[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
OPENING THE FLOOD GATES:
BIDEN'S BROKEN BORDER BARRIER
=======================================================================
JOINT HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
BORDER SECURITY AND ENFORCEMENT
AND THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
OVERSIGHT, INVESTIGATIONS, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 18, 2023
__________
Serial No. 118-24
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov/
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
54-404 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Mark E. Green, MD, Tennessee, Chairman
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi,
Clay Higgins, Louisiana Ranking Member
Michael Guest, Mississippi Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Dan Bishop, North Carolina Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey
Carlos A. Gimenez, Florida Eric Swalwell, California
August Pfluger, Texas J. Luis Correa, California
Andrew R. Garbarino, New York Troy A. Carter, Louisiana
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia Shri Thanedar, Michigan
Tony Gonzales, Texas Seth Magaziner, Rhode Island
Nick LaLota, New York Glenn Ivey, Maryland
Mike Ezell, Mississippi Daniel S. Goldman, New York
Anthony D'Esposito, New York Robert Garcia, California
Laurel M. Lee, Florida Delia C. Ramirez, Illinois
Morgan Luttrell, Texas Robert Menendez, New Jersey
Dale W. Strong, Alabama Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Josh Brecheen, Oklahoma Dina Titus, Nevada
Elijah Crane, Arizona
Stephen Siao, Staff Director
Hope Goins, Minority Staff Director
Natalie Nixon, Chief Clerk
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER SECURITY AND ENFORCEMENT
Clay Higgins, Louisiana, Chairman
Michael Guest, Mississippi J. Luis Correa, California,
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia Ranking Member
Tony Gonzales, Texas Shri Thanedar, Michigan
Morgan Luttrell, Texas Robert Garcia, California
Josh Brecheen, Oklahoma Delia C. Ramirez, Illinois
Mark E. Green, MD, Tennessee (ex Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
officio) (ex officio)
Natasha Eby, Subcommittee Staff Director
Brieana Marticorena, Minority Subcommittee Staff Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT, INVESTIGATIONS, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Dan Bishop, North Carolina, Chairman
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia Glenn Ivey, Maryland, Ranking
Mike Ezell, Mississippi Member
Dale W. Strong, Alabama Shri Thanedar, Michigan
Elijah Crane, Arizona Delia C. Ramirez, Illinois
Mark E. Green, MD, Tennessee (ex Yvette D. Clarke, New York
officio) Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
(ex officio)
Sang Yi, Subcommittee Staff Director
Lisa Canini, Minority Subcommittee Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS
The Honorable Clay Higgins, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Louisiana, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Border
Security and Enforcement:
Oral Statement................................................. 1
Prepared Statement............................................. 3
The Honorable J. Luis Correa, a Representative in Congress From
the State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Border Security and Enforcement:
Oral Statement................................................. 4
Prepared Statement............................................. 6
The Honorable Dan Bishop, a Representative in Congress From the
State of North Carolina, and Chairman, Subcommittee on
Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability.................. 7
The Honorable Glenn Ivey, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Maryland, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability.................. 9
The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Mississippi, and Ranking Member, Committee on
Homeland Security:
Prepared Statement............................................. 14
WITNESSES
Panel I
Ms. Ntina K. Cooper, Acting Deputy Executive Assistant
Commissioner for Enterprise Services, United States Customs and
Border Protection:
Oral Statement................................................. 15
Prepared Statement............................................. 17
Colonel Jason K. Jefferis, Head of Contracting Activities, United
States Army Corps of Engineers:
Oral Statement................................................. 20
Prepared Statement............................................. 22
Ms. Rebecca Gambler, Director, Homeland Security and Justice,
United States Government of Accountability Office:
Oral Statement................................................. 23
Prepared Statement............................................. 25
Panel II
Mr. Ronald D. Vitiello, Private Citizen, Former Chief of the
United States Border Patrol:
Oral Statement................................................. 54
Prepared Statement............................................. 55
Mr. James De Sotle, Interim Chief Executive Officer, Lonestar
Pipeline:
Oral Statement................................................. 56
Prepared Statement............................................. 58
Mr. Russell A. Johnson, Private Citizen, Former Agent, United
States Border Patrol:
Oral Statement................................................. 59
Prepared Statement............................................. 61
Dr. Alexander Tenorio, Resident Physician, Neurological Surgery,
UC San Diego:
Oral Statement................................................. 67
Prepared Statement............................................. 68
FOR THE RECORD
The Honorable Glenn Ivey, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Maryland, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability:
Article, July 12, 2023, The Washington Post.................... 10
Article, July 14, 2023, The Washington Post.................... 13
The Honorable J. Luis Correa, a Representative in Congress From
the State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Border Security and Enforcement:
CBP June 2023 Monthly Update................................... 72
OPENING THE FLOOD GATES:
BIDEN'S BROKEN BORDER BARRIER
----------
Tuesday, July 18, 2023
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Subcommittee on Border Security and
Enforcement, and the
Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations,
and Accountability,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 2:02 p.m., in
room 310, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Clay Higgins
[Chairman of the Subcommittee on Border Security and
Enforcement] presiding.
Present from the Subcommittee on Border Security and
Enforcement: Representatives Higgins, Guest, Greene, Luttrell,
Breechen, Correa, Thanedar, Garcia, and Ramirez.
Present from the Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations,
and Accountability: Representatives Bishop, Greene, Ezell,
Strong, Crane, Ivey, Thanedar, and Clarke.
Also present: Representatives Green, Pfluger, Thompson, and
Jackson Lee.
Chairman Higgins. The Subcommittee on Border Security and
Enforcement and the Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations,
and Accountability will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare the
committee in recess at any point.
Without objection, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Pfluger,
is permitted to sit on the dais and questions of both panels
and witnesses will be allowed.
The purpose of this hearing is to investigate the Biden
administration decision to cancel border barrier contracts and
the negative impacts on local contractors and communities.
Cancelling border contracts has led to a substantial waste of
resources, taxpayer funds, and time. Today, our subcommittee
will investigate this decision and its effects on the American
communities and businesses that have been impacted.
I now recognize myself for an opening statement.
Well, welcome to the Subcommittee on Border Security and
Enforcement and Subcommittee on Oversight. The two
subcommittees that are joined to address this important matter
and we will have two panels before us today. This joint hearing
is to examine the effectiveness of the border barrier system
and the effects of the Biden administration's cancellation of
border wall contracts on the safety and security of the
American people. I would like to thank our witnesses for being
here today, some of which traveled extensively to join us to
discuss this important topic.
Simply put, physical barriers work to deter and delay any
form of criminal intent. In areas along the Southwest Border
where there is some kind of physical barrier, illegal border
crossings have decreased by up to 87 percent. From fiscal year
2017 to fiscal year 2020, during the construction of the border
barrier system we will be discussing today, the Department of
Homeland security never reported more than 1 million yearly
encounters of illegal aliens at the Southwest Border. The
border barrier system also allows Customs and Border Protection
agents to respond and to detect threats or breaches using
surveillance technology in places along the barrier instead of
relying on manned patrol and other limited surveillance
efforts. This is why earlier this year I introduced the Finish
the Wall Act, requiring the Biden administration to resume
construction of the border barrier system.
In the 2\1/2\ years since President Biden was inaugurated,
there have been more than 5 million illegal border crossings
and over 1.5 million gotaways, criminal runner gotaways. If
this trend continues, the Biden administration is expected to
reach nearly 2.5 million alien encounters at the Southern
Border by the end of September for this year alone. The truth
of the matter is that my colleagues and friends across the
aisle find it difficult to deny that walls work. In fact, there
is a long history of bipartisan Congressional support in
securing the border using physical barriers, such as fencing,
innovative technologies, all-weather access roads, and
lighting. Many of my colleagues across the aisle, including
some members currently on this committee, voted in favor of the
Secure Defense Act of 2006. This has long been a bipartisan
understanding that physical barriers work and they are integral
to effective security of any perimeter. So certainly our
Southern Border is no exception to that simple fact.
Until recent years, it has been clearly understood and
accepted beyond the political divisions that we face, that
physical barriers work. Unfortunately, when President Biden
paused and eventually canceled all border wall construction
projects in 2021, he demonstrated to the American people that
he would prefer to engage in partisan politics over
prioritizing our Nation's sovereignty and our national security
and deterring those who break our laws by conducting illegal
activity at our Southern Border. Fencing and border wall
construction has ceased to be a bipartisan security tool and
the American people are suffering for the sake of this
political posturing.
In addition to the human cost of these cancellations, it is
apparent this administration did not stop and think about the
consequences and the impacts that cancellation of border
barrier projects would have on American small businesses who
had a contract for and had completed work on the border wall
system. One of our witnesses here today, Jim De Sotle, his
company was hired in 2019 by the Federal Government to conduct
work on the border barrier system. To this day, Jim's company,
LoneStar Pipes, has yet to receive any payment or reimbursement
for the work that they did. Another witness with us today, Mr.
Russell Johnson, is a former Border Patrol agent, returned to
ranching along the New Mexico border. As border wall
construction expanded, he and his family saw illegal traffic
pushed to other sections of the border without a wall, showing
that the border wall system is a force multiplier so that the
United States Border Patrol can focus agents in areas where a
wall might not be logical or possible. Border Patrol agents and
the recently-retired chief of Border Patrol, Raul Ortiz, have
repeatedly stressed the importance of the border wall for the
Border Patrol to do its job.
The border wall system should not and did not, prior to the
recent years, was not used as a partisan issue. But over the
past few years every detail of border security has become a
political playground, including paying our contractors for work
that has already been done. These are American citizens,
American companies that engaged in good faith in contractual
agreements with the U.S. Government and performed their work
and have not been paid. It is shameful.
Completing the border wall system is critical to our
Nation's safety, security, and sovereignty. We, the people,
demand a resolution to this crisis. Order must be restored, and
this is the first step.
[The statement of Chairman Higgins follows:]
Statement of Chairman Clay Higgins
Good afternoon and welcome to the Subcommittee on Border Security
and Enforcement and Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and
Accountability joint hearing to examine the effectiveness of the border
barrier system and the effects of the Biden administration's
cancellation of border wall contracts on the safety and security of the
American people. I would like to thank our witnesses, especially those
who traveled from New Mexico and New Jersey, for being here today.
The simple fact is that physical barriers work to deter and delay
any form of criminal intent. That is why earlier this year, I
introduced the ``Finish the Wall Act'' which required the Biden
administration to resume construction of the border barrier system.
When I first introduced this bill in the 115th Congress during the
Trump administration, the border was more secure than ever. From fiscal
year 2017 to fiscal year 2020, during construction of the border
barrier system, the Department of Homeland Security never reported more
than one million encounters of illegal aliens at the Southwest Border.
Since Biden was inaugurated in January 2021, we have lost all
operational control of our Southern Border. In just 2\1/2\ years, we've
had more than 5 million illegal border crossers, and over 1.5 million
gotaways--and if current trends continue, the Biden administration is
expected to reach nearly 2.5 million alien encounters at the Southern
Border by the end of fiscal year 2023.
Who could forget that there is a long history of bipartisan
Congressional support in securing the border using physical barriers,
such as fencing, innovative technologies, access roads, and lighting.
In fact, this committee introduced and led the bipartisan ``Secure
Fence Act of 2006'' (Pub. L. 109-367) which authorized the Department
of Homeland Security to achieve and maintain operational control over
the border and authorized construction of 700 additional miles of
fencing along the United States and Mexico border. Sixty-four Democrats
voted for the measure in the House, and 26 Democrats voted for the
passage of the bill in the Senate. In 2013, House Democrats also
supported a measure that would have authorized $8 billion to repair and
reinforce certain sections of the border barrier.
The truth of the matter is that my colleagues and friends across
the aisle cannot deny that walls work. In areas along the Southwest
Border where there is some kind of physical barrier, illegal border
crossings have decreased by XX percent. The border barrier system
allows Customs and Border Protection agents to not only gain effective
control of the border, but agents are able to respond to and detect
threats or breaches using surveillance technology.
Unfortunately, when President Biden paused and eventually canceled
all border wall construction projects in 2021, he showed the America
people he would rather engage in partisan politics over prioritizing
our Nation's national security and stopping those who break our laws by
conducting in illegal activity at our Southern Border.
It is apparently, he did not stop and think about the consequences
of his Presidential proclamation and the impacts the cancellation of
border barrier projects will have on American small businesses who had
a contract and completed work on the border wall system.
One of our witnesses here today, Jim De Sotle, his company was
hired in 2019 by the Federal Government to conduct work on the border
barrier system. To this day, Jim's company, LoneStar Pipelines, has yet
to receive a single reimbursement for any of the work they did.
Another witness with us today, Mr. Russell Johnson, was a former
Border Patrol agent turned rancher.
The most serious consequence of Biden's Executive Order is the gaps
that were left when the administration abruptly canceled border barrier
projects. On Mr. Johnson's ranch for example, there is a gap--this gap
has been exploited by illegal border crossers and transnational
criminal organizations.
This is why completing the wall is critical to our Nation's safety.
America demands and deserves border effective border security and
House Republicans will hold the Biden administration accountable for
failing to defend our Nation's sovereignty at the Southern Border.
Chairman Higgins. I now recognize the Ranking Member, my
colleague, Mr. Correa, the gentleman from California, for his
opening statement.
Mr. Correa. Chairman Higgins and Chairman Bishop, I want to
thank you both for holding this most important hearing.
I am glad that we all agree here today that we need to
secure our borders. I don't however believe that building a
wall is the best way to achieve that. The wall is a Clinton-
era, Bill Clinton-era project from 30 years ago. The challenges
today look very different than they did 30 years ago. I think
the question before us is, what we have to be asking ourselves
is, does a border wall fit into the challenges that we are
seeing today? Our world has changed since Bill Clinton and
since post-COVID-19. Many here in this room actually voted to
end a COVID-19 public health emergency, thereby ending Title
42. These same individuals predicted the demise, a chaos at the
border, which is yet to materialize. Because the reality is,
after Title 42 went out, Title 8 has been imposed, and Title 8
has with it severe criminal sanctions against immigrants who
cross between ports of entry. This administration has in place
a policy that does deter people from crossing between ports of
entry. Let me be clear, I don't agree with that policy. But it
is hard to argue with the facts and the numbers. The numbers
are challenges at the border have dropped. Those numbers have
dropped since the ending of Title 42. It didn't take building a
wall to make that happen.
Bottom line, the world today is experiencing a migratory
crisis, a refugee crisis like we have never seen in the history
of this world. I have to reiterate, the challenges that we face
today require world-wide solutions, not regional solutions.
Let's be clear as well, the wall is not preventing migrants
from coming to the United States, but rather the wall is
directing migrants to cross in more remote and dangerous areas
of the border. It is no surprise then that the Border Patrol
has seen more deaths and assisted in more rescues as a result
of this policy. We have also seen more injuries, traumatizing
families and costing our hospitals millions of dollars. As we
will hear today from our witnesses, a local hospital in the San
Diego sector has witnessed an unprecedented increase in
traumatic brain injuries and spinal injuries from border wall
falls since 2019.
To address border security, we need to address the push
factors that are driving people to move north. No one wants to
pick up and leave their homes and families. I ask you, if
thousands of families are willing to trek through the dangerous
Darien Gap to get to the United States, like the little girl in
this photo behind me, you really think that a wall is going to
stop a family from going north? Of course it won't. That is why
we need partnerships with Mexico and countries in Latin America
and Central America.
This following chart shows the magnitude of the refugee
challenge we are facing just in this region alone. Countries
south of the border are stepping up to help us. Colombia, for
example, has taken in 2.5 million refugees. Others, like
Guatemala, are allowing new migrant processing centers to be
established in Guatemala. Mexico is also hosting thousands of
refugees in Mexico.
The wall never helped with cooperation in the region.
Refugees are not just our problem or their problem, refugees
are our collective challenge and opportunity. Today we are
seeing the full integration of the North American markets. Let
me repeat, today we are seeing the full integration of the
North American markets. Some of my colleagues will argue that
the wall is an important deterrent for smugglers and criminals
unlawfully entering the United States. But you can't fix a
problem using a 30-year-old solution.
We heard last week during the hearings that transnational
criminal organizations are exploiting legitimate private-sector
trade to move fentanyl precursors and fentanyl presses and
fentanyl across China, Mexico, and the United States. Now we
are seeing precursors coming into the United States through our
seaports. A border wall does not address this kind of a
challenge. Cartels today are smuggling the overwhelming
majority of drugs through our ports of entry, using very
creative ways to smuggle. Just last month, CBP officers seized
900,000--900,000 fentanyl pills concealed in a porcelain sink
at the Otay Mesa port of entry--at the port of entry. I really
don't see how a border wall will help us tackle the drugs
coming through our ports of entry. In addition, we heard last
week on how cartels are now using drones, some drones that cost
$200, with a payload of $1 million value of fentanyl to cross
the border. How is a border wall gonna stop a drone?
The fact that my colleagues continue to focus on the wall
again and again and again puts this committee and this Congress
out of touch with what we really need to secure our country.
Instead of spending taxpayer dollars, or like previous
administration did, shifting money from drug-countering
missions, let's invest in ports of entry, additional CBP
personnel, and the root causes of why refugees continue to move
north.
Again, today we are seeing tremendous integration of trade
between Canada, the United States, and Mexico. The trade across
our borders is unbelievable. We have to invest in the
technology to make sure that we stop drugs from coming into
this country and make sure we continue to preserve the free
flow of goods and services that help American consumers on a
daily basis. Between ports of entry we can deploy innovative
technologies like sensors, autonomous towers to detect and
identify threats. Some of these technologies are actually being
manufactured in my district today.
Let me conclude by saying that the Biden-Harris
administration has engaged in these solutions. I am sad to say
that my colleagues across the aisle voted against funding these
initiatives to combat modern threats against proven solutions
that are working today. Just ask the folks at the border. I
hope that going forward, this committee can work together with
others to combat not only the threats of today, but also the
threats of tomorrow, and that we move beyond the solutions that
were put in place 30 years ago.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
[The statement of Ranking Member Correa follows:]
Statement of Ranking Member J. Luis Correa
July 18, 2023
I am glad that we all agree on the need to effectively secure our
border. I don't, however, believe that a border wall is the best way to
achieve that. The wall is a Clinton-era project from 30 years ago. But
the challenges of today look very different than they did 30 years ago.
I think the question we should all be asking ourselves is how the
border wall fits into the challenges we are seeing today. Our world has
changed since the Clinton era, particularly with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Many in this room voted to end the COVID-19 public health
emergency, thereby ending Title 42. They also predicted border chaos,
which has yet to materialize. Now many seem disappointed that numbers
have dropped. That our border is under control. Because the reality is
that Title 8 imposes criminal consequences on migrants who cross
between ports of entry. This administration has in place a policy to
deter people from crossing between ports of entry.
To be clear I don't agree with that policy. But it's hard to argue
with the fact that numbers have dropped since the end of Title 42. It
didn't take building a wall to make that happen. The world is
experiencing an unprecedented migratory crisis like no other since
World War II. As I have reiterated in the past, the challenge we face
is a world-wide issue that requires worldwide solutions.
Let's be clear--the wall is not preventing migrants from coming to
the United States, but rather directing migrants to cross in more
remote and dangerous areas of the border. It's no surprise then that
Border Patrol has seen more deaths and assisted in more rescues as a
result. We've also seen more injuries, traumatizing families, and
costing our hospitals millions of dollars.
As we will hear today, a local hospital in the San Diego Sector
witnessed an unprecedented increase in traumatic brain injuries and
spinal injuries from border wall falls in 2019. This is neither humane
nor effective.
To address border security, we need to address the push factors
driving people to migrate. No one wants to pick up and leave their
homes and families. If thousands of families are willing to trek
through the dangerous Darien Gap to get to the United States, like the
little girl in this photo, do we really think that a wall is going to
stop them?
It won't. That's why we need partnerships with Mexico and countries
in Latin America and Central America.
This chart shows the magnitude of the refugee challenge we are
facing just in this region. That countries are stepping up. Colombia,
for example, is accepting millions of Venezuelans. Others, like
Guatemala, are allowing new migrant processing centers to be
established in their countries. The wall never helped with cooperation
in the region. Refugees are not just our problem or their problem.
Refugees are our collective challenge and opportunity. Today, we
are seeing the full integration of the North American markets.
Some of my colleagues will argue that the wall is an important
deterrent for smugglers and criminals unlawfully entering the country.
But can we solve a 21st-Century problem with a Bill Clinton solution?
As we heard during last week's hearing, transnational criminal
organizations are exploiting legitimate private-sector trade to move
fentanyl precursors and pill presses between China, Mexico, and the
United States. And, we're now seeing precursors move through our
seaports. A border wall doesn't address this trade.
Cartels are smuggling the overwhelming majority of drugs through
our ports of entry, using creative methods of concealment. For example,
just last month, CBP officers seized 900,000 fentanyl pills concealed
in porcelain sinks at the Otay Mesa port of entry. I don't see how a
border wall helps us tackle the drugs coming through our ports of
entry. In addition, we heard last week how cartels are using drones
that cost $200 to send million-dollar payloads of drugs high over any
border barrier. The fact that my colleagues continue to focus on the
border wall again and again makes our committee look out-of-touch with
reality.
Instead of spending taxpayer dollars--or in the previous
administration's case--shifting money from countering drug missions--
let's invest in our ports of entry, in our CBP personnel, and,
importantly, in addressing the root causes to migration with our
international partners.
In a time of exponential growth in cross-border trade, let's
dedicate resources to inspection technology to interdict dangerous
drugs like fentanyl. Let's keep the bad stuff out, and let the good
things in. Between the ports of entry, we can deploy innovative
technologies like sensors and autonomous towers to detect and identify
threats. Some of these technologies are even being made in my district.
The Biden-Harris administration has engaged in these solutions. I'm
sad to say that my colleagues across the aisle voted against funding
these initiatives to combat modern threats against proven solutions
that are working. I hope that going forward, this committee can work
together to combat not only the threats of today, but also those of
tomorrow.
Chairman Higgins. Thank you, Ranking Member Correa.
I now recognize the Chairman for the Subcommittee on
Oversight Investigations and Accountability, the gentleman from
North Carolina, Mr. Bishop, for his opening statement.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I am glad to
extend my welcome also to those who are attending today's
hearing.
I have to take a point of departure from the opening
statement of the Ranking Member just articulated. Barriers are
not some old technology. They aren't from some long-ago thing
from the Clinton administration. The Secure Fence Act was 2005,
2006. The progress that was made was interrupted by the Obama
administration first and then, of course, all know that in
2019, President Trump declared a national emergency in
recognition of the security and humanitarian crises at our
Southern Border, but on the very first day in office, President
Biden terminated President Trump's proclamation and halted
construction of the border wall. While this purely political
decision appeases a radical-left open-borders advocacy, it does
nothing to enhance the security of Americans.
The numbers do not lie. Since the 2018 election and the
year following, border encounter numbers reached 20-year highs,
broke records for encounters of aliens from countries other
than Mexico, and more than doubled in every sector along the
U.S.-Mexico border. Today, our crisis is at a boiling point. We
just heard that the numbers have fallen. A boiling point with
over 200,000 encounters in the month of May alone. Who is out
of touch? Yet President Biden refuses to budge on restarting
construction of a border barrier, wasting taxpayer dollars,
encouraging illegal traffic at gaps at our border, and
endangering the safety and security of Americans.
A physical border barrier slows down those seeking to
illegally cross the border and enhances Border Patrol agents'
ability to apprehend those individuals. It is simply common
sense and any Border Patrol agent you find will tell you that.
President Biden's failure to complete the border barrier system
unquestionably hinders Border Patrol's efforts to control the
border.
As then-Chief Patrol Agent for the Del Rio sector, now
chief of Border Patrol, Jason Owens, testified to this
committee in a transcribed interview, a ``physical barrier
extends the amount of time that I and my team have to respond
to and interdict, and it increases the certainty of arrest.''
Another sector chief logically explained in his transcribed
interview that the presence of a border wall leads individuals
to cross at areas without a barrier, which allows Border Patrol
to focus resources in response. Since President Biden halted
border wall construction, Border Patrol recorded more than 1.5
million gotaways who crossed illegally into the United States
without being apprehended. Not being apprehended because they
weren't diverted to the places where they could be apprehended
or deterred or slowed. We don't know who the gotaways are. We
don't know what they are doing and what they are bringing
across the border. To speak of fentanyl, they catch it at the
port of entry in the sink, but we don't even have any idea. It
is the same small quantities that can poison hundreds of
thousands or millions of Americans and we don't even know. We
don't know their intentions. But we do know that cartels
traffic fentanyl across the Southern Border and Americans are
dying of fentanyl overdoses at historic levels.
These are among the reasons Congress acted to enhance
physical infrastructure along the Southern Border. For example,
Section 3 of the 2006 Secure Fence Act requires, ``At least two
layers of reinforced fencing, installation of additional
physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors.''
Since 2006, Congress appropriated funding explicitly to
construct the barrier system on the Southern Border. In fact,
just 1 month before President Biden halted border wall
construction, Congress included almost $1.4 billion for the
border barrier system in the Consolidated Appropriations Act
for Fiscal Year 2021. It makes a mockery of the duty faithfully
to execute the law.
Notwithstanding legal requirements and Congressional
appropriations to build a barrier system, President Biden's
Department of Homeland Security is instead spending tax dollars
on environmental remediation projects. President Biden's
irresponsible decision left stacks of unused construction
materials exposed to the elements to rust away at project sites
along the border. Reckless cost to the Federal Government,
reckless waste of resources. Private citizens on the border
found themselves left with the inconvenience, hazard, and
expense of these materials remaining abandoned on their
properties for now over 2 years. No resolution, just abandoned.
That is the policy of the administration. We bought materials,
we signed the contracts, but now we are getting nothing for it,
just unprecedented levels of illegal immigration.
The suspension and termination of contracts also placed
contractors in an untenable position. Contractors made business
plans and took on expenses to fulfill their contracts. They
were then forced to wait on hold for months without any clear
decision while the Biden administration decided whether to
honor contractual obligations. When that became something that
even the Biden administration couldn't contend that they were
doing any longer, they terminated contracts and contractors
now, 2 years later, are saddled with the need to attempt to at
least recover some of their costs. This is some madness.
With the on-going border crisis of historic proportions, we
need to equip our Border Patrol agents with all tools possible
to secure our border. Congress has spoken and passed laws, but
the Biden administration has wasted hundreds of millions of
American taxpayer dollars in canceling contracts that would
finish the job. Instead of getting what Americans paid for, we
are left with wall panels to bake in the desert and a wide open
border. President Biden's unconscionable decision compromises
national security.
Thanks to all for joining this hearing. I look forward to
the testimony from our witnesses.
I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. Thank you, Chairman Bishop.
I now recognize the Ranking Member for the Subcommittee on
Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability, gentleman from
Maryland, Mr. Ivey, for his opening statement.
Mr. Ivey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In 2015, former President Trump vowed to build a wall. He
said, and I quote: ``We're going to build a wall and it's going
to be impenetrable. It will be a real wall.'' That same year,
he also said, and by the way, Mexico will pay for it. It is
going to be a great wall because I do, I know how to build.
Absolutely none of that turned out to be true.
The border wall never even got close to being impenetrable,
even the parts that had been built. I think it has been pointed
out lately, because the Republican Presidential campaign has
kicked off, that during President Trump's 4 years in office,
only about 50 miles of the wall got built. The rest of what was
done was repairing the wall that, yes, the Obama administration
had put up. I also need to point out too that during that time
period, the Government spent $2.6 million to repair border wall
breaches from years 2019 to 2021. The maintenance records show
wide-spread damage demonstrating the wall's limitation as an
impediment to illegal crossing. It didn't even stand up to
winds. Sometimes it was knocked over by flooding and the like.
The CBP discovered 40 tunnels from 2017 through 2021, with the
greatest number being discovered in 2020. So not only were the
cartels going over the wall, as Mr. Correa pointed out, and
they are doing that in increasing amounts with the drones that
they are now using, and they were driving around the walls. We
went down to look, the walls don't do anything to block off
traffic going up and down the streets, and they are certainly
going under the walls as well. Don't forget the cheap ladders
used to climb over the wall. We had photographs that I have
seen about this. Even though they raised the height of the
walls, people were still able to go over the walls or sometimes
just buy, you know, Home Depot kind of saws and cut through it.
So to build his wall, since Mexico didn't pay for it,
between 2017 and 2020, Congress appropriated $4.5 billion for
the construction of the new and replacement barriers along the
Southwest Border. Then former President Trump pulled $10.5
billion, diverted it, $6.3 billion from the Department of
Defense for its counter-drug programs, $3.6 billion from
military construction projects, including schools and day care
centers for military families, and $600 million from the
Department of Treasury's forfeiture of funds. As I mentioned,
that led to the building 52 miles over the years. That amount
of money, the result at the end of the Trump administration was
52 miles of new wall.
When President Biden got into office, the remaining funds
he sent back to where they were supposed to have gone to start
with. But it is clear, and the GAO reported in 2021, that Mr.
Trump's desire led to a great deal of waste. One of the
issues--and we will be able to talk about the contracting issue
later on, but rather than doing competitive contract bids,
because they had declared an emergency, were moving quickly,
they did sole-source and direct-let contracts, which led to, in
some instances, contracts that weren't competitively bid and
didn't necessarily get the best results for dollars and cents
for the American people. Because the way the Federal
contracting system is structured, you want to have competition
whenever you can so that you can get the best price. But the
way President Trump ran these programs, it bypassed those and
other issues too, like environmental protections, in order to
``address the emergency'' that he needed to do to build the
wall.
I think along the lines--and I will shorten it up because
Mr. Correa said a lot of the things that I wanted to hit on
too. I think it is pretty clear at this point that building the
wall, and I believe H.R. 2, which is passed by my Republican
colleagues, I believe it came out of this committee with no
Democratic support, calls for the construction of 900 more
miles of wall. Now, at the rate that President Trump was going,
I guess it will take like 45 years to do that. The cost would
be astronomical. I think it is clear at this point that because
the cartel is already, just from a technological standpoint,
bypassed the type of protections that a wall could have
provided maybe 20 or 30 years ago, putting that kind of money
into those programs, as opposed to the things that meet head-on
what they are doing in the cartels to get fentanyl into the
United States, since 92 percent of it comes through the ports
of entry, not where the walls are or even in between the ports
of entry. I think we need to focus on that.
I did want to make one last point, though, to Mr. Jefferis
of the Army Corps of Engineers. In reading the testimony, I did
have concerns about what had happened with LoneStar Pipeline
contractors. So I do want to have a chance to ask you about
that. I think he raised--he sent a letter, he didn't send
testimony, but that is fine. The point is the same. I do want
to make sure that to the extent innocent contractors got caught
up in the changes of the politics that come out of Washington,
DC, they don't suffer for it.
So with that, Mr. Chairman--oh, and I did have two articles
I wanted to offer to the record. We will come back to this in a
minute. ``Southern Border Eerily Quiet After Policy Shift on
Asylum Seekers'', this is out of the Washington Post on July
12, and also from the Post, an opinion piece on ``Biden's
Border Policy Critics, Both Left and Right Were Wrong.''
Chairman Higgins. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
Southern border `eerily quiet' after policy shift on asylum seekers
By Nick Miroff and Toluse Olorunnippa, The Washington Post
July 12, 2023 at 6 o'clock a.m. EDT
EL PASO--On the border bridge from Mexico, about 200 asylum seekers
lined up on a recent morning with their phones open to a Customs and
Border Protection mobile app, ready for appointments at a reception
hall on the U.S. side.
Thirty miles north, the Biden administration provided a different
reception for those attempting to enter the United States illegally,
bringing them to a massive tent complex in the desert for migrants
facing deportation. The new 360,000-square-foot facility's shelves were
stocked with diapers, snacks and baby formula, signs of the
administration's efforts to meet the changing demands of U.S.
immigration enforcement.
The two locations illustrate the extent to which Biden
administration officials have begun transforming the way asylum seekers
and migrants are processed along the southern border since May 11, when
the White House lifted the pandemic policy known as Title 42. The
policy had allowed quick expulsions of migrants who entered the United
States illegally but no penalty for those who tried to get in again and
again.
Now the administration is allowing tens of thousands of migrants to
enter the United States legally each month through the mobile app CBP
One, while those who don't follow the rules face ramped-up deportations
and tougher penalties.
The preliminary result is a nearly 70 percent drop in illegal
entries since early May, according to the latest U.S. Customs and
Border Protection data. After 2 years of record crossings and crisis-
level strains, the Biden administration appears to have better control
over the southern border than at any point since early 2021.
The president's critics continue to depict his border policies as
too permissive--geared more toward accommodating mass migration than
deterrence. But the decline in illegal crossings undermines a key line
of attack for President Biden's Republican critics and bolsters
Democrats' argument that the pandemic expulsion policy was partly to
blame for record numbers of border arrests.
Administration officials acknowledge it is too soon to tell whether
their new approach can achieve lasting effects. Republican State
officials are suing in Federal court to block Biden's policies
expanding legal entries through CBP One. At the same time, immigrant
advocacy groups have filed challenges in Federal court to Biden's new
border restrictions on asylum seekers who cross illegally.
The recent drop in illegal crossings does not mean fewer than half
as many migrants are coming to the United States. President Biden is
allowing roughly 43,000 migrants and asylum seekers per month to enter
through CBP One appointments and accepting an additional 30,000 through
a process called parole. The new legal channels appear to be absorbing
many of the border crossers who for years have entered unlawfully to
surrender in large groups, overwhelming U.S. border agents.
U.S. agents made about 100,000 arrests along the Mexico border in
June, the first full month that Biden's new measures were in effect,
down from 204,561 in May, according to the latest CBP data. It was the
largest 1-month decline since Biden took office.
Imelda Maynard, the legal director of Diocesan Migrant & Refugee
Services in El Paso, which aids migrants, described the past several
weeks in the city as ``eerily quiet.'' The number of migrants released
by CBP onto the streets of El Paso dropped to zero in recent days,
according to the city.
``We've been so used to putting out fire after fire, we're like:
Where are all the people?'' Maynard said.
`We're so close'
On the outskirts of El Paso, where for much of the past 2 years
migrants have attempted to enter illegally each day through the steep
canyons of Mount Cristo Rey, a CBP helicopter and a team of agents gave
chase one recent morning to a single border-crosser. He turned back
south.
With CBP using more contractors at its facilities to help perform
tasks such as data entry, medical screening and child care, Biden
officials say more U.S. agents can return to patrol duties. That
appears to be making it harder for border-crossers to sneak through.
The factors that have fueled migration to the United States remain
largely unchanged, but for the first time since Biden took office, the
President's team is testing a new border-management strategy, one it
considers a more humane and effective alternative to the Trump
administration's approach. At the heart of the strategy is a belief
that reducing the chaos and illegality of migration is more feasible
than trying to stop it.
Legislative proposals to overhaul the U.S. asylum process continue
to face steep odds in a polarized U.S. Congress, which hasn't passed
significant immigration legislation in nearly two decades.
Blas Nunez-Neto, the top border policy official at the Department
of Homeland Security, said the Administration's measures remain
vulnerable to adverse court rulings because they rely on executive
actions rather than congressional fixes, which remain stalled.
The fact that the new Biden system is working as intended is
encouraging, Nunez-Neto said in an interview. ``But it's still too
early to draw any definitive conclusions about what we're going to see
in the coming weeks and months.''
For migrants in Mexican border cities trying to secure a CBP One
appointment, the wait can be harrowing.
Jose Ricardo Pimentel, a 33-year-old Venezuelan, stood on the
bridge on a recent morning. Lowering his voice to a whisper, he
acknowledged that he'd slipped into the line without an appointment
that day because he was so desperate to leave Mexico.
``I was kidnapped along the highway to Ciudad Juarez and held for
22 days,'' he said. ``I'm scared.''
Pimentel reached the front of the line to plead his case, but U.S.
officers saw his name wasn't on their list. They turned him back.
Pimentel fell in behind other families who lacked appointments but
were clinging to faint hopes the CBP officers would allow them to enter
anyway.
Leidimar Munoz; her husband, Alexander Gonzalez; and their 7-year-
old daughter, Yefreannys, waited there, too, but they gave up after 5
hours in the 100-degree heat.
``My daughter couldn't stand it any longer,'' said Munoz, also from
Venezuela. ``She was hungry and asking to use the bathroom.''
The family walked back down the bridge into Ciudad Juarez, then
laid out a blanket under the bridge's shade, sharing a plate of chicken
and fried rice from a foam container. Yefreannys took out Play-Doh and
Barbie dolls from a dusty backpack with a cat face.
Munoz had registered the family for a CBP One appointment 8 days
earlier. The average wait for an appointment was 4 to 6 weeks, but she
didn't want to move into a shelter farther away from the border bridge.
They were spending nights under the bridge, sleeping outdoors on the
patio of a Mexican migrant services center.
Downtown El Paso seemed within grasp, its skyline visible past the
border wall and the spools of concertina wire.
``We're so close,'' Munoz said.
Before May 11, the family could have joined the tens of thousands
of other Venezuelans crossing illegally and surrendering to border
agents with an expectation they'd be quickly released into the United
States. Now doing so would risk deportation back to Mexico and
ineligibility for asylum. Munoz had to wait, glued to the mobile app.
Criticism from all sides
The drop in illegal crossings has given Biden a reprieve on one of
his most vulnerable issues ahead of next year's Presidential election.
White House officials expressed a sense of validation at seeing the
border numbers fall after the expiration of the pandemic restrictions--
noting how Republican politicians had been warning of impending chaos
after May 11.
But even as Biden's aides expressed relief, the president himself
has largely refrained from calling out his detractors over the issue.
The challenges with border enforcement have vexed his administration
since its earliest days, with fast-changing migration patterns, court
orders that kept Title 42 in place and criticism from both liberals and
conservatives.
The issue is bound to remain a sticking point during the 2024
campaign. Former president Donald Trump--who initiated the Title 42
policy and predicted that its end would lead to record migration--has
accused Biden of deliberately undermining border security by lifting
the restrictions.
Recent polling indicates that immigration is one of Biden's biggest
political liabilities, with 6 in 10 adults saying they disapprove of
his handling of the border, according to a recent AP-NO RC poll. In the
aftermath of Title 42's lifting, several Republican candidates have
announced Presidential bids--and almost all of them have used their
campaign launches to attack Biden on immigration.
In some cases, the disapproval is coming from Biden's side of the
aisle--with Democrats criticizing him as being too harsh toward
migrants.
Crystal Sandoval, director of strategic initiatives for Las
Americas, an advocacy group working on both sides of the border, said
Biden's restrictions have effectively ``ended'' access to asylum.
Though the administration is allowing tens of thousands to enter with
CBP One appointments to live in the United States while their
protection claims are pending in U.S. courts, asylum seekers who might
be fleeing immediate danger face new hurdles if they cross the border
illegally.
``Is it really due process?'' said Sandoval, whose organization has
been helping migrants in Ciudad Juarez fix errors to their CBP One
registrations.
``I expected more,'' she said. ``We can and should do better.''
A floating city
The deceased man lay facedown in a sandy berm about five miles
north of the border wall and 100 yards from a highway.
A CBP helicopter first spotted him, sending agents on horseback.
They estimated he'd been there about a week. Pieces of sponge were
glued to his boot soles, a tactic used to mask footprints. The sun had
left his limbs the color of charcoal.
He was one of two deceased migrants recovered in the Santa Teresa,
N.M., area, just outside El Paso, on a recent morning.
Crossings have historically dipped during the peak summer months
when temperatures along the border soar past 100 degrees. But as
migrants trying to evade capture face tougher odds to sneak through,
they often resort to more remote areas with greater risk. They may be
U.S. deportees, or have criminal records, making them ineligible for
CBP One.
Border agents in CBP's El Paso sector are still averaging 400 to
500 arrests per day, bringing detainees to the sprawling new detention
facility comprising brightly lit, climate-controlled tents that
resemble puffy clouds. The size of six football fields, it is the
largest and perhaps least harsh CBP facility ever built, with capacity
for more than 2,500.
The Border Patrol supervisor running the facility likened it to a
cruise ship--a small self-contained city floating on the desert. With
hot showers, onsite laundry and scores of private booths where migrants
can videoconference with attorneys, asylum officers and immigration
judges, the facility's operating costs exceed more than $1 million per
day.
Border Patrol officials said the facility allows them to manage
detainees using far fewer agents. They can reserve the more austere,
jail-like detention cells at Border Patrol stations for migrants
considered security risks. Family groups, unaccompanied minors and
others deemed lower risk can be held at the tent complex, where
contractors perform administrative and custodial tasks that have long
grated on agents.
Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Tex.), a border-district lawmaker who
criticized the new facility's price tag after a recent tour, said
100,000 illegal crossings a month still add up to more than a million
annually, near historic highs. Asylum seekers who are released into the
United States while their claims are pending rarely end up deported,
even though the majority of their cases are rejected in U.S.
immigration court, he said.
``If this is what the administration thinks is a win, they're on
the complete wrong path,'' Gonzales said.
He said he is concerned that the arrival of tens of thousands of
migrants through CBP One has effectively ``streamlined and normalized
illegal immigration.''
``So they won't be deported, but they'll be living in the shadows
all their lives,'' Gonzales said. ``It's wrong to funnel them down a
dead end.''
Under CBP policy, 72 hours is the maximum amount of time migrants
should remain in the agency's custody before they are released or
transferred to another agency such as Immigration and Customs
Enforcement for longer-term detention. The 3-day window is generally
too short to resolve asylum seekers' claims of persecution in their
home countries.
The Biden administration appears to be using the new tent complex
to hold detainees longer, allowing more time for the government to
apply the new asylum restrictions and deport those who disregard the
CBP One route.
Border Patrol officials providing a tour of the facility did not
allow interviews with detainees. But one man lining up for a shower
said he'd been there 18 days.
Olorunnipa reported from Washington.
______
Opinion: On Biden's border policy, critics both left and right are
wrong
By the Editorial Board, The Washington Post
July 14, 2023 at 7:30 a.m. EDT
Uncontrolled migration across the U.S.-Mexico border is not in
anyone's interest except, perhaps, for the smugglers who profit by
charging people to make the difficult and dangerous trek. After much
hesitation, during which unauthorized attempted border crossings
reached an all-time high of 2.76 million in fiscal 2022, the Biden
Administration acted to stem the flow and redirect it into lawful, more
manageable channels. Initial data from the Department of Homeland
Security shows progress: Daily Border Patrol encounters with migrants
fell from 10,000-plus just before May 11, when the policy went into
effect, to 3,400 in early June. Set forth in regulations finalized May
10, the plan seems to be preventing the border chaos many had feared
would follow expiration of emergency powers under Title 42, a public
health law that had allowed Federal authorities to expel migrants
summarily during the pandemic.
There's a catch, though: President Biden's policy has to be
consistent with Federal law. And critics from both ends of the
political spectrum have gone to Federal court arguing that it's not. On
July 19, a judge in Oakland, Calif., is set to hear a coalition of
immigrants' rights advocates, headed by the American Civil Liberties
Union, who claim, in effect, that the Biden plan unlawfully truncates
the right to asylum. Meanwhile, red States, headed by Texas, accuse the
administration of the opposite: letting in hundreds of thousands of
migrants without sufficient legal authority.
The courts should let the administration's approach, which includes
a 2-year time limit, run its course. Some of the legal arguments
against it are serious. Yet, so is the Biden administration's case:
that the President is trying to address a major problem through a
pragmatic exercise of his existing authority.
Essentially, the new policy offers migrants incentives and
disincentives--carrots and sticks--the net effect of which is to
discourage irregular border-crossing. The disincentive, framed as a
``rebuttable presumption'' against entry, is swift expulsion and a 5-
year bar on reentry for those who cross between ports of entry without
first seeking asylum in a third country en route. The incentive is that
these tough conditions do not apply to migrants who first make
appointments using a cellphone app to apply for asylum at ports of
entry and wait in Mexico for their turn. The rule contemplates advance
processing for asylum in a third country as well. Separately, it offers
30,000 people per month from Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Haiti--
main sources of the 2022 border surge--direct access to the United
States via 2-year humanitarian parole, provided they have a U.S.
sponsor.
Mr. Ivey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
With that, I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
Other Members of the committee are reminded that opening
statements may be submitted for the record.
[The statement of Ranking Member Thompson follows:]
Statement of Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson
July 18, 2023
We are here today to focus on a policy that has little to do with
border security, and that's Donald Trump's border wall. Trump's wall
has not only been ineffective in providing security at the border, but
it's also had a devastating financial and humanitarian cost.
Financially, this wall has been a disaster for the American people.
Former President Trump promised Mexico would pay for this wall.
Mexico has not paid one penny toward the wall. Instead, former
President Trump and Republicans have left American taxpayers to foot
the bill.
Let's remember, the strategy to build the border wall had so little
support that the Trump administration had to divert billions of dollars
away from the Department of Defense to build a small part of the
ineffective border wall. This ill-conceived plan resulted in the
previous administration building only 52 miles of new border wall when
the regional plan called for 1,000 new miles.
These 52 miles of new wall cost taxpayers billions of dollars. In
fact, some segments cost the American taxpayers up to $46 million per
mile. The billions of dollars spent on this wall have not made the
border more secure or stopped migrants from coming to our border.
Numerous reports suggest individuals are using $100 power tools to
breach the wall. CBP reports the border wall was breached over 4,000
times in just fiscal year 2022. As a result, CBP spent $2.6 million
from fiscal years 2019 to 2021 to repair damages to parts of the wall
that were breached by individuals. Again, at the expense of American
taxpayers.
Costly repairs also occurred due to weather damage. High winds and
flooding have caused parts of the wall to fall or separate, creating
huge openings in the barrier. It's clear the border wall has serious
flaws and limitations as a deterrent. The financial cost to build and
maintain Trump's wall is exorbitant, but nowhere near as damaging as
the humanitarian cost it has created.
A record number of people world-wide are being forcibly displaced.
People are fleeing war-torn countries, persecution, and human rights
abuses. Individuals fleeing these terrible situations come to America
in their most desperate hour. When we only have restrictive border
policies, and no realistic pathway to legal immigration, migrants cross
illegally out of desperation.
These are families willing to brave the Darien Gap and the
treacherous journey to the border to seek help and opportunity. It
should be no surprise that they are also willing to climb a 30-foot
wall and risk injury or death to get to America. Tragically, we are
seeing more injuries and deaths. There have been at least 28 deaths as
a result of falls from border walls and fences from 2019 to 2022. The
wall indirectly causes injuries and deaths by pushing individuals even
further out into remote areas and treacherous conditions to cross.
Clearly, the 30-foot border wall is inhumane, in addition to being
ineffective.
In addition, it's ironic that the Republicans titled this hearing
``Opening the Flood Gates: Biden's Broken Border Barrier'' when a storm
in Arizona blew the flood gates in Trump's wall off their hinges. And
when flooding in Nogales, Mexico has been tied to the border wall. If
we want to be serious about securing our border, let's look at things
that actually work like providing better technology and more personnel.
I urge my Republican colleagues to join Democrats in finding
effective and humane measures to secure our border.
Chairman Higgins. I am pleased to welcome our first panel
of witnesses.
Let the record reflect that the witnesses have answered in
the affirmative. Thank you. Please be seated.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Chairman Higgins. I would like to now formally introduce
our witnesses.
Ms. Ntina Cooper serves as the acting deputy executive
assistant commissioner for enterprise services at the United
States Customs and Border Protection, Colonel Jason Jefferis
graduated from West Point Military Academy in 1996 and
currently serves as the head of contracting activities for the
United States Army Corps of Engineers. Ms. Rebecca Gambler is
the director of the U.S. Government of Accountability Office's
Homeland Security and Justice Team, where she leads projects
concerning border security, immigration, and election issues.
I thank the witnesses for being here today. The witnesses'
full statements will appear in the record.
I now recognize Ms. Cooper for 5 minutes to summarize her
opening statement.
STATEMENT OF NTINA K. COOPER, ACTING DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER FOR ENTERPRISE SERVICES, UNITED STATES CUSTOMS AND
BORDER PROTECTION
Ms. Cooper. Thank you. Chairman Higgins, Chairman Bishop,
Ranking Member Correa, Ranking Member Ivey, and distinguished
Members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today about CBP's use of physical barriers as part of
the U.S. Border Patrol's critical role in securing the
Southwest Border between the ports of entry.
As these committees know, the Southwest Border environment
in which CBP works is complex and requires continual adaptation
to respond to dynamic threats and changing operational
environments. CBP's multifaceted approach to border security
not only prioritizes investments in personnel, modern
technology, and infrastructure, but also non-materiel
capabilities including domestic and foreign partnerships, as
well as intelligence and information sharing. Additionally, the
immense diversity of terrain, threats, and operational
conditions across each Border Patrol sector along the Southwest
Border requires that CBP acquire and deploy the right
combination of resources, including physical barriers and
related attributes, tailored to address specific operational
requirements, and enhance our detection and interdiction of
unlawful cross-border activities.
Today I would first highlight how CBP uses border barriers
along the Southwest Border, then describe our requirements and
acquisition process for deciding where and what type of barrier
and attributes to use, and finally, share the status of current
barrier and system attribute-related projects.
First, CBP uses barriers to impede unlawful entries into
the United States and to provide agents additional time to
effectively and safely respond to incidents that require a law
enforcement resolution. Barriers are most effective when used
as part of a border barrier system that incorporates other
critical attributes, including surveillance and detection
technology to provide domain awareness, and roads and lighting
to provide Border Patrol agents with improved access, mobility,
and visibility. The Border Patrol evaluates each unique
operating environment and utilizes a rigorous requirements
management process, including the capability gap analysis
process that we refer to as CGAP. This larger process engages
Border Patrol field personnel at all levels, soliciting input
that is used to identify capability gaps, generate operational
requirements, and ultimately inform the identification of
effective and efficient solutions, such as technology or the
deployment of physical barrier system to meet those
requirements.
USBP uses its requirements development process, including a
complementary decision support tool, to prioritize investments
in border barrier solutions. The tool takes into account
quantitative and qualitative operational factors, everything
from vanishing times, total known flow, narcotic seizure
information, and agent assaults, to the ability to contain and
deny entries, and many other factors. The scoring created by
this tool supports the prioritization and decision making
process. Through an established governance structure, USBP
layers the latest intelligence on changing operational
conditions over the raw scoring of the tool to finalize a
prioritized list. Once the prioritized list is established, CBP
applies land acquisition, engineering feasibility,
environmental factors, and cost considerations in developing
its border barrier system acquisition approach. The
comprehensive approach is critical for ensuring CBP makes
informed decisions relating to acquiring the most effective
system solutions tailored to specific locations along the
Southwest Border.
Consistent with the guiding principles in the Department of
Homeland Security Border Wall Plan, which provides for the use
of prior year border barrier funding, CBP is currently moving
forward with several border barrier projects across the
Southwest Border, including actions to construct border
barriers and system attributes in the Rio Grande Valley sector,
and complete fence replacement in the Yuma and El Centro
sectors. These projects are designed to ensure that the
previously-installed border infrastructure functions as it was
intended, address enforcement vulnerabilities, and improve
operational conditions for Border Patrol agents, make the
project areas safe for agents, migrants, and adjacent
communities, and prevent further environmental degradation in
areas impacted by border barrier construction.
As with all major acquisition programs, CBP's border
barrier system requirements development process is continuous,
meaning we conduct assessments of new acquisitions and perform
periodic assessments of deployed materiel and non-materiel
solutions to evaluate how well a deployed solution meets and
continues to meet technical parameters and identified
requirements. While Border Barrier is a valuable tool, it is
one of many investments in personnel, technology, and
partnerships that all work together to create the right
combination of resources in the right locations to help Border
Patrol agents gain operational advantage while supporting the
daily enforcement of immigration laws and counteracting illegal
activity along the Southwest Border.
I thank you for the opportunity to testify today and look
forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Cooper follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ntina K. Cooper
July 18, 2023
introduction
Chairman Higgins, Chairman Bishop, Ranking Member Correa, Ranking
Member Ivey, and Members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to discuss U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) use
of physical barriers as part of the U.S. Border Patrol's (USBP)
critical role in securing our borders between the ports of entry along
the Southwest Border.
The border environment in which CBP works is dynamic and requires
continual adaptation to respond to emerging threats and changing
conditions. CBP's multifaceted border security approach along the
Southwest Border not only prioritizes investments in personnel, modern
technology, and infrastructure, but also non-material capabilities such
as domestic and foreign partnerships, and efficient intelligence and
information sharing, critical to addressing the complex border
environment and enhancing our detection and interdiction of unlawful
cross-border activities. These investments increase CBP's ability to
detect illegal activity along the border, increase our operational
capabilities, and improve the safety of frontline law enforcement
personnel.
Each USBP sector along the Southwest Border is different, with
different terrain, natural barriers, egress routes from the immediate
border area, and varying threats and operational conditions. While some
sectors may be better served by more personnel, others might benefit
from increased technology, such as Autonomous Surveillance Towers, that
could monitor remote areas more easily, or counter-unmanned aerial
system (C-UAS) technologies to detect and mitigate the illicit use of
drones. When placed in strategic areas, physical barriers work in
conjunction with detection technology and other attributes to support
USBP's ability to protect the border against unlawful entries into the
United States, often providing agents additional time to carry out law
enforcement resolutions. USBP evaluates each unique operating
environment and consults with field commanders on what is necessary in
their particular area of responsibility to allow for the best mix of
resources in any given sector.
border barrier system
As part of an integrated ``border barrier system,'' physical
barriers, whether in the form of a steel bollard, levee fencing, or
other designs, are typically complemented by attributes such as a
tailored array of surveillance and detection technology, and all-
weather roads and lighting. These system components work together to
increase USBP's domain awareness, access and mobility, and ability to
impede and/or deny unlawful entries.
Border Barrier Requirements and Acquisition Process
USBP leverages a robust requirements management process, including
the Capability Gap Analysis Process (CGAP), to identify areas of the
border where gaps in capability create vulnerabilities or risks to
border security or border security operations. The process engages USBP
field personnel at all levels, soliciting input that is used to
generate operational requirements and, ultimately, inform the
development of effective, efficient, material, and/or nonmaterial
border security solutions. USBP continues to mature its requirements
management capability, which began with CGAP in 2014, to identify
capability gaps, generate requirements to address those gaps and
ultimately identify solutions, such as technology and/or the deployment
of border barrier system, to meet those requirements.
Assessments of new attributes as well as periodic assessments of
deployed material and nonmaterial solutions help CBP better evaluate
how well a deployed solution meets technical parameters and addresses
identified requirements. This process is critical for ensuring CBP
makes informed decisions related to acquiring the most effective and
best value technology and barrier solutions and attributes tailored to
specific locations along the Southwest Border.
CBP has also implemented a complementary Decision Support Tool 2
(DST2) to prioritize investments in border barrier system solutions to
address identified vulnerabilities across the Southwest Border. The
tool applies several weighted categories that address operational needs
and takes into account the current infrastructure laydown as well as
metrics of known flows of unlawful cross-border activity. The tool is
comprehensive considering both quantitative and qualitative operational
factors, everything from vanishing times,\1\ total known flow,
narcotics seizure information, agent assaults, to ability to contain
and deny entries and many other factors. The scoring created by this
tool supports the prioritization and decision making process through an
established governance structure that layers the appropriate strategy
and latest intelligence on changing operational conditions over the raw
scoring of the tool. Once the prioritized list is established, CBP
considers land acquisition, engineering feasibility, environmental
factors, and cost/affordability in developing its acquisition approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The amount of time an individual who has unlawfully crossed the
border generally has before they have access to shelter and/or
transport. Depending on the operational environment, this could vary
from minutes to hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using the identified and prioritized border barrier system
requirements, CBP executes a deliberative acquisition program in
accordance with DHS's acquisition management directives and
processes.\2\ The process also breaks down the acquisition program into
stages allowing for approval (or disapproval, as appropriate) of
procurement recommendations and close oversight of the execution of
contracts and the deployment of infrastructure and technology by the
Acquisition Decision Authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ DHS Directive 102-01, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
2022-03/22_0321_- cio_acquisition-management-directive.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
border wall plan
On January 20, 2021, President Biden issued Presidential
Proclamation 10142, Termination of Emergency with Respect to the
Southern Border of the United States and Redirection of Funds Diverted
to Border Wall Construction. Since that time, DHS issued its Border
Wall Plan Pursuant to Presidential Proclamation 10142 (the Plan)\3\ and
has authorized CBP to resume several barrier projects necessary to
address life, safety, environmental or other remediation measures in
accordance with the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.dhs.gov/publication/department-homeland-security-
border-wall-plan-pursuant-presidential-proclamation-10142.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS approved an amendment \4\ to the Plan on July 11, 2022, that
allows for additional uses of fiscal year 2018-2021 appropriations to
prioritize environmental remediation and mitigation, as well as to
install system attributes such as lighting, cameras, and detection
technology in places where barrier was constructed but the planned
system attributes were left incomplete at the time of the pause.
Procurement actions and construction projects are under way across 7 of
USBP's Southwest Border sectors to support this work. As of July 1,
2023, CBP has closed 68 gates and gaps in the border barrier, and we
are working to close an additional 61 gates and gaps along with life,
safety, environmental, and other remediation activities at incomplete
border barrier construction sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.dhs.gov/publication/amendment-dhs-border-wall-plan-
pursuant-presidential-proclamation-10142.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, CBP has been able to use some of the previously-
procured construction materials for current projects. For example, CBP
has been able to utilize previously procured steel bollards for
projects such as the Yuma Hill Gap Closure Project. CBP is also using
other materials such as rip-rap (rock/aggregate), gate hardware and
operators, and some concrete culvert pipes for make-safe projects at
incomplete former Department of Defense project sites. In accordance
with the Plan, CBP will continue to evaluate if remaining materials
from former projects will be disposed of or used for any possible
future projects.
Consistent with the guiding principles in the Plan, on June 30,
2023, DHS announced that it had authorized CBP to move forward with the
planning and execution of up to approximately 20 miles of border
barrier system in the USBP Rio Grande Valley (RGV) Sector, as mandated
by the DHS fiscal year 2019 border barrier appropriation.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/local-media-release/cbp-moves-
forward-rgv-barrier-and-yuma-andrade-and-el-centro-calexico.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As required by DHS's fiscal year 2019 appropriation, CBP will be
using 18-foot steel bollard fence panels placed in removable concrete
jersey barriers, as the steel bollard design remains the most
operationally effective design and has been tested and evaluated over
the last several years. This project will also include the installation
of system attributes, such as detection technology, lighting, and
access roads. The proposed project, which does not involve the use of
U.S. Fish and Wildlife refuge tracts, is located within Starr County,
Texas, which is USBP's highest-priority location within the RGV Sector.
In addition, DHS authorized CBP to move forward with the Yuma
Andrade and El Centro Calexico Fence Replacement Projects. Both
projects will replace dilapidated segments of legacy fencing that
presently create potential safety and security concerns for USBP
agents, migrants, and the surrounding community. The decision to
proceed with these replacement projects, similar to previously-approved
projects, prioritizes the completion of activities and projects needed
to address life, safety, and operational risks--including the safety
and security of individuals, Border Patrol agents, migrants, and nearby
communities.
Environmental and Community Impact
As set forth in the Plan, CBP has prioritized efforts to address
safety hazards and remediate and mitigate environmental damage from
incomplete construction at border barrier project sites. Activities
include, but are not limited to, remediating temporary use areas such
as staging areas, haul roads, and project areas impacted by
construction, completing erosion control measures, repairing drainage
gates to prevent flooding, and addressing other environmental
requirements, such as installing small wildlife passages. The
remediation work is intended to ensure that the previously-installed
border infrastructure functions as it was intended, improve operational
conditions for USBP, make the project areas safe, and prevent further
environmental degradation in areas impacted by prior border barrier
construction.
CBP and the Department of the Interior (DOI) have developed a plan
and are implementing mitigation projects to address impacts to cultural
and natural resources associated with past barrier construction
projects. Mitigation projects may include actions to address impacts to
Tribal cultural resources, restoring or replacing habitat, offsetting
damaged cultural sites and studies to assess impacts of barrier
construction on threatened or engaged species. These activities are
intended to identify and address long-term impacts from the barrier on
cultural and natural resources.
As part of environmental planning efforts for new construction
projects, CBP consults with Federal, State, local, and other relevant
stakeholders to identify potential resources that may be present within
a planned project area to avoid these resources or develop measures to
offset or mitigate potential impacts, to the greatest extent possible,
while still meeting operational requirements. CBP is committed to
limiting the impacts of border barrier construction on sensitive lands
and wildlife along the Southwest Border including in national wildlife
refuges, national forests, national monuments, wilderness areas, and on
imperiled species.
CBP works diligently to integrate responsible environmental
practices, including incorporating sustainable practices, into all
aspects of its decision making and operations.\6\ Working closely with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the
U.S. Forest Service, and the National Park Service, CBP implements best
management practices that are designed to minimize or avoid impacts to
sensitive biological, cultural, and natural resources during
construction, to the greatest extent possible, while still meeting
operational requirements. Where avoidance is not possible, CBP
consistently demonstrates our strong commitment to environmental
stewardship by evaluating and identifying possible mitigation measures
for implementation to offset impacts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ CBP's environmental planning includes the preparation of an
Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement, in
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). For some
projects, the DHS Secretary may determine it is necessary to exercise
authority in Section 102(c) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to waive certain environmental
laws, including NEPA, to expedite construction of border
infrastructure. In this case, CBP seeks to accomplish responsible
environmental planning within a managed time frame to meet operational
needs and prepares and implements an Environmental Stewardship Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Throughout the planning, design, and construction process, CBP
completes project, budget, real estate, and environmental planning to
maximize transparency and accountability and to ensure the most
effective and efficient solutions are deployed to meet requirements.
CBP is committed to ensuring that all stakeholder communities,
including Federal partners, State, local, and Tribal officials, and
impacted communities, are kept informed and engaged throughout this
process.
CBP continues to review border barrier projects presenting life,
safety, environmental, or other remediation needs and will continue to
conduct environmental planning activities for planned projects. Any
future construction will be conducted in accordance with enacted
appropriations and in line with the intent to utilize a range of tools
including smart border technology to enhance security along the border
as warranted by requirements in specific areas.
conclusion
Infrastructure is just one piece of the border security enterprise.
While infrastructure acts as a tool that allows our agents time to
respond to activity, it is not the only operational resource.
Investments in personnel, technology, and partnerships all work
together to help CBP gain situational awareness, mitigate the flow of
irregular migration, and protect our borders between the ports of entry
along the Southwest Border.
All of these improvements and investments have helped CBP provide a
greater response to border incursions, while supporting the daily
enforcement of immigration laws and counteracting other illegal
activity along the Southwest Border.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to
your questions.
Chairman Higgins. Thank you, Ms. Cooper.
I now recognize Colonel Jefferis for 5 minutes to summarize
his opening statement.
STATEMENT OF COLONEL JASON K. JEFFERIS, HEAD OF CONTRACTING
ACTIVITIES, UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Colonel Jefferis. Chairman Higgins, Chairman Bishop,
Ranking Member Correa, Ranking Member Ivey, and distinguished
Members of the subcommittees, thank you for this opportunity.
My name is Colonel Jason Jefferis.
I'm here today in my capacity as the head of contracting
for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. As an organization
entrusted with the responsibility of managing a large, complex
portfolio of infrastructure projects to include those with
border security, we truly appreciate the significance of an
efficient and transparent contracting process and ensuring the
successful execution of our Nation's priorities. We take this
responsibility seriously.
The Corps has a long-standing relationship with Customs and
Border Protection. From 2003 to 2018, the Corps partnered with
CBP under various authorities, to include the Secure Fence Act
of 2006. During this time, we completed approximately 650 miles
of border barrier consisting of approximately 350 miles of
pedestrian and another 300 miles of vehicular. Since that time,
three distinct authorities have guided USACE's involvement in
border wall construction. Support to Homeland Security under
the Economy Act and then later support to DoD under 10 U.S.
Code Sections 284 and 2808. Regardless of the authorities and
the appropriations used, the Corps has acted as the design and
construction agent for all three programs, including the
requisite acquisition support. In performance of these duties,
USACE prioritized competition to the extent practical, while
ensuring the contracting process is conducted fairly and
transparently. In recent years, there has been significant
interest in these contracts, including from the U.S. Government
Accountability Office, who found that the Corps conducted these
acquisitions consistent with applicable laws and regulations.
On January 25, 2017, the President of the United States
issued Executive Order 13767 titled ``Border Security and
Immigration Enforcement Improvements'', requiring Secretary of
Homeland Security to take all the appropriate steps to
immediately plan, design, and construct a physical wall along
the Southern Border. USACE received this mission to support
these efforts under the Economy Act. On 15 February 2019, the
President declared a national emergency on the Southern Border,
making certain emergency authorities available to the
Department of Defense, including 10 U.S. Code 2808 and Section
284. On February 25, Homeland Security requested DoD assistance
in securing the Southern Border. On March 25, USACE received
formal designation as the construction agent for these programs
with the direction for the construction to begin at the end of
that fiscal year. In response, we immediately proceeded with
the development and award of contracts under the 284 program
while simultaneously continuing the execution of contracts
under the DHS annual appropriations.
On September 3 of that year, the Secretary of Defense
provided specific guidance on the undertaking of emergency
military construction projects pursuant to 10 U.S. Code 2808.
USACE awarded contracts in response to this guidance beginning
in November 2019.
On January 20, 2021, the President terminated the National
Emergency Declaration with respect to the Southern Border and
directed the secretaries of both departments to pause
construction and obligation of funds and to create respective
implementation plans.
On January 23, the deputy secretary of Defense directed the
immediate pause of all construction and on April 30 the
Secretary of the Army directed the Corps to cancel all
construction undertaken with DoD authority. The Corps
terminated those contracts the next day pursuant to Federal
Acquisition Regulation Clause for termination for convenience
to the government. This termination process has numerous steps,
including a receipt of termination settlement proposal from
each prime contractor, followed by an audit of these proposals
by the Defense Contract Audit agency. Only then can the
contracting officer begin negotiating final contract settlement
amounts. This is a lengthy process and is still on-going and
projected to continue into 2024 for some contracts.
DHS directed the Corps to begin the process for partially
canceling some of the border wall program on September 17 of
2021 with the continuation of certain life safety activities
for certain levy and non-levy projects. The Corps began the
partial termination convenience process for the affected
contracts in October 2021.
Again, I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here
today and thank you for your continued support for the soldiers
and civilians of the Army Corps of Engineers.
I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Colonel Jefferis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Colonel Jason K. Jefferis
July 18, 2023
Chairman Higgins, Chairman Bishop, Ranking Member Correa, Ranking
Member Ivey, and distinguished Members of the subcommittees, thank you
for the opportunity to address you today on behalf of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE).
The Contracting Activity for USACE is entrusted with executing
contracts to manage complex infrastructure projects. We understand the
significance of an efficient and transparent contracting process to
ensure the successful execution of our Nation's priorities, and take
this responsibility seriously.
USACE has a proud history of delivering critical infrastructure
projects with the highest standards of quality, cost-effectiveness, and
integrity. We recognize that the border wall project has garnered
substantial attention, both in terms of its nationally-prominent
mission and the associated challenges it presented.
USACE plays a critical role in the planning, design, and
construction of various infrastructure projects across the United
States, including those related to border security. In the context of
the border wall, USACE has a long-standing relationship with the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Customs and Border Protection
(CBP). From 2003 until 2018, USACE partnered with CBP to complete
approximately 653 miles of border barrier, which included approximately
353 miles of pedestrian barrier and 300 miles of vehicular barrier. Our
efforts associated with this work included real estate planning,
environmental mitigation, and design and construction. These efforts
were under various authorities including the Secure Fence Act of 2006.
In 2017, USACE assisted CBP by providing engineering subject-matter
expertise to assist with the solicitation of prototype border barriers
and the evaluation of prototype construction methods proposed by CBP
contractors. In relation to border wall construction, three distinct
authorities guided USACE's involvement; support under the Economy Act
to CBP utilizing CBP appropriations, and later, USACE's support to the
Department of Defense (DoD) under 10 U.S.C. 284 and 2808.
Regardless of the authorities and appropriations used, USACE acted
solely as the design and construction agent for CPB and DoD/Army,
meaning USACE provided design and construction services, to include
contract award and oversight and acceptance of the contracted work. In
performing duties under these authorities, USACE ensured that the
contracting process was conducted fairly, transparently, and in
accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
Transparency and accountability are fundamental principles within
the Federal Acquisition system and guide USACE's contracting practices.
Throughout the procurement process, we prioritized open competition to
the maximum extent practicable given program requirements.
Over the past several years, there has been significant interest in
our border barrier procurements, including from the U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO). The GAO found that USACE conducted its
acquisitions consistent with applicable laws and regulations.
On January 25, 2017, the President of the United States issued
Executive Order 13767, titled, ``Border Security and Immigration
Enforcement Improvements,'' requiring the Secretary of DHS to take all
appropriate steps to immediately plan, design, and construct a physical
wall along the Southern Border. USACE received the mission to support
DHS's Border Infrastructure Program under the Economy Act. The program
anticipated approximately $20 billion of border infrastructure
construction to be executed over a 10-year period, using both Design-
Build and Design-Bid-Build delivery methods to execute various
requirements such as fence, wall, patrol roads, access roads, lights,
gates for access to border monuments, maintenance, and for Border
Patrol operational use, drainage improvements, levee walls, and other
miscellaneous improvements, repairs, and alterations. USACE used a mix
of existing contracting tools to execute immediate and near-term
actions, while completing the acquisition planning process to create
two to four separate Design Build Multiple Award Task Order Contracts
targeted for award in 2019.
On February 15, 2019, the President of the United States declared a
national emergency on the Southern Border making available certain
emergency authorities to include 10 U.S.C. 284 and 2808.
On February 25, 2019, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 284, DHS, through
CBP, requested that DoD assist DHS in its efforts to secure the
Southern Border.
On March 25, 2019, the Acting Secretary of Defense designated USACE
as the Construction Agent for these programs and directed that
construction begin by the end of the fiscal year. In response, USACE
immediately proceeded with the development, solicitation, evaluation,
and award of contracts for construction under the 284 program, while
simultaneously continuing execution of contracts under DHS annual
appropriations. On September 3, 2019, the Secretary of Defense provided
guidance for undertaking Military Construction Projects pursuant to 10
U.S.C. 2808. USACE awarded contracts in response to this guidance
beginning in November 2019.
On January 20, 2021, the President of the United States terminated
the national emergency declaration with respect to the Southern Border
of the United States and directed the Secretaries of DHS and DoD to
create an implementation plan for redirecting funding and repurposing
contracts.
On January 23, 2021, the deputy secretary of defense directed
implementation of the pause of construction pursuant to the
Presidential proclamation. USACE subsequently issued suspension of work
letters to pause all construction until USACE received applicable
implementation plans.
On April 30, 2021, the Secretary of the Army directed USACE to take
immediate action to cancel all construction undertaken pursuant to 10
U.S.C. 284 and 2808. USACE then terminated those contracts pursuant
to Federal Acquisition Regulation Clause 52.249-2, Termination for
Convenience of the Government, by May 1, 2021. The termination for
convenience process has numerous steps including, making work sites
safe, disposing of excess materials, receiving a termination settlement
proposal from affected contractors, auditing proposals by the Defense
Contract Audit Agency, and negotiating final contract settlement
amounts. This process is on-going and is projected to continue through
2024.
On September 17, 2021, DHS directed USACE to begin the process for
partially canceling the DHS border wall program while completing
certain life safety activities for levee and non-levee projects as
directed in the DHS Secretary's exception memo dated April 30, 2021,
and the subsequent Decision Memo signed July 24, 2021. In October 2021,
USACE began the Termination for Convenience process for the affected
contracts under the DHS program. USACE follows all applicable laws,
regulations, policies throughout the contract termination process.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony about
USACE's contracting support to border wall construction operations
before your combined subcommittees, and for your continued support for
the soldiers and civilians of USACE.
Chairman Higgins. Thank you, Colonel Jefferis.
I now recognize Ms. Gambler for 5 minutes to summarize her
opening statement.
STATEMENT OF REBECCA GAMBLER, DIRECTOR, HOMELAND SECURITY AND
JUSTICE, UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT OF ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Ms. Gambler. Good afternoon Chairman Higgins, Chairman
Bishop, Ranking Member Correa, Ranking Member Ivey, Members of
the subcommittees. I appreciate the opportunity to testify at
today's hearing to discuss GAO's work on Federal agencies'
efforts to contract for and deploy barriers along the Southwest
Border.
In recent years, Federal agencies have obligated billions
of dollars to construct border barriers. Within the Department
of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, or
CBP, is responsible for the overall management of border
barriers. Within the Department of Defense, the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers has served as the design and construction agent
for border barriers.
GAO has issued numerous reports over the years addressing
the deployment of barriers to the Southwest Border. Today I'm
going to summarize GAO's most recent reports on the contracting
and procurement process for border barrier construction. I'm
going to focus my remarks on the key areas.
First, the Army Corps' contract obligations and awards in
fiscal years 2018 through 2020; second, the factors that drove
the Army Corps' acquisition approach; and third, the status of
barrier completion as of January 2021 and subsequent DHS
planning efforts.
First, the Army Corps obligated more than $10 billion in
both DHS and DoD funding for construction contracts from fiscal
years 2018 through 2020. The Army Corps obligated funds for
specific construction projects under 13 contract awards.
Second, expediency drove the Army Corps' approach to border
construction contracts. In particular, the Army Corps' approach
was shaped by senior DoD leadership direction, the time frame
for obligating funds before they expired, and the prior
administration's goal to complete at least 450 miles of border
barriers by the end of 2020. Under this approach, the Army
Corps, for example, used non-competitive awards to a greater
extent than initially planned. In some instances, it authorized
or expanded work without full and open competition and
authorized contractors to begin work before defining key
requirements. In addition, contracts awarded with DoD funds
were used for border barrier construction projects on Federal
lands. This allowed the Army Corps to proceed without acquiring
real estate from private landowners, a process that can take
years.
Based on our reporting, we recommended that the Army Corps
conduct an assessment of the approaches it used to build the
border barriers and as appropriate reassess its acquisition
strategy going forward. Such an assessment would provide, among
other things, an opportunity for the Army Corps to determine
how best to reduce the use of contracting approaches that limit
competition. The Army Corps agreed with this recommendation and
implemented it by conducting an after-action review of the
contracting process.
Finally, with regard to the status of barrier construction,
from fiscal years 2018 through 2020, the Army Corps contracted
for more than 600 miles of border barriers. Approximately 32
percent of the miles to be built under these contracts were new
barriers in areas where no barriers had previously existed,
while about 68 percent of the miles were to replace existing
barriers. As of January 2021, when the new administration
issued a proclamation pausing on-going construction for the
border contracts, the Army Corps had approximately 450 miles of
barriers. However, about 85 percent of the miles constructed
represented the installation of barrier panels rather than the
completion of the full barrier system, which includes
technology, lighting, and roads for maintenance and patrolling.
This was because the Army Corps had structured many of its DoD-
funded awards to prioritize the construction of barrier panels
rather than the full barrier system.
Following the January 2021 pause, DHS suspended performance
on border barrier contracts and construction activities, with
the exception of activities related to ensuring project sites
were safe and secure. DHS also developed a plan for the use of
border barrier funds as called for in the Presidential
proclamation. Under this plan, DHS noted its intent to use
funds to continue addressing safety hazards, identify actions
to address environmental damage from past barrier construction,
and install system attributes.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify at today's
hearing. This concludes my prepared statement and I would be
happy to answer any questions members may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Gambler follows:]
Prepared Statement of Rebecca Gambler
July 18, 2023
gao highlights
Highlights of GAO-23-106893, a testimony before the Subcommittees
on Border Security and Enforcement, and Oversight, Investigations and
Accountability, Committee on Homeland Security, House of
Representatives
Why GAO Did This Study
A January 2017 Executive Order directed the Secretary of Homeland
Security to immediately plan, design, and construct a wall or other
physical barriers along the Southwest Border. From fiscal years 2017
through 2021 DHS received funding to construct border barriers. A 2019
Presidential Declaration of National Emergency directed DOD to support
barrier construction and USACE awarded billions of dollars in
construction contracts. In January 2021, a Presidential Proclamation
paused border barrier construction to the extent permitted by law.
This testimony discusses: (1) USACE's contract obligations and
awards in fiscal years 2018 through 2020 to support barrier
construction on the Southwest Border, (2) the factors that drove
USACE's acquisition approach, and (3) the status of barrier completion
as of January 2021 and subsequent DHS planning efforts.
This statement is based on 7 reports GAO issued between 2017 and
2023. For that work, GAO analyzed DHS and USACE documents and data and
interviewed agency officials. GAO also conducted selected updates.
What GAO Recommends
GAO made 5 recommendations in prior reports related to the
deployment and contracting process for border barrier construction. DHS
and DOD concurred and fully addressed 4. For the recommendation related
to analyzing costs associated with future barrier segments, DHS noted
that it conducts cost estimates as part of the acquisitions process.
southwest border.--award and management of barrier construction
contracts
What GAO Found
GAO's past work has highlighted the increased investment associated
with construction and deployment of barriers on the Southwest Border.
For example, in June 2021 GAO reported that the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE)--the construction agent--obligated $10.7 billion to
support the border barrier efforts from fiscal years 2018 through 2020,
almost all of which was obligated on construction contracts. More than
70 percent of the funds obligated on construction contracts during this
time were Department of Defense (DOD) funds made available following
the President's 2019 National Emergency Declaration. During this time
period, USACE awarded 39 construction contracts, primarily DOD-funded,
to build more than 600 miles of border barriers. Approximately 32
percent of the miles to be built under these contracts were new
barriers in areas where no barriers had previously existed, while about
68 percent of the miles were to replace existing barriers.
In June 2021, GAO also reported that USACE's acquisition approach,
among other things, was driven by the need to obligate DOD funding
before it expired. In response to the 2019 National Emergency
Declaration and with the influx of DOD funds, USACE changed its planned
acquisition approach to expedite construction. For example, USACE used
noncompetitive awards to a greater extent than originally planned. In
addition, USACE structured many of its DOD awards to prioritize the
construction of barrier panels, rather than the full barrier system
(which included panels and supporting attributes, such as technology).
As of January 2021, when the new administration directed the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and DOD to pause on-going
construction for the border contracts to the extent permitted by law,
USACE reported that it had completed approximately 450 miles of
barriers. Most of these miles represented the installation of panels,
rather than the completion of the full barrier system. Less than 69 of
these miles--or about 15 percent--were for completed barrier system as
of January 2021. Since that time, DHS issued and updated a plan for use
of border barrier funds. DHS intends to use its funding to continue
addressing safety hazards, identify actions to address environmental
damage from past barrier construction, and install system attributes
for DHS- and DOD-funded projects, such as lighting and technology.
Chairmen Higgins and Bishop, Ranking Members Correa and Ivey, and
Members of the subcommittees, thank you for the opportunity to discuss
our work covering Federal agencies' efforts to deploy border barriers
along the nearly 2,000-mile Southwest Border. Within the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is
responsible for securing the border from illicit activity while
facilitating legitimate travel and trade. As part of its border
security mission, as of fiscal year 2015, CBP had built more than 650
miles of barriers along the Southwest Border of the United States.\1\
In addition, within the Department of Defense (DOD), the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) has a long-standing role in supporting DHS
along the Southwest Border, including providing project and contract
management support. USACE's role was expanded in 2019 when it was
tasked to help expedite the construction of border barriers using
billions of dollars in DOD funding made available following a 2019
Presidential National Emergency Declaration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the purposes of this testimony, we generally use the term
``barrier'' to refer to a physical structure, such as a pedestrian
fence, vehicle barrier, or wall, or any combination of these structures
intended to impede the movement of people or vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My statement today focuses on the contracting and procurement
process for border barrier construction. Specifically, it discusses:
(1) USACE's contract obligations and awards in fiscal years 2018
through 2020 to support barrier construction on the Southwest Border,
(2) the factors that drove USACE's acquisition approach, and (3) the
status of barrier completion as of January 2021 and subsequent DHS
planning efforts.
This statement is primarily based on 7 reports we issued between
February 2017 and April 2023 on the increased investment in barriers
and the acquisition approach for construction and deployment of
barriers on the Southwest Border. For these products, we analyzed DHS
and USACE documents and data, conducted site visits to locations along
the Southwest Border, and interviewed agency officials. We also
conducted selected updates to those reports regarding DHS and USACE
efforts to address our previous recommendations.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ We made a total of 5 recommendations to DHS and USACE related
to the deployment and contracting process for border barrier
construction. The agencies concurred with the recommendations and fully
addressed 4. For the remaining recommendation for CBP to analyze the
costs associated with future barrier segments and include cost as a
factor in its prioritization strategy, CBP noted that it conducts
detailed cost estimates as part of the acquisitions process. For more
information on this recommendation and its status, see https://
www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-614.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More detailed information on the objectives, scope, and methodology
for our work can be found in the issued reports listed in Related GAO
Products at the conclusion of this statement. We conducted the work
upon which this statement is based in accordance with generally
accepted Government auditing standards. Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence
to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on
our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a
reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit
objectives.
background
In January 2017, an Executive Order directed the Secretary of
Homeland Security to immediately plan, design, and construct a
contiguous wall or other impassable physical barrier at the Southwest
Border.\3\ In response, CBP initiated the Border Wall System Program to
replace and construct new barriers along the Southwest Border.\4\ CBP
uses the term ``wall system,'' or barrier system, to describe the
combination of physical barriers, technology, and other infrastructure
used at the Southwest Border. Physical barriers and other elements of
the system vary, in part, based on the terrain. For example, pedestrian
barrier fencing may consist of steel bollard panels, ranging from 18 to
30 feet, constructed at ground-level. CBP uses supporting attributes
such as technology (e.g., surveillance cameras), lighting, and roads
for maintenance and patrolling to establish varying enforcement zones
as part of the barrier system. Figure 1 shows an example of bollard
panels and barrier construction in south Texas, constructed atop levee
walls, and a 150-foot wide border enforcement zone on the river side of
the barrier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, Exec.
Order No. 13767, 4, 82 Fed. Reg. 8793, 8794 (Jan. 30, 2017) (issued
Jan. 25). Executive Order 13767 defines ``wall'' as a ``contiguous,
physical wall or other similarly secure, contiguous, and impassable
physical barrier.'' See id. 3, 82 Fed. Reg. at 8794. In February
2021, this Executive Order was revoked by the President. See Creating a
Comprehensive Regional Framework To Address the Causes of Migration, To
Manage Migration Throughout North and Central America, and To Provide
Safe and Orderly Processing of Asylum Seekers at the United States
Border, Exec. Order No. 14010, 86 Fed. Reg. 8267 (Feb. 5, 2021) (issued
Feb. 2).
\4\ We have regularly reported on DHS's Border Wall System Program
as part of our annual assessment of DHS acquisition programs. For the
most recent report, see GAO, DHS Annual Assessment: Major Acquisition
Programs Are Generally Meeting Goals, but Cybersecurity Policy Needs
Clarification, GAO-23-106701 (Washington, DC: Apr. 20, 2023).
From fiscal years 2017 through 2021, DHS's CBP received a total of
$5.9 billion in appropriations to construct border barriers.\5\
Beginning in 2019, the Department of Defense (DOD) also provided
funding for barrier construction. In particular, in February 2019, the
President issued a Declaration of National Emergency regarding the
border security and humanitarian crisis at the Southern Border, and
provided additional authority to DOD to support the Federal
Government's response to the emergency.\6\ Following the 2019
Declaration, the administration identified additional funding sources
for border barrier construction, including under the following DOD
statutes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ As we noted in November 2020, the funds provided through each
year's DHS appropriations acts came with various provisos, including
certain restrictions. For example, funds could not be used for the
construction of barriers in the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge in
Texas. See GAO, Southwest Border: Information on Federal Agencies'
Process for Acquiring Private Land for Barriers, GAO-21-114
(Washington, DC: Nov. 17, 2020). In fiscal year 2021, DHS received
$1.375 billion in appropriations for construction of barrier system
along the Southwest Border. In April 2023, we reported that DHS had not
identified the scope of work for those funds. See GAO-23-106701. DHS's
CBP received no new funding for border barrier construction in fiscal
years 2022 or 2023.
\6\ Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border
of the United States, Pres. Proclamation No. 9844, 84 Fed. Reg. 4949
(Feb. 20, 2019) (issued Feb. 15). The National Emergency Declaration
required the use of the armed forces and invoked various statutes to
address the border security and humanitarian situation at the border.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug Activities (counterdrug)
funds.--Under 10 U.S.C. 284, DOD is authorized to support the
counterdrug activities of other Federal agencies, if requested.
DHS requested DOD's counterdrug assistance in the form of
construction of fences and roads and installation of lighting
to block drug smuggling corridors.\7\ DHS selected the barrier
projects to support with counterdrug funds. The funding was
available to DOD for obligation for 1 year, after which the
funding expired and could no longer be used for new
obligations.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 10 U.S.C. 284(b)(7). While the President's National
Emergency Declaration on February 15, 2019, did not expressly invoke
section 284, following a February 25 request from DHS to DOD for
assistance under section 284, the Acting Secretary of Defense
authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to begin planning and
executing support to DHS pursuant to section 284. DOD's authority under
section 284 is not dependent on a National Emergency Declaration.
\8\ In September 2019, GAO concluded that DOD's transfer of funds
into its Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug Activities, Defense, account
for border fence construction was consistent with DOD's statutorily-
enacted transfer authority, and that use of these amounts for the
purpose of border fence construction was permissible under various
statutory provisions. GAO B-330862, Sept. 5, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military construction funds.--Under 10 U.S.C. 2808, the
Secretary of Defense is authorized to undertake military
construction projects in certain circumstances, including a
National Emergency Declaration.\9\ DOD selected the barrier
projects that it undertook with military construction funds
from a DHS-provided list.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 10 U.S.C. 2808.
\10\ See GAO, Southwest Border: Schedule Considerations Drove Army
Corps of Engineers' Approaches to Awarding Construction Contracts
through 2020, GAO-21-372 (Washington, DC: Jun. 17, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For most contracts, USACE served as the design and construction
agent supporting border barrier activities.\11\ Between fiscal years
2017 and 2020, USACE awarded contracts to construct the border barrier
system using several types of contracting vehicles and approaches.
These included stand-alone contracts, which USACE can use when the
exact quantities and timing of delivery are known at the time of
award.\12\ USACE also used multiple-award, indefinite-delivery,
indefinite-quantity contracts, which it may award to one or more
contractors when the exact quantities and timing of products and
services are not known at the time of award.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ USACE has a long-standing role in supporting DHS along the
Southwest Border, including providing project and contract management
support.
\12\ Stand-alone contracts, also called ``definitive contracts,''
are contracts other than an indefinite delivery vehicle that must be
reported to the Government-wide database used to report data on
Government procurements. Federal Acquisition Regulation 4.601.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In January 2021, after a change in administrations, a Presidential
proclamation terminated the emergency at the Southwest Border and
paused border barrier construction to the extent permitted by law.\13\
The proclamation also directed the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland
Security, consulting with the director of the Office of Management and
Budget and other agencies, to develop a plan within 60 days for
redirecting border barrier funding, as appropriate and consistent with
applicable law. After developing this plan, DHS and DOD were to take
appropriate steps to resume, modify, or terminate projects and to
implement the plan, as discussed later in this statement.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Termination of Emergency With Respect to the Southern Border
of the United States and Redirection of Funds Diverted to Border Wall
Construction, Pres. Proclamation No. 10142, 86 Fed. Reg. 7225 (Jan. 27,
2021) (issued Jan. 20). The Presidential proclamation paused all border
barrier construction pending development of a plan by the Secretaries
of Defense and Homeland Security that, among other things, was to
address the potential redirection of border barrier funds while
ensuring funds Congress explicitly appropriated for barrier
construction were expended.
\14\ We separately reviewed the pause in border barrier
construction and obligations of funds as a result of the January 20,
2021 proclamation and determined that it did not violate the
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. GAO B-333110,
June 15, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
usace obligated more than $10 billion to support border barrier
construction from fiscal years 2018 through 2020
Following the President's February 2019 National Emergency
Declaration, the White House announced that military construction and
counterdrug activities funds would be used for border construction. In
June 2021, we found that USACE obligated $10.7 billion to support the
border barrier efforts from fiscal years 2018 through 2020, almost all
of which--$10.6 billion--was obligated on construction contracts.\15\
More than 70 percent of the funds obligated on construction contracts
during this time--$7.5 billion of the $10.6 billion--were DOD
counterdrug and military construction funds. In total, USACE awarded
119 construction contracts and orders during this time frame, and
obligated funds for specific construction projects under 39 of these
awards.\16\ Figure 2 shows the number of USACE contracts and obligated
amounts in fiscal years 2018 through 2020 for barrier construction
broken down by DOD military construction, DOD counterdrug, and DHS (CBP
barrier construction) funding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ USACE obligated the remaining $102 million to provide services
related to border barrier efforts--primarily architecture and
engineering services. See GAO-21-372. For that report we selected
fiscal year 2018 to start our data collection so as to capture changes
in contract data associated with the 2019 emergency declaration, and
ended our data collection at fiscal year 2020 as it was the most recent
year for which we could obtain a full year of data at the time of our
review.
\16\ The other 80 were a combination of base indefinite-delivery,
indefinite-quantity contracts and orders. The orders reported in the
Government-wide database used to report data on Government procurements
were for $2,500 or less and were not for specific construction
projects, so we did not focus on these in our June 2021 report. For
purposes of our report, we focused on the 39 construction contracts and
orders awarded for specific border barrier construction projects,
unless otherwise noted. All 39 were firm-fixed price awards, meaning a
contractor has full responsibility for the costs of performance and the
resulting profit or loss.
expediency drove usace's approach to border construction contracts
after the 2019 national emergency declaration
In June 2021, we found that USACE's ultimate acquisition approach
was driven by senior DOD leadership direction, the time frame for
obligating funds before they expired, and the prior administration's
goal to complete at least 450 miles of border barriers by the end of
2020.\17\ In response to the 2019 National Emergency Declaration and
with the influx of DOD funds, we found that USACE changed its planned
acquisition approach to expedite construction. In particular, USACE had
initially planned for a three-phase acquisition approach for border
barrier construction to support CBP's 5-year border security investment
plan. In the first phase, USACE planned to use existing or planned
indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts to award certain
projects. In the second phase, USACE intended on using a prequalified
source list to make additional awards, and in the third phase, planned
on establishing new indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity
contracts.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ GAO-21-372.
\18\ For use of a prequalified source list, defense and USACE
acquisition regulations allow potential vendors, with proven
competence, to prequalify for work on specific construction contracts
when necessary to ensure timely and efficient performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the declaration, USACE changed this acquisition approach
to move more expeditiously. For example, USACE used noncompetitive
awards to a greater extent than originally planned. Federal law and
acquisition regulations generally require that contracts be awarded on
the basis of full and open competition. However, contracts may be
awarded without full and open competition under certain circumstances,
such as an unusual and compelling urgency where a delay in contract
award would seriously injure the Government.\19\ USACE also used
various contracting authorities to start construction quickly. In
particular, we found that USACE authorized or expanded work without
full and open competition and authorized contractors to begin work
before defining key requirements. Using these flexibilities, USACE
awarded four counterdrug-funded contracts valued at more than $4
billion without full and open competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Office of Federal Procurement Policy guidance has stated that
competition is the cornerstone of the Government's acquisition system
and can obtain the best return on the Government's investment. Office
of Federal Procurement Policy, Memorandum for Chief Acquisition
Officers and Senior Procurement Executives: Enhancing Competition in
Federal Acquisition (Washington, DC: May 31, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USACE also used another flexibility--DHS's February 2020 waiver of
procurement competition requirements--to help expedite construction
efforts.\20\ Specifically, USACE obligated an additional $1.6 billion
for new projects, totaling about 60 more miles of construction using
fiscal year 2020 counterdrug funds. Generally, modifying an existing
contract could be considered out of scope and, if so, the new
requirement would need to be competed. However, the USACE determination
to use the waiver stated that the new projects were located relatively
close to where the contractors were already working, and were in line
with the Secretary of Defense's directive to begin construction on
these projects as quickly as possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ In February 2020, the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security
issued a waiver determination pursuant to a 2005 law that allows the
Secretary to waive legal requirements to ensure the expeditious
construction of barriers and roads along the Southwest Border. See 85
Fed. Reg. 9794, 9796 (Feb. 20, 2020). The REAL ID Act of 2005 amended
the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
by expanding the authority of the Secretary of Homeland Security to
waive all legal requirements, as determined to be necessary, in the
Secretary's sole discretion, to ensure expeditious construction of
barriers and roads along the border. Pub. L. No. 104-208, div. C, tit.
I, subtit. A, 102(c), 110 Stat. 3009, 3009-555, as amended by Pub. L.
No. 109-13, div. B, tit. I, 102, 119 Stat. 231, 306 (classified, as
amended, at 8 U.S.C. 1103 note).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also found that USACE structured many of its DOD-funded awards
to prioritize the construction of barrier panels, rather than the full
barrier system. All 13 DOD-funded contracts were required to complete
some or all of the barrier panel construction by the end of 2020.\21\
For example, in some cases, these contracts were awarded or modified to
extend deadlines so that contractors could prioritize barrier panel
construction, resulting in longer time frames to produce a complete
barrier system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ USACE terminated one of the DOD-funded contracts at the
Government's convenience shortly after award. Officials said it was
terminated due to an administrative error and that they later awarded a
new contract for the same work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also found that the projects' location on Federal lands
facilitated USACE's approach for DOD construction, allowing
construction to begin quickly. Contracts awarded using DOD counterdrug
and military construction funds were used for border barrier
construction projects on Federal lands. This allowed USACE to proceed
without acquiring real estate from private landowners--a process that
CBP said could take years, as we reported in November 2020.\22\
However, because CBP and DOD focused on building on Federal lands to
facilitate beginning construction quickly during the national
emergency, DOD border barrier construction projects did not
consistently align with the projects CBP had originally prioritized for
construction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ GAO-21-114.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In our June 2021 report, we recommended that USACE conduct an
assessment of the approaches used to build the border barriers and, as
appropriate, reassess its acquisition strategy going forward.\23\ We
noted that such an assessment would provide, among other things, an
opportunity for USACE to determine how best to reduce the use of
contracting approaches that limit competition. Without doing so, USACE
would miss opportunities to strengthen its future acquisition
approaches in furtherance of its long-standing support for CBP on the
Southwest Border.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ GAO-21-372.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USACE concurred with our recommendation and stated that it would
conduct after-action reviews to identify lessons learned from its
approaches to respond to the national emergency. USACE noted it would
also consider additional tools it could create to respond to similar,
less-predictable emergencies in the future. In December 2021, USACE
officials conducted an after-action review of the contracting response.
As part of this review, USACE considered actions required to improve
contracting methods for future national emergency declarations, such as
having comprehensive contracting tools in place prior to emergencies.
In doing so, USACE should be better-positioned to support future
national emergencies.
usace completed barrier panels and dhs developed plans for the use of
funds
In June 2021, we found that USACE met the goal of completing
approximately 450 miles of border barriers, and, in March 2022 and
April 2023, we reported that DHS developed plans for the use of border
barrier funds.\24\ From October 1, 2017, through September 30, 2020,
USACE contracted for more than 600 miles of primary and secondary
border barriers--primarily through DOD-funded contracts (see fig.
3).\25\ Approximately 32 percent of the miles to be built under these
contracts were new barriers in areas where no barriers had previously
existed, while about 68 percent of the miles were to replace existing
barriers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See GAO, DHS Annual Assessment: Most Acquisition Programs Are
Meeting Goals Even with Some Management Issues and COVID-19 Delays,
GAO-22-104684 (Washington, DC: Mar. 8, 2022); and GAO-23-106701.
Department of Homeland Security, Border Wall Plan Pursuant to
Presidential Proclamation 10142 (June 9, 2021); and Amendment to DHS
Border Wall Plan Pursuant to Presidential Proclamation 10142 (July 11,
2022).
\25\ The primary barrier is the first barrier encountered when
moving into the United States from the border and the secondary barrier
is located behind the primary barrier on the U.S. side of the border.
As of January 2021, when the new administration issued a
proclamation pausing on-going construction for the border contracts, to
the extent permitted by law, USACE reported that it had built
approximately 450 miles of barriers. Most of the 450 miles constructed
represented the installation of barrier panels, rather than the
completion of the full barrier system. In addition, slightly less than
69 of these miles--or about 15 percent--were for completed barrier
systems, as shown in table 1.
As noted above, the January 2021 Presidential Proclamation required
development of a plan for redirecting border barrier funding, as
appropriate and consistent with applicable law. In June 2021, DHS
announced its plan for the use of border barrier funds in response to
the Presidential proclamation.\26\ As we reported in March 2022, this
plan outlined how DHS intended to use funds the previous administration
was planning to use for border barrier construction.\27\ DHS suspended
performance on border barrier contracts and construction activities,
with the exception of activities related to ensuring project sites are
safe and secure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Department of Homeland Security, Border Wall Plan Pursuant to
Presidential Proclamation 10142 (June 9, 2021).
\27\ GAO-22-104684.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The January 2021 Presidential Proclamation also states that the
Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security may make an exception to
the border barrier construction pause for urgent measures needed to
avert immediate physical dangers, or where an exception is required by
Congressional appropriation. In June 2021, DHS reinitiated activity on
two projects under the exception for urgent measures, as we reported in
March 2022.\28\ One project was to construct or remediate approximately
13 miles of compromised levee in south Texas, and the other was to
address erosion control in the San Diego segment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ GAO-22-104684.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In July 2022, DHS issued an amendment to its June 2021 plan,
stating its intention to prioritize expenditure of appropriations
received for the barrier system, as we reported in April 2023.\29\
Specifically, DHS intends to use fiscal year 2018 and 2019
appropriations to continue addressing safety hazards, identify actions
to address environmental damage from past barrier construction, and
install system attributes. According to the amended plan, DHS plans to
use fiscal year 2020 and 2021 appropriations to close out the projects
funded by DOD by, for example, completing construction of roads;
installing system attributes; and addressing environmental damage
caused by past barrier construction. We have on-going work reviewing
the effects of border barrier construction on natural and cultural
resources, and we plan to report on the results of that work later this
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See GAO-23-106701 and Department of Homeland Security,
Amendment to DHS Border Wall Plan Pursuant to Presidential Proclamation
10142 (July 11, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairmen Higgins and Bishop, Ranking Members Correa and Ivey, and
Members of the subcommittees, this concludes my prepared statement. I
would be pleased to respond to any questions that you may have at this
time.
Chairman Higgins. Thank you Ms. Gambler.
Members will be recognized by order of seniority for their
5 minutes of questioning. An additional round of questioning
may be called after all Members have been recognized.
I now recognize myself for 5 minutes of questioning.
The Ranking Member, my friend, Representative Correa, who
is my friend, and he and I have spoken for, I would say,
cumulatively, scores of hours about our endeavor to----
Mr. Correa. Conservatively, yes.
Chairman Higgins [continuing]. Work together over the
course of the last 7 years to seek resolutions for the
challenges of our country within the parameters of this
committee's jurisdiction. We are each frustrated regarding some
of the political barriers that have been well-established that
we have to cross in order to confront the true issues. So I am
going to effort today, as somehow during the course of my 62
years of life the Lord has illuminated this path for me and
here I sit. So I am going to ask Members on both sides of the
aisle to let's truly listen to the expertise of the witnesses
today, Majority and Minority witnesses. None of us should claim
to know greater than the witnesses that we call before our
committees when they are specifically chosen for their history
and their area of expertise.
Physical barriers have worked to deter criminal action
since the dawn of man. They continue to work. It is not
reflective of intellectual soundness to just deny the fact that
physical barriers work to restrict criminal activities. The
systems we had designed in 21st Century technology, some of
which we cannot even discuss, but the technologies that were
built into the physical barrier systems that were planned
during the Trump administration would most certainly have
allowed us to view up to 5 miles into the Mexican territory,
our Southern Border. It is a great deterrence for intended
criminal crossings.
I ask Ms. Cooper, CBP has been on record affirming the
effectiveness of barriers. You have made that clear. Yet the
policy decision was made to cancel construction of the barriers
on the President's first day in office. Does CBP believe this
is an effective policy decision?
Ms. Cooper. With respect to the policy decision, I will
have to defer to my DHS colleagues. However, I am more than
able to speak to the efficacy of border barrier system in the
places where it makes sense for our operation.
Chairman Higgins. Yes ma'am. So none of us are suggesting
that we put a 30-foot wall on top of a 200-foot cliff. Are we?
God already put a 200-foot wall there. So where barriers are
effective. But regarding the policy, this committee had
endeavored very hard to ask the Biden administration to provide
a witness from the Department of Homeland Security Office of
Strategy, Policy, and Plans. I want all of us to grasp where we
are here. It is really so indefensible that the Biden
administration has put this policy in place from Day 1 to stop
construction of a border barrier system that had proven to be
incredibly effective with embedded technologies that would
enhance that effectiveness. This is their response. This is an
actual email redacted to protect the innocent, as we used to
say, thanks for the phone call on Friday to discuss the scope
of the proposed hearing and for your engagement throughout the
development of this hearing. After careful consideration, DHS
is unable to provide a headquarters witness for this hearing.
It would not provide a witness to speak to the policy that was
established by the administration. CBP is unable to respond to
policy questions because it is not their area.
We have further questions for the witnesses, and I intend
to go into a second round if my colleagues will participate.
My time has expired for this round and I recognize my
colleague Mr. Correa for questioning.
Mr. Correa. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you
also for framing this debate as it should be framed, which is
our common interests and protection of our country, protection
of our citizens. Although we may disagree in a lot of ways of
doing it, the bottom line is we have the same objectives.
My issue, sir, if I may call you, my good friend, Mr.
Higgins, is not with national security, it is with the way to
approach it. I have lived most of my life near the border,
native Californian. I have seen things change, re-change. When
I mentioned a border wall security concept that is 30 years
old, I didn't mean that we had stop working on it 30 years ago,
but rather questioning its effectiveness moving forward.
Post-COVID, China is no longer our top trading partner,
Mexico is now our trading partner at the top. Canada tells me
that the flow of goods and services into this country is
unbelievable. That is just based on yesterday's statistics from
a month or 2 ago or 3 months ago. God knows what those
statistics are going to be today.
We are going to continue to trade with our partners. If we
think about our border, border to stop refugees, border to stop
illegal drugs, we are forgetting about the other borders in
this continent. Mexico's Southern Border, Guatemala's border,
the Darien Gap in Panama, where Panama's beginning to engage
with us, is engaging with us, in addressing that refugee flow
in that very dangerous area. I mentioned Colombia, many other
countries that are working with us. I would argue that border
security is not our Southern Border. As General Kelly, the
former Secretary of Homeland Security would say, our border
security does not start and end at our border. That is just the
refugee challenge. Again, record number of refugees in the
world as well as this hemisphere.
Shifting to fentanyl issue, I have gone to the border
numerous times since I discovered that I would be the Ranking
Member on this committee to educate myself on the facts. Go
back and kick the tires to make sure that the policies that we
are engaged in are going after the right elements. Talk to
those border agents. I have gone to those ports of entry. Only
2 percent, 2 to 4 percent of the vehicles, passenger vehicles,
are inspected, looked at, when they go north. Something like 15
percent of the huge semis coming across the border are actually
inspected as well. If you really want to put a dent on the
illegal drug trade on fentanyl, go where that gusher is. It is
our ports of entry. We can talk about gotaways all you want to
talk about. When you look at the record seizures by our good
men and women at the border, it is at the ports of entry.
We all have priorities. We all have a limited number of
dollars to spend. We can prioritize.
Ms. Cooper, you have said a lot of things in your
testimony--I have about a minute left here--but given the
nature of the ever-evolving environment, how important is it
that the United States engage--and I would call them now our
allies south of the border because their interest is like ours,
commerce. Anything that slows down commerce, they don't want to
see happen. So how would you say the new environment of
integration of these markets, how does that factor into how we
address refugees, illegal drug business?
Thank you.
Ms. Cooper. Ranking Member Correa, I believe you're
flagging an important point with respect to the larger security
strategy that CBP is engaged in.
With respect to our relationships with many of our foreign
partners, continued engagement with many of the countries you
named, and certainly with others, are a critical part of our
larger strategy. As you said, and we've said within CBP for
many years, border security is not simply at the border, it
begins far outside of that. Our continued collaboration at
multiple levels of leadership with offices across many foreign
partners is a critical layer of our strategy.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
I now recognize my colleague, Chairman Bishop, for his
questioning.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Colonel Jefferis, I have an understanding that the
administration since January 2021, since late I guess in 2022
or maybe even this year, agreed to permit some progress on some
border wall construction to fill in gaps or something of the
kind. Do you administer that process? Am I correct first of all
and do you administer that process?
Colonel Jefferis. Sir, thank you for the question.
Regarding whether the administration has opened up
additional construction for the fill in the gaps, as you say, I
would have to go back to the program office, but the Corps of
Engineers does provide oversight as the design construction
agent for those contracts or those projects they've been
designated whether it's been through DoD or DHS. When they're
designated, they do provide that oversight, yes, sir.
Mr. Bishop. All right. Are you able to quantify what
portion of construction activity that represents in
relationship to the contracts that had been let and were
pending at the time the Biden administration took office and
stopped them?
Colonel Jefferis. Again, Chairman, based on the number of
miles that you're referring to, not having that specific
knowledge, I cannot answer specifically what percentage you're
referring to. We can take that back for the record.
Mr. Bishop. Well, that regardless, you can answer
specifically. It is my understanding that it was just a
relatively--just a very small percentage. Isn't that correct?
Colonel Jefferis. That is my understanding, but I don't
have enough qualification.
Mr. Bishop. Yes. Are you able to say what border materials
are in possession of any of the contracting Government agencies
under these contracts that have been suspended then canceled?
Colonel Jefferis. Yes, Chairman, we've got--you know,
started off with $262 million worth of materials left over from
these various contracts. We've currently gotten it down through
the disposition process to where we've got the border bollard
panels still on the ground out there in some locations. We do
have some of the other materials, whether it be electrical
equipment for the fiber optic cabling or lighting, that is in
the disposition process, but that's not on the ground with the
contractors in my understanding at this----
Mr. Bishop. How are you disposing of it?
Colonel Jefferis. At this point, Chairman, there's two
different processes, one for the DoD, one for the DHS, both of
which are similar, but it goes through a defined process
through which it is inventoried at the contract level and the
Government validates that inventory and then reviews it to
determine whether it can be reusable or must be thrown to
scrap. Then through that process, if it's DoD, the Defense
Logistics Agency will manage that process from start to finish
all the way through and it'll go through multiple entities of
can DLA use it, can another DoD entity use it before it'll go
to Federal or State agencies, and then finally out for sale. If
none of that works, then it goes to scrap.
On the DHS side, GSA will facilitate that and it will go
first to another agency if there's a requirement and then we
work that with GSA by notifying them. Then if not, then GSA
will help facilitate the process of advertising and then final
disposition.
Mr. Bishop. What value of American-taxpayer-paid-for
supplies has been disposed of as scrap?
Colonel Jefferis. I am sorry, Chairman. I don't have that
exact number on me right now.
Mr. Bishop. Does any of the witnesses know the answer to
that, whether precisely or roughly?
Ms. Cooper. I do not, sir.
Mr. Bishop. So none of the witnesses here can tell us how
much of the American taxpayers' precious dollars spent on first
quality goods have been disposed of as scrap, is that correct?
How many unused border wall panels are in the possession of
DoD?
Colonel Jefferis. Currently in possession of DoD, we have
20,822 at various storage locations.
Mr. Bishop. What is the cost to DoD to store and secure
unused border materials per day?
Colonel Jefferis. So that's a very interesting question in
the fact that we don't get in--we don't incur the cost by day.
Those contracted storage rates are valued inside their
termination proposals because the contractors are required for
that. So that----
Mr. Bishop. Are you able to provide any stat here about
cost of storage?
Colonel Jefferis. Yes, sir. At this point in time, we've
run a running point-in-time estimate. It constantly changes
based on what we've turned in. We currently believe that based
on the amount of disposition or the disposition that's been
conducted and the amount of materials still on the ground,
we're looking at about $160,000 a month for the storage of the
material on the DoD process at this time.
Mr. Bishop. How much did DoD spend on storing unused border
materials in fiscal years 2021 and 2022?
Colonel Jefferis. Sir, again, that would be wrapped inside
the fixed-price contracts and I can't provide that cost.
Mr. Bishop. All right.
Ms. Gambler, I don't know if you can speak to this. I
understand that that GAO at one point said this was a mere
programmatic delay, didn't violate the Impoundment Control Act,
but that was in 2021. What about 30 months later? Is that still
the contention of GAO, that this doesn't violate the
Impoundment Control Act for the Biden administration
unilaterally to disregard Congress' appropriation?
Ms. Gambler. Yes, thank you for the question, Chairman.
As you noted, that was GAO's legal decision at the time in
the summer of 2021. We have not done an additional review of
the facts and circumstances at this point. If that's something
that the committee is interested in, we'd be happy to talk with
you about that going forward, Chairman.
Mr. Bishop. It might be interesting, but I don't really
care. I know what the violation of law looks like.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman. My time has expired.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
I now recognize Ranking Member Ivey for his line of
questioning.
Mr. Ivey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate your
comments a moment ago about how we approach this hearing. I
certainly agree that we want to be careful about stepping on
the opinions of our witnesses here. We want to make sure we
take it all in.
I did want to raise some data, though, today. I mean, I
think one of the points that has been made in two of the
articles that I mentioned earlier and wanted to make a part of
the record is the drop-off in these encounters since the Title
42 regime was taken out of play. I understand we have got
differences of views about how impactful a wall might be, but I
think it is clear that the wall isn't there now, but we are
seeing tremendous drop-offs and encounters almost immediately,
based on some policy changes and some strategic changes. So I
don't necessarily want to say that a wall could never be a
barrier to people coming, I am just saying that 900 miles of
wall at--I think the estimate was $24 million per mile last I
saw, and that is a total of $22 billion, I think the money
could be better spent.
I think we can show by some of the--in fact, from hearings
in this room, some of which that you led, that there are other
ways that we could go about reducing some of the challenges we
face there. In fact, I think it was your hearing last, where
there was testimony about China, and that one of the major
reasons we had such a big spike in fentanyl was because the
foreign policy relationship between the United States and China
with respect to suppressing the precursors coming from China
had fallen off. Therefore people were sending the precursors
out of China into Mexico at an accelerated rate. That one of
the ways we could address that problem is to see if we could
reestablish the relationship with China in addressing those
concerns. I think that would be a great step forward.
I also wanted to say, too, Ms. Gambler, I appreciated the
testimony from GAO about, well, frankly, the waste to some
extent in the way the contracting was done. It was rushed, we
will say expedited, but that doesn't keep in place the
protections of competitive bidding and the like that ought to
make sense here.
I will say this too--I want to get to the LoneStar issue--
but before I move off of that, I do want to say this. I mean, I
think I appreciate the comments about wanting to have open
hearts and minds as we approach this issue and see if we can
just do it based on the evidence and the facts that come before
us. I will say this, before I even got to Congress to become a
Member of this committee, we had Members of this committee
talking about--well, frankly, calling for the impeachment of
Secretary Mayorkas. That kind-of puts things in a different
context, I think, than if we were just sitting here and talking
about the best ways to try and address this issue. We got the
55-page document in support of that effort, which we hadn't
seen in advance on the Minority side and so we didn't really
have a chance to respond to it. But I appreciate your comments
and as we move forward hopefully we can do it in a spirit of
bipartisanship that you expressed here today.
Colonel, I want to ask you quickly about LoneStar. I took a
quick look. I am not a Government contracting expert, but if I
understood the gentleman's letter correctly, who is the interim
CEO, LoneStar is a subcontractor for a prime. The Government
decided to terminate the prime contract for convenience. Then
LoneStar began its efforts to get compensation back and filed
the documents to do so. But before that was completed and they
could have been compensated, there was a decision made,
according to his testimony, to in some way reinstate the prime
contractor. So that left LoneStar in a position where they
couldn't get compensation for termination of the contract
because the contract had been reinstated. So even though they
weren't actually doing any work and getting paid, they weren't
able to get compensated either. That doesn't sound right to me.
What am I missing here?
Colonel Jefferis. Thank you, Congressman Ivey, for the
question.
Without having the insight into the specifics of that one
subcontractor--I didn't have the chance to deep dive into that.
I can speak to subcontracting relationships in general.
The Government's contract is with the prime. The prime is
who we interface with and they're responsible for all their
subs. In this particular case, what I was able to determine is
that LoneStar is on the DHS side, so some of those contracts
are partially terminated for the border wall construction while
other efforts were on-going. Again, not being able to speak to
what they could do specifically, but the process is laid out in
Part 49, 112 when it comes to partial payments and those types
of things. When the prime contractor is ready for an interim
termination settlement, they can submit their interim proposal,
we will review it, analyze it, and then provide payment
accordingly if it is in league with what's going on. In this
particular case, because I don't have or the Government does
not have privity of contract into the relationship between the
prime and LoneStar, the Government does not pay subcontractors
directly. We highly encourage our primes, we hold them
accountable for not doing what they're supposed to, but we
still can't force them to use the money that we pay for them.
It's their business arrangement back down to the subcontractor.
Mr. Ivey. Could I do just a--I know I am over, but just a
quick follow-up on that? It has been 30 years since I have done
Government contracting, but I thought there was a flow-through,
flow-down provision so that if a prime got paid, the Federal
Government could require them to pay the sub. So, you know, I
don't want to cross any ethics lines here, this isn't a company
that has asked for my assistance, they are not in my district,
and I am certainly not trying to leverage an adjudication of
this in a hearing room where I don't know all the details, but
it does seem to me that companies in this scenario, we ought to
be able to find a way to try and make them, if not whole, at
least find some degree of compensation, because they have gone,
apparently, a couple of years without being able to do the work
that they could get paid for, even though they legitimately
relied, reasonably relied, on the fact that the prime had
gotten the contract and they had been given a subcontract to
perform certain work.
So if you could follow up, perhaps, with the committee on
the status of that to the extent you can, we would appreciate
it.
Colonel Jefferis. Absolutely. Yes, sir.
Mr. Ivey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
We have all witnessed 2 minutes and 8 seconds of bipartisan
cooperation.
I recognize my colleague, the gentleman from Mississippi,
Mr. Ezell----
Mr. Ezell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Higgins [continuing]. For 5 minutes of
questioning.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you.
The evidence is clear that a wall at our Southern Border
will deter illegal immigration and stop the flow of drugs into
this country. It is frustrating to see that the Biden
administration end policies that would protect American
citizens. On top of this, the cancellation of border wall
construction has cost the taxpayer millions of dollars and has
harmed many small businesses.
Ms. Gambler, it is well-known that the termination of the
border wall system has wasted millions of taxpayers' dollars.
Specifically, the halted contracts caused construction
materials to go unused, costing the taxpayers $6 million a day.
Has GAO estimated the Federal Government's stated cost of
storing these unused materials?
Ms. Gambler. We have not, but I would just note, as we've
been discussing, Federal agencies are required to compensate or
to pay contractors for goods and services rendered and any
costs associated with terminating contracts. So while we
haven't estimated some of the costs associated with storing
goods or termination of contracts, Government agencies are
required to pay those costs to contractors.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you.
We have talked about some options that the Federal
Government has to dispose of these unused construction
materials. Are there any avenues for CBP or the Army Corps of
Engineers to transfer materials to State or local governments?
Ms. Gambler. That is something that GAO has not looked at,
and I would defer to my co-witnesses on the panel to give more
insight to that question, sir.
Mr. Ezell. Sir.
Colonel Jefferis. Yes, sir. Thank you for that question.
The disposition process I had defined a little bit earlier
is unique to the system that we're talking about, whether it's
DHS or DoD, but yes, throughout the process, if it goes into
the DoD--ultimately after DLA, DoD, and other Federal agencies,
the State or another municipality would be one of the potential
receipt of that--those panels, if it made it that far. Yes,
sir.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you.
Do you believe it is more expensive for the Federal
Government to cancel existing border wall contracts or is it
more expensive to resume the construction?
Ms. Gambler. Again, that is not an area that GAO has looked
at. Again, I would defer to the witnesses on the panel with me
in case they have more detailed information on costs.
Mr. Ezell. Anybody.
Colonel Jefferis. Sir, that's a question that gets into the
eaches of depending on which contract and which area we're
talking about, so it's a tough one to answer. I can't give you
a definitive yes or no.
Mr. Ezell. OK.
Ms. Cooper, what is the cost to the Government of canceling
the contracts and re-competing them to undertake their current
activities, including adding attributes and addressing
environmental damage?
Ms. Cooper. Thank you for that question.
With respect to the cancellation of the contracts, I have
to defer to my colleague at the Army Corps. As we've discussed
with respect to the companies that were bid for that work,
making sure that the negotiation for termination is conducted
appropriately so that they can be compensated is a process that
the Corps manages on behalf of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection.
Mr. Ezell. Colonel, anything?
Colonel Jefferis. Sir, can I ask you to repeat the question
real quick?
Mr. Ezell. Anything you could add to that? The cost to the
Government--what is the cost of the Government canceling
contracts and re-competing them to undertake their current
activities, including adding attributes and addressing
environmental damage?
Colonel Jefferis. Again, Congressman, that's a tough one to
answer because we have to have individual contracts that we're
referring to before we can get into the estimation, but I can't
really give you a specific on that one.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
I recognize Mr. Thanedar for 5 minutes for questioning.
Mr. Thanedar. Thank you, Chairman Higgins. I appreciate it.
Well, here is another quote from President Trump in 2016.
The President said we will use the best technology, above- and
below-ground sensors, towers, aerial surveillance, and manpower
to dislocate tunnels and keep out criminal cartels. One of the
first trips I took after joining this committee was to go to
the Southern Border and look at the wall with my own eyes.
Looks like the reality is, despite replacing 250 miles and
building 50 new miles of wall in 2020, nearly one new tunnel
per month was discovered by CBP that year. In fact, Trump
administration had the highest number of tunnels. I believe
there were 40 tunnels, including one touted as the longest ever
discovered.
As clear as day, the wall falls short when it comes to
tackling illegal crossings.
Ms. Cooper, can you provide more details on the discovery
of tunnels during the Trump administration years?
Ms. Cooper. Congressman, with respect to the tunnel
program, unfortunately, I am not an expert and would be happy
to take that question back.
What I can tell you is that the application of border
security technology, the application of barrier system in those
locations where it makes sense, allows our agents--it frankly,
delivers capability to our agents that then allows them to be
responsive to new threats as our transnational criminal
organizations continue to adapt. That's applicable in the
context of cross-border tunnels, and that's certainly
applicable in other contexts we see in our enforcement
environment.
Mr. Thanedar. Thank you, Ms. Cooper.
Also, how would you respond to the argument that using
taxpayer funds to construct the wall is a more effective
approach than implementing comprehensive border security
measures, including enhanced intelligence interdiction efforts
to combat illegal activities, such as drug smuggling and human
trafficking through the tunnels?
Ms. Cooper. As I'm certain you've heard from my colleagues
in Green, including former Chief Ortiz and others, there is no
single solution for the border security challenges that we
face. The implementation of infrastructure and the associated
attributes provides capability, the continued partnership with
foreign governments to do what we can to reduce the global
migration that we are seeing, the information sharing again
with those governments and certainly internal to our own
Government, all play a role in continuing to deliver capability
for our agents and our officers at the ports of entry.
Mr. Thanedar. All right. Thank you, Ms. Cooper.
Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
I recognize the gentlewoman from Georgia, Ms. Greene, for
questioning.
Ms. Greene. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In looking at the wall situation, the headline speaks for
itself. DHS announces steps to protect border communities from
wall construction. Yes, I will read that again. DHS announces
steps to protect border communities from wall construction. I
don't know who wrote this, but they probably should have been
fired for writing that headline. That is pretty bad.
Let's talk about walls. Walls are very important for most
countries. There are many countries with walls. I have one
article here that comes from earlier this month that says--
talking about 65 countries have erected fences on their
borders, also talking about walls, talking about security
fears, wide-spread refusal to help refugees, have fueled a new
spate of wall building around the world. They include Israel's
apartheid wall, India's 2,500-mile fence around Bangladesh, and
Morocco's huge sand berm. So many countries around the world
agree that walls are important in protecting the people within
the country, protecting their national security interests.
I would also like to really praise President Trump's
administration that the contractors completed most of the DoD-
funded border barrier bollards by the end of December 2020 as
scheduled. I am impressed with that because I own a
construction company and I love to see a project completed on
time. They truly did a remarkable job and it is unfortunate it
is unfinished.
In my district alone, we have fentanyl deaths and that is
what really upsets me. We have had many fentanyl deaths, but
the El Paso sector, with the border--El Paso sector has
experienced a significant reduction in drug and smuggling
activities in areas where the border wall system was built.
Most notably, in two separate zones, apprehensions decreased by
60 percent and 81 percent from the beginning of fiscal year
2020 to the end of it. So, walls work and they protect people.
We have 300 Americans dying a day, so I think having a wall to
protect people from deadly fentanyl is the greatest thing we
can do.
Ms. Cooper, CBP has been on record affirming that the
border barrier has been effective and allowed CBP to readjust
their agents to more pressing areas. If CBP said that the
border barrier system is effective, why did DHS cancel the
border wall contracts on the first day of this administration?
Ms. Cooper. I certainly can't speak to the policy
decisions. However, I can certainly speak to those locations in
which border barrier has been deployed historically and the
success with which our agents have seen a growth in capability.
As you mentioned, the El Paso sector, currently there's a GAP
project, a gaps and gates project, that was approved by
Secretary Mayorkas that has completed 68 of those gaps and
gates. An additional 61 are on-going, some of which are in the
El Paso sector. In addition, with the fiscal year 2020 and
fiscal year 2021 appropriations that Congress provided, CBP
will be able to go back and add the system attributes to the
barrier that was previously constructed by DoD in locations
again, such as El Paso, that will provide for protection----
Ms. Greene. OK.
Ms. Cooper, can you tell me--I have got the Biden
administration plans here--does any of this include--these were
many of the categories of things that they--they used the money
that was supposed to go for the wall. They turned it into
things like habitat fragmentation and wildlife impacts,
restoration of disturbed areas, invasive species control and
monitoring, erosion concerns, low-water crossing, lighting and
light pollution, border burial removal or completion--not sure
what that means--impact to cultural resources. This is a list
of projects that the Biden administration decided to take wall
money that was set aside and contract money, and they canceled
the contracts to build the wall and they canceled building the
wall and they took this money and moved it to things like
erosion control and invasive species control. So with the new
wall building or project that you are talking about, are they
still going to be addressing invasive species to protect our
States and protect our border towns and communities? Or are
they actually interested in building a legitimate wall that
will stop the invasion into the United States?
Ms. Cooper. As part of barrier construction, for as long as
I've been working on barrier programs, which is about 15 years,
we have had a long-running relationship with the Department of
Interior to ensure that environmental resources are considered
as a part of that barrier construction. Those types of projects
that you just referenced are not new to this type of work and
in fact, have been on-going with every border project that I've
been involved in.
Ms. Greene. Well, protecting the land from invasive
species, will that save the 300 Americans that are dying from
fentanyl at all? I don't think so.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Higgins. The gentlewoman yields.
The gentleman from California, Mr. Garcia, is recognized
for questioning.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I know we are talking a lot about walls today and I
definitely have some comments and questions about the border
wall, but I just want to just kind-of just restate a few facts
for the record.
First, just as a reminder, and for this subcommittee and
for a greater committee, when all the kind-of cheering went
about, folks trying to really, I think, encourage chaos during
the end of Title 42, I just want to really note that there was
no chaos happening. The administration has actually done a
fairly good job of this transition. I also want to confirm that
Border Patrol chiefs have confirmed for Congress that the
present situation is actually manageable. We have heard this
time and time again. They have said in many of their own words,
there is no crisis at the border. DHS has never been given any
kind of stand-down order as well, as has been stated by some in
the Majority. We have a shared mission of a secure and orderly
border.
Third thing I want to say is that Democrats have been
saying for years legal pathways have been critical to providing
order at the border, especially after Title 42. I just also
want to note that Donald Trump's border wall has always been,
in I think my opinion and many others, an anti-American
monument and not a real solution to actually any of our issues
at the border.
Now, we know as has been stated by our Ranking Member and
others, walls can be climbed, they can be jumped, they don't
meaningfully disrupt the flow of fentanyl in this country. Know
that fentanyl is coming in from legal ports of entry. While
walls can't solve our problems, they actually do create serious
concerns in many cases. I want to bring up one in particular.
I want to raise a case that has been deeply troubling back
in California, certainly to me and many of my colleagues.
Recently, the San Diego Union Tribune reported a nearly week-
long incident in which approximately 150 asylum seekers were
trapped between the layers of border wall near the San Ysidro
port of entry adjacent to San Diego. Now, according to
eyewitness reports from the Union Tribune, reporter on the
ground, that migrants tried to leave, but Border Patrol herded
them back into spaces between the fences, and migrants at the
time believed that they were in custody. Now, CBP detention
standards require people in custody must be supplied with basic
hygiene items, food at regular intervals, and that water must
always be available. But migrants did not receive any of these
things. In fact, it was just one plastic water cooler for
around 150 people between these two fences. Now, this does not
appear to be an isolated incident. My office and other offices
have received reports that migrants are frequently stranded
between border walls for extended periods of time. Many of
them, of course, are suffering from hunger and dehydration. An
article in the New York Times confirmed that this situation has
actually played out in other sectors of the border as well.
To the committee and to our Chairman, to our witnesses, now
I wrote the Border Patrol to ask what policies guided Border
Patrol response in situations when migrants may be trapped in
portions of the wall. We received a reply just last week.
Border Patrol told me and my colleagues, and I quote, ``The
individuals in question had not made contact with U.S. Border
Patrol and were not constrained from further movement.'' This
is actually from the letter. But now I want show you actually a
photograph and you can see for yourself, absolutely there is
contact being made and the San Diego Union Tribune, the
editorial board themselves, said that Border Patrol claims that
the incident was a collective hallucination and that this was
absolutely not the case.
So I hope that there is some better communication from
Border Patrol to Members of this committee on exactly what
happened and what is continuing to happen along this incident.
CBP's response, it is not even touching on the questions we
raised about the conditions, guidance, and protocols that exist
in this situation and others.
Now, Ms. Cooper, as a leader within CBP and certainly
someone that is involved, I know that you necessarily don't
oversee this exact sector, but I would like to ask you to
please take these concerns back to your leadership and CBP
leadership. We have been given no adequate response so far. Is
that something that you would be willing to do?
Ms. Cooper. Thank you for the opportunity to respond,
Congressman.
I can assure you that our U.S. Border Patrol agents take
the safety and security of those who come into our custody with
great seriousness and I'm happy to take that question back.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you.
Because right now Border Patrol leadership is telling us
that they are not interacting with these migrants but there are
reporters on the ground that are reporting that this is
actually happening. So it is actually a grave concern.
I just want to just close, you know, this is an incredible
country. I am proud to have migrated here myself as a young
child. This is a country that does not leave women and children
in the desert without food and water. We have to do better as a
country. Certainly as we discuss things like walls, we should
also understand what the impacts are to people that are trying
to seek asylum that is actually legal in our country.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
The Chair recognizes my colleague from Alabama, Mr. Strong,
for questioning.
Mr. Strong. Thank you, Chairman Higgins.
Colonel Jefferis, Texas acquired 1,700 used border wall
panels from the Federal Government in 2021 to build the border
wall. However, the Federal Government continues to store a
significant amount of border wall material that will not be
used as a result of President Biden's decision to halt the
border wall. Have any State governments contacted the Corps to
express interest in acquiring the unused border wall material?
Colonel Jefferis. Representative, thank you for the
question.
I cannot answer whether any other States have reached out
to us specifically. As I mentioned earlier, the disposition
process is managed by the Defense Logistics Agency. So once we
receive disposition instructions, DLA would be the ones that
would manage that coordination on the DoD-specific contracts.
Mr. Strong. Thank you.
I know earlier you mentioned that you are paying about
$160,000 per month to store some 20,822 panels. With this in
mind, I know that I have received information from the DoD that
says that $130,000 a day, or $47 million annually, is being
spent to store material and wall panels. Have you heard of
these numbers? Your numbers are absolutely different than
DoD's. How much is it costing to store 20,822 panels along with
the material to do that?
Colonel Jefferis. Congressman, thank you for the
opportunity to address the question of storage costs or
estimates in that case.
As I mentioned earlier, the costs of storing those are
still currently with the contractor. So we had an estimate at a
point in time when we terminated these contracts and the full
amount of the material for the DoD side, $262 million worth of
equipment and material. That was what the first estimate was,
was a point in time when we had all of that. As one would
suspect through the disposition process, the inventory and the
number of locations goes down. So it's much closer and
continues to drop. That's where the $160,000 a month comes
from. That's current estimate.
Mr. Strong. Thank you.
There is a big discrepancy in $130,000 a day and $160,000 a
month. But no matter what it is, is this responsible? You think
this is responsible to pay this kind of money to store this
border fence? Is that responsible when the taxpayers of America
have a $32 trillion dollar debt?
Colonel Jefferis. Again sir, thank you for the question.
At this point without disposition instructions, it is
responsible for us to pay for the storage of those. At this
point those are estimated costs, so we won't know the finalized
costs until later.
Mr. Strong. Thank you.
Has the Army Corps of Engineers decided a strategic plan to
use the remaining construction material? If so, can the Army
Corps of Engineers commit to sharing that plan with the Members
on this committee?
Colonel Jefferis. Again sir, as the design and construction
agent, the Corps of Engineers has not come up with the plan to
re-utilize that equipment. We have a requirement owner that
supports that. At this point in time, I'm not aware of any
decision yet to re-utilize that material.
Mr. Strong. Thank you.
What is the cost to the Government of canceling the
contracts and re-competing them under their current activities?
Colonel Jefferis. That is one of those questions that it's
very challenging to answer because we're talking about a unique
process and each contract would be different depending on what
the requirement is. So I cannot provide a specific answer.
Mr. Strong. Thank you.
I know that it was also mentioned about, I think, in some
of our testimony that we are looking at about 17-to-1 drones. I
know that the other side of the aisle mentioned the cartel and
the 17-to-1 drones.
I can tell you this, my hometown of Huntsville, Alabama
could neutralize this in a matter of days. In a matter of days,
they could neutralize these drones that are flying in U.S. air
space. I commit to both sides of this aisle, let's get to work.
We are willing to do it. They are dropping fentanyl across the
U.S. border and they are destroying a generation of Americans.
Mr. Correa. Will you yield?
Mr. Strong. I yield to Mr. Correa.
Mr. Correa. Thank you, sir.
I think you might have heard my statement that we actually
have a firm in my district that is actually working to
implement that technology. Should they win a contract with
Homeland Security, they will be implementing that technology.
Mr. Strong. I can tell you I witnessed it first-hand with
SAIC and multiple companies in Huntsville, Alabama. I will
promise you this right here, it is a cost-effective way to
neutralize it. We can jam them, we can drop them, whichever way
it is, but it is unacceptable to have drones coming into U.S.
air space to destroy the children of our country. I will tell
you this right here, I will work with anybody, I will work with
the President, I will work with Democrats, I will work with
Republicans, because it is time to address it. They are fixed
to destroy a generation of our children.
Mr. Correa. Mr. Strong, I welcome you to my districts and
take a tour of this contract that is doing a great job and
concur with you to stop these drones wherever possible.
Thank you.
Mr. Strong. Thank you.
I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
The gentlewoman from New York, Ms. Clarke, is recognized
for 5 minutes for questioning.
Ms. Clarke. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank both
Chairman Bishop and Higgins and Ranking Members Ivey and Correa
for convening this today's hearing.
I would like to thank our panel of expert witnesses for
joining us on this very important subject matter.
Speaking up on Mr. Strong, it is very clear that we have
reached a technological age where we can address a number of
the issues on our border. I am just thinking that the--I
understand the concerns and the way folks are wedded to this
idea of a wall, but it seems a bit antiquated at this stage,
given where we are with respect to technology and our ability
to manage affairs with a lot more expertise, a lot more
technology on our border. Besides, I thought Mexico was
supposed to pay for it. But that is beside the point.
As you may know, I represent a district that has long
served as a safe haven for migrants. As the daughter of
immigrants myself, I am deeply vested in protecting our
immigrants and seeking accountability for those without a
voice.
It is crystal clear that after over 30 years that we have
to assert an urgent need for comprehensive immigration reform.
Our immigration system has proven to be woefully inadequate and
the consequences are dire. Let me be clear, no individual
seeking safety, freedom, and the pursuit of a better life
should be compelled to endanger their own lives or the lives of
their loved ones.
Customs and Border Protection personnel regularly engage
with Americans who live and work around the Southwest Border to
monitor migration trends and how they affect local communities.
While my colleagues on the other side of the aisle often try to
paint the picture of dangerous lawlessness in these
communities, it is just simply not the case. Most frequently,
community leaders work closely with CBP and Immigration and
Customs Enforcement to welcome migrants while keeping
communities safe, clean, and prosperous. Many landowners along
the border are against the construction of a new border wall.
So I want to ask, Ms. Cooper, can you describe some of the
feedback that you have heard from border communities about why
they are not excited about supporting the construction of new
border barriers?
Ms. Cooper. Thank you for the opportunity to speak a little
bit about the work that we do to collaborate with communities
across the board.
As laid out in the plan that DHS issued in June 2021, we
have been engaged in robust community engagement with respect
to the border barrier projects that were planned. That
community engagement begins with consultation letters that go
to--in fact, in the last 2 years, more than 2,000 consultation
letters have been sent out. We've engaged in more than 1,700
meetings with community members. We hear a variety of feedback.
We hear support, we hear concern. One of the things that we are
able to do through that consultation process is understand what
affects each community and to the degree that we can, make
adjustments to be able to address those things, whether that is
with respect to previously-constructed barrier system, adjust
alignments, in some cases with respect to environmental
concerns, create gaps. We've done everything from lizard gaps
that allow for migratory species and a variety of other things
to be able to address community concerns.
Ms. Clarke. Very well. I think that is a very good
approach, and if we dial down the rhetoric a bit, perhaps we
can get to a solution that we can all agree to.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Chairman Higgins. The gentlewoman yields.
The gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Brecheen, is recognized.
Mr. Breechen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate you all taking the time to be with us today.
For years, United States citizens have been clamoring to
find a solution for the border. It is not just about the
fentanyl, which is the leading cause of death, we know from 18-
to 45-year-olds. It is absolutely heavily correlated to what is
being allowed at that Southern Border, but it is also weapons
and human trafficking. There is a movie, a little-known movie
being out right now that you may have heard about called the
Sound of Freedom. I think the American people know what a
tragedy we have.
President Trump's administration, they responded. They
built physical barriers. It has been cited that there were many
people, some on this committee, on the other side of the aisle
that voted for the 2006 Secure Fence Act. President Biden voted
for the Secure Fence Act. But yet, as President, he took office
and said, not another foot, shut down the $15 billion that was
to be allocated as mandated by Congress, appropriated under the
rule of law, and he, with the stroke of his pen, said, not
another foot.
In the context of 2021, I am in the construction business,
I have a little small business, I found myself in Washington,
DC, and I found myself outside of a physical barrier in the
fall of 2021. That physical barrier had been put in place by
Speaker Pelosi. Quite a contrast that months before the
President had said physical barriers, they don't work, Nancy
Pelosi employed them.
So, Ms. Cooper, here is what I would ask you is, if
physical barriers, as my Democrat colleague a minute ago said,
are 30-year-old outdated systems, why did Nancy Pelosi employ
them at the same time we are canceling contracts on the
Southern Border around the Capitol building?
Ms. Cooper. Respectfully, Congressman, I can't speak to the
decision to employ barriers in that context.
Mr. Breechen. Do you see a conflict, I mean, in terms of
ideology to say on one side we don't think physical barriers
work, 65 countries, to my colleague's point a minute ago, \1/3\
of all countries, the United States have physical barriers on
their borders. There is this floating thought pattern out there
that physical barriers don't work, they are outdated. Do you
see the hypocrisy when they are used to surround the Capitol
building by Speaker Pelosi at the same time we are canceling
contracts to stop the flow of drugs coming into our country?
Ms. Cooper. Again, with respect, Congressman, I can't speak
to that.
Mr. Breechen. Let me pivot.
Two hundred sixty-two million dollars, Mr. Jefferis, you
cited, was the amount of total expense of the material out of
the $15 billion that was laying dormant after President Biden
said not another foot, $262 million, 20,000 panels. Someone
that comes from the heavy equipment world, there is kind-of a
few things you can do with big pieces of metal. I find it
astounding that we don't know if there are some States that
wanted those materials when the disposition process is to
include either Fed or State entities first, prior to scrap. It
is astounding to me that between GAO and the Corps of Engineers
that we don't know, especially with the Texas LoneStar Program.
They are spending $4 billion a year in Texas, they are putting
rent-a-fence up. They are actually putting up physical barriers
called rent-a-fence. Why are we not diving in with the State of
Texas that has the largest mileage that is lacking physical
barriers and asking these strong questions? Hey, we have got
material, 20,000 panels. Instead of us looking at scrap, would
you be interested in erecting physical barriers? Because they
will all tell you that they work. Is that not something that we
need to become more insightful about?
Colonel Jefferis. Congressman, thank you for your question
and your concern about the barrier material.
Your numbers are correct. We have 20,000 panels in the
storage facility process right now, but we have not received
disposition instructions. As the head of contracting, as part
of the design and construction agent, we're not part of that
decision making. I can't speak to who's having those
conversations or where but I can just speak to the amount of
material we currently still have.
Mr. Breechen. Well, I just--look, I want to end with this.
I have got 23 seconds.
Senator Langford from my home State, United States Senator
Langford, he has information come out, $6 million a day was
wasted because of this situation of contracts and place that we
are having to lease to put material. That number then----
Mr. Correa. The gentlemen yield for a second?
Mr. Breechen. Well, can I finish the thought?
Then there was $3 million a day, then it became $130,000
every day, and now it is $160,000 a month. It is just a moving
target. Regardless, it is such waste. I think the taxpayers are
so disheartened by the waste.
I would yield for the extra 18 seconds that I have gone
over.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields and the gentleman's
time has expired.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas, Miss
Jackson Lee, for a questioning.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Did you need some seconds, Mr. Correa?
Mr. Correa. Thank you.
Just trying to figure out your comment about comparing the
fence around the Capitol and border wall, to work or not. I
think there is a lot more order now that that fence around the
Capitol is gone, right?
Ms. Jackson Lee. Reclaiming my time.
Mr. Correa. Thank you.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
Let me thank Mr. Higgins, Mr. Correa, Mr. Ivey, Mr. Bishop
for their courtesies on this committee that I have been the
Ranking Member of on this full committee.
I think this idea, Mr. Correa, of technology is being
ignored. I think it is important that the obligated funds are
not wasted. They are either in DHS or they are either in DoD,
waiting for Congress to do its job of re-appropriations. But I
think that the technology is worthy. Some of what the
administration has done with some of the funds has helped the
State of Alaska with missile field expansion and 2nd Radio
Battalion in North Carolina, an Elementary School for U.S.
military children, firecrafts, rescue station, etc. So it is
not wasted.
I think we have a general disagreement on the value of the
wall. I will say to the gentleman that spoke about fentanyl, I
don't think there is one person on this committee, on this
panel that would not join you in a major effort. I for one, I
have introduced a fentanyl bill. I know that the House had one.
It wasn't quite my cup of tea, but I am ready for the fight. So
I hope that we will have an opportunity to do some of the
things that might be within our democratic principles, when I
say democracy, and within the justice principles, let's try to
do some things together.
But I quickly want to just ask a question of Ms. Cooper.
What is the current state of the Southern Border in terms of
migrant numbers? Have those numbers gone down? Do you have
knowledge of that?
Ms. Cooper. I do not have the most recent numbers in front
of me. We have seen, in fact, as of the end of the fiscal year,
we have seen approximately 1 million encounters. That is a----
Ms. Jackson Lee. OK, you don't have the current.
What about you, Ms. Gambler, GSA? Do you have some
information about numbers going down or not?
Ms. Gambler. We can follow up and provide specific numbers
for your office.
Ms. Jackson Lee. OK, let's do that.
But let me ask both Ms. Cooper, because you are Government
right before me, DHS, and Ms. Gambler, I don't think because we
do not have a wall that this kind of behavior that I am about
ready to report is appropriate. I think we can find ways of
dealing with this as we have done before and certainly we
should not be in the category of doing inhumane items.
The Department of Public Safety trooper sent an email
because he was very concerned about actions happening at the
Texas border, where the Governor has placed wire and buoys in
water that brought about a pregnant woman having a miscarriage,
was found late last month, caught in the wire, doubled over in
pain, a 4-year-old girl passed out from heat exhaustion as she
tried to go through it and was pushed back by Texas National
Guard, a teenager broke his leg trying to navigate the water
around it. Then the incident of a pregnant woman--excuse me, on
a series of previously-reported drownings in the river during
1-week stretch earlier this month, including a mother and at
least one of her two children who Federal Border Patrol agents
spotted struggling to cross the Rio Grande, and my
understanding is--and given medical care before being
transferred to EMF or later declared deceased in the hospital,
the second child was never found.
This is a DPS trooper providing an email because of his
concern of what is happening in forcing people with the buoys
and the wire to go into deeper water and therefore drowning.
Yes, they are illegally crossing. This is a country of
immigrants, but it is a country of laws, and I do understand
that. But we have to--the question is that immigration is a
Federal issue, and it needs to be investigated as to the
appropriateness of this kind of action and whether this action
is truly left to the States where you wind up with this
continued loss of life. So, I would like this--Ms. Cooper, you
have a comment?
Ms. Cooper. While I can't speak to the policies or actions
of the State of Texas, I would like to reassure the
Congresswoman and the committee that our Border Patrol agents,
as they meet migrants in those locations, take their safety and
security as they come into our custody very seriously and
ensure to the greatest extent possible that they are taken care
of at that moment.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I would expect to do so. I have seen them
and I know they do, but I am asking that you carry this request
for an investigation from me regarding the actions that this
DPS agent--trooper, excuse me, has suggested. We can provide
you additional information. I would ask Ms. Gambler, I know
that you are in GAO, that we provide you with information. I
have only cited what the trooper has cited in terms of maybe
Border Patrol agents being forced to try and help these people.
I think that is what I indicated. They were trying to help
someone drowning in the middle of buoys and wires, but I would
like to have an investigation in that.
Ms. Gambler. Congresswoman, thank you.
Well, we would be happy to talk with your office after this
hearing.
Let me also just note that GAO has done prior work looking
at CBP's provision of care for individuals in its custody and
we've made recommendations to CBP in those areas. We'd be happy
to brief your office on that work as well.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me just finish one sentence, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you for your indulgence.
I think I was specifically making the point of how
difficult it makes--whether CBP or in essence Border Patrol,
which is at the border, make their job difficult when State
actions like this cause what this trooper has suggested has
occurred. Loss of life, miscarriage, 4-year-old broken leg, and
a mother and her two children, one missing, mother and child
dead.
So I think that we have established that immigration and
border security is a Federal issue. Whether we agree or
disagree with the wall, it is a Federal issue, and this should
be investigated whether a State is intrusively, wrongly
engaging in immigration responses.
I yield back. Thank you.
Chairman Higgins. The gentlewoman yields.
With respect to her request, I feel compelled to state that
the State's actions--the State is not here today to speak on
their behalf. I would ask that the gentlewoman's questions
regarding State law enforcement actions be appropriately
directed whereby she may receive the answers she seeks. This
committee does not have a witness here today from the State of
Texas.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Crane,
for questioning for 5 minutes.
Mr. Crane. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Today in this committee hearing I have heard that walls
will not stop the immigration crisis that we see today. I have
heard that walls also will not stop a drone. I have also heard
that people are tunneling under walls, and let's not forget the
ladders that people are using to climb over the walls.
I want to remind this committee that this committee is
called the Homeland Security Committee. It is not called the
Homeland wall construction committee. Why do I point this out?
Because real security, whether at your house or on the Southern
Border or in a prison or at a military base overseas, has
always been and will always be protected by overlapping
deterrents. I will say it again, real Homeland Security is
supported by overlapping deterrents. Now a wall is simply just
one of those deterrents that overlaps and works in conjunction
with well-trained agents, technology, intelligence, and more.
Because you can't just say that one security element is going
to keep you safe in any of those environments that I pointed
out. It is kind-of like saying, I am not going to use a lock on
my front door because it is antiquated and people can go
through the window, they can climb the backyard. It would be
the same to say I am going to use a lock on my front door, I am
going to use an alarm system, and I am also going to use a
camera system. That is overlapping deterrence at your own home.
Any professional that came in and gave you a site security
assessment on your home would advise you to use overlapping
deterrents.
I think it is sad that we are still talking about very
rudimentary, basic, simplistic, common-knowledge security
measures when we know what we are trying to protect. We are
trying to protect our citizens, our constituents from all over
the country who vote different ways, who think different
things, but we know that they are being harmed by everything
that we have been discussing in this chamber for months. They
are harmed by the fentanyl, they are harmed by the MS-13 gang
members, they are harmed by sex trafficking and everything that
comes over that Southern Border. I will acknowledge again, we
all know that there are people that come over that Southern
Border who just want a taste of the American dream and to work
hard and to raise a family. We can all acknowledge that. But if
we are ever going to get serious about security, we have to
quit pointing out that a wall isn't by itself security. We all
know that. Real security is always, always, always contingent
on whether you have overlapping security elements and every
Border Patrol agent will tell you that.
I want to turn now to Mr. Jefferis.
Mr. Jefferis, in your professional opinion, just because
something is antiquated like a lock or a wall, do you believe
that we should discard it in trying to secure what we want to
protect?
Colonel Jefferis. With respect to your question,
Congressman, I believe that we should look at all opportunities
that are out there without giving a definitive answer for my
position as a contracting agent.
Mr. Crane. Thank you.
What about you, Ms. Cooper?
Ms. Cooper. It's been my privilege to support the U.S.
Border Patrol for the last 5 years. And in my role, one of my
chief responsibilities has been working with each sector to
identify their full suite of gaps and requirements. Those come
in the form of a dozen different master capabilities, including
some of the things you mentioned, additional communications
capability--I should say requirements that ultimately lead to
solutions such as additional communications capability,
additional technology, additional roadways, partnerships, and
in certain contexts, barriers, intelligence and information
sharing. All of those, when appropriately combined, the right
mix in the right place, can add value to our border security
enterprise.
Mr. Crane. Thank you, Ms. Cooper.
I guess what I am trying to say is this, this situation at
our Southern Border will not change until my colleagues on the
other side, and even those of us on this side, start
implementing overlapping deterrents at our Southern Border just
like we would at our own homes.
Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
The first series of questions having been completed, we are
going to forego a second round of questions for this panel. I
very much appreciate the dedication of time that this panel has
given the committee today.
The Members of the committee may have some additional
questions for these witnesses and we ask that the witnesses
respond to those questions in writing. They will be properly
submitted. The witnesses are dismissed.
Mr. Ivey. Mr. Chairman, if I might, before you dismiss the
witnesses?
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. Ivey. Thank you, sir.
Colonel, if you could send the responses to the questions
we raised to the Chair and Ranking Member as opposed to me or
someone else, that would be appreciated.
Is that fine, Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman's comment is appropriate.
Mr. Ivey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Higgins. So we are going to recess for 5 minutes
and I will gavel in in 5 minutes.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman, just a small moment.
Chairman Higgins. Another bipartisan moment.
The gentlewoman is recognized.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman, with respect, you assessed
the witnesses in front of us. I accept that. But for whatever
witnesses that might be able to respond to my inquiries, I
would like them not to be hindered and to be able to get back
with me on that, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Higgins. Noted.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you so very much.
Chairman Higgins. Noted and agreed, good lady.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
Chairman Higgins. The witnesses are greatly appreciated and
are dismissed.
The committee will be in recess for 5 minutes and I will
gavel in in 5 minutes.
[Recess.]
Chairman Higgins. The Subcommittee on Border Security and
Enforcement and Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and
Accountability will come to order.
I am pleased to welcome a compelling panel of witnesses
before us today to provide insight on this important topic.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Chairman Higgins. Let the record reflect that the witnesses
have answered in the affirmative.
Thank you and please be seated.
I would like to now formally introduce our second panel of
witnesses.
Mr. Ron Vitiello, in his over 30 years of public service,
has served as chief of the United States Border Patrol, acting
deputy commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, and
director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Mr. Jim De
Sotle, currently serves as the chief executive officer of
LoneStar Pipeline contractors, a Texas-based pipeline and
facility company contracted to assist in the construction of
the border barrier system. Mr. De Sotle has substantial
experience in infrastructure, construction, and technology. Mr.
Russell Johnson is a fourth-generation cattle rancher from New
Mexico who has experienced first-hand the impact of an unsecure
border and the repercussions of the decision to cancel
construction of the border barrier system. Mr. Johnson also
previously served as a United States Border Patrol agent. I
have Mr. Tenorio. I thank you for being here, Mr. Tenorio. I do
not have a summary of your background.
I will recognize the Ranking Member to introduce his
witness.
Mr. Correa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the honor.
Let me introduce neurosurgeon at UC San Diego, Dr.
Alexander Tenorio. Dr. Tenorio has been on the front lines
treating traumatic brain injuries caused by border wall falls.
Mr. Tenorio has published multiple studies documenting the
tragic increase in the number of traumatic injuries and
mortality caused by the decision to increase the border walls
height to 30 feet. Dr. Tenorio has also focused on the economic
burden that the increase in traumatic injuries falls have
created for hospitals in the San Diego area. Sir, Dr. Tenorio,
thank you for being here today with the subcommittee and look
forward to hearing your testimony.
Thank you, sir.
Chairman Higgins. I thank Ranking Member Correa.
I thank all the witnesses for being here today.
I now recognize Mr. Vitiello for 5 minutes to summarize his
opening statement.
STATEMENT OF RONALD D. VITIELLO, PRIVATE CITIZEN, FORMER CHIEF
OF THE UNITED STATES BORDER PATROL
Mr. Vitiello. Good afternoon Chairman Higgins, Chairman
Bishop, Ranking Members Correa and Ivey. I'm glad to be with
you today and look forward to discussing my experience in
border and national security and all things related to my 34
years as a public servant.
I entered on duty in the Border Patrol in Laredo, Texas. I
first took the oath in 1985 and reaffirmed it in action, as I
worked my way up the chain of command, serving in Texas,
Arizona, Vermont, and holding leadership positions as chief
patrol agent, the chief at headquarters, I served at CBP's
acting deputy commissioner for over a year and served as the
acting ICE director while seeking confirmation, being nominated
by President Trump. In 2019, I chose to retire from Federal
service and now I'm happily in the private sector.
While in headquarters as a chief and as the chief in Rio
Grande Valley sector, I was responsible for evaluating and
setting requirements for border wall in the front line and
served at headquarters during the implementation of the 2006
Secure Fence Act, which deployed 700 miles of border barrier.
As the deputy at CBP, I also oversaw the team that set
requirements and estimates for the border wall system in 2017
and 2019. The team at CBP and I delivered several prototypes in
2017, giving the operators and builders more knowledge of the
best kinds of wall attributes, including anti-breach and anti-
climb features. Wall is not the full solution. Wall must be
augmented with sensors and all weather access roads and a
sufficient number of agents to safely patrol and apprehend
smugglers and contraband and criminals that will still cross
the border illegally. By combining physical barriers with
state-of-the-art--sorry--technology works until it doesn't.
Chairman Higgins. Take your time, good sir.
Mr. Vitiello. The construction of wall and the augmentation
of advanced technology in our Southern Border would
significantly enhance our national security, control
immigration flows, combat criminal activities, ensure public
safety, and promote fiscal responsibility by combining physical
barriers with cutting-edge surveillance and detection systems.
We can effectively address the challenges posed by unauthorized
border crossings while maintaining the integrity and
sovereignty of our Nation.
Border wall system works, front-line agents know it, and
the data shows it. Walls provide agents and operators with an
anchor to place technology and patrol assets which can operate
more safely and effectively. Securing the homeland is the
responsibility of the Executive branch policies. By combining
physical barriers with cutting-edge surveillance, border wall
systems work, front-line agents know it and the data show it.
Walls provide agents and operators with an anchor to place
technology and patrol assets which can operate more safely and
effectively. When we talk about border wall system, I was
implementing on the front line for Secure Fence Act in the Rio
Grande Valley sector. I was at headquarters during the Trump
administration when we did the combined wall requests that he
made to Congress and eventually got funded and accessed funding
for. This is an important distinction. Wall by itself isn't
going to help the Border Patrol agents, the men and women that
are out there on the front lines each and every day. It's a
system. Cameras, sensors, all weather access roads, and a
sufficient number of agents to do the work that we ask them to
do each and every day. It keeps them safe, it keeps the
community that they live in safe, and it protects us all.
Border security is national security.
I thank you and look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Vitiello follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ronald D. Vitiello
June 18, 2023
Good afternoon Chairmans Higgins, Bishop, Ranking Members Correa
and Ivey. I'm glad to be with you today and look forward to discussing
my experience in border security, homeland security, and all things
related to my 34 years as a public servant. I entered on duty in the
Border Patrol in Laredo, Texas. I first took the oath in 1985 and
reaffirmed it in action as I worked my way up the chain of command
serving in Texas, Arizona, Vermont, and holding leadership positions as
a chief patrol agent, the chief at headquarters. I served as CBP's
acting deputy commissioner for over a year and served as acting ICE
director while seeking confirmation, being nominated by President
Trump. In 2019 I chose to retire from Federal Service, and now I'm
happily in the private sector.
While in headquarters and as chief in the Rio Grande Sector I was
responsible for evaluating and setting requirements for border wall on
the front line, and served at headquarters during the implementation of
the 2006 Secure Fence Act which deployed 700 miles of border barrier.
As the deputy at CBP I also oversaw the team that set requirements and
estimates for the border wall system in 2017-2019. The team at CBP and
I delivered several prototypes in 2017, giving the operators and
builders more knowledge of the best kinds of wall attributes including
anti-breach and anti-climb features. Wall is not the full solution.
Wall must be augmented with sensors and all-weather access roads and a
sufficient number of agents to safely patrol and apprehend smugglers
and contraband that criminals will still cross illegally. By combining
physical barriers with state-of-the-art surveillance and detection
systems, we can effectively mitigate risks, enhance law enforcement
capabilities, and protect the sovereignty of our Nation.
1. Enhancing Border Security.--The construction of a wall provides
a tangible physical barrier that deters unauthorized border
crossings. It limits the ease of entry for individuals
attempting to cross our border illegally, reducing the burden
on law enforcement agencies and enhancing the overall security
of our Nation. By physically impeding illegal border crossings,
we create a first line of defense that allows Border Patrol
agents to focus their efforts on detecting and apprehending
those who pose a genuine threat.
2. Regulating Immigration.--A secure border is essential for
ensuring an orderly and legal immigration process. By deterring
illegal border crossings, we can better allocate resources
toward processing and vetting individuals who seek lawful entry
into our country.
3. Combatting Criminal Activities.--Our Southern Border is
unfortunately susceptible to criminal activities such as drug
smuggling, human trafficking, and illegal firearms trade. By
implementing a wall and advanced technology, we can
significantly impede the operations of criminal organizations.
Enhanced surveillance systems, such as drones, cameras, and
ground sensors, would provide real-time situational awareness
to law enforcement, enabling them to respond quickly and
effectively to potential threats.
4. Public Safety.--A secure border is synonymous with public
safety. By strengthening border security, we can prevent the
entry of individuals with criminal backgrounds, thereby
reducing the potential for crime within our communities.
Furthermore, an increase in technological infrastructure would
allow for swift detection and interdiction of potential
security threats, ensuring the safety of both our citizens and
those seeking legal entry.
5. Fiscal Responsibility.--Contrary to misconceptions, investing in
border security measures can lead to long-term cost savings. By
reducing illegal border crossings, we alleviate the strain on
our immigration enforcement agencies, reduce the burden on the
judicial system, and limit the costs associated with detention
and deportation. Additionally, technological advancements
provide efficient and cost-effective surveillance and detection
mechanisms, optimizing resource allocation and reducing
operational costs over time.
The construction of a wall and the augmentation of advanced
technology on our Southern Border would significantly enhance our
national security, control immigration flows, combat criminal
activities, ensure public safety, and promote fiscal responsibility. By
combining physical barriers with cutting-edge surveillance and
detection systems, we can effectively address the challenges posed by
unauthorized border crossings while maintaining the integrity of our
Nation.
Border Wall System works; front-line agents know it and the data
shows it. Walls provide agents and operators with an anchor to place
technology, and patrol assets which can operate more safely and
effectively.
Securing the homeland is the responsibility of the Executive
branch. Policies that promote large-scale illegal migration puts,
everyone at risk. Those in the pipeline are trafficked and abused, our
cities and towns are burdened with large numbers of low-skilled workers
who may have health issues. It overcrowded schools and stresses public
health and law enforcement resources. You must get the border
controlled physically but if there is no consequence to entering
illegally and not following requirements to claim asylum or go to
immigration proceedings, we'll continue the lawlessness and significant
illegal flow we see today.
Chairman Higgins. Thank you, Mr. Vitiello.
I now recognize Mr. De Sotle for 5 minutes to summarize his
opening statement and also to correct our pronunciation of your
name, good sir, if I haven't gotten it right thus far.
Mr. De Sotle, you are recognized.
STATEMENT OF JAMES DE SOTLE, INTERIM CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
LONESTAR PIPELINE
Mr. De Sotle. Thank you.
Well, it depends on which side of the family. It is either
De Sotle or De Sotle. So, De Sotle is what I pronounce it as.
So, Chairman Higgins, Chairman Bishop, Ranking Member
Correa, Ranking Member Ivey, and distinguished Members of the
subcommittee, I want to thank you for allowing me to testify in
front of your subcommittee today regarding our experiences as a
subcontractor on the Southern Border wall.
So as an overview, in July 2019, Posillico Contractors of
Long Island, New York, contracted PLC Group, D/B/A LoneStar,
regarding potential work on the border wall that was being
constructed along the U.S.-Mexico border. LoneStar immediately
engaged in discussions with Posillico and ultimately signed a
subcontract with Southern Border contractors to provide loose
concrete, aggregate, and aggregate for Sections 08 and 09 in
McAllen, Texas. So SPC was a joint venture between Posillico
and SPC.
So LoneStar was responsible for providing loose concrete
for the footings of the border wall, as well as grout and
necessary aggregate for temporary roads, drainage, and other
applications. LoneStar purchased 2 mobile cement plants, 7
cement trucks and various other equipment necessary to fill the
contract. So at this point in time we were just getting into
heavy civil. We were a pipeline contractor in Midland, Texas.
We chose this opportunity to actually get into heavy civil. So
we went out and spent a lot of money on equipment in order to
make that happen. We won the contract. We were very excited
about it.
July 2020, LoneStar commences work on the border wall in
sections 08 and 09 in McAllen, Texas. In January 2021,
President Biden took office and issued a suspension of work
order for the border wall construction. Contractors were
actually required to stand by per our contract, so we had to
keep our equipment and our labor on-site.
There was no indication of how long this was going to be
taking place, so we were left in the dark. There was really no
communication around how long we would have to have that
equipment and that labor on-site. One other note, we were not
able to submit any invoices during this period. So we're paying
for labor, we're paying for equipment, no invoices will be
submitted. The Army Corps of Engineers would not accept
invoices.
I want to be clear, the Army Corps of Engineers was not the
issue here. The Army Corps of Engineers was simply following
their orders, OK. This went far higher than the Army Corps of
Engineers. So I have no animus toward the Army Corps. This is
something that I think the administration and Congress in
general needs to look at when it comes to small contractors
like ourselves, put in situations like this that ultimately put
us into a position where we're nearly bankrupt.
May 2021, we sent a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers
requesting guidance. To date, we've received no communication
back on that letter. LoneStar retained in May 2021 Williams
Mullen, a law firm actually out of Washington DC, Dixon,
Hughes, Goodman, which are accountants. So we went and found
proper lawyers and the proper accountants to actually deal with
these Federal contracts. We knew as a subcontractor that we're
limited in what we do with the Government. As Colonel Jefferis
actually stated, as a subcontractor, I do not have the right
that a prime has. I basically have no voice with the Federal
Government, period, end of sentence. So we hired these law
firms, we brought them in, they worked with our primes, law
firms, and accounting firms in order to try to shepherd us
through this process. So this is May 2021.
In September 2021, we sent a second letter to the Army
Corps of Engineers requesting guidance on payments and monies
owed. No response.
October 2021, the Army Corps officially canceled the border
wall contract. As I spoke to Colonel Jefferis after his
testimony, what ended up happening here, and I will speak
further to Colonel Jefferis about this, is the contract was
canceled and then it was reinstated and our law firm and our
accounting firm both said the same thing, they've never seen
this happen before. So now I'm in a position as a
subcontractor, my primes contract is now put back into into
operation, if you will. I cannot submit a termination
settlement proposal because we still have an active contract.
So now I'm stuck in a catch-22 in this lurch, and again, time
is moving on.
October 2021, SPC's notified that the contract was
reinstated for purposes. I just went through--they actually had
to go back to the border to actually--they were contracted to
go back and deal with safety issues. So when we stopped
construction, there were many holes in the wall, there's
ditches, there's all kinds of safety issues there. To prevent
people from injuring themselves, they went back to actually
cure these issues. So that's why they were actually--and
they're still down there by the way, they're still working on
this to this date.
November 2021 through July 2022, LoanStar works with SVCs,
attorneys, Southern Border contractors, attorneys and
accounting firms, as well as its own attorneys, to put together
our TSP. So this is November 2021 through July 2022, so months
and months go by, we're paying our attorneys, we're paying our
accountants six figures to make this all happen. July 2022 on
the advice of our attorneys, LoneStar finally submitted the
TSP. So basically what we did is we went to our prime and we
said we cannot wait any longer. We're going to submit. If the
Army Corps throws it back at us, they throw it back. We're
hopeful that they see the urgency here and they actually take
it.
October 2022, so now we're almost 2 years into this. So
January '21 to October '22, nearly 2 years, we finally get an
official meeting with the Army Corps of Engineers and that
started the audit process. So November 2022, the audit process
officially started. July or June 2023, or actually today, we
are still in that audit process, OK. So we are now 2 years, 7
months without payment from July 21st of 2021. So we're in 2
years, 7 months. We're a small construction company. This is
$3.6 million. That's a lot of money for a company of our size.
That has had a substantial impact on our business. It's hurt us
with our vendors, it's hurt us with potential contracts. The
sad thing is we were literally trying to get into heavy civil.
This actually killed it. So we were actually moving, we're
trying to diversify, we were getting into renewables. This
actually you know put a period on that sentence. We no longer
can do that, so.
I thank you for your time. I thank you for listening to my
testimony, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. De Sotle follows:]
Prepared Statement of James De Sotle
July 13, 2023
overview
In or around July 2019, Posillico contractors of Long Island NY
contacted PLC Group (``LoneStar'') regarding potential work pertaining
to the border wall being constructed along the U.S./ Mexico border.
LoneStar immediately engaged in discussions with Posillico and
ultimately signed a sub-contract with Southern Border Constructors,
(SBC) to provide loose concrete and aggregate for sections 08 and 09 in
McAllen TX. SBC is a joint venture that Posillico has ownership in.
LoneStar was responsible for providing the loose concrete for the
footings of the border wall as well as the grout and necessary
aggregate for temporary roads, drainage, and other applications.
LoneStar purchased 2 mobile cement plants, 7 cement trucks and various
other equipment necessary for fulfillment of our contract.
July 2020.--LoneStar commences work on border wall sections 08/09
in McAllen TX for SBC.
January 2021.--Biden administration issues a suspension order for
work pertaining to the border wall construction. Contractors are
required to ``Stand By''. This required our company to continue to
maintain a presence onsite and incur daily labor and equipment costs
without the ability to invoice. We had NO indication of when or how
this suspension would be resolved.
May 2021.--LoneStar sends a letter to the ACoE requesting guidance.
To date we have received NO communication from the ACoE.
May 2021.--LoneStar retains William and Mullen law firm and Dixon,
Hughes, and Goodman accountants.
September 2021.--LoneStar send a second letter to ACoE requesting
guidance on payments of monies owed.
October 2021.--The ACoE officially cancels the border wall
contracts.
October 2021.--SBC is notified that its contract is reinstated for
the purposes of addressing ``Safety'' issues as a result of
construction being halted. Because our prime had its contract
reinstated, we were not able to file our termination settlement
proposal (TSP) which further delayed our ability to recoup our losses.
Our attorney noted that he had never seen a Federal contract canceled
and subsequently reinstated. This put us in an untenable situation.
November 2021-July 2022.--LoneStar works with SBC's attorneys/
accounting firm as well as its own attorneys and accounting firm to
complete our TSP. During this time we are being advised that the TSP
cannot be submitted because SBC is still under contract.
July 2022.--On the advice of our attorneys, LoneStar submits our
TSP to the ACoE for $3.6 million.
October 2022.--LoneStar begins the audit process with the ACoE on
its TSP.
November 2022-June 2023.--ACoE is in contact with LoneStar
throughout the audit process.
June 2023.--ACoE completes its audit and proposes paying LoneStar
50 percent of the submitted costs.
July 2023.--LoneStar is awaiting a date for the ``Exit'' interview
from the ACoE.
Two years and seven months after the suspension of the border wall
project, LoneStar has not received a single payment for services
rendered.
Impact on PLC Group
The border wall cancellation has had a significant impact on PLC
Group. COVID-19 caused a severe downturn in our industry. This downturn
was exacerbated by the current administration's policy toward domestic
oil and gas production. The combination led to almost 30 months of
limited work in the industry. During this downturn our company was
subjected to $100 thousand in attorney and accounting fees, and over
$1.8 million in capital outlays for the border wall project including
startup costs and carrying costs during the suspension, (January-
September 2021).
The overall cost to our company is $3.6 million. Construction
companies require a significant amount of capital to start and complete
a project. Having our capital tied up within this project for 3 years
has reduced the number of opportunities our company could pursue. Most
recently, in March 2023, we lost a $24 million opportunity with a large
producer due to a lack of funding. We were forced to sell our assets in
order to keep operations going and as a result, were not able to pursue
further civil work. This effectively shut down the civil division.
Chairman Higgins. Thank you Mr. De Sotle.
I now recognize Mr. Johnson for 5 minutes to summarize his
opening statement.
STATEMENT OF RUSSELL A. JOHNSON, PRIVATE CITIZEN, FORMER AGENT,
UNITED STATES BORDER PATROL
Mr. Johnson. Chairman Higgins, Chairman Bishop, Ranking
Member Correa, and Ranking Member Ivey, and distinguished
Members of the subcommittees, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today on the Biden administration's decision to stop
border wall construction and the effect that it has had on
Americans like me who live and work on or near the Southern
Border. It is an honor to share my story with you all today,
but also disappointing that this issue still exists.
I'd like to speak briefly about my background and my
relationship with the border. I was born and raised in southern
New Mexico on a cattle ranch that borders Mexico for
approximately 8\1/2\ miles. This ranch has been in my family
since 1918. Border issues are nothing new to me or my family.
For example, my dad and my uncle had a pickup stolen from them
at gunpoint by young men who had been guarding a drug field in
Mexico. Cattle thieves have crossed into the United States to
steal our cattle and illegal immigrants have caused property
damage, left trash, and broken into the homes of several of my
family members.
I also served 5 years in the United States Border Patrol as
a patrol agent in El Paso, Texas. During my service, I worked
along the Rio Grande River as well as spent 2 years with Air
and Marine Operations. I resigned from the agency in 2016 in
order to return to the family business.
This experience has given me a unique perspective on the
border as I have seen it through the eyes of a stakeholder as
well as a law enforcement officer. For over 100 years, our
entire section of border was no more than a five-strand barbed
wire fence that my family and I maintained at our own expense.
This fence was constantly damaged by illegal traffic, and no
Government agency would accept responsibility for this
international boundary.
In 2008, a Normandy-style vehicle barrier was installed
along roughly half of our border. Though an improvement, it did
not solve the problem. The remaining border was still barbed-
wire fence and this left us vulnerable to illegal foot traffic
and vehicle drive-throughs. In April 2020, wall construction
had begun on our neighbor's ranch. Finally, a sense of security
and relief from an open border was being provided. Normandy
barrier and barbed wire fence was going to be replaced by a 30-
foot-tall concrete reinforced steel barrier with stadium-style
lighting and sensor technology that provide agents real-time
data on attempted crossings. This project came hot on the heels
of the surge of traffic we had seen in 2019. As construction
began on our ranch, illegal traffic was pushed to areas without
the wall. The wall system was going to be the force multiplier
that Border Patrol needed to gain operational control of the
Southern Border.
When President Biden signed the Executive Order to halt
border wall construction, we were left with a \3/4\-mile gap,
one border monument access gate that hadn't been installed, and
a few miles of wall that had not been filled with concrete or
welded together. Contractors were told to stand down, leaving
their equipment, material, and debris scattered along the
border.
It's important to note that in New Mexico the wall was
built on the Roosevelt Reservation. For this reason, my family
and I were never approached by the Federal Government nor given
any information regarding wall construction. All information I
received was from talking to contractors or the United States
Army Corps of Engineers. Contractors were eventually told to
just make things safe. In doing so, wall panels were
consolidated into two different areas, one on our ranch and the
other on our neighbor. We were also left with two areas of
massive piles of gravel and rock left over from the
construction in the mountains. The above-mentioned locations on
our ranch are on Bureau of Land Management land and my family
owns a grazing lease on said land.
This material has been sitting on the border for over 2
years. Taxpayer dollars are being stockpiled rather than being
utilized for their intended purpose. Contractors are now
telling my family that these wall panels are going to be hauled
off for scrap. If anyone ran their business as inefficiently as
the Federal Government has handled this project since the
shutdown, they would all be broke.
In the months leading up to January 2021, there was little
illegal traffic through our area. When the project was shut
down, we saw an immediate increase in traffic. We continued to
see this upward trend until Title 42 was lifted. Border Patrol
agents tell me that the traffic in my area is slow, but remains
steady.
In closing, our Government does not have operational
control over our Southern Border. I rarely see an agent on the
border in our area. If you do see an agent, they're further
north chasing groups of people that have already made it
several miles into the United States. I've traveled over 2,000
miles and left my family and business to be here today. Every
time I leave, I fear for what my wife and kids may encounter
because of our open border. These are fears I shouldn't have as
an American living on American soil. My Government is failing
to protect this country, and the fiscal irresponsibility is
appalling.
I'd like to thank the committee for allowing me to testify
today and look forward to answering any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Johnson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Russell A. Johnson
July 18, 2023
Chairman Higgins, Chairman Bishop, Ranking Member Correa, and
Ranking Member Ivy, and distinguished Members of the subcommittees,
thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the Biden
administration's decision to stop border wall construction and the
effect it has had on Americans like me who live and work on or near the
Southern Border. It is an honor to share my story with you all today,
but also disappointing that this issue still exists.
I would like to speak briefly about my background and my
relationship with the border. I was born and raised in southern New
Mexico on a cattle ranch that runs along the U.S./Mexico border for
approximately 8.5 miles. This cattle ranch has been in my family since
1918. I am very familiar with all that happens along the border. My
family has experienced very little good, but just about all the bad one
can wish to experience regarding the border. My dad and uncle had a
pickup stolen from them at gunpoint by young men who had been guarding
a drug field in Mexico. We have had cattle thieves cross into the
United States to steal our cattle and drive them into Mexico. My
parents, uncles and cousins have all had their homes broken into by
illegal immigrants. Property damage and trash left behind by illegal
immigrants are also things that my family and I deal with.
I served 5 years in the United States Border Patrol as a Border
Patrol Agent in El Paso, Texas. In my 5 years of service, I worked
along the Rio Grande River as well as spent 2 years as a Supplemental
Aircrew Member with Air and Marine Operations. I resigned from the
agency in 2016 in order to return to the family business, which was
more conducive to raising a family. All my experience from where I grew
up to my time served in the United States Border Patrol has given me a
unique perspective on the border as I have seen it through the eyes of
a stakeholder as well as a law enforcement officer.
Prior to 2008, our entire 8.5-mile section of border was nothing
more than a 5-strand barbed wire fence that my family and I maintained
at our expense. This fence was constantly damaged by illegal traffic
crossing into the United States. My family and I maintained the fence
at our own expense because no Government agency would accept
responsibility for it. In 2008, Normandy-style vehicle barrier was
constructed and installed along roughly half of that 8.5 miles. This
was an improvement over barbed wire, but did not deter vehicle drive-
throughs, or human foot traffic. The remaining border was still barbed
wire through the mountainous portion of our ranch. This left us
vulnerable to illegal traffic, vehicle drive-throughs, not to mention
the fact we still had to maintain the barbed wire fence which was
serving as the international boundary line.
Fast forward to April 2020. I had been back on the family ranch for
a little over 3 years after having resigned from my position with the
United States Border Patrol. Border wall construction had begun on our
neighbor's ranch and was coming east in our direction. Finally, a sense
of security and relief from an open border was being provided. A large,
30-foot-tall concrete reinforced steel barrier, stadium-style lighting
and sensor technology that would provide Border Patrol agents real-time
data on attempted crossings was going to be erected in place of the
barbed wire fence my family had been maintaining for over 100 years.
This project came hot on the heels of the surge of traffic we had seen
in 2019 when caravans had formed, and groups of illegal immigrants were
giving themselves up en masse at Antelope Wells, New Mexico and other
ports of entry.
As construction began on our family ranch, illegal traffic was
pushed off our ranch and to areas without a border wall. No longer did
we have to worry about vehicle drive-throughs and car chases through
our ranch. Cattle theft by individuals from Mexico would be a thing of
the past. The border wall system was going to be the force multiplier
that Border Patrol needed to gain operational control of the southern
border. All of that ended January 20, 2021.
As you know, when President Biden took office, one of his many
Executive Orders was to halt border wall construction. Construction
sure enough stopped on a dime. Not a screw was turning on the border.
On our ranch unfortunately, the contractors hadn't finished installing
all of the wall. We were left with a \3/4\-mile gap, one border
monument access gate hadn't been installed and a few miles worth of
wall had not been filled with concrete or the wall panels welded
together.
Contractors working on the wall did not know what was going on,
they were just told to stand down. This went on for several weeks with
little to no information on what was going to happen. Construction
equipment, materials and debris were scattered up and down the border
through our ranch and on our neighbor's ranch. This is a good
opportunity to explain how the United States Government did not
communicate with my family regarding wall construction.
The Roosevelt Reservation gives the Federal Government a 60-foot
easement along the Southern Border in New Mexico, Arizona, and
California. This easement was established to keep public lands in the
respective States free from obstruction for the purpose of border
security. For this reason, my family and I were never approached by the
Federal Government, nor given any information regarding wall
construction. All information I received was from me reaching out to
contractors or the United States Army Corps of Engineers working in our
area.
Eventually, all the contractors were told to ``make things safe''
and remove all of their equipment. In doing so, wall panels were
consolidated into two different areas, one on our ranch and the other
on our neighbor's ranch. Along with the wall panels, we were left with
two different areas where rock crushers had been set up to crush gravel
from pilings left over from wall construction in the mountains. Massive
piles of gravel and rock remain in these two locations on our ranch.
All of the above-mentioned locations on our ranch are on Bureau of Land
Management land and my family owns the grazing lease on said land.
I mentioned earlier that I was disappointed that this was even an
issue. What I have just mentioned regarding the material left behind is
nothing new. This material has been sitting on pastureland all over the
Southern Border for over 2 years. Taxpayer dollars are rusting away in
stockpiles rather than being utilized for their intended use.
Contractors are now telling my family that these wall panels are going
to be hauled off for scrap. Brand-new, American steel with all of the
costs in getting that wall panel fabricated and it's going to scrap. If
anyone ran their business as inefficiently as the Federal Government
has handled this wall project after the shutdown, they would be broke.
I have yet to mention the effect shutting the wall project down has
had on illegal immigrant traffic. In the months leading up to January
2021, there was very little illegal traffic through our area. As soon
as the wall was shut down, we immediately saw an increase in traffic.
We continued to see this upward trend until Title 42 was taken away in
May of this year. Though we did not see the surge of traffic like we
expected to, Border Patrol agents tell me that the traffic in my area
is slow, but steady. Our Government does not have operational control
over the Southern Border. With very few Border Patrol agents in the
field, you will rarely see an agent on the border in our area. If you
see an agent, they are further north chasing groups that have already
made it several miles into the United States.
I have travelled over 2,000 miles to be here today. I left behind
my wife, two young children, my parents, and my business. Ranching on
the U.S./Mexico border is not for the faint of heart. Every time I must
leave, I fear what my wife and kids may encounter because of our open
border, and I'm not there to protect them. I often get asked, ``Why
don't you just move?'' or ``If it's so bad, I'd just pack up and
leave.'' Maybe I'm crazy for not entertaining those two ideas, but the
way I see it, I am an American. The last time I checked, I still live
in the United States and therefore entitled to life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness. All of which should be protected by my Government
who at this time is failing to do so.
In closing, I want to thank the committee for allowing me this
opportunity to testify today and I look forward to answering any
questions you might have.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Higgins. Thank you, Mr. Johnson.
I now recognize Dr. Tenorio for 5 minutes to summarize his
opening statement.
STATEMENT OF ALEXANDER TENORIO, M.D., RESIDENT PHYSICIAN,
NEUROLOGICAL SURGERY, UC SAN DIEGO
Dr. Tenorio. Good afternoon, Chairmen Higgins and Bishop,
Ranking Members Correa and Ivey, and Members of the
subcommittee. It is an honor to testify before you today about
the humanitarian toll and the economic burden imposed by
increasing the border wall heights across the Southern region.
I am a fourth-year neurological surgery resident physician
at UC San Diego Health. As part of my duties, I treat patients
with devastating neurological conditions, including injuries to
the brain and spinal cord. This often requires emergent and
life-saving treatment of injuries that also includes traumatic
injuries after border falls. I have been at the front lines and
witness to the devastation that these raised border walls have
caused every single day.
During my tenure at UC San Diego, my trauma colleagues and
I have observed an unrelenting increase in traumatic injuries
after these falls. We're the first institution to describe this
phenomenon and have published several peer-reviewed articles
detailing this emergent public health crisis. Our research
shows that since the U.S.-Mexico border wall was raised up to
30 feet in 2019, there have been a record number of traumatic
injuries from border falls. Hospital admissions from border
falls at our two major trauma centers have increased almost ten
times when comparing 2021 to 2016. Not only has the frequency
increased, but the severity and mortality have risen
significantly. There have been 16 deaths after the border wall
was raised compared to 0 prior. We are also now seeing record
number of severe injuries to the spine, the brain, and even the
brain's blood vessels, which otherwise can only happen with
high-impact trauma. Research from our colleagues in Texas also
shows significant increases in border trauma admissions,
indicating to us that this is widespread.
In addition to the profound human cost, there has been
increased economic burden to our health care system. At our
hospital, charges for each patient suffering a spine injury
after a border fall increased 70 percent since the border wall
was raised. At our two major trauma hospitals, total hospital
costs due to all traumatic injuries after border falls
increased by 636 percent, from $11 million during the 2016 to
2019 period, compared to $72 million during the 2020 to mid-
2022 period.
Now, these are individuals with families, escaping violent
threats, untenable economic conditions, and political upheaval.
I am reminded of a young patient of mine who had suffered a
severe spinal injury and would require surgery. He was a farm
laborer back home who had lost his job and his home. He had a
young daughter and a young wife and he was now unemployed
living in the streets. He came to the United States to escape
extreme poverty and feed his family. Now, as I attended to him
at our trauma bay and described the extent of his injury, his
response wasn't whether he would be able to walk again, but
rather he responded,
[Speaking foreign language]--when will I leave the hospital
to see my family?
Now, I ask the subcommittees to consider the following. Do
you believe this individual left his family, risked his life,
and climbed that 30-foot barrier due to trivial circumstances?
As the son of a father who escaped violent threats in his
hometown, and now a witness to these stories, I can assure you
that these people I care for are searching for the same things
we all do, safety, security, and a chance for a better life for
their family.
Ultimately, these raised border walls have resulted in a
record number of traumatic injuries, increased severity and
mortality, and increased economic burden to our hospital
systems. As a neurosurgeon, I must reveal this untold human
suffering and strain on financially-strapped hospital systems
to our Nation. I fear this trend will only get worse until we
further study the full extent of the humanitarian and economic
costs from our current border infrastructure. Only then can we
determine sensible alternative solutions.
Thank you to both subcommittees for inviting me to testify
today and I hope you do all within your power to recognize the
harms of the raised border wall.
I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Tenorio follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alexander Tenorio
July 18, 2023
introduction
Good afternoon Chairmen Higgins and Bishop, Ranking Members Correa
and Ivey, and Members of the subcommittees. It is an honor to testify
before you today about the humanitarian toll and economic burden
imposed by increasing border wall heights across the southern region.
My name is Alexander Tenorio and I am a 4th-year neurological
surgery resident at UC San Diego Health. As part of my duties, I treat
patients with neurological conditions. This involves injury to the
brain and spinal cord, which often require emergent and life-saving
treatment of devastating injuries. This includes traumatic injuries
that occur after border falls. I have been at the front lines, and
witness to the devastation that the raised border wall causes every
single day.
During my tenure at UC San Diego, my trauma colleagues and I have
observed an unrelenting increase in traumatic injuries as a result of
border falls. We were the first institution to describe this phenomenon
and have published several peer-reviewed articles in academic journals
detailing this emerging public health crisis.
significant findings
Our research shows that since the U.S.-Mexico border wall was
raised up to 30 feet, there have been a record number of traumatic
injuries from border falls. Hospital admissions from border falls in
California have increased almost 10 times compared to 2016.
Not only has the frequency increased, but the severity of injuries
and mortality have risen significantly, with 16 deaths after the border
wall was raised compared to 0 deaths prior. We are also now seeing more
severe injuries to the spine, brain, and even the brain's blood
vessels, which are otherwise uncommon and can only result from high-
impact trauma. These are injuries that will leave people unable to work
and care for their families. Research from colleagues in Texas also
shows significant increases in border trauma hospital admissions,
indicating that this issue can be seen across the Southern Border
region where the border wall height has also been raised.
In addition to the profound human cost, there has been an increased
economic burden to our health care system. Our hospital costs have
increased by 636 percent from $11 million prior to the border height
increase to $72 million afterwards.
These are young individuals with families escaping violent threats,
untenable economic conditions, and political upheaval. I am reminded of
one of my patients, a 25-year-old man who had suffered a severe
fracture to the spine that would require surgery. He was a farm laborer
who had lost his job and his home. He was unemployed, living in the
streets with his wife and young daughter. He came to the United States
to escape extreme poverty and to feed his family.
While he laid on a stretcher in our trauma bay, I could sense his
fear and despair. He was now in another country being held in custody
with a severe injury. As I described to him his injury and that he
would need surgery, his response wasn't about whether he would be able
to walk again. He responded, ``Cuando voy a salir del hospital para ver
a mi familia?'' When will I leave the hospital to see my family?
Now, I ask the subcommittees to consider the following: Do you
believe this individual risked his life, left his family, and climbed
that 30-foot barrier due to trivial circumstances?
As the son of a father who escaped violent threats in his home town
as a teenager and now a first-hand witness to these stories, I can
assure you that these people that I care for are searching for the same
things that my parents did and that we all do: safety, security and a
chance for a better life for their children.
conclusion
Ultimately, these raised border walls have resulted in a record
number of traumatic injuries, increased severity and mortality, and
increased economic burden to our hospital systems.
As a neurosurgeon, I must reveal this untold human suffering and
strain on financially-strapped hospital systems to our Nation. I fear
this trend will only get worse without any current system in place to
analyze the full extent of the humanitarian and economic costs of
border infrastructure policies to help determine sensible alternative
solutions.
Thank you to both subcommittees for inviting me to testify today,
and I hope the subcommittees do all within their power to recognize the
harms of the border wall on human lives and our hospital systems.
References
Marshall WA, Bansal V, Krzyzaniak A, et al. Up and over: consequences
of raising the US-Mexico border wall height. J Trauma Acute Care Surg.
2023; Publish Ahead of Print. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36972427/
Liepert AE, Berndtson AE, Hill LL, et al. Association of 30-ft US-
Mexico Border Wall in San Diego With Increased Migrant Deaths, Trauma
Center Admissions, and Injury Severity. JAMA Surgery. Apr 29
2022;doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2022.1885 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
35486395/
Tenorio A, Brandel MG, Produturi GR, et al. Characterizing the
frequency, morbidity, and types of traumatic brain injuries after the
Mexico-San Diego border wall extension: a retrospective cohort review.
J Neurosurg. 01 Feb. 2023 2023:1-6. doi:10.3171/2023.1.Jns221859
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36806495/
Tenorio A, Brandel MG, Produturi GR, et al. The impact of the Mexico-
San Diego border wall extension on spine injuries: a retrospective
cohort review. J Travel Med. 2022;29(7)doi:10.1093/jtm/taac112 https://
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36165623/
Tenorio, A. Brandel, MG. Produturi, GR. et al. Novel association of
blunt cerebrovascular injuries with the San Diego-Mexico border wall
height extension. World Neurosurg. Published on-line July 5, 2023. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.wneu.2023.06.127. https://
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37419313/
Polmear MM, Nicholson TC, Blair JA, Thabet AM, Adler AH, Rajani R.
Injuries sustained with falls from height in crossing the United
States-Mexico border at a level I trauma center: a prospective cohort
study. JAAOS Glob Res Rev. 2023;7(6). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
37285513/
Chairman Higgins. Thank you, Dr. Tenorio.
Members will be recognized by order of seniority for 5
minutes of questioning. An additional round of questioning may
be called after all Members have been recognized.
I now recognize myself for 5 minutes of questioning.
Mr. Johnson, you stated you had massive piles of rock and
gravel and material. I am not talking about the steel, I am
talking about massive piles. Describe what you mean by that.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you for the question, Chairman Higgins.
In a portion of the area where the border wall was
constructed on our ranch was through a slightly mountainous
area, and so the mountains had to be taken down to certain
grades to accommodate the wall. In doing so, all that rock was
taken and piled up, but rather than wasting that rock they were
going to crush that rock into using on the all-weather access
roads that were to be constructed.
Chairman Higgins. Understood. It was byproduct of of the
construction effort. Give us an idea, when you say massive, the
size of a suburban or the size of this committee hearing room?
Mr. Johnson. Probably two to three times the size of this
room, sir.
Chairman Higgins. OK. There you go. So America can get an
idea. It is on a man's private land. It is left behind by the
Government. You are not going to clear that with a shovel and a
wheelbarrow.
Mr. Johnson. No, sir. Mr. Higgins, if I may, that is on
Bureau of Land Management land, but we own the lease of that
land.
Chairman Higgins. Oh, I understand.
Mr. Johnson. It's not private property.
Chairman Higgins. But certainly it is not usable.
Mr. Johnson. Correct.
Chairman Higgins. Right. Are you being compensated at all
for the materials left behind, including the steel and anything
else?
Mr. Johnson. No, sir, not compensated. Like I mentioned in
my testimony, we've never been reached out to by any Government
entity regarding this project. It's always been us reaching out
to them.
Chairman Higgins. Have you invoiced the Government?
Mr. Johnson. No, sir.
Chairman Higgins. I suggest that you do. I would like to
see us discuss that in appropriations.
Tell us about the steel, Mr. Johnson. When you say that you
have--you described it in your opening statement, but tell us
how much steel has been left behind.
Mr. Johnson. I haven't gone out and actually counted it,
just because of the vast quantities of it. But in the pictures
that were up here a minute ago was the section that is on our
property. It's probably more than enough panels to fill that
\3/4\-mile gap. Then the storage yard on our neighbor's ranch
has probably 3 to 4 times that in panels.
Chairman Higgins. By your observations, the steel, how
would you grade the quality of that steel?
Mr. Johnson. This grade A top American made steel. When it
was brought in for fabrication, it was brand new, hot off the
presses.
Chairman Higgins. You were a border agent at one time, sir?
Mr. Johnson. Yes, sir.
Chairman Higgins. You recall the original wall
construction, those sections made from surplus DoD panels from
the Vietnam era?
Mr. Johnson. Yes, sir.
Chairman Higgins. So relative to that, what my colleagues
have said, old technology and physical barriers as a concept
for security shouldn't be quantified as old or new. It is a
moving target. Would you describe this steel that is left
behind as modern steel and robust steel as compared to the old
steel that you that you witnessed and encountered when you were
a border agent, the original wall?
Mr. Johnson. There's truly no comparison. Those bollard
wall square tubings are half an inch thick with two joints of
rebar and filled with concrete. There's absolutely no----
Chairman Higgins. Are you familiar with the concrete that
we had anticipated filling those bollards with?
Mr. Johnson. In what sense, sir?
Chairman Higgins. The kind of sense I can't even explain to
you right now.
So you have traveled a long way, and I want to acknowledge,
Mr. Johnson, that you have dedicated a great deal of personal
time to get here and we thank you for that.
I would like to close by just asking Mr. Vitiello, you had
three significant leadership roles in the Department of
Homeland Security. How do you think things are going down
there?
Mr. Vitiello. Well, we're in the middle of the worst border
crisis than we've ever seen. This administration chose to make
incredibly bad choices about the policies that exist at our
border today versus what they inherited. Just as an example,
illegal migration along the Southwest Border when this
President took over was at 45-year lows. Now we're seeing the
worst surge ever. Even at half as what it was before Title 42
ended, it overwhelms the system that exists.
Chairman Higgins. My time has expired.
I thank the panelists. I recognize the Ranking Member for a
questioning.
Mr. Correa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to thank
the panelists for traveling far to be with us today. It is
important that we, as policy makers, are informed of what is
going on out there. So thank you for being here today.
Start out with Dr. Tenorio, San Ysidro area. Last time I
was out there, I believe I counted three walls. How many walls
do you have out there?
Dr. Tenorio. From my understanding, currently there's an
18-foot barrier and there's a 30-foot barrier that was also
constructed afterwards.
Mr. Correa. Those have been there for a while and yet you
still have these issues of people trying to cross, crossing and
major injuries resulting?
Dr. Tenorio. Correct. So the border walls were--the
construction was ended in the year 2019, at the end of 2019. So
all of our studies and research shows that after that, meaning
starting in 2020, we started seeing these record number of
traumatic injuries. As a neurosurgeon I treat some of the most
devastating injuries to the brain and the spinal cord and even
the brain's blood vessels. A lot of these injuries, of course,
we started seeing them after it was raised.
Mr. Correa. Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit for the
record, 20 minutes ago, CBP just released their June 2023
monthly update. I would like to submit that for the record.
Chairman Higgins. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
CBP Releases June 2023 Monthly Update
statistics show lowest southwest border encounters since february 2021
WASHINGTON.--U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) today
released operational statistics for June 2023, which show a significant
and continuing decline in migrant encounters along the Southwest border
as well as successful drug interdiction efforts resulting from new
enforcement initiatives. CBP's total encounters along the Southwest
border in June were the lowest in over 2 years, dropping nearly a third
from May.
``Our sustained efforts to enforce consequences under our
longstanding Title 8 authorities, combined with expanding access to
lawful pathways and processes, have driven the number of migrant
encounters along the Southwest Border to their lowest levels. in more
than 2 years. We will remain vigilant,'' said Troy A. Miller, CBP
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Commissioner.
``As our June statistics show, CBP's mission is vast, and thanks to
the dedication of our personnel and Federal partners, we are delivering
results that keep the American people safe: ensuring border security,
seizing drugs, stopping the flow of illicit weapons, rescuing people in
distress, facilitating lawful travel and trade, and stopping the entry
of harmful agricultural pests.''
Below are key operational statistics for CBP's primary mission
areas in June 2023.
Ensuring Border Security and Effectively Managing Migration
CBP is processing all migrants under Title 8 immigration
authorities, and generally placing individuals who cross the border
unlawfully into Expedited Removal or Section 240 Removal Proceedings.
Noncitizens who cross between the ports of entry or who present at a
port of entry without making a CBP One appointment, are subject to the
lawful pathways rule, which places a condition on asylum eligibility
for those who fail to use lawful processes, with certain exceptions.
In June--the first full month since the lifting of the Title 42
Public Health Order--the U.S. Border Patrol recorded 99,545 encounters
between ports of entry along the Southwest Border: a 42 percent
decrease from May 2023. Total Southwest Border encounters in June,
including individuals who presented at ports of entry with or without a
CBP One appointment, were 144,607, a 30 percent decrease from May 2023.
These are the lowest monthly Southwest Border encounter numbers since
February 2021.
People who made the dangerous journey to cross the Southwest Border
unlawfully have died of dehydration, starvation, and heat stroke.
Smuggling organizations abandon migrants in remote and dangerous areas.
To prevent the loss of life, CBP initiated a Missing Migrant Program in
2017 that locates migrants reported missing, rescues individuals in
distress, and reunifies decedents with their families in the border
region. In June 2023, the U.S. Border Patrol conducted nearly 1,700
rescues, bringing the total number of rescues in fiscal year 2023 from
24,056 at the end of May to 25,735 at the end of June.
Safeguarding Communities by Interdicting Dangerous Drugs
CBP continues to interdict the flow of illicit narcotics across the
border. CBP has significantly increased non-intrusive inspection
scanning capabilities and forward-operating labs to swiftly identify
suspected drugs and recognize trends. CBP has found packages of
narcotics in roofs, floorboards, door panels, bumpers, tires, gas
tanks, car batteries, seats, speaker boxes, false floors, drones, and
more.
Nation-wide in June, seizures of cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin,
fentanyl, and marijuana (combined, by weight) increased 7 percent from
May. To date in fiscal year 2023, CBP has seized more than 22,000
pounds of fentanyl--compared with 8,300 pounds over the same period in
fiscal year 2022.
To disrupt supply chains used in the development and movement of
fentanyl, CBP launched two new interagency operations in June:
Operations Artemis and Rolling Wave. A parallel intelligence and
analysis operation, Operation Argus, is providing trade-focused
analysis. These efforts build on the success of Operations Blue Lotus
and Four Horsemen, which seized nearly 10,000 pounds of fentanyl.
Operation Artemis began on June 5 and has made over 130 seizures,
which include:
21 pill presses and 54 pill molds
More than 5,000 pounds of precursor chemicals
More than 300 pounds of methamphetamine
And over 5,000 pounds of other drugs.
The U.S. Border Patrol is concurrently running Operation Rolling
Wave, surging inbound inspections at Southwest Border checkpoints. This
operation has seized:
More than 1,500 pounds of fentanyl
More than 1,000 pounds of cocaine
More than 8,000 pounds of marijuana
More than 6,500 pounds of meth.
Under Operation Blue Lotus 2.0, which launched on June 12, CBP and
HSI have also continued to surge resources to Ports of Entry, where 90
percent of fentanyl is trafficked primarily in cars and trucks. This
operation has seized over 1,500 pounds of fentanyl and over 23,000
pounds of other narcotics like cocaine, methamphetamines, and heroin.
Facilitating Lawful Trade and Travel and Promoting Economic Security
To improve the traveler experience while maintaining the highest
levels of security, CBP has increased the deployment of technology that
provides a more seamless and faster entry into the United States by
air, land, and sea. In June, CBP announced the deployment a new
Electronic System for Travel Authorization mobile application. CBP
continues to improve the travel experience and reduce wait times while
enforcing over 400 laws for 40 other agencies and stopping thousands of
violators of U.S. law.
Travel volumes continue to rebound globally from pandemic lows.
Travelers arriving by air into the United States increased 20 percent
from June 2022 to June 2023, and pedestrians arriving by land at ports
of entry increased 12 percent over the same period. Passenger vehicles
processed at ports of entry increased 11 percent and commercial trucks
increased 2 percent from June 2022 to June 2023.
CBP works diligently with the trade community and port operators to
ensure that merchandise is cleared as efficiently as possible, and to
strengthen international supply chains and improve border security. In
June 2023, CBP processed more than 3.1 million entry summaries valued
at more than $278 billion. CBP identified an estimated $7 billion of
duties to be collected by the U.S. Government. In June, trade via the
ocean environment accounted for 39.5 percent of the total import value,
followed by air, truck, and rail.
CBP One App
The CBP One mobile application remains a key component of DHS
efforts to incentivize migrants to use lawful and orderly processes and
disincentivize attempts at crossing between ports of entry. In June,
more than 38,000 individuals who scheduled appointments through the CBP
One app were processed at a POE.
Since the appointment scheduling function in CBP One was introduced
in January through the end of June, more than 170,000 individuals have
successfully scheduled appointments to present at a POE using CBP One.
The top nationalities who have scheduled appointments are Haitian,
Mexican, and Venezuelan. Beginning on July 1, CBP announced the
expansion of available appointments for noncitizens through the CBP One
app to from 1,250 to 1,450 per day.
Protecting Consumers and Eradicating Forced Labor from Supply Chains
CBP continues to lead U.S. Government efforts to eliminate goods
from the supply chain made with forced labor from the Xinjiang Uyghur
Autonomous Region of China.
In the year after the agency began implementing the Uyghur Forced
Labor Prevention Act on June 21, 2022, CBP has reviewed a total of
nearly 4,300 shipments valued at nearly $1.4 billion. In June 2023, CBP
stopped 405 shipments valued at more than $239 million for further
examination based on the suspected use of forced labor.
Intellectual property rights violations continue to put America's
innovation economy at risk. Trade in counterfeit and pirated goods
threaten the competitiveness of U.S. businesses, the livelihoods of
American workers, and the health and safety of consumers. In June, CBP
seized 1,709 shipments that contained counterfeit goods valued at more
than $120 million.
Defending our Nation's Agricultural System
Through targeting, detection, and interception, CBP agriculture
specialists work to prevent threats from entering the United States.
In June 2023, CBP issued 5,400 emergency action notifications for
restricted and prohibited plant and animal products entering the United
States. CBP conducted 97,101 positive passenger inspections and issued
678 civil penalties and/or violations to the traveling public for
failing to declare prohibited agriculture items.
CBP
U.S. Customs and Border Protection is the unified border agency
within the Department of Homeland Security charged with the
comprehensive management, control, and protection of our Nation's
borders, combining customs, immigration, border security, and
agricultural protection at and between official ports of entry.
Mr. Correa. The number showed lowest Southwest Border
encounters since 2021, February, 2021. In June, the first full
month since the lifting of Title 42, the U.S. Border Patrol
recorded 99,545 encounters between ports of entry along the
Southwest Border. That is a 42 percent decrease from May 2023.
Total Southwest Border encounters in June, including
individuals who presented at ports of entry were 144,000, about
a 30 percent decrease from May 2023. These are the lowest
monthly Southwest Border encounters since 2021. I would like to
present this for the record.
Mr. Johnson, if I can turn to you, sir. First of all, I
want to say that you and your family should not be living in
fear. You should not have those metal items left on your
property, whether it is your private property or lease. Just
unacceptable. How long did you say, Mr. Johnson, that you have
been living there your family?
Mr. Johnson. I was born and raised there, but I've been
back since 2016 when I left the Border Patrol.
Mr. Correa. So generationally you have been there for--you
were born there so you have been there how many--your family
how many years?
Mr. Johnson. We've been there for 105 years this year. I'm
the fourth generation.
Mr. Correa. When you were in CBP in El Paso, you are green
or blue uniform?
Mr. Johnson. Green.
Mr. Correa. Green uniform, OK. I am trying to, in my mind,
trying to figure out what is going on in that area. Was it this
unsafe 100 years ago?
Mr. Johnson. That's kind-of a catch 20-20 on that question.
The dynamic----
Mr. Correa. Would you feel less safe today than your family
did 50 years ago?
Mr. Johnson. The demographic of the people crossing today
versus 20, 50 years ago is completely different. Twenty, 50
years ago, the people crossing were legitimately trying to look
for a better way of life. That's not----
Mr. Correa. Legitimate, undocumented, looking for a job.
Mr. Johnson. Right.
Mr. Correa. Today you have those refugees, you have others
that maybe are not?
Mr. Johnson. We don't have any refugees coming through in
our area. These people are all wearing camouflage, concealing
their footprints with booties. They do not want to be
apprehended. They do not want to be part of the system. They're
trying to slip through the cracks.
Mr. Correa. I would probably say there are probably some
there also that have been pushed in your area given other
activities along the Southern Border. So I think you are kind-
of bearing the brunt of a lot of things converging on your area
of the country, I believe. Would you say that is possibly true?
Mr. Johnson. To the best of my knowledge, sir, we're the
first gap in the wall coming west out of El Paso, Texas, which
is about 90 miles from us. So I would say, yes, we're catching
a lot of the extra activity that's being diverted around the
wall.
Mr. Correa. Thank you.
I don't have a lot of time left here, 25 seconds, but I
just want to say that--I want to thank you for being here.
Again, I just think our policies need to be designed to make
sure that as we try to address these management issues at the
border, people like you are not put in harm's way, so to speak.
My earlier testimony was directed really at trying to make the
point that we got to work with a whole lot of other factors, a
lot of other solutions, a lot of other governments too, and try
to make sure we are addressing these issues. I think that you
are here, you made the trip to testify, and I bet you there are
folks out there that are also in your situation that couldn't
afford to be here today to tell us what is going on. A lot of
those people are north of the border and south of the border.
Public safety, I think, is an issue that is relevant to all of
us, north and south of the border and other regions of the
world. So, got to work together to make sure Johnson families,
your challenges are addressed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield.
Chairman Higgins. The gentlemen yields.
I recognize Chairman Bishop for questioning for 5 minutes.
Mr. Bishop. Mr. Johnson, since the Biden administration
ordered a stop to the border wall construction that was in
process, as you have described, what has the Biden
administration done to protect you from the consequences that
you have described?
Mr. Johnson. In our area, the only thing that has changed
is there's been one of the fixed integrated camera towers put
in and then they're also discussing putting in a rescue beacon
on our ranch that will help migrants that they get lost and
give up. They can push a button on this rescue beacon. But I'm
not quite sure what that has to do with border security.
Mr. Bishop. How has that helped you?
Mr. Johnson. It has not.
I was interested, would you elaborate a little bit more?
You said the people who come across are in camo?
Mr. Johnson. Yes, sir. It literally looks like a military
invasion in the sense that they're all wearing the same
camouflage, the same boots, the same backpacks, the same
booties to conceal their foot tracks. They do not want to be
caught.
Mr. Bishop. Is this something that has happened only once
or twice, or is it a pattern?
Mr. Johnson. It's a pattern that started probably in the
last, probably about 8 years.
Mr. Bishop. Whose responsibility is it to protect you from
that?
Mr. Johnson. Last I thought it was the U.S. Government.
Mr. Bishop. Why should you be subjected to that kind of
invasion across your private property simply because you live
and own property at the border of the United States?
Mr. Johnson. I thought I should feel just as safe and
secure 300 miles inland than where I'm at 3 miles off of the
border where my house is located.
Mr. Bishop. Folks have opined on this panel, these guys up
here are all experts you know, that that border walls, barriers
don't work.
Mr. Vitiello, do they work? You seem to have had a fair
amount of experience with that.
Mr. Vitiello. They absolutely work. Anybody that's been in
the Border Patrol for more than 5 minutes knows that it's much
easier to control an area when you have a barrier technology
and a sufficient number of agents, plus access to the border to
make it more secure. It provides an anchor for those agents to
patrol and control area much more efficiently, much more
effectively, and safer.
Mr. Bishop. So how do these folks come up with this, or
where is the expertise these folks are drawing on when they
keep telling us border walls don't work?
Mr. Vitiello. I'm here to tell you that they do work. Spent
a lot of time setting requirements, watching how it works,
talking to agents, did a lot of planning around how we were
going to protect that border and they absolutely work.
Mr. Bishop. So you have witnessed that they work to help
interdict people who are crossing illegally. How about effects
on communities adjacent to the border wall?
Mr. Vitiello. So it's a good question.
So it's an anchor for all of the things you must do to
control the border. You said earlier about overlapping
deterrence. That's a good phrase for it. There is a particular
community near San Ysidro, Chula Vista. Back in the 1990's,
before the national strategy and what Border Patrol was trying
to elaborate across the Southwest Border, that was a lawless
area. They had a chain link fence. It has been described by
reporters, it was so badly overrun that it looked like a
hammock. Just north of that area of the border was a no man's
land. It was a big open area where nobody wanted to be. When
the sun went down, bad things happened inside of that small
canyon.
After 1994, the initial fence that was talked about, the
Vietnam landing mat, done by Border Patrol, very DIY project,
but immediately after that barrier was installed, people
started investing in that area just north of the border. Right
now, if you go to that area, it has some of the best strip
malls, outlet malls, restaurants, and homes that are worth
multi-million dollars just north of the U.S.-Mexico border.
Twenty-five years ago people would not go anywhere near that
place when the lights were off, when the sun went down, and now
it's one of the best neighborhoods in the region.
Mr. Bishop. Mr. Johnson's family might be envious of that.
Mr. De Sotle, what are the consequences for your business,
for your family, of the Federal Government's unbelievably
reckless means of curtailing this construction, ending this
construction?
Mr. De Sotle. Thank you.
The impacts have been primarily financial, stress-related
as well. It's put a significant financial burden on our
business. So we have, you know----
Mr. Bishop. Are you going make it or are you going to fail?
Mr. De Sotle. Well, I never like to quit. I like to think
that we will make it. It's not easy, though. But the reality is
right now, it's fairly complicated. Our financial situation is
fairly complicated. Actually involves the Federal Government
and involves a Main Street loan, which is very difficult to
deal with. The Main Street loan is not something I can go and
renegotiate like I could have at a bank. So my debt is with the
Federal Government, which does not allow me to renegotiate. So
it's not going to be easy to make it to be quite honest. Yes
that's the honest truth.
Mr. Bishop. God bless you, sir.
Mr. Johnson your family as well. My sympathies are with
you.
My time has expired.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
Ranking Member Ivey is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Ivey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I did want to follow up on Mr. Correa's point with respect
to the new information that just came from CPB, that in the new
numbers for June 2023, 144,607, looks like that is roughly--I
guess in May 2019, the number was 144,116. So I guess it is
comparable to where it was during that time in the Trump
administration.
I also want to mention, just ironically, this morning I
mentioned my appreciation for the Chair's comments and
mentioned that, yes, working together is a good thing. let's
see if we can do that. Then I stopped by my office a few
minutes ago and I got an article from, looks like the Daily
Caller, Jennifer Taer. It says, exclusive House GOP is about to
drop a massive report alleging that Biden's DHS chief broke the
law. I guess this is a build on to the 55-pager that we got.
The morning it was released a few weeks ago, the Chairman,
Chairman Green, the full committee Chairman, goes through and
discusses what is in it and, you know, the dereliction of duty
claims and the like. I guess this is more efforts at the trying
to push this toward the effort to impeach the Secretary. I
don't know who has filed which articles of impeachment for who
over there, but this is kind-of the same thing I was talking
about a few minutes ago.
So, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the way you have run this
hearing, I really do, but there is a context to this, and that
is kind-of a disappointing piece.
Mr. Vitiello, I have got, what is this, NeoKlanist party? I
guess this isn't new to you. I guess Senator Peters questioned
you about this previously. Apparently, this is a statement that
you made on a social media platform. Is that right?
Mr. Vitiello. It was brought up during the confirmation
hearing for the ICE director position before the vote at the
committee in which I got bipartisan support. Yes, it was
brought up then.
Mr. Ivey. OK, I mean, what does that even mean? What are
you saying with a comment like that?
Mr. Vitiello. My statement is on the record at the hearing.
I thought I was making a private communication with an
entertainment show. I was wrong about that. That was a public
tweet. It was my novice ability of using Twitter back then. I
apologized to the committee at the time and said I meant no
offense to anyone, and we left it there.
Mr. Ivey. Well, look, I mean I appreciate the fact that you
thought it was a private comment, although I can't say I find
that particularly reassuring, the fact that you would----
Mr. Vitiello. It was based on the context that was in the
program.
Mr. Ivey. What program was that?
Mr. Vitiello. It was the Mark Levin show.
Mr. Ivey. OK, I am not really familiar with that, so I
guess I will leave it alone. But I will move on.
I want to say this to Mr. De Sotle. I apologize if I
mispronounced your name. I was studiously saying LoneStar
earlier in the hearing, so I wouldn't mess it up. But as I said
earlier, I don't know if you were in the room or not, but I
really think it is important--And I guess this would apply to
you too, Mr. Johnson, that the Government takes steps to make
sure that you are made whole as much as possible. I find your
scenario particularly troubling because you are a business
trying to act in good faith, contract with the Government
through a prime contractor, but that really shouldn't expose
you to the type of scenarios that you have described here
today. So I do hope that steps will be taken to address that,
and we should be getting a response from the Army Corps. That
was promised to us.
Mr. Johnson, I am not as clear on what to do for you. I
don't know if that is an Army Corps deal or not, but I do hope
that we can try and take steps to address what has happened
with you.
But, look, this is real people, real businesses getting
caught in the crossfire, political disagreement in Washington,
DC. That is unfortunate that you are in the middle of that. I
don't agree with the desire to spend whatever that number was--
I think it was $22 billion to build 900 more miles of wall,
because I think there are more effective and efficient ways to
protect the border. My colleagues over here disagree. Let's
shake it out. But I don't like having civilians get caught in
the crossfire. So whatever we can do to try and correct this, I
will work with whoever wants to do it to try and make it
happen.
So with that, I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
The gentlewoman from Georgia, Ms. Greene, is recognized for
questioning.
Ms. Greene. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Vitiello, I would like to thank you for your service as
our former U.S. Border Patrol chief. I really appreciate the
job you did there. I would like to apologize to you on behalf
of the committee for the accusation that just came against you.
You were confirmed in a bipartisan Senate, so just wanted to
extend that to you.
Mr. Vitiello. Thank you very much. I had a good run in
Government. Got cleared through the committee and was very
close to a full confirmation. So, thank you.
Ms. Greene. Yes.
Also, I would like to point out, it was said on this
committee earlier that the border wall was an anti-American
movement. That was said by a Democrat Member earlier. I think
that is an egregious thing to say. The border wall was being
built to protect our country, protect our border, help our
Border Patrol agents. I think the most anti-American moment in
this country was when a giant fence was erected around the
Capitol and left there for months. Our U.S. military was
brought in and forced to sleep on the floor in parking garages
for months at a time. I think that is an anti-American moment.
But I will move on.
The CBP One app----
Mr. Ivey. Will the gentlelady yield?
Ms. Greene. No, she will not. I will not.
Mr. Ivey. All right.
Ms. Greene. CBP One app is now allowing the orderly
invasion of 1,500 illegal aliens per day into our country. This
is a serious problem.
Mr. Johnson, as you live, you said, is it 3 miles from the
border?
Mr. Johnson. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Greene. Has the CBP One app, with its orderly invasion,
sending people to ports where they can make an appointment in
their convenient time and choose a port of entry where they
show up and then they are allowed to come into the United
States at the expense of the United States taxpayer, has this
slowed down or stopped people from crossing the border and
coming onto your land?
Mr. Johnson. I can't speak to how the apps really helped
because up until just a few months ago I wasn't even aware of
this, but we still have traffic coming through. It has slowed
since Title 42 was lifted, but it has never stopped completely.
Ms. Greene. So it has never stopped. So people are still
crossing the border illegally onto your land.
This headline, I read it on our earlier panel, DHS
Announces Steps To Protect Border Communities From Wall
Construction. This was an actual headline from 2021, April 30,
2021. Did the wall construction or the border wall, did you
feel threatened? Was your safety threatened by the wall?
Mr. Johnson. It was quite the opposite. We were so glad to
see it. It was, like I say, an answer to our prayers because
that was going to be some safety and security we had never seen
before.
Ms. Greene. That is what I thought. It seems like it was a
very good thing. It was actually helping.
We had a Democrat amendment on this committee to disarm
Americans 200 miles into the United States, taking away their
guns. That would be you, it would take away your guns if that
were to make law. Do you think taking away your guns would help
keep you and your family safe from the people that are
constantly invading, coming across the border onto your land?
Would taking away your guns help keep you safe?
Mr. Johnson. Absolutely not. In our area, we are so rural,
the only law enforcement we have is Border Patrol. Sheriff's
departments stretch thin, response times are well over an hour.
You have to rely on yourself for your own safety.
Ms. Greene. So the Second Amendment, your right to bear
arms, is your first line of self-defense?
Mr. Johnson. It's not just a luxury, it's a necessity.
Ms. Greene. Thank you, Mr. Johnson.
In my district, Georgia's 14th District, which is in
northwest Georgia, this is far away from Texas, far away from
the border, the fentanyl-involved deaths in Georgia alone, have
increased by over 230 percent, but in my district, fentanyl-
involved deaths have increased by over 350 percent. This looks
to be--it has to be a direct result of the Biden
administration's policies. You can't help but to wonder what
would it be like in my district? What would it be like in
Georgia? What would it be like in the rest of the country if
300 Americans weren't dying every single day from fentanyl?
So Mr. Vitiello--I am sorry if I keep saying it wrong, I
apologize--would it be fair to describe the border wall, had it
been completed, or at least what we have, as a force multiplier
for Border Patrol in areas where it was installed?
Mr. Vitiello. One hundred percent. Where you have that
barrier, you have an anchor for all of the technology and all
of the operations that need to occur in that place in the
world. So when you control that area, that gives agents more
opportunity to find and rescue people that are in distress, to
find and rescue people who are being trafficked, to stop
fentanyl from coming into the United States. It's a terrible
situation that we're in.
We talked a little bit about smuggling through these areas.
All smuggling is organized, whether it's narcotics or people.
These cartels are being enriched because the pipeline that was
opened up at the beginning of this administration is still
open, regardless of CBP One, regardless of the number of
people, the reduced apprehensions, the reduced encounters.
There's still thousands and thousands of people coming to the
border every 24 hours. Having the right kind of infrastructure,
having enough and sufficient agents, well-trained, and having
the technology to support them is still important and always
will be.
I did this work for a long time. The American people have
demanded a secure border in--for the entirety of my career,
most acutely after 9/11, but that desire still continues, and
it hasn't been addressed in a sufficient way. There was a lot
of progress made in the last administration. That's all been
ripped down now.
Ms. Greene. Thank you.
I yield, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Higgins. The gentlewoman yields.
The gentlewoman from New York, Ms. Clarke, is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Ms. Clarke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to yield some time to the Ranking Member of the O&I
Subcommittee.
Mr. Ivey. Thank you, ma'am.
I just had two quick comments. One was it was surprising
for me to hear that suggestion that putting up a fence around
the Capitol after the invasion and raid that led to the deaths
of several police officers was more dramatic or less dramatic
than the actual invasion itself.
Ms. Greene. Walls work, apparently.
Mr. Ivey. Hopefully we----
Ms. Clarke. Reclaiming my time. The time is for Mr. Ivey,
not Ms. Greene.
Mr. Ivey. Yes, hopefully we don't have Sinaloa trying to
come into the Capitol. But what we had happen on January 6 was
sufficiently bad. I appreciate the Department of Justice
prosecuting the 700-plus that have done so, so far.
I yield back.
Ms. Clarke. My question is actually for Dr. Tenorio.
Migrants who cross the Southwest Border in search of a better
life in the United States face a perilous journey across rocky
and dangerous terrain. All too often, Border Patrol agents find
migrants who have been injured, dehydrated, or even drowning in
the rivers along the journey. But just as dangerous are
attempts to climb and breach the border wall, particularly
since the Trump administration increased its height. The walls,
no matter the height, do not deter migrants, they simply make
it more deadly in their attempts to cross.
So Dr. Tenorio, can you describe the nature of the injuries
you have seen in your time at UC San Diego hospital and how
increasing the height of the border will increase the number of
fatal or near-fatal accidents?
Dr. Tenorio. Thank you for the question.
So as a neurosurgeon I see some of the most devastating
neurological injuries to the spine and the brain, which as I
mentioned often require life-saving treatment. Since the border
wall is raised, from our research and what I've observed at the
hospital, taking trauma call at this trauma center, there have
been a record number of spine injuries. They've increased five-
fold since the border wall was raised.
Now, more alarmingly, there has been an increase in the
amount of brain injuries, and now we're seeing even injuries to
the brain's blood vessels. Now, let me say that with these
brain injuries and brain blood vessel injuries, we don't see
these unless they're suffering from high-impact trauma. A lot
of these patients, that doesn't get captured in the fatality
rate or the mortality rate, are these are devastating injuries,
so these patients often can't--you know, no longer interact
with their family. So they're not counted as a fatality, but
again, they're left without being able to interact with their
families or unable to walk. You know, they can't support their
families anymore.
Now, going to the mortality aspect, as I mentioned in my
opening statement, there were zero instances of fatalities
after border falls. Now, after the border wall was raised,
there's been 16. Now, let me mention that this only captures a
fraction of what's going on, because these are only fatalities
that are recorded or captured, but I'm sure there's more that
are happening that we don't know about either.
Ms. Clarke. Well, I think, Doctor, we have really got to
find a way to address what has become a challenge to our Nation
and to those migrants who are seeking a better life. Certainly
climbing a border wall only to drop to your death or to a brain
injury is not what they had in mind. They just wanted some
freedom.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. Th gentlewoman yields.
The gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. Ezell, is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Johnson, during my first few months in office I visited
the border and saw first-hand the impacts of the Biden
administration's refusal to resume border wall construction. In
front of the mile-long gaps in our border system, there is
steel that is literally rusting away. You said the Federal
Government is treating your land like a warehouse because of
canceled border wall contracts. Have these abandoned
construction materials impacted your ranching business?
Mr. Johnson. The areas where these materials are located
are impacting us minimally in the sense of like cattle grazing,
but it's more aesthetically displeasing. But it's more
troublesome that it's sitting there on the ground instead of up
in the air, serving its purpose as a wall.
Mr. Ezell. What is the Government telling you about the
steel bollards they left on your ranch? What are they telling
you about it?
Mr. Johnson. There's been zero contact about any plans for
removal. What we've heard is just from contractors in passing
saying that it's going to be hauled off for scrap.
Mr. Ezell. So the Government hadn't contacted you, said
anything?
Mr. Johnson. No, sir.
Mr. Ezell. Mr. De Sotle, if that is how I pronounce your
name, details surrounding the cancellation of contracts have
not yet been disclosed. But it is our impression that the
Government intends to continue the terminations for
convenience. Can you talk about what the impact has been on
your company while being on standby, waiting for the
resolution? How did these additional costs add up?
Mr. De Sotle. So the additional costs were in excess of
almost $1.5 million dollars that we had to absorb as part of
our business. So that was capital outlay at a time when--if you
remember this is during COVID, so our industry was impacted
fairly significantly and the border wall as I mentioned earlier
was our first foray into heavy civil. So this was a line of
business that we're looking to go into. We were actually
excited when we got the contract because we assumed that this
was actually going to help through COVID. It was something that
was going to continue to be operational. So the impact has been
significant. I'm not going to sit here and lie. It's not been
the only impact. I'm not going to tell you that either.
However, it has not helped at all.
The most concerning thing for me was the lack of
communication. The Federal Government simply can ignore you.
They can ignore me whenever--you know, I can't invoice them. I
have no recourse whatsoever. Even my prime had no recourse with
the Federal Government. So that was what was most concerning.
The Federal Government simply would not communicate.
Mr. Ezell. No engagement, No help, no anything.
Mr. De Sotle. No. I mean other than, quite frankly,
Congressman Pfluger's office, there was no communication from
the Government. Congressman Pfluger's office actually helped us
through a lot of the difficulty, but--I mean there was no
payment, but they helped to shepherd us in the right direction
on many occasions.
Mr. Ezell. Is there any way to renegotiate a settlement?
Mr. De Sotle. We are currently--we finally got the audit
completed. They're offering 50 cents on the dollar for our
submission. So that is where we stand right now. So we are
actually literally next week probably going to negotiation with
the Army Corps of Engineers. Then from there we'll see how that
goes. It's gonna be back and forth, I'm sure, for quite a
while.
Mr. Ezell. Please stay in contact with our office so that
we can try to help you with this.
Mr. De Sotle. I appreciate that.
Mr. Ezell. With that Mr. Chairman I yield back.
Mr. De Sotle. Yes, I do appreciate it.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
The gentleman from California, Mr. Garcia, is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you Mr. Chairman and thank you to our
witnesses that are here.
I just want to also be clear. I think we have not heard
real solutions along our border. I don't believe that our
colleagues on the other side of the aisle have proposed real
solutions. What we have had and what I have heard over the last
few months are some really out there and crazy ideas. We have
heard everything from invading northern Mexico to the assertion
that we should be sending missiles into Mexico. A member
suggested we should maybe build an alligator moat to protect
the border along the Mexican border. Of course, Donald Trump
famously said that maybe we should even be shooting migrants in
the legs to stop them from coming over the border. So these are
actually all ideas that have been brought forward to address
our border crisis, all of which are incredibly inhumane.
But today I want to address some horrific news that is
coming out of Texas. This has been reported by the Houston
Chronicle about the Governor. Now, the Governor's border
security initiative, according to the Houston Chronicle, has
ordered State troopers in the Department of Public Safety to
push small children and nursing babies back into the Rio Grande
River. They have been told not to give them water, to these
asylum seekers, even in extreme heat.
So I want to submit this article for the record. This
actually just came out. I know it is getting a lot of
attention. If I can please submit this article into the record.
Chairman Higgins. Without objection.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The information was not available at the time of publication.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Garcia. So State troopers on this detail have raised
concerns that the policies were over the line and inhumane.
These are accounts from the State troopers in Texas. The
individual reports themselves are horrific. A pregnant woman
having a miscarriage was found late last month caught in a wire
doubled over in pain. A 4-year-old girl passed out from heat
exhaustion after she tried to go through it and was pushed back
by the Texas National Guard soldiers. A trooper suggested that
Texas had set ``traps of razor wire wrapped barrels in parts of
the river with high water and low visibility''. A trap as we
know isn't something that deters migrants; it is something
designed to hurt animals.
I want to quote from this article directly. ``The trooper's
email sheds new light on a series of previously-reported
drownings in the river during a 1-week stretch earlier this
month including a mother and at least one of her two children
who Federal Border Patrol agents spotted struggling to cross
the Rio Grande on July 1st.'' It continues, ``According to the
email, a State police boat found the mother and one of the
children who went under the water for a minute. They were
pulled from the river and given medical care before being
transferred to EMS, but were later declared dead at the
hospital. The second child was never found, the email said.''
Never found. Now, this is sickening, it is un-American, and
Governor Abbott's stunts have consequences.
On another shift, medics said they found about 120 people
camping out, including nursing babies and other young children,
exhausted, hungry, and tired after a day where the temperature
reached 108 degrees. Now, the medics were ordered to push these
people back into the river. The medics said that this was,
``Not the correct thing to do'' and that it could have led to a
risk of drowning or great injury. They were told to leave the
area.
Now, these aren't reports, by the way, from activists or
human rights groups, which could just be ignored by some, these
are actually quotes and statements from front-line law
enforcement officials that are working there along the border.
Another front-line law enforcement official said, and I
quote: ``I believe we have stepped over a line into the
inhumane. We need to operate correctly in the eyes of God.''
Now, the United States, as far as I am concerned, should
not be leaving babies to die in the desert or forcing pregnant
women back into rivers. We don't order our law enforcement
officials to leave people to drown or die. We all want a secure
and orderly border, but Governor Abbott's brutal orders aren't
accomplishing that and that needs to be brought up today in
this hearing. This conduct is disgusting and these issues
around this incident should be brought forward into this
committee to answer questions. That Governor needs to be held
accountable.
I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
The gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Brecheen, is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Breechen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
So under the Trump administration, build a wall. Common
theme, build a wall. Illegal immigration was at a 45-year low.
Biden takes office. President Biden says, not another foot. We
now have historic numbers of illegal immigration occurring at
our Southern Border. It is not a coincidence. The thoughts on
physical barriers go hand-in-hand with what we see as the
consequence, the fruit of the decisions. Are you going to be
serious about the rule of law, or are you not?
We talk about deaths. I think all of us, in our humanity,
our heart goes out to people that undergo hardship, but where
is the hardship coming from? What is causing people to drown as
they cross the Rio Grande? It is because of a message that says
our border is open, increases the number, increases those
people that are drowning.
We talk about things that are happening, 18- to 45-year-
olds, leading cause of death is fentanyl. That is happening now
under the not-another-foot thought. What about human
trafficking? What about the 85,000 children that we can't
account for in the last 2 years? ``Sound of Freedom'' is a
movie that is getting a lot of attention. We know that people,
those single adults, are using children and they are sending
them back across to bring across another single adult. We don't
have any idea how many of these children are being utilized for
a sex trade. I mean, that is the real tragedy of this, is that
we are, by our dereliction of enforcing the rule of law, we are
compounding the problems.
So, Mr. Tenorio, as the Democrat-invited witness to come
before us who is contending--just to make sure I am
understanding this--your contention is because people have
fallen off the wall and you have, as a doctor, have seen more
accidents and incidents, you are contending that that is
justification for bringing down the wall. Am I understanding
that correctly?
Dr. Tenorio. Let me clarify that for you, Representative.
So I'm here as a neurosurgeon speaking on my experience as a
neurosurgeon at a level one trauma center near the border.
What----
Mr. Garcia. Reclaim my time. But your contention is because
of the incidents of the accidents, the wall should come down,
they are causing more injury. Yes or no?
Dr. Tenorio. That is not my contention, no.
Mr. Garcia. So you believe we should continue the wall
construction?
Dr. Tenorio. You know, I came here,--I'm not a border
policy expert, and that's outside of my expertise.
Mr. Garcia. But I have heard you imply that because of
people falling off the wall we should tear down the wall. I
mean I have heard that implication. Am I wrong in understanding
you?
Dr. Tenorio. I did not make that statement.
Mr. Garcia. Is that your thought?
Dr. Tenorio. As I mentioned I'm not a border policy expert.
Mr. Garcia. I think you are----
Dr. Tenorio. I came here as a neurosurgeon to speak on what
I've seen at the hospital.
Mr. Garcia. I understand. I have heard the implication. I
think it is pretty clear to those of us that you don't support
walls because people are falling off walls and they are getting
hurt.
Here is where I want to go with this. For all of us, just
make a sound judgment call, OK. Mr. Johnson, I read from 1918
your family has had a ranch, fourth-generation rancher. Same
situation, except I live in Oklahoma. Nineteen-eighteen, my
great-grandfather moved in and started a family ranch. I don't
have to deal with what you have to deal with. I don't have to
go climbing in the deer woods and worry about if I am out there
deer hunting if I could be the one that could be the prey
because somebody that is running a cartel ring could shoot me
deer hunting on my own place. That is the kind of--what I
understood from what you described, you deal with that. That is
a sad reality.
I want to go back to this thought though. I mean if
somebody cuts the fence and is stealing your cattle, I mean
given what you described, they are not having to cut the fence
to steal your cattle, and they slice their hand, should you be
responsible for their medical bills?
Mr. Johnson. No, sir.
Mr. Garcia. OK, so same train of thought. Airport parking
has barriers around it. If somebody climbs over that wall and
breaks the law, is it my responsibility to be liable because
that business owner was trying to protect my property? I mean,
if somebody is trying to break into my home, should I tear the
door down to make it easier for them the next time so they can
come inside my door? Because we are talking about lawlessness.
Our heart goes out to people that are harmed, but we are
talking about people who are breaking the law. Someone said a
while ago, they are just trying to get freedom. Then do it
legally. Go through a port of entry. There are many people who
do that.
With that, I yield.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
The gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Crane is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Crane. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to all the
witnesses on our panel for coming today and testifying.
I want to start with Mr. Vitiello real quick. Sir, you and
I, we are talking about similar things. You called it a
security system, I was talking about overlapping deterrence.
Either way, it is really the same thing, right? It is just
multiple overlapping deterrents that work in conjunction to
create the most security possible for whatever institution we
are talking about, whether it is a country, a prison, a school,
right?
Mr. Vitiello. I agree with you.
Mr. Crane. How long were you in the Border Patrol, sir? Was
it 33 years?
Mr. Vitiello. I wore the uniform for 33 years and I was in
ICE for almost the last year I was in Government.
Mr. Crane. You were a chief, is that correct, Mr. Vitiello?
Mr. Vitiello. I was a chief in two locations on our
Northern Border and in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas, and then
I was chief at headquarters for a time.
Mr. Crane. Sir, knowing what you know about border
security, what does it make you think when you sit in this
chamber and you hear individuals attacking one part of that
security system or one of those deterrents, like the wall?
Mr. Vitiello. It's a little bit frustrating. We should be
agnostic about whether walls work or not. It's not a partisan
issue. Walls work. Everybody that's been in the Border Patrol
for more than 5 minutes recognizes it's easier to control a
territory on the border when you have infrastructure that goes
along with it. Not just wall. We talked about the comprehensive
nature of it. I was thinking through this just a couple of
minutes ago. We often talk in this chamber and others in this
building about comprehensive immigration reform. Let's talk
about comprehensive border security, which talks about our
foreign relations overseas, which talks about what Mexico and
Canada can do for us to help secure our border. Let's talk
about what the State and locals can do and what communities can
be active and talk about. Then you have to have physical
infrastructure if you want to be successful, especially in the
urban areas.
Mr. Crane. Thank you, sir.
I want to transfer real quick to Dr. Tenorio. Doctor, thank
you for coming. I also want to say thank you for your service.
I was listening to your testimony, it must be really hard to
watch somebody a young kid or even a mom or a dad come in to
your emergency room or your hospital and see a leg broken or a
stress fracture a spinal injury or a TBI. Is it pretty pretty
tough to watch that, sir?
Dr. Tenorio. Yes, it is. Thank you for the comment.
Mr. Crane. Yes, sir. Doctor, I wanted to ask you, because I
noticed you were getting teared up. I can tell that witnessing
these injuries really affect you. But I did want to know,
Doctor, have you ever seen an American who has overdosed on
fentanyl? Have you ever had to treat one of those?
Dr. Tenorio. I have not had to treat one of those as of
today, no.
Mr. Crane. How about any of your colleagues? Any of your
colleagues ever have to treat anybody that has overdosed on
fentanyl?
Dr. Tenorio. Yes, they have. I haven't spoken to them about
the specifics and what the experience is like though.
Mr. Crane. OK. Doctor, do you know how many Americans every
day--or I should say every year, are dying of fentanyl in the
United States?
Dr. Tenorio. No, I do not.
Mr. Crane. OK. It is about 70,000 right now.
Mr. Correa. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Crane. Yes. Go ahead, sir.
Mr. Correa. I just want to say, Mr. Crane, totally agree
with you in the fentanyl challenge. That is why we are trying
to figure out the priorities in my mind right now. If we want
to keep fentanyl out, you go work on, make sure our ports of
entry are much more secure because that is where 90 percent of
the problem is.
Mr. Crane. OK, thank you, sir. I appreciate it.
Mr. Correa. Thank you.
Mr. Crane. I yield back--take my time.
The reason I am pointing it out, Mr. Ranking Member, is
because obviously you guys called him here to talk about the
injuries that he has witnessed from the extended height of our
walls, right? But I want to point out, again, this is the
Homeland Security Committee. Our primary job in this committee
is to make sure that our Homeland Security units have the
necessary resources, funding, and equipment to make sure that
Americans are safe. So the doctor was talking about 16 people
that he knows of that have died because they fell off that
wall. That is horrible. That is horrible, Doctor. But since the
Biden administration took office, Doctor, do you have any idea
how many Americans have died because of fentanyl? I just gave
you the 1-year number. Any idea how many have died in the 3
years?
Dr. Tenorio. I cannot speak to that, no.
Mr. Crane. Three hundred thousand, Doctor. How would you
like to treat one of those individuals? How would you like to
break the news to those family members that--and I know you--I
know you are a man, you have a heart. I could see that. But I
am asking, do we care about those individuals as well?
Dr. Tenorio. Absolutely. As a physician, I took an oath to
take care of every patient that comes to our hospital and I
treat every patient the same.
Mr. Crane. I appreciate that, Doctor. I think that is
great.
The last thing I want to say is, Mr. Johnson, how does it
make you feel when you hear politicians that you know have
camera systems, locked doors, walls, security system, and often
armed personnel sit here and talk about how walls don't work?
Do you think that they might change their tune a little bit,
Mr. Johnson, if they lived at your ranch?
Mr. Johnson. I think that's a big issue is nobody truly
knows what's going on on the border. Ports of entry, there's
more assets allocated there than there are in between the
ports. I know that from a professional career as a Border
Patrol agent versus my point of view as a stakeholder now.
I would like to take this time to--opportunity to invite
any Member of this committee to come down to my ranch and I
will show you first-hand what we are dealing with.
Mr. Crane. Thank you Mr. Johnson.
I yield back.
Chairman Higgins. The gentleman yields.
I thank the witnesses for their testimony today and Members
for their questions.
The Members of the subcommittees may have additional
questions for the witnesses, and we would ask that the
witnesses respond to these in writing.
Pursuant to committee rule VII(D), the hearing record will
be held open for 10 days.
Without objection, the subcommittees stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 5:25 p.m., the subcommittees were
adjourned.]
[all]