border
Patrol is overwhelmed with illegal aliens from several
countries that are known to be affiliated with terrorism, but
those agents cannot get timely language translation support to
conduct the most basic processing, let alone a meaningful
interview.
This continues even after the discovery of the ISIS-
associated smuggler that helped the Uzbekistanis enter the U.S.
illegally. The release of those Uzbekistanis demonstrates the
vulnerability of overlying on data systems for our national
security.
The key to effective law enforcement and border security
will always be face-to-face interviews. The ongoing mass of
illegal immigration is a threat to our national security.
Didn't we all promise after the 9/11 to never forget?
I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Chief Scott follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. I want to thank you and all the witnesses
for their testimony.
We will now proceed under the five-minute rule with
questions, and we will begin with Mr. Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
It is good to see that we are having this hearing.
So, this notion that being concerned about terrorists
entering through the Southwest border, which is absolutely
open, that somehow is ``fiction or speculation'' is probably
one of the most asinine pieces of testimony I have heard in
Congress. It's astounding. I found myself saying, have you
never been to the border? Have you seen what's going on at the
border? Do you know what's going on at the border?
I go down often, really often, and I look at data
constantly. The biggest piece of data that you have ignored is
the 1.7 million known got-aways. Those are known got-aways. The
unknown got-aways probably match it one-for-one minimum.
Have you ever stood in a group of individuals, as I have,
and you say, ``Where are you from?'' ``Russia.'' ``Oh,
really?'' There's 40 of you. You're all about 25 years old.
Then, we bring a translator in, and all of a sudden, they don't
speak Russian. They say they're from Georgia. We bring a
different translator in. They say, ``Oh, well, yes, we really
are Russian.''
The number of people coming across that we can't even vet
through the process when we encounter them, or through CBP One,
where we're sending them to the ports of entry. I find it
astounding that anybody would--this is the problem. This is the
problem: We've got people that just say--they're the ones that
are engaged in ``fiction and speculation.'' Actually, it's not
``fiction and speculation.'' It's a great big dream, and it's a
hope and a wish, because it's going to be people like you who
get to say, ``Yes, we were wrong,'' when a terrorist does
engage in activity in the homeland.
I'm astounded, flabbergasted by that testimony. I've heard
a lot of weird testimony in here since I've been here.
Chief Scott, tell us a little bit about this notion--so, we
were also told that, if somebody's on the Terrorist Watchlist,
it's no big deal. Right, it's really no big deal because they
haven't committed an act of terrorism. Why do we have a
Terrorism Watchlist and why is that important and relevant?
Chief Scott. It's important and relevant because our
intelligence agencies and law enforcement are always looking to
put Border Patrol, to put law enforcement in general, in a
better position to keep America safe. So, any kind of
derogatory information, links to terrorism--and obviously,
there's other agencies that could testify to this more--are
looked at. People that meet certain criteria, there's
reasonable suspicion to believe that they're tied to these
threats to America, are put on that list. By the way, that's
only, again, the knowns.
Mr. Biggs. Right. So, we get to this point: Are there
Nations in the world that we have no information whatsoever
about? We can't get any background on these people, even if we
do encounter them, and actually have a chance--which we don't
really have very often--to interview them.
Chief Scott. That would be the vast majority of the globe.
Mr. Biggs. Yes.
Chief Scott. We have very little information. We act on
what we have. When you think about the total population of the
world, we have very, very minuscule data on anyone.
Mr. Biggs. How about with Mauritania?
Chief Scott. I'm sorry?
Mr. Biggs. How about with the country of Mauritania?
Chief Scott. No.
Mr. Biggs. Yes. So, the reason I say that is because we're
now starting to see groups of Mauritanians come in through
Arizona.
I got a call from a CBP agent last week. I said, ``What's
going on?'' and he said, ``A group of 250 Mauritanians.'' I
said, ``Well, how are we doing there? Do we have any way to vet
them?'' He replied, ``No, no way to vet them.''
Mr. Bensman, you get down to the border often; I know that.
Tell us about the Darien Gap. Is any vetting going on there
before they move on from the Darien Gap up through the Northern
Triangle states on up to the U.S.?
Mr. Bensman. In the Darien Gap right now, there must be,
you know, 50,000 pouring through. Michael Yon and some other
reporters are there right now sending us video. It's
unbelievable what's happening, the numbers coming through.
In normal times, when it's 10,000 or less, American and
Panamanian officials have a biometric program where they try to
fingerprint and photograph, and take some collection on almost
everybody that crosses through there. Impossible to do that
right now--impossible. The numbers are just flabbergasting,
huge. We can't collect a bit.
Mr. Biggs. So, as we go here and I close here, Cato's
position is for an open border. It supports an open border.
This is what an open border looks like.
I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Ms. Jayapal?
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As I said earlier, I and everyone on this panel want to
keep Americans safe from real security threats. That's why I'm
disappointed that we didn't wait just the two-weeks that we
know we have, so that we can get an actual classified briefing
from the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI.
Having a hearing where the Republican majority tries to
scare the public and demonize immigrants is not how we're going
to make America safer. It's only going to serve to further
divide us and prevent us from working together to find common-
sense, bipartisan solutions that improve our national security.
One way to do that is to expand legal pathways for people
who come to the United States lawfully. Unfortunately, the
Trump Administration decimated our refugee and legal
immigration systems, increasing migration from all over the
world to the Southern border.
The Biden Administration has worked hard to rebuild the
refugee program and has tried to expand legal pathways using
parolee, but only Congress can provide permanent solutions.
So, Mr. Nowrasteh, let me turn to you. Congress has not
expanded the number of legal immigrants that we accept in over
30 years. You mentioned in your testimony that the expansion of
legal pathways would help improve our national security. Can
you describe how that is so?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes. Expanding legal pathways will vastly
improve security. Being able to vet immigrants before they
arrive would absolutely increase domestic security and further
discourage terrorists or other bad actors from even trying to
come to the United States in the first place.
Many people who come here unlawfully today would love to
come through a legal system, where they can work lawfully. By
expanding legal opportunities, it will drive the vast majority
of them into the legal system, and then, that will allow Border
Patrol and these other agencies to focus on a small number who
remain.
Ms. Jayapal. You mentioned in your written statement some
examples of how the Biden Administration has used parole to
expand lawful pathways. Can you discuss some of those examples
here in more detail and how they actually contributed to
decreased numbers at the Southern border?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes. We know for a fact that expanding legal
immigration works because of recent experiences with parole.
Specifically, parole allows Americans to sponsor, at least in
these cases, to sponsor foreigners from specific countries that
come to the U.S. to work and live for a period of time. There's
the Uniting for Ukraine example, which was implemented in May
2022. It reduced the total number of Ukrainians showing up at
the U.S.-Mexico border by 99.9 percent from April 2022-July
2023.
Then, there are similar parole programs that the
administration put in effect for people fleeing Venezuela,
Cuba, Nicaragua, and Haiti, that also reduced illegal entries.
So, for example, Venezuelan illegal entries fell 66 percent
from September 2022, the month before the program was put into
effect, to July 2023. Then, from December 2022-July 2023,
illegal entries from Haiti fell 77 percent; 98 percent from
Cuba, and 99 percent from Nicaragua.
Parole is a great, short-term, stop-gap measure. It has
proven, empirically, once and for all, that increasing legal
pathways reduces illegal immigration, increases border
security. Immigration liberalization, though, is the only
sustainable, long-term fix to border chaos.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you.
One of the other places that the President can act
unilaterally is by increasing the number of refugees that the
administration accepts. I'm happy to see that the Biden
Administration is on pace to welcome the highest number of
refugees since 2016.
Very briefly--because I have one other question for you
that I want to get to--what are some additional ways that the
Biden Administration can expand and grow the refugee program?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes. So, the Welcome Corps is a great
opportunity for Americans to sponsor folks, modeled on the
Canadian system. We worked on that at Cato.
I think the easiest, No. 1 way to do is for him to expand
parole to other countries--for Guatemalans, Hondurans,
Salvadorans, Colombians, and others fleeing dangerous,
despotic, socialist, poor, or cruel regimes, and to allow
Americans to sponsor folks and to increase the cap for the
Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans (CHNV)
countries. I think they should be numerically uncapped. They
should only be capped by the generosity and willingness of
Americans to sponsor people.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you.
Last, I know you've studied the nexus of tourism and
immigration quite extensively, and your testimony is very
different from some of the people that are sitting right next
to you. Why do you have such different perspectives?
Mr. Nowrasteh. I think it comes from our different
approaches to studying topics in general. I like to look at the
data. I like to zoom out to take a look at the big picture, to
take a look at the actual risk; to use normal analysis, risk
analysis, used by the government in other areas, by insurance
companies, by others, to look at that; to read through some of
this other research out there. A lot of it is anecdote-driven.
We need to be data-driven. Terrorism is too important to ignore
the data.
Ms. Jayapal. Data-driven. Thank you so much.
I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. The gentlelady's time has expired.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Tiffany for five minutes.
Mr. Tiffany. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. N--if I may address you that way--do you believe in the
rule of law?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes.
Mr. Tiffany. OK. So, parole is a very specific concept in
the law here in the United States of America that is supposed
to be done on a case-by-case basis. That has been wiped out by
fiat without passing a law to change the law that enabled
parole back in 1954. They have been breaking the law.
Eighty thousand Afghans came in, all waived in via--
virtually all waived in via parole. So, in other words, the
reason illegal entries, as you've been saying, have been going
down; it's because they've ignored the law. So, you want us to
be a lawless country, is what we're hearing from you.
By the way, from the other side, that fearmongering
conservative who has been talking about this regularly is Mayor
Adams from New York City; that ``his city is being
destroyed''--his quote, not mine.
The Ranking Member talks about no government witness that
we've heard from. Oh, yes, we have. We heard from Mayorkas back
in July. We heard from the FBI two weeks prior to that, from
Mr. Wray. We heard from Sheriff Mark Dannels from Arizona.
Let's share a couple of quotes.
FBI Director Wray, ``We are seeing all sorts of very
serious threats that come from across the border.'' He closed
by saying, ``It is becoming more and more of a priority for
us.''
Sheriff Mark Dannels, in regard to fentanyl, ``The border's
not effectively managed right now, and until it is, the
cartels, they are the winner in this.''
I asked Secretary Mayorkas about that. ``Who's telling the
truth, FBI Director Wray or you?'' He wouldn't answer the
question.
I asked him, ``Who's telling the truth, Sheriff Mark
Dannels, who is seeing the fentanyl flowing in since January
20, 2021 in numbers that have skyrocketed?'' Secretary Mayorkas
says, ``Nah, there's not a problem here.'' I asked, ``Who's
telling the truth?'' He wouldn't answer the question.
It's this whole approach that we're hearing--there's
nothing to see. For those of you of a certain age like me,
you'll recognize it as the Sergeant Schultz approach: ``I see
nothing.''
For those of you that are a little bit younger than I,
you'll recognize it as the Harry Potter story with the Ministry
of Magic.
Mr. Marino, it is said that we have done nothing here. The
House of Representatives passed H.R. 2. ``We have not proposed
solutions.'' Is H.R. 2 a solution to the border crisis that we
have?
Mr. Marino. Yes, it is. It restores a layered approach
overall to border security and immigration enforcement. It
restores law and order.
As I previously said, the major causation of this crisis
has been the Biden Administration's abandonment of law and
order, and we are seeing this perfect storm of poor policies at
the Federal level to the local level--poor policies, abandoning
law and order at the Federal level, and then, it's exploiting
the poor policies of abandoning law and order in sanctuary
cities. It's leading to chaos.
The one thing that the Biden Administration has proven to
us is that, when you remove all structure through law and
order, it results in chaos.
Mr. Tiffany. Mr. Chair, I want to highlight here for the
American public that may be watching at this point, this body
has passed legislation to secure the border, to bring a
solution forward.
Mr. Bensman, I really appreciate that Representative Biggs
brought up the Darien Gap. I was there a little over two years
ago. There were lots of people coming through there at that
point. The people in Bajo Chiquito, a little Indian village
right on the edge of the Darien Gap, we're talking about being
destabilized. I have a text from the last couple of days from
someone who is down there, ``The scene is truly apocalyptic.
Bajo Chiquito was completely overrun--thousands.'' They had
about 500 when I was there that had rolled through that date,
and they viewed it as destabilizing. Thousands now. Possibly
more arriving every second.
Is this destabilizing the country of Panama?
Mr. Bensman. Actually, Panama has a policy in place called
``controlled flow.'' So, they are moving all those migrants
through into Costa Rica as fast as possible by bus, so that
they do not destabilize the country. They've always done that.
Costa Rica does the same thing.
They, essentially, the governments are the smugglers in
that case. They are moving them through rather quickly.
However, the numbers that are passing through right now, I
don't know and I don't think we've seen anything like this
particular number right now that's happening--that's going
through. It will certainly overwhelm the Panamanian and Costa
Rican capacity to move them through like normal.
Mr. Tiffany. So, they send them here?
Mr. Bensman. They're all coming here.
Mr. Tiffany. I yield.
Mr. Bensman. Everyone's coming here.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. The gentleman's time has
expired.
Mr. Nadler?
Mr. Nadler. Thank you, Mr. Speaker--Mr. Chair, rather.
Since the mayor of my city was invoked, let me say that he
is incorrect in saying that this is destroying the city. He is
trying to get Federal aid because it's properly a Federal, not
a city, expense. The fact is, the $12 billion figure he
mentions is over four years, a $3 billion annual expense, which
is three percent of the city's budget, which we can absorb--
with difficulty--although it's properly a Federal
responsibility, which the mayor is pointing out.
Mr. Nowrasteh, I want to discuss some of the terms that are
being thrown around by the witnesses and my colleagues. We've
heard a lot about migrants who are encountered who are on the
Terrorist Screening Dataset, or the TSDS. Can you discuss this
dataset in more detail? Who's on this list? Does it only
include known or suspected terrorists?
Mr. Nowrasteh. It does not only include known and suspected
terrorists. There's a reasonable suspicion standard for being
included in these, but there is an exception to this, based on
a rational inference, which, as far as we can tell, is just
when somebody says they should be on there, and they put them
on there.
This is true because 99 percent of people nominated to be
on this list by other agencies, by other people in the
government, are included there. There is no rigorous test or
screening to put people on this list.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you.
In your testimony, you mention that the TSDS includes many
false positives. Can you explain what a false positive is and
why they appear in the TSDS data base?
Mr. Nowrasteh. So, it's, basically, an erroneous match, a
mistaken identity. To be on this list, you have to have one
biographical piece of information and that's it. So, a lot of
people get caught up in this list, false flagged, because of
that.
We had a recent case of this with Alireza Heidari, an
Iranian national arrested along the border. He was flagged on
the Watchlist. There are a lot of scary news stories about this
that came out very rapidly about this Iranian national who was
on the Terrorist Watchlist, and then, whoops, it was the wrong
guy.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you.
During the Biden Administration, we've seen an increase in
the number of people on the TSDS data base who have been
apprehended along the Southwest border. While this is still
less than one percent of all apprehensions, can you discuss
some of the potential reasons for this increase over the last
couple of years? For example, do migration patterns in the
hemisphere, including increased migration from Colombia, have
something to do with this increase of migrants on the TSDS
apprehended on the Southwest border?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Not only is it very small, but it is
minuscule, 0.0--oh, let me count the zeroes--0.007 percent of
people apprehended by Border Patrol in 2023 so far have been on
this Watchlist. I think that you hit on it directly, sir.
Colombians explain a lot of this.
I ran a regression analysis this morning about the number
of Colombians coming to the border, and it's the best predictor
of the number of hits on this Watchlist. The CBP does not
release the nationalities of people who are on the Watchlist
who come up as hits, but a great Washington Examiner piece that
has some leaked data. So, the 25 out of 27 of those folks in
the first half of 2022 were from Colombia. As I said in my
written remarks, ``there's never been a terrorist attack by a
Colombian. They don't target the U.S.''
There's also a wrinkle in this data, which is, when you
take a look at Border Patrol apprehensions that lead to these
hits and those through Customs, the number has actually gone
down since 2019.
Mr. Nadler. OK. Thank you.
I have a number of questions which I would like to answer
quickly because we only have a minute.
We've also recently heard the term ``Special Interest
Aliens.'' Can you describe what a Special Interest Alien is?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes. DHS defines it as a non-U.S. person,
based on analysis of their travel patterns--and, well, it's a
long definition. A lot of other things are put on this list. A
lot of words. In practice, an SIA is just somebody from a
country that could have a lot of terrorists in it. It's not a
meaningful metric.
Mr. Nadler. Are Special Interest Aliens terrorists? Are
they even suspected of terrorism?
Mr. Nowrasteh. No, in fact. As DHS--
Mr. Nadler. Thank you.
According to one source--
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes?
Mr. Nadler. --Border Patrol Agents encountered 25,000
Special Interest Aliens in the Fiscal Year 2022. That's a lot
of people. Has an SIA apprehended by the Border Patrol ever
committed an attack on U.S. soil?
Mr. Nowrasteh. No, and DHS explicitly says being an SIA
does not mean that you are a terrorist.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you.
My last question: Is it possible that the number of SIAs
have increased in recent years because the decimation of our
legal immigration and refugee systems have led people around
the world to believe that the only way to immigrate to the
United States is via the Southwest border?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Not only is it possible, I think it is
extremely likely and the best explanation for why there has
been an increase in illegal immigration and border crossers
from around the world and from Central and South America.
The U.S. immigration system is extremely restrictive. It is
very difficult to come here. The idea that we have an open
border is ludicrous. It is totally contrary to all the facts
and to what's happening.
If we have an open border, why are people paying $5-$20
thousand to be smuggled here? In the U.S., Virginia and
Maryland have an open border. I don't have to pay $20,000 to go
from my home in Virginia to Maryland. Where is this open border
that we keep hearing so much about?
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time--
Mr. Nadler. Thank you very much. My time has expired. I
yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Roy?
Mr. Roy. Mr. Nowrasteh, prior to September 11, 2001, how
many individuals had flown airplanes into the World Trade
Center and killed 3,000 people?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Zero.
Mr. Roy. Thank you.
Mr. Scott, how many got-aways have there been?
Chief Scott. There is 1.7 million known. That means there's
evidence, video, whatever, but I can't give you an estimate on
how many we don't know in the hundreds of miles of border that
are not being patrolled.
Mr. Roy. Mr. Nowrasteh, where are those 1.6 million got-
aways?
Mr. Nowrasteh. They are most likely at different places in
the United States working and living.
Mr. Roy. Who are they, who are they?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Well, there are probably people from
different countries around the world, sir.
Mr. Roy. Probably, probably. People from all over the
world.
Mr. Nowrasteh. Well, they are from different countries
around the world, yes, sir.
Mr. Roy. Right, yes. How many different countries?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Well, if the data that we have about those
who are apprehended is any indication, a large number of
countries. Probably about 150--
Mr. Roy. A 162 of them from all over the world.
Mr. Nowrasteh. Probably, yes, sir.
Mr. Roy. Right. You are willing to bet your family's life,
my family's life on the safety in our country, irrespective of
who these individuals are when you don't even know who they
are?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes, sir. The chance of dying from a
foreign-born terrorist attack since 1975 is--
Mr. Roy. I am sure, Mr. Nowrasteh--
Mr. Nowrasteh. --one in 4.4 million per year.
Mr. Roy. Mr. Nowrasteh, I am sure that is great comfort to
the families of the people from 9/11. Because when you sit here
and testify that zero people have committed a terrorist attack
from crossing our border, I am sure that is comfort to the
people who had terrorist attacks committed by people who came
here and overstayed their visas.
Mr. Nowrasteh. It is no comfort--
Mr. Roy. The fact of the matter is when you talk about
having an open border and you minimize the open border by
saying that people have to pay $5,000 to come here in that open
border, you're ignoring the fact of what that does to human
beings. When it is in fact so open that that is exactly what is
happening.
I am sure that your position is great comfort to the man in
Baltimore who was being held up for ransom for $23,000 so that
his little girl wouldn't be raped in a stash house in Fort
Worth. Have you talked to that little girl or that father?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Was he a terrorism suspect?
Mr. Roy. Have you talked to that father, Mr. Nowrasteh?
Mr. Nowrasteh. No, I am not aware of that terrorism case.
What was his name?
Mr. Roy. Have you talked to that father whose little girl
was being raped in a stash house?
Mr. Nowrasteh. No, I haven't. Is this a terrorism-related
issue?
Mr. Roy. Right, and so do you know--I am answering the
questions, and this is the subject matter I want to talk about
in this hearing, Mr. Nowrasteh. Because you are the one sitting
here trying to tell the American people that our border is
perfectly fine.
That it is perfectly OK. That it is, oh, not open because
people are paying five or ten thousand dollars to get here. So,
it is very much relevant that a little girl is getting raped in
a stash house because of the policies of you and radical
leftists who don't give a damn about it.
Because it is more politically expedient for you to saddle
up to the libertarian Cato Institute or a bunch of radical
leftists and talk about, oh, how important it is for people to
free flow across borders.
Mr. Nowrasteh. I have talked about the chaos repeatedly,
sir--
Mr. Roy. That is the truth.
Mr. Nowrasteh. The way to reduce the chaos is through
legalization and liberalization--
Mr. Roy. Right.
Mr. Nowrasteh. Not cracking down more--
Mr. Roy. Right. Which will--
Mr. Nowrasteh. If you cared about the border chaos, that is
the way to do it.
Mr. Roy. Which will perpetuate the lawlessness, and you
know it.
Mr. Bensman.
Mr. Nowrasteh. The exact opposite.
Mr. Roy. Mr. Bensman, can you please expand on your
testimony about dozens of terror watch list foreign nationals
apprehended at the Southern border being members of the
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), and how
dangerous that is to this country?
Mr. Bensman. Right. One of the most disturbing aspects of
the border crisis has been the recent development of FARC-
related terror watchlisted suspects crossing that border. Those
are people who have spent years and years involved in murder,
kidnaping, drug trafficking, extortion, and bombings. They are
experts in weaponry.
These are people who the United States absolutely would
never countenance coming across the border and never provide a
visa for certainly. The fact that FARC members, former of the
delisted faction, but also there are two FARC factions that are
still listed, that those people would cross our border and come
into this United States is anathema to all our homeland
security values. A terrible development that we should pay a
lot of attention to, because a lot of Colombians are coming
across.
It is true that so far, we haven't seen an attack. This is
a relatively new thing for FARC. One thing that we have to
worry about is that when FARC members cross into the United
States successfully, they will embed themselves in Colombian
emigre communities. Very probably begin intimidation tactics,
vigilante justice.
This is a terrible thing for Colombian communities inside
the United States in general. Plus, these people are
professional drug traffickers their whole lives, so we are
going to be hearing a lot about FARC people over the next
decade.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time--
Mr. Roy. Yield back, thank you.
Mr. Bensman. This is not a reason--
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Roy. Thank you, Mr. Bensman.
Mr. McClintock. Next is Ms. Escobar.
Ms. Escobar. I would like to thank Mr. Correa for yielding
to me, switching with me. I want to thank our witnesses.
This is actually an important opportunity for us as
Congress-members to look at facts versus fiction for us to
truly solve the issue at hand.
I am the only a Member of this Subcommittee and the larger
Committee on Judiciary who was born, raised, and lives on the
border. I raised my two children on the border. I am a very
proud border resident.
There is nobody in the country who wants a safe, secure
border more than those of us who have invested our lives living
there, creating community there and wanting to make sure our
kids can come back to living there.
It is so important for us to realize and acknowledge this
is not an issue related to President Biden. Honestly, every
time I hear that, it undermines the credibility of the person
telling me, because I live on the border, and I know for a fact
because I went to facilities during President Trump's
Administration that were overcrowded, and I saw the daily
numbers at our shelters.
The only time the numbers dropped was immediately after
COVID and only for a few months. They went right back up in May
2020, long before the November 2020 election, long before
President Biden was elected, even longer before he was sworn
in. So, we really, we do ourselves and the issue an injustice
by politicizing it and blaming the President.
Frankly, if there's anyone to blame for the challenges at
our border, it is the U.S. Congress. The U.S. Congress has
failed to reform immigration law for 37 years. I will tell you,
it is absolutely ridiculous for either side to think that 1
day, if we just wait long enough, we will get everything we
want.
That is not going to happen. The only solution is
bipartisan compromise.
I want to inform my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle and on my side of the aisle, we have a bipartisan,
comprehensive immigration reform compromise right now. It is a
bill that I worked on a filed with my colleague Representative
Maria Salazar, a Republican from Miami.
It certainly is not a perfect bill. It is not everything I
as a Democrat want. It is not everything Republicans want. It
is the first bipartisan, comprehensive immigration reform bill
that has been filed in the House of Representatives in a
decade.
Where I will agree with critics of the status quo, this is
unsus-
tainable. In fact, I get daily reports about how many people
are in our shelters in El Paso, how many people have been
apprehended. I am consistently speaking with migrants, with law
enforcement, and with NGO's.
Congress has to do something. I would invite everyone to
begin focusing on what we should be doing within the realm of
what is real and achievable in Congress in this political
environment, so that we can create not just safety and security
for all, but those key legal pathways that are critical not
just to better managing our border, but critical to us as a
country.
What is so distressing about hearings like this is that
immigrants are intended to be demonized. Immigrants made this
country great. Immigrants have built this country. We need
immigrants to ensure that we have a sustainable economy. We
should be embracing immigrants and fixing broken systems to
help achieve real solutions.
Thank you, Mr. Correa, and thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield
back.
Mr. McClintock. The gentlelady yields back. Ms. Spartz.
Ms. Spartz. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Nowrasteh, do you believe we should have unlimited
immigration to our country?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Unlimited, no.
Ms. Spartz. So, you believe that we need to limit number of
immigrants.
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes, I especially believe security threats,
people convicted or responsible for crime--
Ms. Spartz. So, we should have some limits. Do you believe
we should look at our immigration, how we can better serve our
national interest?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Oh, yes, absolutely. Immigration to the
U.S., legal immigration, absolutely does that.
Ms. Spartz. So, we agree with you, in some issues. Do you
believe that our system is overwhelmed right now, and it is
extremely difficult to immigrate to this country legally?
Mr. Nowrasteh. It is extremely difficult and restricted--
Ms. Spartz. So, we have some agreement.
Mr. Nowrasteh. It is like a Soviet-style system.
Ms. Spartz. Good, that is we have some agreement. Do you
believe that what is happening in the border and how
overwhelmed the border, it exposes national security risks?
Mr. Nowrasteh. There are absolutely risks that are posed by
it. They are--
Ms. Spartz. We have a problem over there. Do you believe
the border needs to be secured?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes, absolutely. The way to do that is by
expanding I think legal immigration.
Ms. Spartz. Well, that is part of it because we need to
have a better look at that. Do we also need to make sure that
we have proper border security, the proper mechanism to deal
with border security, whichever tools we can do that? Do you
believe it needs to be secure, a border?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Oh, yes, absolutely, we do need a secure
border. We should have a secure border. We just have--there are
different perspectives of how to get there.
In the same way that Al Capone and a lot of organized crime
was crushed by legalizing alcohol, I think that we can crush a
lot of cartels and border crime and the chaos in the border,
which is a travesty, the chaos is a travesty, do that by
increasing legal immigration to the United States to reduce the
black market.
Ms. Spartz. We have to look, it might have some effects, it
depends how it is. Ultimately, we are not right now created
perverse incentive to human traffic, drug traffic, and child
labor, what's happening right now in places like Darien Gap? Is
that correct, what we are doing is bad?
Mr. Nowrasteh. I would say that the immigration
restrictions we have are an enormous subsidy to cartels and
criminal organizations.
Ms. Spartz. So, we don't have disagreement on that. Let's
talk a little bit about; I have an agreement this problem being
really pondered for many years and not just one President.
Do you believe the President is not putting emphasis to
help Border Patrol dealing with situation and not dealing right
now where we have to overwhelm Border Patrol right now? It has
magnified opportunities for cartels to take advantage of the
situation.
Mr. Nowrasteh. I think it is a perfect storm of many
events. You have a very low unemployment in the United States
attracting large numbers of people coming in. I think that you
have a restrictive system that makes it difficult for a lot of
people to come in.
I think you have other security issues that have resulted
in a lot of the overwhelming of the Border Patrol. There is a
lot of chaos. Nobody disagrees about that.
Ms. Spartz. Do you believe what my Democrat colleagues
talking about comprehensive reform, it has to have a really
significant conversation also over border security and how we
can improve border security and be more innovative and make
sure that we mitigate some of the risk and support our Border
Patrol? Does that need to be part of it?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes, absolutely. I think the way, the best
way to do that, the best way for Border Patrol and for the U.S.
Government to regulate the flow of people into the United
States is to legalize it. Because you can't regulate a black
market.
Ms. Spartz. We can have a debate about legal immigration,
but we also should have a debate on how we can secure our
border better, correct?
Mr. Nowrasteh. I agree, but I think they are linked. I
don't think you can do one without the other.
Ms. Spartz. They are linked, and we should link.
Unfortunately, we are kind of having this chicken-and-egg
situation where one side says we need to--because it is not, it
needs to be a comprehensive solution. Because this is not a
joke situation of that border. It is a national security issue.
It is a national security issue not just for border State,
it is for all the States, whether New York or Indiana, and now
we allow also, cartels in China to really becoming very
material, drug trafficking and then fentanyl, and what is
happening in the country. It is going to be a big problem.
So, I hope you encourage your colleagues to look at the
situation too and look at not just--because we never have that
conversation. We do it in politicking. We have a very dangerous
situation in the border. We have to acknowledge it as a
country.
I came here as a legal immigrant. This is country created
by immigrants, but we need to have an orderly process. We
cannot have anarchy; we are the country of law. Otherwise, we
will become like third-world country with cartels running the
country, and we cannot let it happen.
So, I hope you will help me to talk to your colleagues. I
yield back.
Mr. McClintock. The gentlelady yields back, and Mr. Correa.
Mr. Correa. Thank you, sir, for holding this hearing today.
I am also a Member of Homeland Security. I am the Ranking
Member of the Border Security Subcommittee. In Homeland we have
probably had at least half a dozen hearings on this issue, Mr.
Chair, and I welcome one in the Immigration Subcommittee. This
is an important issue. National security is important for
America. Democrats and Republicans for America.
We should be talking immigration, but let's talk border
security. I want to remind everybody that the most deadliest
attack in American soil, 9/11, we just had that commemoration
across the country to remember, was carried out by folks with
visas. One came on a student visa and the rest came on tourist
and business visas.
I have visited the border a number of times, numerous
times, and I have talked to the men and women in uniform. I
have asked them, what is it that makes your job better? What
can make you more successful? The answer is intel, working with
good intelligence. Working with allies across the globe,
Brazil, Mexico, the Middle East, that's what's helped you
identify terrorists.
In fact, if folks are interested in working with us, Chair
Clay Higgins and I have a bill, H.R. 4575, that will enable us
to work much closer with our allies across the globe to make
sure we have better intel.
When you talk about undocumented terrorism, I am going to
make some--OK, let's talk about terrorism and undocumented. I
can have this poster behind me. This is an undocumented
soldier, an undocumented Marine. Does he look like a terrorist?
Mr. Bensman, does that look like a terrorist to you? Mr.
Nowrasteh, Mr. Marino, and Mr. Scott, is that a terrorist
behind us?
He made the ultimate sacrifice right after 9/11, and
there's a lot more Dreamers in American uniform who will
probably be undocumented after the Supreme Court rules on the
status of Dreamers in the United States. I just want to make
sure people understand terrorism versus immigration versus
undocumented workers.
Now, gentlemen, if I can, I want to ask each and every one
of you, do you favor deporting ten million taxpaying
undocumented workers from the U.S. right now?
Mr. Scott, yes or no?
Chief Scott. I believe in the rule of law--
Mr. Correa. Do you--
Chief Scott. If you oppose the law, you should be held
accountable.
Mr. Correa. Would you deport them right now? It is a yes-
or-no--
Chief Scott. If a judge ordered they should be deported, I
would deport them.
Mr. Correa. Mr. Marino?
Mr. Marino. It is impossible to do--
Mr. Correa. Yes or no, would you deport them right now?
Mr. Marino. Yes.
Mr. Correa. Mr. Nowrasteh?
Mr. Nowrasteh. No, and I would try to legalize--
Mr. Correa. Mr. Bensman?
Mr. Bensman. Yes, yes.
Mr. Correa. OK, would you support an amendment to H.R. 2,
the immigration reform bill just passed by the majority, that
would essentially exempt farmworkers from mandatory eVerify,
would you support that amendment?
Mr. Scott?
Chief Scott. No, I believe eVerify is a--
Mr. Correa. Mr. Marino?
Mr. Marino. No.
Mr. Correa. Mr. Bensman?
Mr. Bensman. eVerify has to happen.
Mr. Correa. That was a Chair's amendment to H.R. 2.
Let's come back to terrorism, let's talk about Colombia,
OK. FARC was essentially decertified as a terrorist
organization in 2020, is that correct? In 2021, is that
correct, yes or no?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Yes.
Mr. Correa. Yes, so yet we continue to talk about members
of FARC, a civil war that happened 20 years ago, as terrorists.
Is this refugee movement something unique to the United States,
or is this something that is worldwide?
Mr. Scott, worldwide or U.S.?
Chief Scott. I believe there is struggle--
Mr. Correa. Mr. Marino? I got less than a minute guys, come
on.
Mr. Marino. I couldn't hear the question, sir.
Mr. Correa. Is the refugee movement something unique to the
United States or is this a worldwide phenomenon?
Mr. Marino. No, it is not unique.
Mr. Correa. It is worldwide.
Mr. Marino. Yes, sir.
Mr. Correa. Colombia right now is holding three million--
hosting three million Venezuelan refugees, and we just talked
about Colombia as being a source of the problem. In my 20
seconds left, in the trips I have taken to Latin America
recently, I think we have to think about the border challenge
on a worldwide scale, OK.
We have a lot of allies South of the border that are
holding, that are hosting refugees, are working with us. For us
to sit here and talk about what is going on at that border, I
think as policymakers is very wrong.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I yield.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Van Drew.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I am going to deviate from what I was going to say. I
almost don't know where to start but other than to say Mr.
Nowrasteh, I disagree and sometimes agree and partially agree
with people. I disagree with you so totally.
You are sitting in your safe office looking at facts that
you believe are accurate, which they are not, and not talking
to the people who live at the border, the people who work at
the border, the people that are suffering, whether it is in
Arizona, California, and Texas. Now, of course, the entire
United States of America.
Let me say one thing, anybody that believes this problem is
only a problem for the Southern border is wrong. This is a
problem for the United States of America. Just to give you a
little example, a little different route, didn't come over the
border.
Did you ever hear of a man by the name of Danelo
Cavalcante? He's the escaped; quite a sensational thing that
went on. A German shepherd got him, thank God. This is a man
that murdered his friend in Brazil, illegally, because he is a
murderer.
Got into Puerto Rico, and then from Puerto Rico got to
Florida and then came up to Pennsylvania. Had an argument with
his girlfriend. He stabbed her with a butter knife 38 times; 38
times.
Nobody is demonizing immigration. We are almost all of us
either sons and daughters or immigrants ourselves. Immigration
is a good thing, legal immigration. What happened to the idea
of the rule of law?
Frankly, Mr. Nowrasteh, I don't care what you think sitting
in your safe office removed from everybody, playing with some
numbers. Go and talk to people, people who have suffered.
Who is suffering too? A lot of the illegal immigrants,
because they are being used, they are being used by these
individuals that we know are dispensing drugs, are hurting
children, are involved with human trafficking, and drug
trafficking. We call them the drug cartel. Now, establishing
business in the United States.
So, the answer is not to just go willy nilly and radically
increase, radically increase the number of illegal immigrants.
The answer is to have real borders. The answer is to have the
rule of law. Once you establish that, then you look into what
needs to be done in our immigration system.
We need to support our individuals who are trying to
protect us at the border. I felt so bad for them because they
are so much held back from doing their job.
Last week I learned of an administration proposal from the
Biden Administration and, by the way, because of a New York
City problem. What did we expect? It is a sanctuary city.
New Jersey where I live is a sanctuary State. You are
saying to people we are going to fund you, we are going to take
care of you, and we welcome you. We will give you legal
defense.
We don't take care of our own people. Our veterans still
don't get what they need. We have a mental health crisis in
America. We have an educational crisis in America. We don't
have the money and time for that. We have the money and time to
take God knows who, some of them good people, but doing it the
wrong way. Some of them not.
According to your figures, never has any one of them done
anything bad. That is just not accurate, it is not. So,
consider the national security implications if they want to do
to my State. I live in Southern New Jersey, Atlantic City
Airport.
We have the 177th Fighter Guard, you have the FAA Technical
Center. Serious, serious facilities that need to be protected.
The 177th protects the Washington to New York corridor. They
wanted up to 60,000 people they are talking about in a town of
50,000 people. That is going to really do well for the
education system.
It is your--you want to open it up, so let's open it all
up. Every country in the world, whether they are good, bad, or
otherwise, just let them open it up. We can't absorb that, and
you are not going to answer yet.
This is especially concerning given recent reports that we
have that there are Isis sympathizers smuggling Russian and
Eastern Europeans across the border, and terrorists have been
apprehended who are real terrorists at our port of entry. I
don't know where you get your stats from, but we also get stats
that are good. So, the situation is out of control.
Chief Scott, in your written testimony, you mention how the
terrorist attacks of September 11th were perpetrated by
individuals who entered the country through ports of entry. Is
the United States at an elevated risk of any type of terrorist
attack, given the state of the Southwest border?
You are a chief, you have to only want to say what is the
truth, tell us the truth.
Chief Scott. I believe we are. We forget that there would
have been 20 attackers, but one was actually caught by the CBP
officer that interviewed him. We are not doing those interviews
at the Southwest border. The cartel's picking and choosing who
enters our country right now instead of us, and that is a
significant threat to this country.
Mr. Van Drew. Mr. Nowrasteh, so you think--
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Van Drew. Oh, I am sorry. Thank you, Chair. Man, I'm
fired up. I am sorry.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Moore.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We have talked a lot, and I don't think any of us in here
are against legal immigration. Immigration builds the Nation,
but an invasion destroys a Nation.
What we have going on at the Southern border right now is
an invasion. We have basically replaced the population of my
entire State with people we really don't know who they are.
As Mr. Nowrasteh--is that how you say your name?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Nowrasteh.
Mr. Moore. Nowrasteh, the Remain in Mexico policy that the
Trumps had in place, wouldn't that help vet people before they
came here? Because I understand that the minute we did away
with Remain in Mexico, people started pouring in here and then
applying for asylum. So, we gave them a cellphone and sent them
on their way in busses or whatever the case may be.
Don't you think in some ways that would have helped us vet
the people coming across the border?
Mr. Nowrasteh. I don't think it would do to much better
than what is going on right now. The main problem is that you
just have a large number of people who are coming up all the--
asylum and nonasylum.
Mr. Moore. Let me ask you this, then. Sheriff Dannels
testified, four decades on the U.S. Southern border. He wasn't
in the office. He is actually on the border. He said the best
he had ever seen the border was in 2018. He said the worst he
has ever seen it, is today.
So, you mentioned the $5,000-$20,000. That seems to have
become the going price now. How do those people, Mr. Marino,
how do they pay that money back if, say, if you are wanting to
come to the country and you are coming from Venezuela and it is
$8,000, what do those people--how do they pay that money back
to the cartel?
Is it a cash-up-front deal, or do they make installment
payments? Are they indentured servants, or are they just drug
mules?
Mr. Marino. They work it off while in the United States. It
comes in all different forms in terms of how they pay that off.
This is where we are extremely susceptible to terrorist
organizations.
Because depending on who funds, in advance, the money to
the migrants to make this journey, their families are going to
be held to account back in the country of origin where they
start. The migrant, once they enter the United States, is
basically at the beck and call, it is an extension--
Mr. Moore. So, you were saying they are either bond
servants or slaves. Is that what our government is doing?
Mr. Marino. That is exactly right. This is more pervasive
than most people think. This is a huge problem. Most of these
migrants don't have a way to pay in advance for these funds to
be trafficked across the border.
So, the overwhelming majority are going to do the beck-and-
call work of the cartels and whoever else the cartels are
working with.
Mr. Moore. So, they have to make the payments or else the
cartel goes and finds a family or something horrible happens.
Mr. Marino. It is a fact. I have studied this for decades
and decades. This is a long-term payment plan. If they don't do
what they are told, families die in the countries of origin and
the person here.
Mr. Moore. This is getting dramatically worse since January
2020.
Mr. Marino. Dramatically.
Mr. Moore. Mr. Scott, I heard that this is an option too,
that if you didn't have the money, you could actually backpack
heroin, cocaine, or fentanyl to pay your passage. So, instead
of installment payments, you could actually backpack drugs,
become a mule if you will, to the cartel and that pay passage.
Is that also the case? Have you heard that? I just happened
to hear that when I was at the border.
Chief Scott. Yes, I agree with the prior witness,
everything he said. That is also another way that you can pay
is by trafficking drugs or doing any service for the cartel.
Mr. Moore. Chief, you said that the CBP caught one of the
9/11, one of the 20, I guess. My understanding is the other 9/
11 pilot, sir, terrorist, whatever we want to call them today,
they actually overstayed their visas.
Chief Scott. I believe that is accurate. The one
individual, and DHS didn't exist yet, so it was legacy Customs,
but was doing a good interview and believed that something
wasn't right with that individual and denied him entry. It is
believed that would have been the 20th.
Mr. Moore. The others--Mr. Bensman, any of you guys want to
answer this--had we actually enforced the laws on the books and
when the visa has expired, the visa expired, it would send them
back. This could have been averted, could it have not? Any, it
doesn't matter--
Chief Scott. I believe it could be. I really want to
highlight too, though, we identified that threat, we worked on
that threat for years within CBP and DHS. We never ignored no
matter what you do to criminals and terrorists, they are going
to try to do something else.
We knew they would go to the Southwest border, that was
part of the planning, that was the second phase. We are seeing
it now; the threat is real.
Mr. Moore. So, Chief, you are warning us now that there is
a problem.
Chief Scott. Yes, definitely.
Mr. Moore. Go ahead, Mr. Marino.
Mr. Marino. Yes, and we are certainly in an elevated risk
environment. I oversaw the implementation of the National
Terrorism Advisory System, and I would actually like to see it
used the way we intended it to be used.
Instead of sending out bulletins on things like
disinformation and No. 1 threats that are not the No. 1
threats, I have yet to see an NTAS bulletin issued about the
crisis on the Southwest border and the threat level that it
accurately represents.
It is not a system to be politicized, and it is obviously
being politicized. There should no doubt be a National
Terrorism Advisory System bulletin for an elevated threat
environment for what is going on at our border currently.
Mr. Moore. Thank you. With that, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman yields back. Ms. Ross.
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks so much to the
witnesses for being here.
I want to echo Ranking Member Nadler's comments about the
timing of this hearing. It is three days after the anniversary
of the worst terrorist attack the United States has ever seen.
This week should be a time for all of us in Congress to reflect
on the impact of terrorism and what we can do to make our
country safer from attacks like the one that we saw on 9/11.
This hearing is not really respecting the legacy of 9/11.
Rather, scheduling this hearing for this week, the majority is
using the tragedy of September 11th to justify their
immigration agenda that does not solve all the immigration
issues that are before us, as my colleague Congresswoman
Escobar laid out. It is painful to see the legacy of 9/11
twisted in this political manner.
As we have heard from Mr. Nowrasteh, there have been no
murders or injuries committed by terrorists who have illegally
entered the United States through the U.S.-Mexico border in the
past 48 years. This hearing doesn't reflect that reality. Nor
does it provide a forum for a genuine discussion about how to
make our country safer from the terrorists who are most likely
to come here.
If the other side wanted to do that, they would work with
us to address homegrown terrorists, who have committed many of
the more violent attacks in the United States, particularly
recently.
If they wanted to make our country safer, they would work
with us to provide security for schools, churches, movie
theaters, and keep the guns out of the hands of violent
individuals with extremist belief.
Mr. Nowrasteh, could you remind the Subcommittee, how did
the 9/11 terrorists enter the United States?
Mr. Nowrasteh. The 19 September 11th hijackers entered
lawfully. Eighteen of them entered on tourist visas. One of
them entered on a student visa. They were lawfully present at
the time of the attacks.
Ms. Ross. Is entry through the Southern border in any
connected to terrorist activity in the United States?
Mr. Nowrasteh. It has not been historically, and there is
very little indication that it is currently.
Ms. Ross. What is the likelihood that someone will be
murdered by a foreign-born terrorist in the United States?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Based on data from 1975 through the end of
2022, the annual chance of being murdered is about one in 4.4
million per year. By comparison, the chance of being murdered
in a nonterrorist homicide is about one in 20,000 per year, or
about 316 times greater.
Ms. Ross. If Members of this Committee want to look at the
way to improve national security and terrorist threats, what
would you recommend we do?
Mr. Nowrasteh. I think the No. 1 thing to do in this
scenario is to increase lawful immigration so that we can
control the border. I think the other witnesses up here
actually made a fantastic case for doing that when talking
about the smuggling and the human rights violations and how the
cartel has got their fingers dug in deep into this black
market.
If you don't like that, the one sure-fire way to get rid of
it, to exclude the black market from this, is to legalize that
flow so folks can come in legally.
If people can buy a plane ticket from their home country
and come here lawfully after being vetted, they are not going
to pay cartels $10,000 to smuggle them across a jungle and then
a desert where they are going to be--have a good chance of
being raped or murdered, etc.
The way to control and to regulate this market is through
legalization. We just cannot regulate; it is impossible to
regulate a black market. We need to legalize it.
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair
recognizes Mr. Hunt for five minutes.
Mr. Hunt. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
When 9/11 happened, I was a sophomore at West Point. I was
sitting in my barracks, Eisenhower Barracks, as I recall, on
the third floor. I watched with terror 3,000 souls leave this
earth.
At that moment as a sophomore at West Point I knew, and my
classmates knew, West Point class of 2004--actually three of us
are currently serving in the halls of Congress right now--we
knew that we were all going to go to war.
We knew that there was a chance that we would not make it
back alive, but by God, we were going to do whatever it took to
protect our country and to prevent something like that from
ever happening again. This is why protecting this country and
protecting our Southern border means so much to me.
The open borders that we are seeing right now at our
Southern border is a slap in the face of everyone who has
sacrificed to keep anything like 9/11 from happening again in
our great country. We lost a lot of blood, a lot of treasure,
to keep our Nation safe, including many of my West Point
classmates that are no longer with us.
We were told that if we fought terror abroad, we could keep
it from coming in our own country. I still believe that to this
day.
It is because of Joe Biden that we have now essentially
turned our Southern border into a welcome mat for terrorists.
Now, the Biden Administration would like you to believe that
every person coming across our border is an asylum seeker
simply looking for a better life. That is not only a lie, but
also it is insulting to our intelligence.
This administration says illegal aliens are women and
children wanting a better opportunity, and I have some numbers
for you that would point out the contrary. Since October 2022,
CBP flagged 75,000 illegal aliens in our country as national
security risks.
Last year CBP announced that 98 illegal aliens on a
terrorist watchlist on our Southern border, 98, that is nine
times the number of people encountered on the terrorist
watchlist during Trump's entire presidency.
Wait, there is more. Just last week, the Office Inspector
General released their audit of DHS titled, ``DHS Does Not Have
Assurance That All Migrants Can Be Located Once Released Into
the United States.''
Quick recap of what is going on here. We have 75,000
illegal immigrants living among us who are national security
risks currently. CBP is encountering illegal aliens on the
terrorist watchlist at a record rate, and DHS is releasing
illegal aliens that are a national security risk to the
interior of our country, and you can't even tell us where they
are.
Why do we have a terrorist watchlist? If people on our
terrorist watchlist can simply walk into our open Southern
border, then why do we have one at all?
How is it possible that the FBI has no problem hunting down
January 6th protesters years later, but this administration has
lost track of illegal aliens who pose a real threat to our
national security?
We know this administration could track down anyone,
anytime, anywhere, we have seen them do it. Why? It is my
opinion that this administration views patriots, or as the
Biden Administration calls them, ``MAGA Republicans,'' as
national security threats, while viewing illegal aliens on the
terrorist watchlist as asylum seekers simply looking for a
better life.
We live in an upside-down world today where Americans are
vetted and surveilled more than illegal aliens that we know
have a propensity to break the law. It is not an oversight. It
is not a mistake. It is a choice.
We have billionaires right now that are putting patrons in
space for sport, and you mean to tell me that we cannot stop
illegal immigrants that clearly pose a threat to our national
security from entering our country? I have a report that says
it.
Now, many of my colleagues on the left, they want to say
that well, if you have border security that is racist or that
is wrong or you are xenophobic. I am not. I am pro-America. I
am pro preserving the values of our country and having a
sovereign border.
Six and a half million people entering our country
illegally is ridiculous. Enough fentanyl has poured into this
country to kill every American six times, it is ridiculous.
I am somebody that is willing to die for this country and
to keep it safe. We cannot continue this. It is time for us to
fix our Southern border. Thank you. I yield back the rest of my
time.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired. I will
now recognize myself for five minutes.
Mr. Scott, you served as Chief of the Border Patrol through
the end of the Trump Administration and the beginning of the
Biden Administration. Ms. Escobar and others have assured us
there really was no difference in policy between those two
administrations. Was this your observation?
Chief Scott. It completely misses the mark. I will go
beyond that. I was in the Border Patrol for 29 years, not just
during the Trump Administration.
I was in San Diego when the Clinton administration said,
``illegal immigration is a threat to this country, we need to
do something about it.'' We came up with an operation and we
started using things called fences, same as a wall. We started
using consequences, and we addressed it.
Mr. McClintock. What impact did the Biden policies have on
the security of our Southern border?
Chief Scott. It reversed the entire like 29 years of my
career. It reversed all the progress we made and completed
decimated border security.
Mr. McClintock. Would you say that these changes are
responsible for the crisis we now see at that border?
Chief Scott. One hundred percent because it is catch and
release.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Nadler assures us that well, don't
worry, everybody who comes across is subject to, his words,
``rigorous vetting procedure.'' Would you elucidate on that?
Chief Scott. The information they give the officer, their
name, and even their fingerprints, are bounced off of a data
base here in the United States that has minuscule information
about foreigners in it. So, it is the equivalent of checking
them in basically an empty hard drive.
Mr. McClintock. So, you once described it as checking it
against a blank sheet of paper.
Chief Scott. Correct.
Mr. McClintock. Because we don't have that information, and
then they are allowed in.
Chief Scott. It sounds really good. It is really doing
nothing. It is the interviews where the agents--and they look
at their tattoos, they look at their face, they figure out if
they are telling you the truth. That is where you find things
out, and that is not taking place today because of the massive
flow.
Mr. McClintock. Because of the massive flow. Yet, the
Democrats say the solution to this is we need to increase that
massive flow. We need to legalize all this so that everybody
coming in has a chance to go through that very process. How
thorough would that be?
Chief Scott. I like to actually use facts as well. The fact
is every time, and this goes beyond immigration, every time
there has been a consequence for a crime, a deterrent, and a
consequence, that crime has gone down.
When we had consequences on the border and we held people
until the judge adjudicated their case, the flow stopped,
because the vast majority of the asylum seekers are frauds.
That is the solution, just enforce the law.
Mr. McClintock. OK, now the two numbers that I have been
focused on are the 2.6 million illegal aliens that the
administration has deliberately allowed into this country,
despite the Federal law that says they should be detained, and,
in addition, to that the 1.7 million known got-aways, people
that the Border Patrol observed crossing the border, but simply
couldn't intercept because they are completely overwhelmed.
As I said in my introductory remarks, this is a population
larger than the combination of New Mexico and West Virginia put
together. If we legalize that, we are going to get more of it,
obviously. How thorough can the vetting process be under such
circum-stances?
Mr. McClintock. There is no bandwidth for that. So, it is
nice to talk about things. Theory is great, in reality, there
is only a certain number of agents and officers.
It takes two hours for a CBP officer to process one of
these asylum seekers at a port, about 1\1/2\ hours for a Border
Patrol agent. Just do the math. There would be no enforcement.
Then back to New York. They can't handle 100,000? How many
is too many? Seriously, we can't--this is unsustainable.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Nowrasteh, 5,000 terrorists released in
Parwan. We know where one of them went. One of them, 10 days
later, went to Abbey Gate and detonated the bomb that killed 13
U.S. servicemembers. Can you tell us where the other 5,000 are?
Mr. Nowrasteh. I'm sorry, can you tell me the name of that
individual? I missed the first part of that.
Mr. McClintock. The terrorist who detonated the bomb came
from Parwan. Where are the other 5,000 that were released that
day?
Mr. Nowrasteh. Which bomb?
Mr. McClintock. The bomb that was detonated at the Kabul
airport.
Mr. Nowrasteh. Oh, Kabul.
Mr. McClintock. Oh, don't play dumb. Come on.
Mr. Nowrasteh. No, I am sorry, I couldn't hear you. You
mean in Afghanistan? In Afghanistan.
Mr. McClintock. If you want to play dumb, play dumb. I am
done asking you questions.
Mr. Nowrasteh. I am sorry, is this about the Southwest
border?
Mr. McClintock. I am not playing this game with--
Mr. Nowrasteh. Is this about terrorism on the border?
Mr. McClintock. The time I have left. Mr. Bensman, we talk
about legalizing the process. Don't we already have a legal
process availed by millions of people to enter this country
legally who obey all our laws, who do everything our country
has asked of them?
Isn't that system already in existence? Isn't the problem
that we have millions of people now flouting that law?
Mr. Bensman. Yes. I think after 9/11 a lot was done to
enhance the counter-terrorism kind of security screening
measures for a lot of those, which I believe made it more
difficult. They do still fail sometimes.
I believe that with this mass migration crisis, that the
balance is shifting where people, bad guys across the world are
well aware that our border now is a vulnerability and they can
get through. There was just recently in July a case in Ohio,
FBI case that just wrapped up that involved an Iraqi asylum
seeker.
He is--pleaded guilty now, defendant, whose plot involved
bringing four Iraqi terrorists over the border to kill
President George Bush, former President George Bush. That was a
legitimate counter-terrorism case, and what it shows us it that
they are looking, the bad guys are looking at the border right
now in a different way.
Mr. McClintock. Well, and as I recall, he actually said
that he was, ``now bringing his accomplices in through the
Southern border.''
Mr. Bensman. That is right.
Mr. McClintock. Because it is so much easier than abusing
the visa process.
My time has expired. I want to thank all of you for joining
us today. I want to thank all the Members who joined us for
today's questioning. This will conclude the hearing.
I would like to thank the witnesses for appearing. Without
objection, all Members will have five legislative days to
submit additional written questions for the witnesses or
additional materials for the record.
Without objection, the hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:51 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
All materials submitted for the record by Members of the
Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and
Enforcement can be found at the following links: https://
docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=116352.
[all]