[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]