U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

64–702 PDF 2011

ENHANCING DHS’ EFFORTS TO DISRUPT ALIEN 

SMUGGLING ACROSS OUR BORDERS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER, MARITIME, 

AND 

GLOBAL COUNTERTERRORISM 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JULY 22, 2010 

Serial No. 111–76 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

BENNIE G. THOMPSON, Mississippi, Chairman 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

JANE HARMAN, California 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

HENRY CUELLAR, Texas 

CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania 

YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York 

LAURA RICHARDSON, California 

ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona 

BILL PASCRELL, JR., New Jersey 

EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri 

AL GREEN, Texas 

JAMES A. HIMES, Connecticut 

MARY JO KILROY, Ohio 

DINA TITUS, Nevada 

WILLIAM L. OWENS, New York 

VACANCY

VACANCY

PETER T. KING, New York 

LAMAR SMITH, Texas 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

ANH ‘‘JOSEPH’’ CAO, Louisiana 

STEVE AUSTRIA, Ohio 

TOM GRAVES, Georgia 

I. LANIER AVANT, Staff Director 

ROSALINE COHEN, Chief Counsel 

MICHAEL TWINCHEK, Chief Clerk 

ROBERT O’CONNOR, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER, MARITIME, AND GLOBAL 

COUNTERTERRORISM 

HENRY CUELLAR, Texas, Chairman 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

JANE HARMAN, California 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona 

BILL PASCRELL, JR., New Jersey 

AL GREEN, Texas 

VACANCY

BENNIE G. THOMPSON, Mississippi (Ex Officio) 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

LAMAR SMITH, Texas 

PETER T. KING, New York (Ex Officio) 

ALISON NORTHOP, Staff Director 

NIKKI HADDER, Clerk 

MANDY BOWERS, Minority Subcommittee Lead 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

STATEMENTS

The Honorable Henry Cuellar, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Texas, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Border, Maritime, and Global 

Counterterrorism .................................................................................................. 1 

The Honorable Candice S. Miller, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Michigan, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Border, Maritime, and Global Counterterrorism .................................................................... 2 

The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of Mississippi, and Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security .. 9 

The Honorable Harry Mitchell, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Arizona: 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 10 

WITNESSES

Mr. James A. Dinkins, Executive Associate Director, Homeland Security Investigations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of 

Homeland Security: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 12 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 14 

Mr. Michael J. Fisher, Chief of the Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection, Department of Homeland Security: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 19 

Mr. Terry Goddard, Attorney General, State of Arizona: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 22 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 24 

Mr. Richard M. Stana, Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues, Government Accountability Office: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 31 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 33 

Ms. Janice L. Kephart, Director of National Security Policy, Center for Immigration Studies: 

Oral Statement ..................................................................................................... 38 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 40 

FOR THE RECORD

The Honorable Candice S. Miller, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Michigan, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Border, Maritime, and Global Counterterrorism: 

Statement of Jan Brewer, Governor, State of Arizona ..................................... 4 

(1) 

ENHANCING DHS’ EFFORTS TO DISRUPT 

ALIEN SMUGGLING ACROSS OUR BORDERS 

Thursday, July 22, 2010 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY, SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER, MARITIME, AND GLOBAL

COUNTERTERRORISM, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in Room 

311, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Henry Cuellar [Chairman 

of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Cuellar, Thompson, Sanchez, Jackson 

Lee, Kirkpatrick, Pascrell, Green, and Miller. 

Also present: Representatives Mitchell and Dent. 

Mr. CUELLAR [presiding]. This subcommittee will come to order. 

The Subcommittee on Border, Maritime, and Global Counterterrorism is meeting today to receive testimony on enhancing DHS’ efforts to disrupt alien smuggling across our borders. 

Today, the subcommittee is examining a growing homeland security challenge—that is, alien smuggling across America’s borders. 

In recent years, those of us living near our Nation’s southern border have witnessed a troubling uptick in alien smuggling activities. 

Not unique to the south, human smuggling also occurs along our 

northern border, too. As a result, the Federal Government has sent 

more personal resources to secure our borders, and in response individuals seeking to enter the United States illegally have become 

increasingly dependent on alien smuggling to help them evade our 

law enforcement and gain entry into the country. 

As we have done more to secure our borders, alien smuggling organizations have increasingly become mobile, violent, and dangerous. They are now posing new threats to our law enforcement 

officials, our border communities, and the people they attempt to 

smuggle across our borders. 

Particularly troubling is the potential for those organizations to 

smuggle terrorists into our country. While the vast majority of individuals smuggled into the United States are economic migrants, 

the possibility exists that those who seek to do us harm might exploit those routes, with dire consequences for our Nation’s security. 

Therefore, we are working to secure not just our land ports, but our 

maritime ports of entry and coastal waters as well. 

But tying up security on the smuggling routes is just one part 

of the bigger solution. Immigration and Customs Enforcement— 

ICE—Customs and Border Protection—CBP—and their Federal, 

State, and local partners have stepped up efforts to identify and 
2 

disrupt alien smuggling organizations in recent years. Just this 

week Secretary Napolitano announced that DHS is deploying 100 

additional ICE personnel and 300 more Border Patrol agents and 

CBP officers and new technology and aircraft to Arizona, which is 

a major area for alien smuggling. 

DHS is also initiating a program in Arizona to increase the prosecution of criminal aliens apprehended and for re-entering the 

United States illegally after prior removal. These kinds of prosecution efforts have been successful elsewhere along the border, and 

I am encouraged by their use in Arizona as well. 

The Obama administration also announced it would temporarily 

deploy 1,200 National Guard troops to the southern border beginning August 1 of this year. This program will provide additional 

support and surveillance to our border security efforts already 

under way. In doing so, it would strengthen our multi-layer approach to combat narcotics, weapons, bulk cash, and human smuggling along our border. 

These measures are encouraging, but much more remains to be 

done. As the Government Accountability Office found in a report 

being released in conjunction with today’s hearing, DHS should 

better leverage its personnel and resources. We know ICE personnel, in particular, are increasingly stretched thin, which is an 

issue DHS and Congress need to address. 

GAO also recommends that ICE consider using additional financial investigative and seizure techniques to combat alien smuggling. Back when I was a member of the State legislature, I was 

the author of the legislation that would regulate in a different way 

the Casa de Cambios, the other places where they use as money 

exchange currency for businesses, as you know, where sometimes 

are involved in laundering illicit proceeds. So, I understand that in 

order to fight criminal organizations, often the best way is to go 

after their money. 

Finally, I would like to thank Chairman Thompson and Representative Harry Mitchell for requesting this important GAO report. Representative Mitchell recently introduced legislation to give 

ICE additional assets for forfeiture authority, and I applaud his 

leadership on this important issue. 

I appreciate our panel of witnesses for joining us today, and I 

look forward to your testimony. 

The Chairman now recognizes the Ranking Member of the subcommittee, the gentlelady from Michigan, Mrs. Miller, for an opening statement. 

Mrs. MILLER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I certainly welcome all of our witnesses as well, and I am delighted to be here this morning to examine the very important 

issue of how we would better combat alien smuggling along the 

southwest border, which is certainly a National security issue for 

our great Nation. 

However, I do think it is ironic that we are here today to examine efforts by the administration to combat alien smuggling, when 

actually this administration is suing the State of Arizona—we are 

shortly going to be hearing from the attorney general of that 

State—for protecting its residents from the effect of illegal immigration, which, of course, is cued largely by alien smuggling. 
3 

Alien smuggling has gotten so bad in Arizona that the Bureau 

of Land Management has actually erected signs in the desert warning of the danger to the public of smuggling. Here is a picture of 

the sign. The sign reads, ‘‘Danger: Public Warning—Travel Not 

Recommended—Active Drug and Human Smuggling Area. Visitors 

may encounter armed criminals and smuggling vehicles traveling 

at high rates of speed—high rates of speed. Stay away from trash, 

clothing, backpacks, and abandoned vehicles. If you see suspicious 

activity, do not confront. Move away and call 911.’’ 

This is a sign in America. 

One recent study actually found that illegal immigration costs 

American taxpayers $113 billion annually, and that is more than 

$1,100 per household across the entire Nation. That same study 

found that Arizona spends more, approximately $2.5 billion annually, on costs associated with illegal immigration. 

I think what should concern us as much, if not more, are reports 

that aliens from special-interest countries that support terrorism 

may be using the same routes used by alien smugglers and drug 

traffickers to across our porous borders, after which they could disappear, of course, to plan or to execute attacks on our country. 

Mr. Chairman, I have asked the Governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer, if she could submit a statement for the record for our subcommittee, and I did receive one late yesterday afternoon. I have 

shared it with all the subcommittee Members. I would certainly 

ask unanimous consent to submit her entire statement for the 

record, without objection, hopefully. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Without objection. 

[The information follows:] 
4 
5 
6 
7 

Mrs. MILLER. If I could, Mr. Chairman, read just a couple of excerpts from the Governor’s statement to our subcommittee. 

‘‘I appreciate the opportunity to submit this statement on human 

smuggling to the House of Representatives Homeland Security 

Committee, Subcommittee on Border, Maritime, and Global 

Counterterrorism. This statement reveals why our Nation’s porous 

southern border and illegal immigration are of such concern to me 

and should be of concern to every American.’’ 

I am just going through a couple of different sections of the Governor’s comments. She said, ‘‘I believe the time has come for the 

Federal Government to secure our southern border with Mexico 

and to ensure the preservation of not only Arizona’s quality of life, 

but our Nation’s sovereignty and security. 
8 

‘‘The border region has become increasingly lawless, and concerns continue to grow about violence spilling over into our border 

communities and then further north into major metropolitan areas. 

Absent a significant improvement in border security and a firm 

commitment to enforce U.S. immigration laws, citizens throughout 

the Southwest—not just Arizona—have a legitimate right to be 

concerned about lawlessness and violence.’’ 

Another section of the Governor’s statement says, ‘‘Recently, the 

Federal Bureau of Land Management posted new signs interior 

counties of Arizona——’’ 

Hold up the sign again, if you could. 

She is also referencing this sign. 

‘‘——warning residents not to access Federal lands due to criminal activity associated with the border. These warning signals to 

some—these warnings signal to some that we have handed over 

portions of sovereign U.S. territory to human smugglers and drug 

traffickers. 

‘‘This is an outrage. Instead of warning Americans to stay out of 

parts of our own country, we ought to be warning all international 

lawbreakers that they will be detained and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. We should also establish measures that stop 

illegal border crossings and put an end to crimes perpetrated on 

Americans by illegal aliens.’’ 

She also goes on to say, ‘‘The lack of a secure border with Mexico 

also poses a National security threat to the United States, as it 

provides terrorists the opportunity to enter our country undetected. 

While the bulk of illegal immigrants being smuggled into the 

United States are from Mexico and Central and Latin American 

countries, others are from special-interest countries. And in a post9/11 world, it is unconscionable that the Federal Government has 

not secured the international border with Mexico, and we face the 

possibility that terrorists looking to harm America could sneak into 

the U.S. through the Arizona desert.’’ 

Just a last comment from her statement, ‘‘The Federal Government has failed to secure our international border with Mexico for 

decades. This neglect has fostered an environment that has led to 

the initial establishment and continued growth of human smuggling rings. The smuggling rings import illegal aliens to the United 

States. 

‘‘The smuggling rings themselves and an element of their human 

cargo can bring crime and violence to our communities and neighborhoods and create a financial burden on Government and taxpayers. If that were not enough, the unsecured border in Arizona 

leaves a gaping hole for terrorists to enter the United States undetected and do us harm.’’ 

The Governor completes her statement by saying, ‘‘It is time for 

the Federal Government to do its job, secure the international border with Mexico, and put human smugglers out of business.’’ 

I think, Mr. Chairman, the entire country can appreciate the concerns of the Governor of Arizona for her citizens as well as all the 

Border States, who share similar challenges as well. 

I certainly look forward to hearing from our witnesses, and I 

would pledge my very strong support to work with the Chairman, 

our entire subcommittee, and the Congress to make sure that the 
9 

Federal Government does in fact do its job and secure our borders 

and protect the homeland. 

Thank you very much. I yield back. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you very much. 

I thank the gentlewoman from Michigan for her opening statement. 

At this time the Chairman now recognizes the Chairman of the 

full committee, the gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. Thompson, for 

an opening statement. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank 

you for holding today’s hearing to examine the Department of 

Homeland Security’s effort to combat alien smuggling across America’s borders. 

As you know, I recently visited Arizona, where I heard from residents about the need to do more to secure our borders and fight 

human smuggling and drug trafficking. I also received briefings 

from Border Patrol’s Tucson sector leadership and met with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in Phoenix about the serious challenges they are facing. 

Representative Ann Kirkpatrick, a Member of this subcommittee, 

and I discussed ICE’s special-agent-in-charge in Phoenix the rising 

threat posed by smuggling organizations. Representative Kirkpatrick has been a vocal advocate for combating smuggling and 

trafficking in her State. She also highlighted a very troubling effect 

these criminal organizations are having even in cities not located 

directly on the border, such as Phoenix. 

I thank her for her leadership and look forward to continuing to 

work with her on these important issues. 

I left Arizona with an even better appreciation for the magnitude 

of the concerns facing border residents and the challenges facing 

Federal and State law enforcement officials in the region. In recognition of these challenges, Secretary Napolitano recently announced regarding sending additional CBP and ICE personnel, and 

assets to Arizona, is welcome news. 

I look forward to hearing more about how these resources will be 

utilized, how long they will deployed, and what the long-term plan 

is for addressing border security needs in the area. 

Regarding the GAO report being released today, it is apparent 

that much work remains to be done in addressing smuggling. I am 

especially concerned about GAO’s finding that ICE is not making 

the best use of its personnel to investigate alien smuggling organizations. According to GAO, ICE investigators are doing immigration enforcement work that would be better suited to detention officers, leaving investigators less time to conduct activities related to 

addressing criminal organizations. 

Given our finite border security resources, it is imperative that 

ICE examine how we can better allocate its personnel to address 

these recommendations. I am also interested in hearing about 

whether additional resources or authorities are necessary for ICE 

to carry out their mission. 

While DHS has made some progress on alien smuggling since 

GAO’s last report on that topic in 2005, it is clear that much still 

remains to be done. I hope GAO will be able to share with us the 
10 

developments they have observed over the last 5 years and that 

ICE and CBP will speak to the department’s plans going forward. 

At the State level, Arizona has been particularly affected by alien 

smuggling organizations in recent years. The Arizona attorney general’s office and its law enforcement partners have achieved impressive results combating alien smuggling organizations by going 

after their money. Federal and State law enforcement agencies 

should be encouraged to work together to identify and implement 

measures to address alien smugglers. Hopefully, today’s hearing offers an opportunity to further that important effort. 

In closing, I would like to thank Representative Harry Mitchell 

for working so diligently with me on this GAO request. He knows 

these issues well, given his efforts to assist the communities in his 

district. I am pleased that he will be with us today and will be able 

to share his valuable insight with the subcommittee. 

Thank you for the witnesses for joining us, and I look forward 

to your testimony. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for your 

opening statement. 

Mrs. MILLER. Yes, Mr. Chairman, if I could, I would ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Dent, 

would be permitted to sit and question the witnesses at today’s 

hearing. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Without objection. 

Mrs. MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. CUELLAR. At this time I also ask unanimous consent to have 

the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Harry Mitchell, to be permitted 

to sit and question the witnesses at today’s hearing without objection. 

So, Mr. Dent. 

Then, Mr. Mitchell, if you want to join us up here. 

Other Members of the subcommittee are reminded that under 

the committee rules, opening statements may be submitted for the 

record. 

[The statement of Hon. Mitchell follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. HARRY MITCHELL

JULY 22, 2010 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you Ranking Member Miller, and all the 

Members of this subcommittee for permitting me to join you here today. 

I also want to thank Chairman Thompson, without whose help, today’s GAO Report and today’s hearing about it would not have been possible. 

I want to extend a warm welcome to Arizona’s attorney general, who has taken 

time from his very busy schedule to join us here today. Attorney General Goddard 

has not just been a leader in the fight against Mexican drug cartels, he’s been an 

innovator, and we will hear more about his important efforts shortly. 

Finally, I want to thank the extremely hard-working team at GAO, whose dedication and attention to detail have resulted in key findings and recommendations that 

we will be examining today. 

Arizona continues to pay a heavy price for the Federal Government’s failure to 

secure the border and fix our broken immigration system. Arizona has been especially hard hit. More than half the illegal crossings across the U.S.-Mexico border 

happen in our State. 

But this isn’t just a crisis for communities along the border. This is a crisis in 

the interior—in places like Phoenix, where smugglers and Mexican cartels have set 

up vast networks of drop houses, which operate as way stations for criminal smuggling enterprises. 
11 

It has been estimated that there may be as many as 1,000 such drop houses in 

the Phoenix metropolitan area alone. 

The crime associated with these drop houses is brutal and alarming. Phoenix now 

experiences upwards of 300 kidnappings a year. 

I had the opportunity to visit a drop house just this past weekend, and I saw 

where smugglers had kept victims behind barred doors and windows while they extorted money for their release. I also visited another home in the same neighborhood, the site of a drug-cartel kidnapping, where smugglers had begun digging a 

grave for one of their captives, right there inside the house. 

These violent thugs put innocent, law-abiding citizens at risk as well, when fights 

between rival cartels over smuggled cargo devolve into gunfire. 

And these drop houses are everywhere. Living in an upscale neighborhood doesn’t 

immunize you from the threat. 

That’s why, back in February of 2008, I asked the GAO to investigate ICE’s efforts to shut down these drop houses and stop the illegal smuggling. It has taken 

2.5 years for the GAO to complete this investigation, but I am pleased that we finally have the results, which are instructive, and I hope that both ICE and Members of this committee will take note. 

Two findings, I think, are particularly important. First, the GAO notes that there 

continues to be a Federal loophole that precludes the use of civil forfeiture to seize 

homes that are used as drop houses. According to GAO, its staff visited one ICE 

investigative office which contained a huge map showing over 300 drop houses in 

the surrounding area. ICE officials complained, however, that they had only been 

able to seize one of these houses, and that civil asset forfeiture authority would have 

made it easier to seize far more of them. 

I firmly believe we need to close this loophole, and that is why earlier this week 

Rep. Bilbray and I introduced a bipartisan bill—the Stop the Drop Houses Act, H.R. 

5769—to do so. 

Second, the GAO recommends that ICE look into the investigative techniques 

used by an Arizona Attorney General task force which has seized millions of dollars 

and disrupted alien smuggling operations by following cash transactions flowing 

through money transmitters like Western Union. The task force has established 

methods for identifying suspicious, smuggling-related wire transfers and disrupting 

them. 

Moreover, under the terms of a major settlement Attorney General Goddard 

reached earlier this year with Western Union, Western Union has agreed to provide 

Arizona and other border States with unprecedented access to data on wire transfers along the border, including locations in Mexico. 

Since the settlement, the other money wire companies have voluntarily agreed to 

provide Attorney General Goddard’s office with their data as well. 

This data, combined with the methods developed by Attorney General Goddard’s 

task force, could be a huge help to Federal immigration enforcement, and I agree 

with the GAO that the ICE ought to examine all of this, and its potential for use 

at the Federal level. 

There are, of course, other important findings in this report, but I will stop here. 

I look forward to hearing more today from the GAO, Attorney General Goddard, 

ICE, and the rest of today’s witnesses. 

At this time I yield back. 

Mr. CUELLAR. I welcome our panel of witnesses at this time. Our 

first witness is Mr. James Dinkins. He is the executive associate 

director for homeland security investigations at ICE. Mr. Dinkins 

has direct oversight over ICE investigative and enforcement initiatives and operations targeting cross-border criminal organizations 

that exploit America’s legitimate travel, trade, financial, immigration systems for illicit purposes. Mr. Dinkins, of course, manages 

a budget over $2 billion and is responsible for strategic planning. 

We look forward to working with you. I believe you have been a 

law enforcement career, and it started off in 1986 with the U.S. 

Customs Service. 

Our second witness—— 

Again, welcome. 

Our second witness is Chief Michael Fisher—again, it is always 

a pleasure seeing you again—named chief of Border Patrol on May 
12 

7 of this year, serves as the Nation’s highest-ranking Border Patrol 

agent and directs the enforcement efforts of more than 20,000 Border Patrol agents responsible for patrolling our Nation’s border between the ports of entry. 

Prior to his appointment he served as the chief border patrols 

there in San Diego, the San Diego sector, and first started his duty 

along the southwest border in 1987 in Douglas, Arizona. 

So again, welcome very much today, Mr. Fisher. 

Third witness is the attorney general for the State of Arizona, 

who has been the attorney general since 2003, Mr. Terry Goddard. 

As the State’s top law enforcement officer, he is focused on reducing crime and taking action against illegal trafficking in drugs and 

arms and money and human beings, recently received the prestigious Kelley-Wyman award, the highest honor of the National Association of Attorney Generals. 

Prior before becoming attorney general, you were elected mayor 

of Phoenix for four times from 1984 to 1990. Again, we want to 

welcome you here today, Mr. Attorney General. 

Our fourth witness is Mr. Richard Stana, who is the director of 

the homeland security justice issues of the Government Accountability Office. He has been with us several times. 

We thank you and GAO for the work that you all are doing. 

He started his 33-year career with GAO, served in headquarters, 

field overseas offices, and has a wide understanding of the complex 

special military and domestic issues and recently directed the 

GAO’s work related to immigration and border security issues. 

Again, he has received many GAO awards throughout his career, 

including the distinguished service award in 2005. 

Mr. Stana, again, thank you very much. We appreciate what you 

and the GAO does—the work that you all do. 

Our fifth witness is Ms. Janice Kephart, who is the director of 

national security at the Center for Immigration Studies. 

Thank you very much for being here with us. 

She was a border and I.D. security expert, who served counsel 

to the 9/11 Commission and was a key author of the Staff Monograph ‘‘9/11 Terrorist Travel’’ as well as the immigration-related 

facts and recommendations in the 9/11 Commission report. 

Prior to 9/11 she was responsible for conducting investigations in 

counterterrorism issues and conducting oversight of the Immigration Naturalization Service as a counsel to the Senate Judiciary 

Subcommittee on Technology and Terrorism. 

We want to welcome you and all the witnesses here. 

Without objection, the witnesses’ full statements will be inserted 

in the record, and I will ask the witnesses to summarize their 

statements for 5 minutes. 

We will begin with Mr. Dinkins. 

STATEMENT OF JAMES A. DINKINS, EXECUTIVE ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF 

HOMELAND SECURITY 

Mr. DINKINS. Chairman Cuellar, Chairman Thompson, and 

Ranking Member Miller and other distinguished Members of the 

subcommittee, on behalf of Secretary Napolitano and Assistant Sec-
13 

retary Morton, I thank you for this opportunity to discuss ICE’s efforts in combating human smuggling. DHS as a department is at 

the forefront of this issue, and I am proud to be here today alongside Chief Fisher from the Office of Border Patrol to discuss this 

important issue. 

Let there be no question about the commitment of ICE to ensuring that our borders are secured from transnational threats, and 

let there be no question of our commitment to combating the illegal 

flow of guns, drugs, as well as individuals coming here to do us 

harm in the United States. 

Over the past several years, we have seen human smuggling organizations become more violent. There has been an increase in 

hostage-taking, extortion, use of firearms, and deadly rollover vehicle accidents involving smuggled aliens. To illustrate the disregard 

smuggling organizations often have for human life, I would like to 

provide you with a recent case example that initiated right here in 

the D.C. area. 

The case started when the Fairfax County Police Department of 

Virginia received a frantic call from a woman stating that she had 

been contacted by smugglers, who had taken her brother hostage 

and were threatening to kill him. The woman explained that they 

were torturing her brother over the phone and demanded that she 

pay additional monies for his release. 

ICE special agents in Washington, DC, were contacted, and their 

investigation led them to Houston, Texas. As a result of extensive 

coordination between special agents in Washington, DC, and Houston, and within 36 hours after receiving the initial information, our 

special agents obtained and executed search warrants with the assistance of Harris County Sheriff’s Office in Texas. As a result we 

rescued the woman’s brother and 10 other hostages, all of whom 

had been brutally assaulted. 

While human smuggling is often linked to the southwest border, 

it impacts communities throughout our country. For example, in 

February we dismantled a Houston area illicit transportation network that provided smuggling organizations with domestic transportation services for undocumented aliens. Transportation routes 

originated in the Houston area, but extended throughout the country. 

Named Operation Night Moves, this investigation successfully 

dismantled the transportation network, resulting in 24 criminal arrests, the seizure of 18 firearms, four bank accounts, 32 vehicles, 

and over $44,000 in U.S. currency. 

Smuggling routes are constantly changing and requires Government law enforcement from ICE and domestic international partners to coordinate. One excellent example of our collaborative efforts with law enforcement partners is Operation In Plain Sight. 

This operation was the most comprehensive human smuggling investigation in ICE’s history and dismantled the infrastructure of 

some of Arizona’s most prolific and profitable human smuggling organizations. 

The enforcement action involved more than 800 agents, officers 

from nine Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies, as 

well as dozens of law enforcement personnel in Mexico. It involved 

coordinating the enforcement operations on both sides of the bor-
14 

der, resulting in 61 criminal arrests, more than 500 administrative 

arrests, and the seizure of approximately 94 vehicles and $80,000 

in U.S. currency. 

ICE also confronts human smuggling organizations in partnerships with CBP and our law enforcement partners through our 

Border Enforcement Security Task forces. We currently have 17 

BESTs, including 10 on the southwest border. I can assure you the 

BEST model is highly successful. 

For example, between October 2008 and June 2010, the BESTs 

initiated over 390 human smuggling investigations Nation-wide, resulting in over 580 criminal arrests and over 360 convictions to 

date. 

ICE is committed to combating human smuggling. Our efforts 

are part of a comprehensive strategy that focuses on securing the 

borders through identification, disruption, and dismantlement of 

cross-border criminal organizations. 

Mr. Chairman and Representative Miller, on behalf of the men 

and women at ICE, I thank you for your commitment to border security and for your unwavering support of ICE’s mission, and I look 

forward to answering any questions you may have. 

[The statement of Mr. Dinkins follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAMES A. DINKINS

JULY 22, 2010 

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Cuellar, Ranking Member Miller, and distinguished Members of the 

subcommittee: On behalf of Secretary Napolitano and Assistant Secretary Morton, 

I would like to thank you for the opportunity to discuss U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) efforts to investigate, disrupt, and dismantle criminal organizations engaged in human smuggling. 

ICE’s mission revolves around combating the cross-border smuggling of humans 

and a wide range of contraband including drugs, guns, and currency. ICE is the primary agency investigating human smugglers and smuggling organizations that frequently put the lives of aliens at risk, take hostages, and extort fees. Through our 

investigations, ICE aims to systematically disrupt and dismantle the international 

and domestic operations of criminal travel networks, identify and seize assets and 

illicit proceeds, as well as identify systemic vulnerabilities that could be exploited 

by criminal organizations to undermine our legitimate immigration system and border controls. The men and women of ICE accomplish the agency’s mission by investigating a wide range of domestic and international criminal activities arising from 

the illegal movement of people, money, and goods within the United States, at our 

Nation’s borders, and beyond our borders in collaboration with our international law 

enforcement partners. 

Human Smuggling Generally 

Human smuggling into the United States constitutes a significant risk to our National security and public safety. Human smuggling pipelines serve as conduits for 

undocumented aliens seeking unlawful entry into the United States. The smuggling 

of criminal aliens and gang members has a destabilizing impact on neighborhoods 

and communities across the United States. Moreover, these smuggling pipelines 

could potentially be exploited by terrorist and other extremist organizations seeking 

entry to the United States. 

The investigation of human smuggling presents unique enforcement challenges. 

Human smuggling organizations are primarily based in foreign countries and depend on loose, but highly effective, transnational alliances. These alliances involve 

various operators, such as recruiters, brokers, document providers, transporters, and 

corrupt foreign officials, to exploit vulnerabilities in our and other nations’ immigration and border controls. Recognizing these threats, ICE is committed to aggressive, 

innovative, and proactive investigations designed to identify, disrupt, and dismantle 

human smuggling organizations. 
15 

1 Human smuggling and trafficking in persons are distinct crimes. Human trafficking involves 

the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of forced labor or commercial sexual exploitation. While human trafficking victims may be smuggled into the United States, United States 

citizens, permanent residents, and others may be exploited by trafficking organizations. Human 

trafficking organizations exploit their victims in order to produce long-term profits for their 

criminal organizations. 

Over the past several years, human smuggling organizations have become more 

violent when interacting with smuggled aliens. There has been an increase in hostage-taking incidents, incidents of extortion by force or by threat of harm, use of 

firearms by human smugglers, and deadly roll-over vehicle accidents involving 

smuggled aliens. These developments are part of a disturbing trend and underscore 

the reason that ICE is aggressively combating these smuggling organizations. 

Worldwide, the international criminal market is very lucrative for human smuggling organizations.1 Profits are often generated outside of the United States and 

are laundered and invested in legitimate business enterprises that are then used 

to fuel additional criminal activity such as the trafficking of drugs, weapons, or 

other contraband. Moreover, these substantial profits feed organized crime activities, undermining governmental action and the rule of law. 

The Department of State estimates that at any given time, there are hundreds 

of thousands of people around the world in the smuggling pipeline whose primary 

destination is the United States, and who are being warehoused by smugglers waiting for new routes to open up or for documents to become available. 

ICE Human Smuggling Operations 

In addition to the security and law enforcement implications, human smuggling 

presents real costs in human suffering. To illustrate the disregard smugglers often 

have for human life, I would like to provide you with a few recent case examples, 

each with a nexus to the Washington, DC metropolitan area, and each emphasizing 

that the effects of human smuggling are felt thousands of miles beyond the Southwest border. 

In January 2009, ICE special agents in Phoenix contacted their counterparts in 

Washington, DC to request assistance in locating a caller who had contacted the 

DHS Tipline to report a hostage situation in the Phoenix area. Smuggled aliens are 

often held hostage in ‘‘drop houses’’ in border regions while the smugglers use 

threats, or actual violence, against them to extort additional fees out of their family 

members in the interior of the United States. In this case, ICE special agents in 

Washington located the caller, who was a family member of the individual being 

held, and obtained evidence through the use of innovative investigative methodologies, that enabled agents in Phoenix to locate a residence at which 21 individuals 

were being held hostage. As a result of this joint investigative effort, the hostages 

were rescued and six smugglers were arrested and charged with Federal alien 

smuggling offenses. 

In August 2009, the Fairfax County, Virginia Police Department received a frantic 

call from a woman stating that she had been contacted by smugglers who were holding her brother hostage and threatening to kill him. The woman explained that they 

were torturing her brother over the phone to ensure she knew they were serious, 

and were demanding that she provide money to cover his smuggling fees. ICE special agents in Washington became involved and verified that the telephone calls 

were being made from the Houston area. As a result of extensive coordination between agents in Washington and Houston, which involved the use of sophisticated 

technical investigative techniques, ICE special agents obtained and executed a 

search warrant with the assistance of the Harris County, Texas Sheriff’s Office 

within 36 hours. This led to the rescue of the woman’s brother and 10 other hostages, all of whom had been brutally assaulted. ICE’s investigative efforts also led 

to the arrest of three individuals on Federal charges of alien smuggling and hostage 

taking. 

In May 2010, a representative from the Embassy of El Salvador in Washington 

contacted ICE special agents to report that three children were being held hostage 

in the Phoenix area, and that the parents resided in Washington. ICE special agents 

immediately responded and, working with the parents to gain vital information, initiated a criminal investigation to rescue the hostages. Through quick action and collaboration between agents in Washington and Phoenix, the three children and 16 

additional aliens being held hostage were located and rescued in Arizona. As a result of ICE’s investigation, three individuals were arrested on Federal charges of 

alien smuggling and hostage taking. 

As these cases illustrate, smugglers often show a callous disregard for the lives 

in their charge. ICE’s strategies, legal authorities, and innovative methodologies 
16 

have proven effective in identifying, disrupting, and dismantling the international 

criminal networks engaged in human smuggling. Last February, ICE completed a 

major investigation known as ‘‘Operation Night Moves,’’ which targeted Houstonarea transportation businesses that used vans and SUVs to provide smuggling organizations with domestic transportation services for undocumented aliens. The transportation routes originated in the Houston area and extended to destination cities 

throughout the country. These transportation companies often bought aliens from 

smuggling organizations, and then charged the aliens additional fees to be delivered 

to their final destinations. The companies operated under the guise of legitimacy in 

order to avoid scrutiny. Operation Night Moves dismantled the Houston-based 

transportation network resulting in 24 criminal arrests, 209 administrative arrests, 

the seizure of 18 firearms, 4 bank accounts, 32 vehicles, and over $44,000 in U.S. 

currency. 

ICE also manages several initiatives designed to attack illicit smuggling organizations and the profits they generate. As part of ICE’s ‘‘Cornerstone’’ initiative, our 

financial investigators partner with members of the financial and trade sectors. 

Through this initiative, ICE helps identify and eliminate vulnerabilities in their sectors that transnational criminal organizations—including human smuggling organizations—may seek to exploit to earn, move, and store their criminal proceeds. To 

date, the Cornerstone initiative has resulted in the initiation of over 800 criminal 

investigations, yielding over 300 arrests and the seizure of over $160 million. In 

March 2010, ICE also launched Project STAMP (Smugglers’ and Traffickers Assets, 

Monies, and Proceeds), a concerted law enforcement project to: (1) Attack organizations involved in human smuggling and trafficking from an aggressive anti-money 

laundering stance; and (2) seize assets that are crucial to shutting down entrenched 

criminal activity. 

ICE’s International Presence 

While human smuggling is often linked to the Southwest border, smuggling is, by 

definition, an international crime and not confined to any geographic region. The 

complexity of this problem demands a closely coordinated, comprehensive, and 

proactive international and domestic strategy. To that end, ICE has developed a full 

range of investigative and enforcement methodologies to confront the threat at every 

turn—in source and transit countries, at sea, at our Nation’s borders, and throughout the United States. 

Human smuggling takes place within a complex global environment of political 

and economic relationships. Smuggling networks often exploit border controls and 

immigration policies of source and transit countries to move individuals toward the 

United States. These routes are constantly changing and evolving based on political, 

economic, and law enforcement activities in source and transit countries, requiring 

an agile law enforcement response from ICE. To target these smuggling methods 

and routes, ICE and the Department of Justice formed the Extraterritorial Criminal 

Travel (ECT) Strike Force in June 2006. 

This initiative combines investigative, prosecutorial, and intelligence resources to 

target and aggressively pursue, disrupt, and dismantle foreign-based criminal travel 

networks—particularly those involved in the movement of aliens from countries of 

National security concern. Through our network of Attache ́s located in U.S. embassies around the world, we work in close coordination with the Department of State 

and our foreign law enforcement counterparts to coordinate these complex international investigations. 

The ECT Strike Force program is a critical component of ICE’s strategy to build 

a layered defense by combating human smuggling organizations as far from the U.S. 

border as possible, and by preventing the arrival of unlawful migrants, thereby expanding our zone of security. ECT Strike Force-designated investigations are intelligence-driven, and support the principles and vision outlined by National security 

experts cited in reports such as the 9/11 Commission Report, the National Counterterrorism Center’s National Strategy to Combat Terrorist Travel, and the Migration 

Policy Institute’s Countering Terrorist Mobility Report. 

ICE recognizes the importance of conducting transnational human smuggling investigations in order to identify and counter the threat these organizations pose to 

the United States. To that end, ICE is collaborating with the Department of Justice 

to explore ways to enhance and expand the ECT program to best leverage our collective resources to proactively identify, disrupt and dismantle emerging human smuggling pipelines as far from the borders of the United States as possible. The success 

of these investigations is predicated on close coordination between ICE domestic and 

Attache ́ offices, the Department of Justice, other U.S. Government agencies, and our 

foreign government partners, particularly their law enforcement and prosecutorial 

agencies. ICE is committed to devoting resources and continually improving internal 
17 

efficiencies to ensure that the ECT program is effective in targeting the most significant transnational human smuggling threats to the United States. 

A recent example of ICE’s efforts to address this threat is the December 2009 arrest of a major maritime smuggler, based in Colombia, responsible for the movement 

of many East Africans destined to the United States. This arrest was the result of 

on-going cooperation between Colombian authorities, ICE special agents in Bogota, 

Colombia and Washington, DC, and the Department of Justice. The target of this 

investigation was recently convicted by the Colombian government and has been 

sentenced to 90 months imprisonment for violations related to human smuggling, 

document fraud, and conspiracy. This investigation exemplifies the impact of ICE’s 

international investigative approach to human smuggling, and the critical role 

played by ICE Attache ́ offices. 

There is a significant amount of information and intelligence available on human 

smuggling organizations that indicate that they operate in a coordinated fashion by 

using a large number of criminal associates, contacts, and facilitators along established smuggling routes into the United States, Europe, South Africa, and other developed countries. A coordinated response is imperative to ICE’s ability to effectively 

identify, disrupt, and dismantle these criminal operations and organizations. 

Collaboration with International Partners 

Combating international crime requires that we collaborate with international 

partners. One example of this collaboration is ‘‘Operation In Plain Sight,’’ an investigation targeting Arizona transportation companies involved in the smuggling and 

transportation of aliens throughout Arizona and the rest of the United States. This 

operation, which was the most comprehensive human smuggling investigation in 

ICE’s history, disrupted the infrastructure of some of Arizona’s most prolific and 

profitable human smuggling organizations that were attempting to hide behind a 

veil of legitimacy. 

The enforcement action, involving more then 800 agents and officers from nine 

Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies was the culmination of a comprehensive, multi-year investigation that expanded well beyond its initial focus on 

several Tucson-based shuttle companies. The investigation was an example of ICE’s 

unprecedented cooperation with Mexican law enforcement authorities, and implicated high-level members of human smuggling organizations in Phoenix, Tucson, 

Nogales, and northern Mexico that were serviced by the transportation network. 

The operation ultimately resulted in 61 criminal arrests, more than 541 administrative arrests, the execution of 32 search warrants, and the seizure of approximately 

94 smuggling vehicles and nearly $80,000 in U.S. currency. This investigation significantly disrupted the ability of human smuggling organizations to operate in 

southern Arizona. 

Border Enforcement Security Task Forces (BESTs) 

ICE also confronts human smuggling organizations in partnership with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and our State, local, and Federal law enforcement partners through the ICE-led Border Enforcement Security Task Forces 

(BESTs). BEST is a law enforcement model, which recognizes that confronting the 

multifaceted threat of cross-border criminal activity requires sharing resources, information, and expertise. BESTs serve as a platform from which interagency and 

international partners can work together to address all aspects of cross-border 

crime. The BESTs that currently exist on our land borders and in major maritime 

port cities incorporate personnel from ICE, CBP, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Federal Bureau 

of Investigation, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Attorney’s Offices, along with 

other key Federal, State, local, and foreign law enforcement agencies. ICE currently 

has a total of 17 BESTs, including 10 on the Southwest border. Our BESTs in El 

Paso and Phoenix have specifically dedicated investigative groups focusing on the 

disruption and dismantlement of human smuggling organizations, in order to address the threats posed by human smugglers in these high-threat smuggling corridors. 

The BEST model has been highly successful. ICE, with the help of our law enforcement partners, has disrupted smuggling operations in both the United States 

and Mexico. From October 2008 through June 2010, the BESTs have initiated 396 

human smuggling investigations Nation-wide resulting in 582 criminal arrests, 291 

indictments, and 361 convictions. 

CONCLUSION

ICE agents are working tirelessly to identify, disrupt, and dismantle smuggling 

organizations that subvert the rule of law, violate our immigration system, desta-
18 

bilize our communities through violence and fear, and threaten our National security. The initiatives and investigations that I have mentioned today are only a few 

of the many in which ICE has been involved throughout the past year. ICE commits 

substantial resources to address the threat posed by human smuggling. 

Working in close coordination with our partners, our efforts are part of a comprehensive strategy that focuses on securing the border, taking down the infrastructure that supports smuggling, and identifying and seizing the illicit profits from 

these crimes. ICE is dedicated and committed to this mission and we look forward 

to working with this subcommittee and the full committee on these efforts. 

Thank you once again for the opportunity to appear before you today. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions that you may have at this time. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Dinkins, thank you again very much for your 

testimony. 

The Chairman now recognizes Chief Fisher to summarize his 

statement for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL J. FISHER, CHIEF OF THE BORDER 

PATROL, U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Chief FISHER. Thank you. Chairman Cuellar, Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Miller and distinguished Members of the 

committee, it is indeed a privilege and an honor to appear before 

you today to discuss U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s efforts 

concerning alien smuggling on our Nation’s border. 

As America’s front-line border agency, CBP’s priority mission is 

to protect the American public while facilitating lawful trade and 

travel. To do this, CBP has deployed a multi-layered, risk-based approach to enhance the security of the people and goods entering the 

United States. 

This layered approach to security reduces our reliance on any 

single point or program that could be compromised. It also extends 

Arizona’s security outward, making sure that our physical border 

is not the first or last line of defense, but one of many. 

CBP’s layered approach to security relies on a combination of 

manpower, technology, infrastructure and a new way of thinking. 

Personnel provide a rapid response capability by being able to deploy agents to address threats. Tactical infrastructure supports response by providing access to the Border Patrol or extending the 

time that agents have to respond by delaying criminals. Technology 

allows us to detect entries and to identify and classify those 

threats. 

Now, over the past few, we have significantly strengthened each 

of these three major elements—personnel, technology, and infrastructure. Currently, we have over 20,000 Border Patrol agents Nation-wide, more than ever before in the history of this country. 

As of July 1 of this year, we have constructed nearly all of the 

fencing that Congress has requested us to build. We have completed 646 miles, with about 5 miles to be completed this year 

along the southwest border. 

We have greatly improved our technological profile, purchasing 

and deploying 41 mobile surveillance systems—those are the 

MSSs—which provide added radar and camera coverage along our 

borders, with plans to purchase additional off-the-shelf technology 

this year and next. 

CBP also recently received approval to increase the miles of airspace available for unmanned aircraft system operations performed 
19 

by the Office of Marine Division within CBP, which would enable 

CBP to deploy UASs from the eastern tip of California, extending 

east across the border into Texas. 

We have significant results to show for these initiatives. During 

the first months of fiscal year 2010, CBP seized nearly 2.8 million 

pounds of drugs, encountered arrested over 520,000 inadmissible 

and illegal aliens, and seized more than $64 million in currency. 

Compared to previous years, CBP has seen an overall apprehensions of illegal aliens decrease significantly from our highest point, 

over 1 million apprehensions just 10 years ago. 

We are not, however, resting on these successes. Alien smuggling 

is one of the many enduring challenges along the southwest border 

that CBP continues to combat. Along our Nation’s borders, CBP 

has the primary responsibility to attack these challenges in ways 

that are smart, tough, and strategic. Defeating transnational criminal organizations that smuggle aliens and drugs is a top priority 

for CBP, and we continue to develop effective strategies to disrupt 

and dismantle their organizations and distribution networks. 

I want to thank you again for this opportunity, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The statement of Chief Fisher follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL J. FISHER

JULY 22, 2010 

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Cuellar, Ranking Member Miller, and distinguished Members of the 

committee, it is a privilege and an honor to appear before you today to discuss U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) efforts concerning alien smuggling along our 

Nation’s borders. I am Michael J. Fisher, Chief of the United States Border Patrol. 

As America’s frontline border agency, CBP’s priority mission is to protect the 

American public, while facilitating lawful travel and trade. To do this, CBP has deployed a multi-layered, risk-based approach to enhance the security of the people 

and goods entering the United States. This layered approach to security reduces our 

reliance on any single point or program that could be compromised. It also extends 

our zone of security outward, making sure that our physical border is not the first 

or last line of defense, but one of many. 

CBP’s layered approach to security relies on a combination of manpower, technology, and infrastructure to confront transnational criminal organizations. Personnel provides a rapid response capability by being able to deploy agents, as needed, to address vulnerabilities. Tactical infrastructure supports response by providing 

access to the Border Patrol, or extending the time that agents have to respond by 

delaying criminals. Technology allows us to detect entries and to identify and classify threats. 

Over the past year, we have significantly strengthened each of the three major 

elements—manpower, infrastructure, and technology. Currently we have over 

20,000 Border Patrol Agents Nation-wide, more than ever before in the history of 

the country. As of July 1, 2010, we have constructed nearly all of the fencing that 

Congress has requested us to build—we have completed 646 miles along the southwest border, with about 5 miles to be completed this year. We have greatly improved our technological profile, purchasing and deploying 41 mobile surveillance 

systems (MSSs) to provide added radar and camera coverage along the borders, 

among other technologies, with plans to purchase additional off-the-shelf technology 

in fiscal year 2010 and fiscal year 2011. CBP also recently received approval to increase the miles of airspace available for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) operations performed by the Office of Air and Marine (OAM) along the southwest border, 

enabling CBP to deploy UASs from the eastern tip of California extending east 

across the border into Texas. 

We have significant results to show for these initiatives. During the first 9 

months of fiscal year 2010, CBP seized nearly 2.8 million pounds of drugs, encountered and arrested over 520,000 inadmissible and illegal aliens, and seized more 
20 

than $64 million in currency. Compared to previous years, CBP has seen the overall 

apprehensions of illegal aliens decrease significantly, from our highest point of over 

1 million apprehensions in fiscal year 2000, indicating that fewer people are trying 

to cross the border. 

We are not, however, resting on these successes; alien smuggling is one of many 

enduring challenges along the southwest border that CBP continues to combat. 

Along our Nation’s borders, CBP has the primary responsibility to attack these challenges in ways that are smart, tough, and strategic. Defeating transnational criminal organizations that smuggle aliens and drugs is a top priority for CBP and we 

continue to develop effective strategies to disrupt and dismantle their organizations 

and distribution networks. Today I will describe in detail some of the programs that 

CBP has in place to address this issue specifically. 

NEW RESOURCES ON THE SOUTHWEST BORDER

President Obama recently requested $600 million in supplemental funds for enhanced border protection and law enforcement activities, and announced the deployment of up to 1,200 National Guard troops to the Southwest border to contribute 

additional capabilities and capacity to assist law enforcement agencies. 

These additional resources will enhance the ability of CBP and our partner agencies to execute our missions, including combating alien smuggling. The supplemental funding would allow CBP to hire an additional 1,000 Border Patrol agents 

and 30 CBP officers, create 20 new canine teams, and launch two new UASs. In 

addition, the deployment of 1,200 National Guard personnel to the southwest border 

will aid CBP agents and officers on the ground, providing critical surveillance support to CBP’s counter-smuggling operations, as CBP recruits and trains additional 

officers and agents to serve on the border in the long term. Along the southwest 

border, the National Guard has had an integrated effort with a counternarcotics 

mission for over two decades, with 300 National Guard troops already working with 

interagency partners. Although not a part of the supplemental request, an additional $100 million of existing CBP resources shall be repositioned to higher priority 

replacement and repair of fences to enhance physical infrastructure along the 

Southwest border. 

In addition, CBP and other DHS components are dedicating additional resources 

to the Tucson Sector along the Arizona border, which has become a particularly 

busy corridor for smuggling activity. As part of this deployment of resources, over 

300 additional Border Patrol agents and CBP officers will be deployed to the Tucson 

Sector, in addition to technological assets such as six CBP aircraft (which include 

four Astar light observation helicopters and two Huey Medium lift/utility helicopters), 36 thermal imaging binocular units, and three trucks equipped with detection scopes. These deployments will strategically increase the resources available to 

counter smuggling in the busiest smuggling corridors. 

OFFICE OF ALIEN SMUGGLING INTERDICTION (ASI)

Within CBP, OFO’s Office of Alien Smuggling Interdiction (ASI) works to deter, 

detect, and disrupt illegal migration to the United States and increase criminal 

prosecution of smugglers and human traffickers. ASI has created a structure to 

share information regarding migrant smuggling, trafficking in persons, and clandestine terrorist travel within CBP as well as with other law enforcement agencies. In 

cooperation with the Human Smuggling Trafficking Center and the National Targeting Center, ASI focuses on migratory trends, specifically human smuggling and 

trafficking-related issues. ASI coordinates alien smuggling interdiction efforts between multiple components including Passenger Analysis Units, Regional Carrier 

Liaison Groups (RCLG), Immigration Advisory Program (IAP) and the Fraudulent 

Document Analysis Unit to increase CBP’s effectiveness in identifying, analyzing, 

assessing, and responding to migrant smuggling threats. In addition, ASI actively 

promotes a National public awareness campaign at POEs aimed at identifying cases 

of human trafficking through the distribution of multi-lingual information cards and 

posters at all CBP POEs. To assist suspected victims of trafficking, CBP Officers 

use a subtler approach by discreetly providing an information card directly to the 

traveler. 

In conjunction with ASI, and under ASI oversight, RCLGs comprised of speciallytrained CBP officers were established and operate out of the Honolulu, Miami, and 

New York airports. RCLGs provide real-time worldwide response to human smuggling and trafficking by providing points of communication and coordination between carriers, immigration authorities, and other DHS entities. They employ advanced targeting techniques and utilize intelligence shared by carriers and other liaisons, to identify inadmissible aliens prior to boarding U.S.-bound flights from for-
21 

eign ports of departure. The RCLGs also work in conjunction with CBP’s National 

Targeting Center to identify and deny boarding to passengers that are a potential 

security threat or inadmissible to the United States. 

PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF MEXICO

The Border Patrol has collaborated with the government of Mexico on a number 

of bilateral initiatives to combat alien smuggling. Programs include the Operation 

Against Smugglers Initiative on Safety and Security (OASISS), the Mexico Interior 

Repatriation Program (MIRP), the Alien Transfer Exit Program (ATEP), Border 

Safety Initiative (BSI) and Humanitarian Campaigns. These programs are focused 

on prosecuting offenders, breaking the smuggling cycle, and saving lives. Collectively, they aid in the overarching effort to improve the safety and security of the 

border. 

OPERATION AGAINST SMUGGLERS INITIATIVE ON SAFETY AND SECURITY (OASISS)

OASISS is a bi-national coordinated effort designed to prosecute alien smugglers 

through the Mexican judicial system when the smuggler does not meet prosecutorial 

guidelines set by the U.S. Attorneys Office. Conducted in cooperation with Mexico’s 

Attorney General’s Office (PGR), through OASISS, select alien smuggling cases that 

are declined by United States Attorney’s Offices are subsequently turned over to the 

government of Mexico for prosecution under Mexico’s judicial system. Since its inception on August 17, 2005, the OASISS program has generated 2,122 cases and led 

to 2,435 principals being presented to Mexico for prosecution. 

MEXICO INTERIOR REPATRIATION PROGRAM (MIRP)

The Mexican Interior Repatriation Program is a joint CBP and Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement (ICE) initiative established in coordination with the government of Mexico. Under the MIRP, aliens apprehended from high-risk areas of the 

Sonora Desert during the peak summer months are voluntarily repatriated to the 

interior of Mexico, closer to their homes or points of origin. MIRP is designed to 

break the smuggling cycle by removing participants from the immediate control of 

smuggling organizations, and also serves as a deterrent to entering the high-risk 

area of the Sonora Desert. MIRP prioritizes the humane treatment of detainees 

throughout the removal process and reflects our mutual commitment to strong and 

effective enforcement of both nations’ immigration laws. 

While ICE is the lead agency for MIRP, the Border Patrol is responsible for processing and screening eligible participants, providing transition centers, and medically screening participants to fly on ICE-chartered flights. MIRP 2010 began on 

June 1, and during the month of June, 7,697 Mexican nationals were returned to 

the interior of Mexico. 

ALIEN TRANSFER EXIT PROGRAM (ATEP)

ATEP is an on-going program that supports the concept of ‘‘breaking the smuggling cycle’’ by allowing for the transportation of aliens out of an apprehending Border Patrol Sector for subsequent removal to Mexico through an adjacent sector. The 

program is designed to deny, disrupt, and dismantle the ability of alien smuggling 

organizations operating in the participating sectors, by separating aliens from organized smugglers and establishing consequences for illegal entry. ATEP was initiated 

by the San Diego, Yuma, and El Centro Sectors in February 2008 and has since expanded to Tucson and El Paso. As of June 30, 2010, a total of 73,266 detainees have 

been removed via ATEP. 

BORDER SAFETY INITIATIVE (BSI)

The Border Patrol’s Border Safety Initiative’s (BSI) focused on reducing injuries 

and preventing deaths along the southwest border, many of which are linked to 

human smuggling. The Border Patrol’s Search Trauma and Rescue (BORSTAR) 

teams are located at every Border Patrol Sector along the southwest border, and are 

specially trained for rescue and emergent medical situations. Additionally, there are 

agents cross-trained as Emergency Medical Technicians or First Responders who act 

as a force multiplier, enhancing our medical proficiency capabilities. In fiscal year 

2009, the Border Patrol recorded 1,312 rescues along the border. Additionally, 64 

Rescue Beacons have been erected in strategic locations to enable illegal aliens to 

contact the Border Patrol when they are in distress and need medical assistance. 

Lastly, Public Service Announcements are broadcast in Mexico, warning of the dangers of illegally crossing the border as well as dangers posed by smuggling organizations. 
22 

HUMANITARIAN CAMPAIGNS

The Border Patrol has two humanitarian campaigns underway aimed at educating potential migrants from Mexico and Central America regarding the threats 

that endanger human life when illegally crossing the southwest border and the dangers of human trafficking. ‘‘No Ma ́s Cruces’’ (No More Crosses on the Border) and 

‘‘No Te Engan ̃ es’’ (Don’t Be Fooled: You Could Be the Victim of Human Trafficking) 

demonstrate our commitment to helping those who may unknowingly find themselves in a situation where they are being exploited by smugglers and transnational 

criminal organizations. The campaigns, which run in various media outlets, consist 

of television ads, radio ads, and billboards, as well as grassroots marketing initiatives. 

CONCLUSION

Chairman Cuellar, Ranking Member Miller, and distinguished Members of the 

committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify about the work of U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection, and particularly about our efforts concerning alien smuggling. The border is a dynamic environment and we will continue to strive to meet 

the demands of today as well as face the challenges of tomorrow. I look forward to 

answering your questions at this time. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Recognize Mr. Goddard to summarize his statements for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF TERRY GODDARD, ATTORNEY GENERAL, 

STATE OF ARIZONA 

Mr. GODDARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Cuellar, 

Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Miller, and Members of the 

committee, likewise for me, it is a pleasure and an honor to be able 

to address you with this distinguished company and on an issue 

that is just critical to my State, Arizona, and to the southwestern 

border. I appreciate your time and attention to this matter. 

As I am sure the committee knows, Arizona has an unfortunate 

distinction. We are a corridor State. Approximately one-half of the 

drugs and human beings that are illegally smuggled into the 

United States comes through our borders or through our State. As 

the attorney general for the last 71⁄2 years and Arizona’s top law 

enforcement official, it has been my priority to go after and fight 

border crime, especially alien smuggling, so I am particularly 

pleased to see you address this subject today particularly. 

I would like to talk to little bit about the lessons that we have 

learned in fighting human smugglers and how I believe Congress 

can be of significant assistance in zeroing in on the problem and 

giving us some important resources to do something to move the 

bar. 

The Chief left a minute and a half on the table. Can I take that 

as well? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will try not to. 

My strategy has been very simple; the Chairman mentioned it in 

his opening remarks. It is to follow the money. We are very money 

conscious in the State of Arizona, and the illegal profits from drug 

trade, from human smuggling have been our No. 1 objective. We 

have been able through a number of techniques to disrupt the flow 

of funds illegally going out of the country and to seize assets that 

have been used by the smugglers. 

This approach has been very successful in Arizona at breaking 

up smuggling rings, and I recommend it to the country, something 

that they could take advantage of. I appreciate GAO analyzing 

parts of our efforts and making some recommendations to ICE 

along that line. 
23 

Unfortunately, misstatements abound about the southern border, 

and I think we need to focus on the facts. They are bad enough. 

As the Justice Department said last year, the drug cartels constitute the greatest organized crime threat to the United States. I 

certainly agree. They are definitely the most immediate threat to 

the security of my State of Arizona. 

Although violent border crime on the Arizona side of the border 

is down, and I think that sometimes gets lost in the rhetoric that 

we have about these issues, we know that serious crime and violent 

crime have skyrocketed in Mexico. That certainly is reason for concern. 

Over the past 8 years, investigators from my office, along with 

our law enforcement partners, have investigated wire transfers 

that profit that are used to pay for human trafficking. We have 

learned an awful lot about that, and I am not going into the details 

unless there are questions. But I think the bottom line is that we 

have been able to distinguish between the massive amount of legitimate wire transfers going across the border and the corrupt 

ones that deal specifically with human smuggling. 

We have used some very specific law enforcement techniques— 

damming warrants, geographical targeting borders, and other aspects of our anti-racketeering laws to seize wire transfers as they 

are made, to disrupt the operation. We have gone from hundreds 

of millions of dollars being wired into the State of Arizona to virtually nothing today. So I know we have disrupted it, but we need 

to expand that effort. 

We basically have been able to find investigative leads through 

our efforts and have therefore been able to close drop houses, to 

learn how the smugglers work, and to apprehend many of the aspects of their operations. We have seized approximately $20 million in cartel assets. We 

have arrested hundreds of human smugglers and corrupt money 

wire agents. We have seized used car lots, travel agencies, and 

drop houses. We have shut down 22 businesses engaged in money 

laundering. 

Just this year we reached a very important agreement with 

Western Union, the largest money wire company in the world. 

From that we are going to get important data that has been denied 

us in the past, and $94 million, approximately, to help fight the 

crimes on the border. Fifty million of that is going to be a specific 

fund for State and local law enforcement in the four Border States. 

I believe that is a great step forward in our efforts to fight border 

crime. It is not enough, but it is a very good start. 

I have five items that I would like to in 35 seconds talk to Congress about being of a major help to us in stopping and dismantling 

the alien smuggling. I would just summarize them. I would be 

happy to go into greater detail. 

The first one is to target the drug cartels. We need to focus to 

operations. The great work that is being done by ICE and Border 

Patrol, I believe, needs to go further and absolutely go after the 

criminal organizations that make it possible for human beings to 

come across a very difficult border. 

Second, go after the money. That, I think, is fundamental. These 

are business operations that we are talking about here. They de-
24 

pend upon their income. People do not work for the cartels because 

they love the work. They do not work because they were religious 

zealots. They do it because they are very well paid. If we can cut 

off the money flow, we will do more than anything else, I believe, 

to stop the violence that we have on the border. 

Third, please follow Arizona’s lead. We have spent over 8 years 

working to perfect the details of how to find the illegal money operations. We know how to do it. Our Federal partners have been in 

and out of the partnership, but we encourage a far greater effort 

to try to stop the wire transfer movement of money illegally cross 

the border. 

Very quickly, fourth and fifth, anticipate the next moves. I would 

like to go into, if we had time, some of the things I think the cartels are about to do in terms of moving money, but the most important is stored value instruments. Now, Congress has demanded 

that Treasury and others come up with regulations for the movement of money through stored value instruments across the border. 

It still hasn’t happened. It has been way too long that this very 

large hole has existed in our international money transfer operations, and it needs to be closed immediately. 

Fifth, we need resources. I would suggest at the very beginning 

that Congress think of matching our $50 million that we put on the 

table now for State and local with at least another $50 million of 

Stonegarden funds to help us expand the reach and to go after 

these border crimes. 

I thank you very much for your time and attention today. 

[The statement of Mr. Goddard follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TERRY GODDARD

JULY 22, 2010 

Mr. Chairman, Members of the committee, it is an honor to appear before you 

today to give my perspective on alien smuggling and criminal cartel operations 

along the Southwest border. It is important to be clear at the outset that alien 

smuggling operations are just one of a diverse line of businesses operated by the 

Mexican criminal cartels, which I consider the most immediate and serious threat 

to the security of the Southwest border. For this reason, before getting into the specifics of alien smuggling, it is important to understand the broader scope of the cartel problem. 

CARTEL VIOLENCE

As I am sure you are aware, the level of violence from the Mexican cartels has 

been accelerating for nearly a decade. But what we have seen in the last 3 years 

is an alarming increase in open, brazen, and deadly violence just south of our border. I stress south to dispel any suggestion that Arizona itself is a dangerous place 

for law-abiding people. It is not. In fact, violent crime within our State has dropped 

nearly 20 percent in the last 5 years. People who suggest otherwise, either purposefully or naively, are misinformed and further confuse an already complex situation. 

Nevertheless, in Mexico, the cartels have killed more than 22,700 people since 

2007. This alarming level of violence warrants much more serious attention from 

our country than it has received. To appreciate the scale of this carnage, it is useful 

to compare the recent death tolls in Mexico with those in actual war zones: 

• Mexican cartel killings in the last 3 years alone exceed the combined number 

of Afghan troops, American troops, coalition troops, and civilians killed during 

the entire 9-year course of the Afghan war. 

• Cartel killings in Mexico are also more than five times the number of American 

soldiers lost in 9 years in Iraq. 

Of particular concern to border States like Arizona, this problem is worse in Mexican border towns: 
25 

• Killings in Juarez, Chihuahua (directly across from El Paso) are over 750 percent higher than the Mexican national average. 

• In Nogales, Sonora—a significant port of entry for U.S.-Mexican trade and the 

counterpart to our own Nogales, Arizona—killings in 2010 are on a pace to 

shatter last year’s record breaking murder rate there. 

Equally disturbing are the attacks on Mexican democracy and law enforcement: 

• Just last month, the leading gubernatorial candidate in Tamaulipas and several 

members of his staff were assassinated. 

• Those killings came on the heels of the attempted assassination of the Police 

Chief of Puerto Penasco, a popular destination for Arizona tourists. 

But lest you think this is simply a border problem, the Department of Justice believes the cartels have active business operations in over 200 cities throughout the 

United States. 

ARIZONA’S RESPONSE

As Arizona Attorney General, the fight against cartel crime has been a top law 

enforcement priority. My strategy has been to follow the money—the flow of cash 

that finances cartel operations. When possible, we have intercepted suspicious wire 

transfers and seized cartel assets. 

My office has been particularly successful using this approach to break up human 

smuggling rings. Over the last 8 years, we have demanded access to a host of wire 

transfer transactions involving Arizona. When we analyzed the data, we saw obvious patterns that helped us quickly distinguish between legitimate wire transactions and suspicious ones that were likely tied to payments to coyotes (the people 

who transport persons illegally across the border) for human smuggling. 

For example, until recently, most legitimate wire transfer companies in Arizona 

wired more money out of Arizona than into it. This is because throughout most of 

the last two decades, the majority of wire senders were new or temporary workers 

who came to Arizona in good economic times and wanted to wire portions of their 

pay either back home to their families or to creditors. As a result, most of the person-to-person wires in the State involved small amounts of money—usually between 

$100 to $200. 

As we started to investigate human smuggling drophouses and looked at how the 

smugglers were getting paid through wire transfers, we saw distinct patterns. At 

certain wire transfer locations—mostly agents of Western Union—we saw unusual 

levels of money being transferred to a single location in larger than average transactions. In contrast to the vast majority of legitimate businesses that sent more 

money out of State than they received, at these corrupt locations money was coming 

in at rates up to 100 times higher than it was going out. For instance, in 2005 a 

single location in central Phoenix received and paid out over $12.8 million in personto-person transactions in excess of $500 each. 

When we tracked these transactions more closely, we confirmed that the recipients of these wires were coyote agents. Upon receiving the wire transfer, agents 

would return to a drop house and release a smuggled alien. 

Using damming warrants and other judicial tools under our State anti-racketeering laws, we began to seize these criminal transfers as they were made, thereby 

disrupting the flow of cash to the smuggling cartels. 

The results were startling. In 2 years, we: 

• Seized approximately $20 million in cartel assets; 

• Arrested hundreds of coyotes and corrupt money wire agents; and 

• Closed down 22 facilitating businesses that were laundering money generated 

from alien smuggling. 

More significantly, our efforts were effective at disrupting the wire transfers to 

the cartels. As shown on the graph below, after 2 years of aggressive actions by my 

Office, suspicious wire transactions into Arizona dropped over 90 percent. 
26 

To better appreciate this graph, it is important to understand the seasonal nature 

of human smuggling through the Sonoran desert into Arizona. Persons seeking work 

in the United States are more likely to attempt to cross the desert in the winter 

and early spring when temperatures are cooler. Crossings tend to be lower in the 

hot and dry summer months. Northbound crossings also tend to drop late in the 

year when many workers return to their families for the holiday season. This seasonal pattern results in what law enforcement refers to as the ‘‘coyote curve,’’ and 

can be seen in the level of money wire transfers in 2004, before we escalated our 

actions. 

My office’s damming warrants and asset seizures occurred primarily in February, 

2005, and February, 2006. As the graph shows, we dramatically reversed and ultimately ended suspicious money transfers into Arizona. 

Unfortunately, the cartels are nimble, and they responded quickly to law enforcement action. After Arizona cracked down on suspicious wire transfers, the cartels 

changed their business model and started asking sponsors of smuggled persons to 

wire smuggling fees to cartel agents just south of the Arizona border and outside 

of our office’s jurisdiction. Upon confirming receipt of the funds telephonically, the 

coyotes would then release the smuggled person. 

WESTERN UNION SETTLEMENT

Which brings me to my office’s recent and historic settlement with Western 

Union. 

During and after the time we were executing our damming warrants, we continued to try to work with money transmission companies, including Western Union, 

to enlist their help in stopping the flow of money wired to the cartels. Unfortunately, these efforts were not always successful. We found ourselves repeatedly in 

court with Western Union in particular. 

In February of this year, however, I reached a milestone settlement with Western 

Union. The company pledged $94 million in new private sector resources for the 

fight against border crimes, especially money laundering. 

The settlement included $21 million to cover Arizona’s lengthy and extensive investigation and litigation costs; $19 million in new Western Union anti-money laundering initiatives; $4 million for a court-appointed monitor to ensure Western Union 

complies with the settlement terms and to recommend improvements in Western 

Union’s AML programs; and, most significantly, $50 million to fund a four-State 

Southwest Border Anti-Money Laundering Alliance aimed at attacking border crime. 

Western Union also agreed to provide Arizona and the other border States’ law 

enforcement with unprecedented near-real-time access to data on wire transfers 

along the—border, including certain locations deep into Mexico. This means that we 
27 

1 A copy of Attorney General Goddard’s July 8, 2010 letter to President Obama is attached 

to this written testimony as Exhibit 1. 

can now track more of the payments between sponsors and the alien smuggling cartels. 

I am especially pleased that once we settled with Western Union, the other money 

wire companies voluntarily agreed to provide us with the same data. We can now 

be confident in our ability to track significant wire transfers within the southwest 

border area. The initial data we have received promises a rich field of investigative 

leads. We are working with ICE, CBP, DEA, IRS, and local law enforcement 

throughout the border region to penetrate as deeply as possible into the cartel structure. 

PARTNERSHIP WITH MEXICAN LAW ENFORCEMENT

Our country cannot successfully fight Mexican drug cartels alone. We need a 

stronger and more effective Mexican law enforcement partner. In this regard, we 

have recently enjoyed much better cooperation with the Mexican government. The 

week after our settlement with Western Union, I traveled to Mexico City to meet 

with Mexican Attorney General Arturo Chavez Chavez and other leaders in the 

Mexican Justice Department. I also met with leadership from the SSP, the federal 

police, and the Mexican Congress. I explained to them how we had been able to follow and disrupt the flow of money to the cartels, as well as the importance of disrupting that flow in the fight to dismantle their operations. 

I left my meetings in Mexico with renewed confidence that the Caldero ́n administration recognizes the threat that cartel warlords pose to the rule of law in Mexico 

and even to the success of democracy there. I am convinced that leadership within 

the Caldero ́n administration is genuinely committed to intensifying the fight against 

the cartels. 

Indeed, several recent cooperative actions between U.S. and Mexican law enforcement give me hope for the future of joint bi-national law enforcement actions. First, 

using Merida ́ Initiative funds, my office has helped train over 400 Mexican state 

and federal prosecutors as that country works to improve its low criminal conviction 

rates. Working with fellow members of the Conference of Western Attorneys General, we have trained a total of 1,200 Mexican prosecutors. 

Moreover, the flow of case-specific information between our countries has improved and is starting to bear real fruit. For example, in April, I joined Under Secretary of Homeland Security John Morton and United States Attorney Dennis Burke 

in announcing Operation Plain Sight, which resulted in the arrests of 47 members 

of a human smuggling ring operating on both sides of the Arizona-Mexico border. 

The simultaneous arrests of the kingpins of these operations in Mexico and Arizona 

would not have been possible without our new, strong, and highly productive relationships with Mexican law enforcement that is genuinely committed to fighting the 

cartels. 

EXPANSION OF THE CARTEL THREAT

I caution again, however, that the cartels are very quick to adapt. Like any successful organized crime enterprise, they are on the prowl for new business opportunities. Recent reports from Mexico suggest that the cartels are diversifying their 

business operations and posing a more serious and immediate threat to international commerce. In the last year, the cartels have engaged in increasingly brazen 

criminal acts directed at international trade, including siphoning significant 

amounts of oil from pipelines, hijacking trucks carrying international cargo, and 

buying multinational trading companies to help launder their profits. These new 

criminal activities target the international business community and expand the cartels’ reach, making them more difficult to attack. 

THE NEED FOR A STRONGER FEDERAL RESPONSE

As I stated in a letter to the President earlier this month,1 cartel crime warrants 

much more Federal attention and response than it has received to date. I agree with 

Attorney General Holder that the cartels pose ‘‘a national security threat.’’ Indeed, 

I would go further: The growth in cartel size, strength, sophistication, and brutality 

is the most immediate actual threat to the security of Arizonans and many other 

Americans. 

While I believe that leadership within the Departments of Homeland Security and 

Justice understands this threat, dismantling the cartels has not been raised high 

enough as a National priority. 
28 

Despite the staggering levels of cartel violence immediately across our border, the 

cartels’ demonstrated ability to penetrate our border defenses, and the direct threat 

that cartel power poses to trade with the United States, Federal spending on the 

fight against the cartels remains well less than 1 percent of our National spending 

on the wars in far-away Afghanistan and Iraq. 

I have called upon the President to launch a major, multi-national, law enforcement initiative aimed first and foremost at identifying cartel warlords and bringing 

them to justice by every means available. Only through coordinated effort of the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Treasury, working closely with State 

and local law enforcement and the criminal justice forces in Mexico, can we hope 

to prevail. 

Breaking up these cartels and restoring the rule of law within Mexico would not 

only bring better security to the border region, but also would greatly assist Mexican efforts to stabilize their economy and improve the conditions that compel so 

many Mexican citizens to seek work illegally in the United States. It would also restore safety and confidence to the many legitimate businesses (including tourism 

and agriculture) that seek peaceful trade between the United States and Mexico. 

Our Government unquestionably has the capability to bring the cartel warlords 

to justice. It is imperative that this Congress provide Federal agencies and law enforcement on both sides of the border with the resources to defeat the cartels. Current Federal funding targeting cartel operations is a tiny fraction of the profits the 

cartels are making from illegal activities. 

I believe Congress should develop both short- and long-term responses. In the 

short term, Congress should help Arizona and the other southwest border States in 

our efforts to disrupt cartel operations that cross into our country. Specifically, I ask 

you to fund a dollar-for-dollar Federal match of the border law enforcement grants 

awarded by the Southwest Border Anti-Money Laundering Alliance. The Alliance 

was created as a result of my settlement with Western Union. As I mentioned, the 

Alliance currently has $50 million from Western Union to award to State and local 

law enforcement grants to combat border crime. That amount will be helpful, but 

it pales in comparison with the cartels’ resources. A Federal match would immediately double the Alliance’s effectiveness and provide immediate help in combating 

the cartel threat. 

In the longer run, I urge the Congress to adopt and fund a much more substantial 

campaign against the cartel threat than what we see today. We must specifically 

identify cartel warlords, attack them with no less than the intensity applied to 

mafia kingpins in the 1920s, and ensure that Mexican law enforcement and military 

have the tools they need to capture them, bring them to justice, keep them in prison, and dismantle their organizations. 

We must anticipate the cartels’ next moves, which are expected to include money 

laundering through international ATM locations and the use of new devices, such 

as stored value instruments and cards, to transport large sums of money across our 

border. 

I have called on Treasury to enact regulations requiring people who transport 

stored value devices across international borders to declare the amounts on the 

cards, just as they declare any bulk cash (over $10,000) in their possession. Border 

patrol agents must have the technology to read stored value cards. Anyone caught 

failing to disclose cards in their possession carrying greater than $10,000 in stored 

value should be subject to serious criminal penalties. 

This committee should also be aware that the cartels seize and hold power 

through a combination of intimidation and corruption of public officials. One of the 

more shocking parts of our anti-cartel efforts in Arizona was the discovery of a cartel agent on the staff of one of the local prosecutors in a border county. I am sure 

that this will not be the last such double agent we find. The threat of further infiltration should be yet another reason to move ahead on this action without further 

delay. 

CONCLUSION

We need to recognize the seriousness and proximity of the cartel threat to American security and eliminate that threat quickly. 

Perhaps the biggest failure of our National debate on border security is that the 

cartel threat seems to have taken a backseat to discussions about immigration. Yet, 

if we eliminate the cartel organizations, the ability of large numbers to illegally 

cross our southwest border would be dramatically reduced. Very few illegal border 

crossers could make the trip across the harsh Sonoran Desert without the smuggling cartels who transport them. Crushing the cartels is the most effective way to 

reduce illegal border crossings. And, if we stand by while the cartels establish a law-
29 

less zone between Mexico’s primary trade partner and the rest of Mexico, the entire 

Mexican economy will falter, and the present wave of immigrants will become a tsunami of refugees. 

No international policy goals are of more immediate interest to the people of Arizona than restoring the rule of law in the border region and developing Mexico into 

a stable and prosperous trading partner. While the cartels are in power, lawlessness 

prevails, confidence in government suffers, and the dynamic economic growth associated with political stability is not possible. 

Our Nation has a long and successful history fighting organized crime. Despite 

the size and sophistication of the cartels’ operations, I know we have the resources 

to dismantle their organizations. What is lacking is a specific resolve to see the effort to conclusion and the resources appropriate to eliminate the threat. 

It is time for Congress and the administration to focus on dismantling the criminal cartels to secure our southwestern border. 
30 
31 

Mr. CUELLAR. Attorney General, thank you very much. 

At this time I would like to recognize Mr. Stana to summarize 

his statement for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF RICHARD M. STANA, DIRECTOR, HOMELAND 

SECURITY AND JUSTICE ISSUES, GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Mr. STANA. Okay. Thank you, Chairman Cuellar, Mr. Thompson, 

Mrs. Miller, and Members of the subcommittee. 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss our report on alien 

smuggling, which was requested by the committee and Mr. Mitchell 

and is being released at the hearing today. As you know, alien 

smuggling along the southwest border is an increasing threat to 

the security of the United States and Mexico, as well as to the safety of both law enforcement and smuggled aliens. 

One reason for this increased threat is the involvement of drug 

trafficking organizations, which collect fees from alien smugglers 

for the use of specific smuggling routes. Also, available reporting 
32 

indicates that some Mexican drug trafficking organizations specialize in smuggling special interest aliens into the United States. 

The violence associated with alien smuggling has also increased 

in recent years, particularly in Arizona. At today’s hearings I would 

like to discuss three main points from our report. 

First, although the use of smugglers is increasing, ICE investigative resources devoted to alien smuggling along the southwest border have remained flat at about 16 to 17 percent of available staff 

years. We found that ICE’s investigative efforts resulted in hundreds of arrests, indictments, and convictions. But we also found 

that some ICE investigators are performing duties that are not consistent with the primary mission of conducting criminal investigations. 

In two of four SAC offices we visited along the southwest border, 

ICE has been diverting staff to non-investigative tasks like responding to calls from State and local law enforcement agencies to 

transport and process apprehended aliens. 

In 2006 in the Phoenix area, ICE developed a LEAR program in 

which DRO took over responsibility for transporting and processing 

apprehended aliens, thus enabling ICE investigators to spend more 

time investigating. We recommend that that ICE study the feasibility of expanding the LEAR program along the southwest border 

and, if found to be feasible, expand it to help ensure that ICE investigative resources are used more efficiently. 

My second point involves ICE’s tepid results in targeting and 

seizing monetary assets of smuggling organizations. Although alien 

smuggling activities generate illicit revenues of billions of dollars 

annually, the value of ICE alien smuggling asset seizures has 

never exceeded $18 million, and decreased to about $7.6 million 

last year. 

One opportunity to improve results involves civil asset forfeiture 

authority, which allows Federal authorities to seize property used 

to facilitate a crime without first having to convict the property 

owner of a crime. We recommended that Justice seek the civil asset 

forfeiture authority it has identified as necessary to seize property 

used to facilitate alien smuggling. 

Another opportunity involves assessing the financial investigative techniques used by the Arizona attorney general’s task force— 

which you have just outlined. 

The task force seized millions of dollars and disrupted alien 

smuggling operations by analyzing transaction data from money 

transmitters to identify those who were complicit in laundering 

alien smuggling proceeds. We recommended that ICE conduct an 

assessment of the Arizona AG’s financial investigation strategy to 

identify any promising investigative techniques that are appropriate for Federal use. 

Finally, while ICE and CBP have established objectives for their 

alien smuggling programs, they could do more to measure progress 

toward achieving program results. For example, although one of 

the major objectives of its alien smuggling investigations is to seize 

smugglers’ assets, ICE does not have performance measures for 

tracking the results of financial investigative efforts for these cases. 

As a second example, although the Mexican Interior Repatriation 

Program is aimed at saving lives and disrupting alien smuggling 
33 

operations, ICE does not know its effectiveness, because it lacks 

performance measures for the program. 

As a third example, the lack of accurate and consistent data has 

limited CBP’s ability to evaluate its alien smuggling programs. 

CBP recognizes the value of systematic program evaluations, but 

has not established a plan with time frames for their completion. 

We recommended that the agencies address these shortcomings. 

ICE and CBP took issue with developing performance measures 

for MIRP, citing potential sensitivities. We continue to believe that 

measuring MIRP performance is important and would be consistent with the program MOU signed by both the United States 

and Mexico, which calls for evaluation by appropriate officials. 

Mr. Chairman, you did mention that over the past few years 

GAO has evaluated alien smuggling activities more than once. In 

fact, we have done it three times in the last 10 years. Considering 

the results and trends shown in these three reports, we see some 

good news and some news that is not so good. 

The good news is that ICE’s efforts have resulted in overall increases in the number of arrests, indictments, and convictions for 

alien smuggling offenses, and increases in CBP resources at the 

border are obstructing some alien smuggling routes. 

The not-so-good news is that over the 10-year period, ICE still 

has a long way to go toward stripping away the financial assets 

and infrastructure of alien smuggling operations. Despite increased 

use of smugglers and the potential for violence, ICE’s resource commitment remains static in this area. Moreover, ICE and CBP have 

not fully evaluated their alien smuggling programs to see what is 

working and what is not and whether programs should be improved or eliminated. Clearly, more needs to be done to address 

these issues. 

This concludes my oral statement, and I look forward to responding to any questions you may have. 

[The statement of Mr. Stana follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICHARD M. STANA

JULY 22, 2010 

GAO–10–919T

Chairman Cuellar, Ranking Member Miller, and Members of the subcommittee: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss Federal efforts to address alien smuggling 

along the southwest border. Alien smuggling along the southwest border is an increasing threat to the security of the United States and Mexico as well as to the 

safety of both law enforcement and smuggled aliens. One reason for this increased 

threat is the involvement of drug trafficking organizations in alien smuggling. According to the National Drug Intelligence Center’s (NDIC) 2008 National Drug 

Threat Assessment, the southwest border region is the principal entry point for 

smuggled aliens from Mexico, Central America, and South America. Aliens from 

countries of special interest to the United States such as Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, 

and Pakistan (known as special-interest aliens) also illegally enter the United 

States through the region. According to the NDIC assessment, Mexican drug trafficking organizations have become increasingly involved in alien smuggling. These 

organizations collect fees from alien smuggling organizations for the use of specific 

smuggling routes, and available reporting indicates that some Mexican drug trafficking organizations specialize in smuggling special-interest aliens into the United 

States. As a result, these organizations now have alien smuggling as an additional 

source of funding to counter U.S. and Mexican government law enforcement efforts 

against them. 
34 

1GAO, Alien Smuggling: DHS Needs to Better Leverage Investigative Resources and Measure 

Program Performance Along the Southwest Border, GAO–10–328 (Washington, DC: May 24, 

2010). 

Violence associated with alien smuggling has also increased in recent years, particularly in Arizona. According to the NDIC assessment, expanding border security 

initiatives and additional U.S. Border Patrol resources are likely obstructing regularly used smuggling routes and fueling this increase in violence, particularly violence directed at law enforcement officers. Alien smugglers and guides are more 

likely than in past years to use violence against U.S. law enforcement officers in 

order to smuggle groups of aliens across the southwest border. In July 2009, a border patrol agent was killed while patrolling the border by aliens illegally crossing 

the border, the first shooting death of an agent in more than 10 years. Conflicts are 

also emerging among rival alien smuggling organizations. Assaults, kidnappings, 

and hostage situations attributed to this conflict are increasing, particularly in Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona. Communities across the country are at risk since among 

those individuals illegally crossing the border are criminal aliens and gang members 

who pose public safety concerns for communities throughout the country. 

Within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Office of Investigations (OI) is responsible for investigating 

alien smuggling. In addition, DHS’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and 

ICE’s Office of Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) have alien smuggling-related programs. 

My testimony is based on a May 2010 report we are releasing publicly today on 

alien smuggling along the southwest border.1 As requested, like the report, my testimony will discuss the following key issues: (1) The amount of investigative effort 

OI has devoted to alien smuggling along the southwest border since fiscal year 2005 

and an opportunity for ICE to use its investigative resources more effectively; (2) 

DHS progress in seizing assets related to alien smuggling since fiscal year 2005 and 

financial investigative techniques that could be applied along the southwest border 

to target and seize the monetary assets of smuggling organizations; and (3) the extent to which ICE/OI and CBP measure progress toward achieving alien smugglingrelated program objectives. Our May 2010 report also provides a discussion of the 

extent to which ICE/OI and CBP have program objectives related to alien smuggling. 

For our report, we conducted site visits and interviews with officials in all four 

of the OI special agent-in-charge (SAC) offices along the southwest border. We also 

interviewed officials with six of the nine Border Patrol sectors along the southwest 

border and interviewed officials in all five U.S. Attorney’s districts along the southwest border. The six Border Patrol sectors were selected based on their proximity 

to OI SAC offices we visited and their varying volumes of removable alien apprehensions. In addition, we interviewed the Arizona Attorney General and officials with 

the Arizona Attorney General’s Financial Crimes Task Force and analyzed relevant 

court affidavits to obtain information on the results of their efforts to address alien 

smuggling in Arizona. We supplemented our interviews with analyses of OI case 

management data (fiscal years 2005 through 2009), Justice Department data on the 

outcome of alien smuggling cases presented for prosecution to U.S. Attorneys along 

the southwest border (fiscal years 2005 through 2009), OI and Border Patrol asset 

seizure data (fiscal years 2005 through 2009), and reviews of CBP and ICE alien 

smuggling program documentation. We determined that despite limitations in certain data collection and oversight processes that are discussed more fully in our 

May 2010 report, case management, asset seizure, and alien smuggling case outcome data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our report. More detailed 

information on our scope and methodology appears in our May 2010 report. Our 

work was performed in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. 

OI WORK YEARS SPENT INVESTIGATING ALIEN SMUGGLING ALONG THE SOUTHWEST

BORDER RECENTLY INCREASED; OPPORTUNITY EXISTS TO BETTER LEVERAGE RESOURCES

OI work years devoted to investigating alien smuggling along the southwest border increased from about 190 work years in fiscal year 2005 to about 197 work years 

in fiscal year 2009, an overall increase of 4 percent, with hundreds of arrests, indictments, and convictions resulting. The overall number of work years decreased from 

about 190 work years in fiscal year 2005 to 174 in fiscal year 2008, but increased 

23 work years from fiscal years 2008 to 2009 primarily due to an increase in one 

office. The percentage of time OI investigators spend on alien smuggling investiga-
35 

tions, versus other investigative areas, such as drugs, has remained steady during 

this time period at 16–17 percent. 

DHS’s Human Capital Accountability Plan states that DHS is committed to ensuring that human capital resources are aligned with mission accomplishments and 

are deployed efficiently and effectively. However, in some cases OI investigators are 

conducting immigration-related activities that are not consistent with OI’s primary 

mission of conducting criminal investigations. Officials from two of the four SAC offices we visited told us that OI has been tasked to respond to calls from State and 

local law enforcement agencies to transport and process apprehended aliens who 

may be subject to removal, which diverts OI resources from conducting alien smuggling and other investigations. For example, according to officials in one SAC office, 

the equivalent of two full-time investigators each week spent their time responding 

to non-investigation-related calls during fiscal year 2009. In 2006, in the Phoenix 

metropolitan area, ICE’s DRO developed the Law Enforcement Agency Response 

(LEAR) program, in which DRO took over responsibility from OI for transporting 

and processing apprehended aliens. DRO processed 3,776 aliens from October 1, 

2008, to May 24, 2009, who otherwise OI would have had to process, thus enabling 

OI agents to spend more time on investigations. DRO headquarters officials stated 

that they have discussed expanding the LEAR program beyond Phoenix but have 

yet to conduct an evaluation to identify the best locations for expanding the program. By studying the feasibility of expanding the LEAR program, and expanding 

the program if feasible, ICE would be in a better position to help ensure that its 

resources are more efficiently directed toward alien smuggling and other priority investigations. Therefore, in our May 2010 report, we recommended ICE take such action. ICE concurred with our recommendation and stated that as a first step in potentially expanding the program Nation-wide, DRO’s Criminal Alien Division prepared and submitted a resource allocation plan proposal for its fiscal year 2012 

budget. 

ALIEN SMUGGLING ASSET SEIZURES HAVE DECREASED SINCE 2005; OPPORTUNITIES EXIST

TO LEVERAGE ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL INVESTIGATIVE AND SEIZURE TECHNIQUES

The value of OI alien smuggling asset seizures has decreased since fiscal year 

2005, and two promising opportunities exist that could be applied to target and 

seize the monetary assets of smuggling organizations. According to OI data, the 

value of alien smuggling seizures Nation-wide increased from about $11.2 million 

in fiscal year 2005 to about $17.4 million in fiscal year 2007, but declined to $12.1 

million in fiscal year 2008 and to about $7.6 million in fiscal year 2009. 
36 

TABLE 1.—OI ALIEN SMUGGLING ASSETS SEIZED IN FISCAL YEARS 2005 THROUGH 2009 NATIONWIDE 

Dollars in thousands 

Fiscal Year Value of Cur- rency Seized Value of Vehi- cles Seized Value of Vessels (e.g., Boats) Seized Value of Real Estate Seized 

Total Value of 

Currency, 

Vehicles, and 

Real Estate 

Seized 

Value of All 

Assets Seized 

Value of 

Currency, 

Vehicle, Vessel 

and Real Estate Seized as a Percentage of Total 

Assets Seized 

2005 ...................................... $4,197 $3,433 $2,427 $691 $10,748 $11,212 96 2006 ...................................... 3,720 3,710 2,055 4,034 13,519 14,220 95 2007 ...................................... 3,432 5,957 4,118 3,433 16,940 17,396 97 2008 ...................................... 1,836 5,275 3,618 818 11,547 12,169 95 2009 ...................................... 1,679 3,280 2,013 140 7,112 7,613 93 

Source: GAO analysis of OI data. Note: Values have been adjusted to account for inflation. 
37 

One opportunity to leverage additional seizure techniques involves civil asset forfeiture authority, which allows Federal authorities to seize property used to facilitate a crime without first having to convict the property owner of a crime. OI investigators indicated that lack of such authority makes it difficult to seize real estate 

involved in alien smuggling activity. In 2005, we recommended that the Attorney 

General, in collaboration with the Secretary of Homeland Security, consider submitting to Congress a legislative proposal, with appropriate justification, for amending 

the civil forfeiture authority for alien smuggling. Justice prepared such a proposal 

and it was incorporated into several larger bills addressing immigration enforcement or reform since 2005, but none of these bills had been enacted into law as of 

July 2010. According to Justice officials, the current administration has not yet 

taken a position on civil asset forfeiture authority for alien smuggling cases. We continue to believe it is important for Justice to seek the civil asset forfeiture authority 

it has identified as necessary to seize property used to facilitate alien smuggling. 

Thus, in our May 2010 report, we recommended that the Attorney General assess 

whether amending the civil asset forfeiture authority remains necessary, and if so, 

develop and submit to Congress a legislative proposal. Justice concurred with this 

recommendation. 

A second opportunity involves assessing the financial investigative techniques 

used by an Arizona Attorney General task force. The task force seized millions of 

dollars and disrupted alien smuggling operations by following cash transactions 

flowing through money transmitters that serve as the primary method of payment 

to those individuals responsible for smuggling aliens. By analyzing money transmitter transaction data, task force investigators identified suspected alien smugglers and those money transmitter businesses that were complicit in laundering 

alien smuggling proceeds. ICE officials stated that a fuller examination of Arizona’s 

financial investigative techniques and their potential to be used at the Federal level 

would be useful. An overall assessment of whether and how these techniques may 

be applied in the context of disrupting alien smuggling could help ensure that ICE 

is not missing opportunities to take additional actions and leverage resources to 

support the common goal of countering alien smuggling. In our May 2010 report, 

we recommended that ICE conduct an assessment of the Arizona Attorney General’s 

financial investigations strategy to identify any promising investigative techniques 

for Federal use. ICE concurred with our recommendation and stated that the week 

of April 12, 2010, ICE participated in the inaugural meeting of the Southwest Border Anti-Money Laundering Alliance, a body consisting of Federal, State, and local 

law enforcement agencies along the southwest border. The main purpose of the 

meeting was to synchronize enforcement priorities and investigative techniques. 

However, while these are positive steps toward combating money laundering along 

the southwest border, it is not clear to what extent these actions will result in ICE 

evaluating the use of the Arizona Attorney General’s financial investigative techniques. 

OI AND CBP COULD DO MORE TO BETTER MEASURE PROGRESS TOWARD ACHIEVING

ALIEN SMUGGLING-RELATED PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

OI and CBP have not fully evaluated progress toward achieving alien smugglingrelated program objectives. Federal standards for internal control call for agencies 

to establish performance measures and indicators in order to evaluate the effectiveness of their efforts. One of the major objectives of OI’s alien smuggling investigations is to seize smugglers’ assets, but OI does not have performance measures for 

asset seizures related to alien smuggling cases. Tracking the use of asset seizures 

in alien smuggling investigations as a performance measure could help OI monitor 

its progress toward its goal of denying smuggling organizations the profit from 

criminal acts. Thus, in our May 2010 report, we recommended that ICE develop performance measures for asset seizures related to alien smuggling investigations. ICE 

concurred with the recommendation and stated that ICE is in the process of assessing all of its performance measures and creating a performance plan. 

In addition, ICE operates the Mexican Interior Repatriation Program (MIRP), 

which removes aliens apprehended during the hot and dangerous summer months 

to the interior of Mexico to deter them from reentering the United States and to 

reduce loss of life. However, ICE does not know the effectiveness of MIRP at disrupting alien smuggling operations or saving lives because ICE lacks performance 

measures for the program. Thus, in our May 2010 report, we recommended that ICE 

develop performance measures for MIRP. ICE did not agree with this recommendation because it believed that performance measures for this program would not be 

appropriate. According to ICE, any attempt to implement performance measures for 

MIRP to emphasize the number of Mexican nationals returned or the cost-effective-
38 

2The Project Management Institute, The Standard for Program Management (2006). 

ness of the program would shift its focus away from the program’s original lifesaving intent and diminish and possibly endanger cooperation with the government 

of Mexico. However, we believe that performance measures would be consistent with 

the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by the United States and Mexico 

related to MIRP which calls for evaluation by appropriate officials. Thus, we believe 

that measuring MIRP’s program performance would be consistent with the MOU’s 

intent. 

CBP operates several programs that address alien smuggling, such as the Operation Against Smugglers Initiative on Safety and Security program (OASISS) in 

which suspected alien smugglers apprehended in the United States are prosecuted 

by Mexican authorities. In addition, CBP’s Operation Streamline prosecutes aliens 

for illegally entering the United States in order to deter them from reentering the 

United States. Lack of accurate and consistent performance data has limited CBP’s 

ability to evaluate its alien smuggling-related programs. CBP is in preliminary discussions to establish systematic program evaluations, but has not established a 

plan, with time frames, for their completion. Standard practices in project management for defining, designing, and executing programs include developing a program 

plan to establish an order for executing specific projects needed to obtain defined 

results within a specified time frame.2 Developing a plan with time frames could 

help CBP ensure that the necessary mechanisms are put in place so that it can conduct the desired program evaluations. Therefore, in our May 2010 report, we recommended that the Commissioner of CBP establish a plan, including performance 

measures, with time frames, for evaluating CBP’s alien smuggling-related enforcement programs. CBP concurred with our recommendation and stated that it is developing a plan that will include program mission statements, goals, objectives, and 

performance measures. CBP stated that it also has begun gathering data and holding workshops on developing performance measures for some of it programs. However it is not clear to what extent these actions will include time frames for evaluating CBP’s enforcement efforts. 

This concludes my prepared testimony. I would be pleased to respond to any questions that Members of the subcommittee may have. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Stana, again, thank you for your testimony. 

At this time I would like to recognize Ms. Kephart to summarize 

her statement for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF JANICE L. KEPHART, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL 

SECURITY POLICY, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES 

Ms. KEPHART. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Thompson, 

Chairman Cuellar, and Ranking Member Miller, and thank you for 

being here, and thank you for the interest in my new mini-documentary, ‘‘Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border 2.’’ It is a privilege also to be here with an esteemed panel. 

I believe my testimony begins with a 2-minute clip of that film, 

and then I have 3 minutes of oral testimony. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Sorry. Is your mic on? Just want to make sure. 

Ms. KEPHART. I am sorry. Do I need to start over, sir? 

Mr. CUELLAR. I think we heard everything, but just to—— 

Ms. KEPHART. I just was thanking Chairman Thompson, you, sir, 

Ranking Member Miller for being here and for your interest in my 

work and my new mini-documentary, ‘‘Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border 2.’’ I believe I am beginning my testimony with a 2- 

minute clip of that, and then I will go into 3 minutes of oral testimony. Thank you. 

[Video is played.] 

Ms. KEPHART. The 10-minute film, from which you just saw a 

clip, seeks to provide a reality check to all Americans on what is 

really going on in Arizona, featuring hidden camera footage of 

those alien and drug smuggling. This film can be found on the Cen-
39 

ter for Immigration’s website at cis.org. The film was released 

nearly a week ago and as of this morning sits at over 110,000 

views on YouTube. 

I began this series of mini-documentaries over a year ago, after 

becoming increasingly alarmed at the growing silence about the 

southwest border, and particularly Arizona. The increasing 

brazenness of drug cartels and gang members that commit violent 

crimes toward Americans was raising the bar on National security 

and public safety issues not just for Arizona, but across the Nation. 

I was especially concerned, based on my work on the September 

11 Commission, about the interest of terrorist groups like 

Hezbollah and al-Qaeda in seeking terrorist travel support from 

alien and drug smugglers for anonymous entry at their operatives, 

especially along the southwest border. 

There were documented cases of both terror organizations pursuing this type of travel strategy, an issue that I have testified to 

in prior years before Congress. Yet in Washington we were told of 

a no new fencing policy, proposed cuts to the Border Patrol, disinterest in prosecuting illegal alien entries, and no replacement program for a failed Secure Border Initiative. 

There was also much-ignored requests by Arizona’s Governor to 

deploy National Guard, despite the success that over 5,000 National Guard have provided to an overwhelmed Border Patrol in 

2006 to western Arizona’s Yuma sector, helping that sector gain 

operational control and reduce apprehensions by over 94 percent in 

just 2 years. 

During the same period, I began receiving anonymous e-mails 

with hidden camera footage from private citizens in Arizona. Over 

time this footage captured hundreds of illegals crossing Federal 

lands over and into Arizona. The Government was telling us that 

illegal alien apprehensions numbers were down, but how did anyone know the true numbers, when so much activity seemed to be 

happening on Federal land, where there was little to no Federal 

law enforcement activity, but only private citizen hidden cameras? 

How could it be that the Federal lands seemed less protected by 

Federal law enforcement and private property? What seems 

strange was that the Department of Interior and Department of 

Agriculture, which owned a huge swath of Arizona, have known the 

devastating effect of illegal alien activity on its land for years. I 

learned this definitively through a series of difficult FOI requests. 

Yet I am told again and again of the heavy struggles the Border 

Patrol has had in gaining timely access to these lands, exasperating environmental and public safety issues, while encouraging 

alien and drug smugglers to use these Federal lands as a playground for travel and waste. 

I encourage Congress to do what it can to correct the Federal law 

enforcement access to Federal lands once and for all to help contain 

alien smuggling and drug smuggling prior to infiltration into America. If nothing else but that comes from this mini-documentary, its 

making will have been well worthwhile, from my point of view. 

Thank you so much. I look forward to questions. 

[The statement of Ms. Kephart follows:] 
40 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JANICE L. KEPHART

JULY 22, 2010 

I am currently the Director of National Security Policy at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and a former counsel to the 9/11 Commission, where I co-authored the monograph 9/11 and Terrorist Travel alongside recommendations that 

appear in the 9/11 Final Report. Prior to 9/11, I was counsel to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology and Terrorism where I specialized in foreign 

terrorist activity in the United States and worked on oversight issues pertaining to 

border security and counterterrorism with the legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service, as well as gained unanimous consent in both Houses of Congress for 

the Federal criminal redress system in place today for identity theft. Today I focus 

on all issues pertaining to border security and its nexus to National security. This 

is my 11th testimony before Congress, and I am privileged to be here before you 

today. 

Last year, after becoming increasingly alarmed at a growing silence about the 

southwest border, and particularly Arizona, where Operation Gatekeeper in the late 

1990s had successfully pushed much of the illegal crossings into Arizona, I began 

a series of documentary films. I was especially concerned about the interest of terrorist groups like Hezbollah and al-Qaeda’s in seeking anonymous entry of their 

operatives along the southwest and northern border. There were documented cases 

of both terror organizations pursuing this type of travel strategy, an issue that I 

had testified to in prior years before Congress. 

At the time, I was concerned that the administration was not taking the threat 

as seriously as it could. It decided not to construct new fencing on the southern border; it had not announced a replacement program for the Secure Border Initiative; 

budget proposals reflected reduced numbers of Border Patrol agents; and requests 

for a National Guard presence by Arizona’s new Governor, Jan Brewer, were ignored despite the success the National Guard had helped the Border Patrol achieve 

in 2006 in the Yuma Sector as active ‘‘boots on the ground.’’ 

During this same period, about a year and a half ago, I began receiving anonymous emails with hidden camera footage from the southwest border. Over time, this 

footage captured hundreds of illegal aliens crossing Federal lands over and into Arizona, with few ever stopped or apprehended by the Border Patrol despite occasional 

chases. To my mind, this footage portrayed a very different reality than Washington’s conventional wisdom, which was reiterating that illegal alien apprehension 

numbers were down. How could we know numbers were down when the only way 

to know the real activity was not from Federal Government apprehensions, but private citizen hidden cameras? 

The apparent absence of the Border Patrol was also striking. This was Federal 

land with known illegal trails that caused environmental devastation as well. How 

could it be that the Federal lands seemed less protected by Federal law enforcement 

than private property? 

‘‘Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border 2: Drugs, Guns, and 850 Illegal Aliens’’ 

is the CIS’ second web-based film on the impact of illegal alien activity in Arizona. 

This new 10-minute mini-documentary—which I produced, directed, wrote, and narrated—features footage of both illegal-alien entry as well as alien and drug-smuggling. It is based on two sources of hidden camera footage [SecureBorderIntel.org 

(Nogales/Casa Grande footage) and BorderInvasionPics.com (Coronado footage)], 10 

months worth of Freedom of Information Act requests including Memos of Understanding between the Federal Government entities that own and patrol these lands, 

and a June 2010 border trip I took to southeast Arizona, the Coronado National Forest, and the Casa Grande sector highlighted in the film. The film is on the CIS 

website at http://cis.org/Videos/HiddenCameras2. Upon conducting document and 

‘‘on the ground’’ research, alongside review of many reels of hidden camera footage, 

it was hard to avoid the conclusion that illegal alien activity is causing severe consequences for Arizona. 

The mini-documentary was released at a press conference with Rep. Rob Bishop 

(UT–1) on July 15, 2010. Its views already exceed 100,000 just on youtube.com. The 

film was featured for 2 days on FOX News and its news affiliates and has been subject of radio interviews and print articles. It appears to be receiving a large and 

grassroots interest, and substantial support, for its substantive appraisal of the current status of illegal activity in Arizona. 

The Center’s first video on the subject, ‘‘Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border: 

Coyotes, Bears, and Trails,’’ (http://www.cis.org/videos/hiddencamerasillegalimmigration) was released on July 14, 2009 and has received over 60,000 

views to date. A blog as to the Federal Government response to that video can be 
41 

1http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/az/pdfs/undoclaliens.Par.57669.File.dat/ 

09-SAZ-Proj.pdf. 

found at http://www.cis.org/Kephart/HiddenCamerasUpdate. This film focuses primarily on the environmental destruction caused by illegal activity on Federal lands, 

highlighting in more detail waste and threat to wild animal life. 

Among the lessons learned from Hidden Cameras 2 is that illegal activity and violence in Arizona is escalating. Moreover, the Federal Government, including the Department of Interior, which owns about 12.5 million Bureau of Land Management 

acres in Arizona, as well as numerous National parks and wildlife refuges, and the 

Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service, which owns the Coronado National Forest, has long known the devastating effect of illegal alien activity on its land. (See 

the 2009 Fact Summary Bureau of Land Management—Southern Arizona Project 

Fiscal Year 2009 Fact Sheet).1 Yet there is minimal Federal law enforcement on 

these lands, exacerbating the environmental and public safety issues while encouraging alien and drug smugglers to use them as a playground for travel and waste. 

Featured in the film is a 2004 Federal Government PowerPoint showing the nearcomplete devastation of Organ Pipe National Monument due to illegal-alien activity, 

an Arizona borderland National park. 

My FOIA requests also yielded PowerPoints from subsequent years on the Buenos 

Aires National Wildlife Refuge and reports on the Coronado National Forest that 

reiterate the 2004 PowerPoint. Even in 2001, a report submitted by the Department 

of Interior to Congress outlined in great detail the issue of increasing illegal activity. The Department of Interior knew the extent of devastation from illegal activity 

on its lands, but instead of putting programs in place to work with Federal law enforcement or request line-item budgets for law enforcement to help curtail the illegal 

activity itself, the problems have continued to deteriorate these lands, making them 

increasingly unsafe and hurting habitats. Two key quotes, which begin the mini-documentary, are as follows: 

‘‘Thousands of new trails and roads have been created on Federal lands by undocumented aliens. 

‘‘Certain Federal lands in southeast Arizona can no longer be used safely by the 

public or Federal employees due to the significance of smuggling undocumented 

aliens and controlled substances into the U.S.’’ 

Some key facts highlighted by my research and the hidden camera footage shown 

in Hidden Cameras 2 include: • In sum, on a total three trails in 60 days between February and March 2010, 

we counted about 850 illegal aliens, 9 drug mules, 3 guns, and a jeep with drugs 

careening through the desert. • Coronado trail facts.—735 of the illegal aliens in the film are found on one trail, 

located in the Tucson Border Patrol sector, 15 miles north of Nogales within the 

Coronado National Forest. They crossed just one hidden camera in 39 days between February and March 2010 during all hours and in all weather. Not one 

Border Patrol agent is seen on this trail in 39 days. The illegal men and women 

travel in groups of 7 to 19. Also found on this trail are burlap remnants and 

water jugs painted black—evidence of drug smuggling. These cameras were 

placed purposely close to layup areas, where the illegal aliens await trucks and 

vans that will smuggle them further into the United States. The layup, shown 

in the film, is cluttered with tons of trash left behind by those utilizing this one 

trail. It is estimated that 8 to 16 million tons of trash has been left behind in 

wildlife reserves like this one. 

Extrapolated out, this one trail, uninterrupted, would yield nearly 7,000 aliens 

illegally entering the United States over the next year. Extrapolate that number 

out over the thousands of illegal trails Government already knows exists. That 

could mean there are hundreds of thousands of entries that are never recorded 

and never make any Government statistic. • Casa Grande trail facts.—A MAC–10 and two assault rifles are carried on foot, 

along with seven drug couriers carrying packs of 60 pounds or more, and one 

jeep, all caught on hidden camera video on two cameras located 70 to 80 miles 

north and west of Nogales. The footage was obtained in January 2010. 

The Federal land area where this footage was captured is west on the I–8 corridor between Tucson and Phoenix, in the Casa Grande Border Patrol sector. 

This area is known as Table Top, another wildlife-designated area north of the 

Tohono O’odham Indian Reservation, the Barry Goldwater Firing Range, in the 

Sonora Desert. In this same area, on April 30, 2010, Pinal County Deputy Sheriff is shot while in hot pursuit of drug cartels. The deputy sheriff survived after 

a 2-hour search to find him. 
42 

The hidden cameras also picked up about half a dozen load trucks, which are 

run deep into the desert carrying anywhere between 20 to 35 individuals at a 

time in areas further west on I–8 in March and April 2010, near a large Federal 

land area known as the Lower Sonora Desert. These loads are weighted down 

in human cargo, load after load, obvious and unstopped. (My sources tell me 

that Bureau of Land Management personnel have seen stand up loads trucks 

with illegals in the back with numbers up to 50.) 

• Federal Government awareness.—The boots on the ground—the Border Patrol 

agents, Forest Service and National Park law enforcement agents, the State 

and local cops—all have known how bad the situation is for years, and are dedicated to their mission. There is no doubt about that. However, through a tedious series of Freedom of Information Act requests, I learned the disconnect between the reality of the Arizona border and Washington rhetoric. 

PowerPoints and reports were obtained that show in intense detail the immense 

destruction to Federal lands caused by illegal activity. The devastation to Organ 

Pipe National Monument, about 100 miles west of Nogales, is shown to be near 

100 percent. The destruction shown is from illegal alien activity that includes 

fires and vegetation cutting; water pollution and human waste; horse, bicycle, 

vehicle and foot tracks; rest sites; and trash. Similar reporting was obtained on 

Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge, also west of Nogales, and multiple reports exist on the Tohono O’odham Reservation and Coronado. In fact, there is 

no place on the Arizona border that does not report extensive destruction from 

unstopped illegal activity. 

A Federal law enforcement officer that helps patrol public land told me during 

a recent visit that his agency only has nine law enforcement officers to cover 

3 million acres. 

• The threat to public safety today. Shortly after the Pinal County Deputy Sheriff 

Louie Puroll was shot on April 30, 2010, in the exact same area, two Latino 

males were shot to death in what is strongly suspected to be drug cartel feuding. (There is reporting this past week that the heavily violent drug cartel 

‘‘Zetas’’ are blaming Americans for the deaths of their couriers, and have put 

out a threat that any armed American found in these Federal lands will be 

shot.) Nogales’ police chief reports that drug cartels are threatening his cops, 

telling them to look the other way if they are off-duty, or they will be targeted 

by ‘‘sniper or other means.’’ 

Moreover, Arizona citizens are not just being threatened, but shot at as well. 

Within the last few months a grandfather and his grandson were dove hunting 

off of the I–8 corridor near at mile marker 124 when a truck loaded with illegal 

aliens came at them at a high rate of speed. The truck began firing guns at 

the grandfather and grandson. Other citizens report to BLM personnel, according to my sources, that there have been other U.S. citizens chased by people 

with AK–47 semi-machine guns in that area. In total there have been 13 confirmed shootings in the I–8 area this year to date. 

Border enforcement solutions.—History provides a guide to help determine what 

Federal law enforcement can be successful on Federal lands, and what cannot. First, 

the Border Patrol needs access that is relatively free of preapproval to operate on 

these lands. It can do so while embracing environmental stewardship. A recent successful model is provided by the Yuma Sector. 

According to the Border Patrol, in January 2004 the Yuma sector border lands 

owned by the Department of Interior and located in far western Arizona experienced 

a huge surge in illegal entries. There was no fence. Agents were assaulted with 

rocks and weapons daily and outnumbered 50 to 1. In 2005, more than 2,700 load 

trucks full of aliens and drugs illegally breached that sector. Smugglers were leading masses through the desert, leaving the sick and wounded to die. The smugglers 

did not stop for agents when in hot pursuit of vehicles. There were many crashes 

and deaths. By 2005, 138,500 illegal aliens were apprehended, and the numbers 

were still increasing. Today, the Yuma sector is clean relative to its past, and the 

Border Patrol can do its job. Apprehensions are down 94 percent to 8,500 in 2008. 

Why and how? In May 2006, President Bush announced Operation Jump Start, 

deploying more than 5,000 National Guard Citizen-Soldiers and Airmen to assist 

the Border Patrol in securing the boundary with Mexico. For the first time in 3 

years, the numbers of illegal entries began to decrease. Governor Napolitano’s 2006 

Arizona Department of Emergency and Military Affairs Annual Report describes the 

National Guard’s contribution to the operation as follows. 

Operation JUMP START, JTF–AZ Border.—The Arizona National Guard, as well 

as the other Southwest Border States, was tasked to support Operation Jump Start 

in coordination with U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Customs 
43 

and Border Patrol (CBP). The Arizona National Guard is supporting CBP with up 

to 2,400 Guardsmen to gain operational control of the border. 

Since July 2006, the Arizona Army National Guard has provided over 5,489 Guardsmen to support missions along the international border with Mexico. 

The Arizona National Guard is in support of the Border Patrol sectors of Yuma and 

Tucson. The missions tasked to National Guard soldiers and airmen include: (1) 

Surveillance; (2) camera operations; (3) vehicle maintenance support; (4) aviation 

support; (5) border infrastructure/fencing; and (6) Entry Identification Teams along 

the 389 miles of the international border between Arizona and Mexico. 

According to the Border Patrol, in the first 6 months of Operation Jumpstart, 

Guard members provided surveillance, border infrastructure, and aviation support, 

and also helped the Border Patrol save lives of those left to die by smugglers, deal 

with crash sites where there were high-speed chases of smugglers, as well as interdict illegal drugs. The Guardsmen were not just repairing fences; they were boots 

on the ground, too. 

With administration support in Washington and the National Guard’s help on the 

ground, between 2007 and 2008, unprecedented amounts of tactical infrastructure 

arrived as well, including: 7 miles of ‘‘floating fence’’ in Yuma sand dunes; 13 miles 

of access and vehicular fencing along the Colorado River; 9 miles of secondary fencing along the San Luis POE; and 68 miles of pedestrian and vehicular fence along 

the Sonoran desert. By the time the operations were complete, all of Yuma’s 126 

miles of border had natural or manmade barriers of some kind. Environmental assessments were conducted to assure preservation. In addition, there are two new BP 

stations in Yuma, and mobile surveillance sensors with ground radar as well. All 

of this personnel and tactical infrastructure were backed up by criminal prosecutions of illegal entrants known as Operation Streamline. 

Operation Stonegarden still funds localities to help assist border security, as well, 

helping Arizona local law enforcement back up Federal law enforcement as need be. 

On July 19, 2010, the administration announced $48 million to the southwest border 

for Stonegarden. 

Conclusion.—Our Nation needs to own up to the real dangers to public safety and 

the environmental degradation highlighted by Hidden Cameras 2. Multiple deaths, 

the threats to Nogales off-duty police by drug cartels and cross-border feuds; the 

millions of tons of trash and complete devastation of wildlife and forest reserves by 

the illegal trails and the illegal alien and drug smugglers that use them; and the 

lack of adequate Federal law enforcement on Federal land all point to the need for 

an urgent, strong, and steadfast solution. 

However, new fencing has stopped, even though there is a 26-mile stretch of 

desert between Naco and Nogales where there are nearly no barriers to hundreds 

of illegal trails in the Coronado. Technology upgrades has stopped with rare replacements. The administration is not prosecuting illegal aliens for illegal entry unless 

they are previously associated with violent crime. Guns are being stopped going 

south but we have no land EXIT/departure system in place, nor a plan for one. Local 

officials, as in Arizona, are discouraged from supporting Federal immigration law 

enforcement. 

Yet despite these facts, the July 19, 2010 ‘‘DHS Weekly Report’’ states that ‘‘The 

Administration has pursued a new border security strategy over the past year and 

half, making historic investments in personnel, technology, and infrastructure.’’ The 

DHS Weekly Report also states that 524 National Guard are to be deployed to Arizona on August 1, 2010 to ‘‘provide support for intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance, and counternarcotics enforcement.’’ What was not said was this National 

Guard deployment is significantly curtailed in numbers and duties compared to a 

successful 2006 Operation Jump Start. 

Like terrorists, alien and drug smugglers must travel across a border in some 

manner. The most critical strategy to curtail their travel across our borders, especially in the southwest, requires an ‘‘all hands on deck’’ approach to border security 

that does not relent until the escalating threats are under control and the border 

secured. All elements—personnel, infrastructure, legal support, a plan for a departure system, and policies supporting Federal law enforcement on Federal lands, 

should be the starting point, not the last point, for border enforcement against illegal alien and drug smuggling. A multi-layered approach such as was done in the 

Yuma Sector assuring strong border presence in personnel and infrastructure, a 

legal system to prosecute illegal entry, and support for localities supporting a Federal enforcement approach, can together discourage brazen alien and drug smuggling and reverse recidivism and criminal activity that threatens our environment 

and public safety. We can make it so, with American political resolve, and the pro-
44 

grams and resources to back it up the way Americans rightfully expect for their 

homeland. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you, Ms. Kephart, very much for your testimony. 

I want to thank all the witnesses for their time for being here 

with us. I remind each Member that he or she will have 5 minutes 

to question the witnesses. 

I now recognize myself for questions. 

One of the things I was just talking to the Chairman here—and 

this is, I guess, a question for Mr. Dinkins—usually when Congress 

passes something for border security, there are two things that 

happened. They talk about fencing, and they talk about adding 

more Border Patrol. Again, with all due respect, I am a big supporter of the men and women in green, but let us assume that, Mr. 

Dinkins, we consider this analogy. 

If you have a problem in the community, you have a policeman 

on the corner, which is I am trying to equate that to Border Patrol. 

If the policeman catches somebody, they in turn will work with an 

investigator so the investigator can build a case and then prosecute 

that person. Same thing, at least in my opinion, same analogy— 

Border Patrol, who always catches somebody, but you got to build 

the cases against that individual. 

One of the things we have been doing in the past is we have been 

adding more Border Patrol, more Border Patrol. We are going to 

add another 1,200 if the supplemental bill passes, which I am in 

agreement. But we got to have a ratio. If we add Border Patrol, 

what should be the ratio of ICE? Because you got to have the investigators. 

If you want to take, as some of the witnesses said, take the fight 

to them, let us say, even to Mexico, and go after those organizations, and I believe ICE talking to Secretary Morton the other day, 

I think out of all of the places ICE is in the world, I think the biggest area is in Mexico, a small number, in my opinion—I think we 

need to have a lot more—but nevertheless, what should be the 

ratio, if we use that analogy about policeman on the beat, the investigator so he can build the cases. 

What should be the ratio, in your opinion, for Border Patrol and 

ICE? Because we have been at it since 2004. We have gone from 

10,000 Border Patrol to 20,000. But ICE has pretty much stayed 

over. Given Arizona, for example, was your ratio there, if you know 

that answer, and then the general ratio we ought to have? 

Mr. DINKINS. Yes, there is. I think it is important to remember, 

you know, while CBP and ICE were created as two independent 

agencies, we really were created to be dependent upon one another 

for our successes. Then that analogy you use is very accurate. We 

are responsible for responding to the ports of entry, to cross-border 

criminal activity, and actually taking, hopefully, those seizures—— 

Mr. CUELLAR. Excuse me, because we have got only 5 minutes. 

Mr. DINKINS. I am sorry. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Ratio. 

Mr. DINKINS. Ratio. That is a very good—yes, right now, I believe, and this is round figures, we have approximately—if we are 

in Arizona, for example, we have a ratio of, I would say, maybe 
45 

5,000 armed Border Patrol officers to a ratio of maybe 350. I can 

get you the exact number. It is about 350 ICE special agents. 

There does need to be a ratio. If you look at the ratio across-theboard for ICE and CBP, it can be a little bit deceptive, because we 

have ICE special agents throughout the country in places where 

there may not be Border Patrol, so the ratio for an ICE special 

agent, and this is from my own review and experience over the last 

20 years, is probably something similar to one to six versus maybe 

the one to 15 that we have between CBP and ICE in the Arizona 

southern border area. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Okay. I would like for you all to develop that and 

come to Congress, because, again, our initial reaction is Border Patrol. But you got to have the investigative part, because you got to 

build those cases and, in my opinion, go into Mexico, and with the 

cooperation of the Mexican government, and go after those organizations at times. So I would ask you to, you know, again, it is that 

ratio, so we can look at that. 

Of course, then, we shouldn’t forget that if you add more activity 

down there, more Border Patrol, that is more cases. You got to 

think about probation officers, prosecutors, U.S. attorneys, judges, 

and all that. 

You look at the casework on the borders, on the southern border 

and the judges there, compared to—and I told this to Chairman 

Conyers, got his casework there compared to the southern border, 

and it is a huge amount of casework compared to other places. So, 

one, I would ask you to develop that and address—you know, come 

to the committee later, No. 1. 

The other thing I would ask Mr. Fisher or Mr. Dinkins what Mr. 

Stana talked about. As you know, I am a big believer in performance metrics. You have got to have those goals. You have got to 

have those performance metrics so we know if we are measuring 

the results, if we really have results. 

I am not interested in performance measures that measure activity, you know. That is useless—well, I shouldn’t say useless, but it 

is more important to look at what are the results from getting 

there. 

I would ask you to sit down with GAO, if you all would, talk to 

Secretary Morton. We really need performance measures from both 

of you all to make sure that we are measuring the right thing. So 

I know you all have some performance measures, but I would question if we are measuring the right things on that. That is very important. I would ask you to do that. 

The other thing I would ask you all—so you saw what happened 

with Me ́rida yesterday with the GAO report. Same thing—here we 

are putting a lot of money to help Mexico, and we still don’t have 

the right measures. So the measures are going to be very, very important to look at. 

The last thing before my time goes, I would ask Mr. Fisher this. 

I am a big believer, and I am trying to think of the correct—is this 

Operation Streamline? 

Chief FISHER. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Okay. I believe it started—I think they had a little 

bit in Yuma, little bit in Del Rio. We started in Laredo. We pushed 

for Laredo. It has got a little bit in South Texas. 
46 

Basically, Members, as you know, there is a 1954 law that basically says that anybody that comes into the United States violates 

the law, Federal law. I know in the past, basically, we have gotten 

some of those folks and sent them back. 

We are now asking them to spend a little bit of time to show that 

we mean business. I know more of our liberal folks are saying we 

shouldn’t be doing that, but again, if there is a violation when they 

come in, I think we ought to look at it. Some judges give them 30, 

60 days. 

It depends on that, because again, it does create work for our 

U.S. marshals, for our U.S. attorneys. Even though they might 

want to focus on the big picture, I really think that if you look at 

the numbers and give them the numbers, what is happening in Del 

Rio, what is happening in Laredo with the crossings in that area 

since we implemented Operation Streamline? 

Chief FISHER. Generally, Mr. Chairman, directly to your question, those areas and what they are seeing with respect to activity 

has been declining, as we have seen across the southwest border. 

Mr. CUELLAR. But in particular, compare them to other areas. 

Chief FISHER. Right. Compared to other areas, they are seeing 

less activity than, for instance, the central corridor, which we are 

talking in Arizona, for instance. I don’t know to what extent that 

level of activity has dropped as it relates specifically to one consequence, which is Operation Streamline, which is Federal prosecution. 

One of the things that Commissioner Bersin has directed CBP to 

look at is don’t look at these individual consequences within a vacuum. We have about 12 different types of consequence programs 

that we are evaluating and measuring, but don’t do it individually 

as a program. 

Take a look and see to what extent each one of those programs 

gives us those outcomes as you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, and 

where should they be applied specifically on the threat, the levels 

of activity, and the geography which dictates where our 

vulnerabilities are and the extent to which those criminal organizations are going to continue to try to exploit us. We are doing that, 

sir. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Okay. Thank you very much. 

At this time I will recognize for 5 minutes our Ranking Member, 

Candice Miller. 

Mrs. MILLER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

You know, just watching that clip, I think every American should 

take a look at what is happening here. I just was thinking here 

that the complexity of what is happening on our border, in regards 

to border security and who is coming through our border, is changing. It is not just poor folks who are coming from other countries 

that want to come to the United States to advantage themselves 

economically. 

What we have now with these drug cartels, as has been said, it 

is the organized crime threat. I appreciate what the Chairman is 

saying about the resources that we have within our country to arrest people, to prosecute them, et cetera. 

I would submit that we need to be thinking a bit about some of 

these folks who are coming here with guns and everything else as 
47 

enemy combatants. They should not be afforded necessarily all of 

the constitutional rights that American citizens have and clogging 

up our entire criminal justice system. I think we should think in 

terms of enemy combatants, because they mean us harm. In many 

ways they can be looked at as terrorists. 

I think while we have been busy—preoccupied, I should say— 

looking at what is happening in theater in Iraq and Afghanistan, 

here we have such a serious problem on our southern border with 

the drug cartels that are coming in. 

I would like to address a question to Attorney General Goddard. 

I listened very closely to your testimony, sir, and I appreciate the 

challenges that you have. You mentioned follow the money in the 

organized crime threat. I think perhaps as a way to supplement 

what we are doing with Customs and Border Protection, ICE, who 

are being overwhelmed with what is going on down there, do you 

think we could use some assistance as well from the CIA and the 

FBI? 

I mention that coming from southeast Michigan, where the brutal reality, many of the charities that were funding terrorist activities came from my region, and we have had great success from the 

previous administration and this administration in shutting down 

many of these charities with work from the FBI and the CIA. 

I am just wondering about that, because you are talking about 

stopping the wire transfers, the money transfers. You also mentioned about the stored value cards. I believe those are sort of prepaid gift cards perhaps through credit card companies. Is there a 

way that we can utilize tools that Congress has already passed, 

whether that is the Patriot Act, various types of things, to work 

with the credit card companies to assist in securing our border? 

Mr. Goddard. 

Mr. GODDARD. Thank you, Ranking Member Miller. I can’t agree 

more that we have a serious problem. I would only caution that the 

things you saw in this film are criminal activities. What I believe 

we need is a very focused criminal response. 

Your point is something that I would really appreciate the 

chance to elaborate on for just a minute, because I have great respect for the forces on my right here, for the Border Patrol and ICE 

have really hunkered down in our area, the Tucson sector, which 

is the most difficult part of the border, in my opinion. 

They have made major strides, but there are two things, really, 

beyond their control. One is the organized criminal activities in 

Mexico, which I believe are the heart of the problem. The people 

that we saw coming across the desert were part of very carefully 

organized convoys. They may not have looked like it, but the timing and the surveillance and the technology that goes into those 

missions, those groups of people coming across the border, are very 

well organized. Without the organized criminal back, they would 

not have been able to make that trip. 

Your point about coordination I think it is absolutely essential. 

I have been trying to get the attention of treasury agents and others to say it is about the money. If we can get the money out of 

this process, we would do a tremendous amount to reduce the violence. 
48 

I believe that those armed guards that you saw with Mach–10s 

and with AK–47s and AR–15s and a whole variety of assault weapons, are paid by the cartels to do that job. They don’t love it. They 

are not religious zealots. They are there because they are well-paid. 

If we can stop the flow of money going south, we would do a lot 

to stop the violence. 

That requires the organized coordination among all the majesty 

and power of the United States Government. You mentioned the 

CIA, the FBI. I am not sure it is a CIA issue, but it nonetheless—— 

Mrs. MILLER. Certainly, the FBI. 

Mr. GODDARD. What I would really request from this committee 

is Congress’ attention to plugging the holes. It is $40 billion we are 

talking about. We found a small part of it, which is the wire transfer portion. We believe almost $2 billion is moved by illegal wire 

transfers. We now have the information as to where they are, and 

we have the ability to find the hotspots, the places where most of 

the illegal activity is going from. 

Mrs. MILLER. So, if I could, because I am running out of time. 

So you do not believe if a drug cartel comes into the United States 

and murders an American citizen, that they should be considered 

to be an enemy combatant? You think they should be just tried to 

the civil criminal courts? 

Mr. GODDARD. I believe the criminal law covers the situation 

without going as far as you are saying. 

I have been talking for years about the danger that the cartels 

place to civil authority in Mexico and eventually perhaps to the 

United States, if we are not vigilant and going after them now. 

They are, as the Justice Department has said, the most serious organized crime threat to the security of the United States. 

That seems to me like it should be in neon letters somewhere in 

the capital to focus our attention on finding the leaders of the cartels and putting them out of business, because whether it is a military or criminal operation, I can’t make that distinction. But I believe criminal law is sufficient, if we can work vigilantly on the focused target of taking down the cartels. 

Mrs. MILLER. I appreciate that. 

My time has expired. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you, Mrs. Miller. 

At this time, I recognize the Chairman of the committee, Mr. 

Thompson. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Stana, I appreciate the work of the committee. GAO—you do 

a good job. You looked at this issue three times. 

Mr. STANA. Actually, we have looked at it many more times. We 

have—— 

Mr. THOMPSON. In recent times. 

Mr. STANA. The first report I recall was in 1977. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Okay. Well, let us say the last three reports. You 

identify what you thought were the strong points and weak points. 

I want to talk a little bit about the weak points. Can you share 

that again with the committee? 

Mr. STANA. Yes, we were talking about basically three weak 

points. You know, the first one dealt with their response to getting 
49 

at the money, which the attorney general just spoke to. We are just 

not doing enough to focus attention on the money trail. 

The second had to do with performance measures, which I know 

Mr. Cuellar can appreciate the value of. The third was the resource 

commitment that ICE has given to the alien smuggling operation. 

You know, when we looked at this in 1997, less than 10 percent 

of the people coming into the country used a smuggler. Now it is 

a solid majority that are using a smuggler—maybe a vast majority. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. 

Mr. Dinkins, you heard Mr. Stana talk about the money issue. 

Can you tell me why ICE discontinued its relationship with the attorney general’s office in pursuing these individuals with money orders? We had an on-going program, and it stopped. What happened 

with that? 

Mr. DINKINS. Sir, well, we were heavily involved initially. We 

still to this day actually do have more cases with the attorney general’s task force. So we haven’t actually stopped and pulled out. 

The approach that they took, which is to identify a vulnerability 

and then try to mitigate and eliminate that, is really is the essence 

of what we do at ICE and our financial programs. So that methodology we continue to employ across all of our investigative programs. 

Mr. THOMPSON. So are you still in the task force? 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Chairman, can I address that question, 

please? 

Yes, ICE is an active member of the task force today. There was 

a period of about 3, 4 years where they did not participate in the 

task force. I would encourage this committee to direct additional 

participation, because right now it is at the agent level. 

They are certainly helpful in the beginning of analysis of this 

massive amount of data that our agreement with Western Union 

is going to provide—is providing, is providing this week for the first 

time. So we have access to all wire transfers on the border on both 

sides of the border, and the analysis of that traffic, I believe, can 

be key to cutting off the illegal movement of funds across the border using wire transfer. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Chief Fisher, good to see you in Washington. You 

were a gracious host when I was out there a few weeks ago. 

How many new agents would you be receiving either in the appropriation or the surge for the Tucson sector? 

Chief FISHER. There will be approximately 300 CBP officers who 

will be part of that surge, which includes CBP officers and Border 

Patrol agents. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Dinkins, how many new investigators would 

you get based on the new CBP numbers? 

Mr. DINKINS. Sir, it fluctuates, but I believe there is right now 

we have 130 that is going to the entire southwest border. I don’t 

have that broken down by sector right with me, but I can get—— 

Mr. THOMPSON. So is your testimony that you have enough investigators to do your job? 

Mr. DINKINS. Sir, we could always use more investigators. As our 

partners grow, there is more work to be done, and we could always 

use more investigators. 
50 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, are you in line to receive more investigators with this new announcement announced by the Secretary? 

Mr. DINKINS. Yes, we are. We are in line to receive additional 

special agents. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Investigators. 

Mr. DINKINS. Investigators, yes, sir. 

Mr. THOMPSON. You are. 

Mr. DINKINS. Yes, we are. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, then somewhere we have a disconnect, because some people are saying that is not the case. 

I want you to go back and review it and make sure, because one 

of the criticisms I heard along the border is that in effect if we get 

more CBP individuals and not enough investigators for ICE, then 

the load for ICE almost becomes unbearable in terms of being able 

to do your work. 

I am trying to pursue a line of questioning to get you what you 

need. I know you have to defend your department. They do a wonderful job. But if in fact we are surging one area to the detriment 

of another, then we are not getting the best effort for the problem 

we all want to solve. 

Mr. DINKINS. I agree with you 100 percent, sir. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Stana, have you looked at that as a staffing 

issue or anything like that? 

Mr. STANA. You know, we realized that the Border Patrol has 

plussed-up way out of—you know, at a greater level than ICE has. 

But, you know, the auditor’s question is always not what you would 

do if you had more. The auditor’s question is how well are you 

using what you have. 

You know, we note that there are very many hard-working men 

and women at ICE and CBP, and that is not the issue. But the 

issue is you want to make sure they are doing the right work, the 

right investigations, before you go and ask for more. 

In this environment, you know, it would seem to make sense that 

the proportion should be maintained, but I would still like to get 

in there and make sure that they are putting their agents on the 

most risky things and the areas where you are going to get the 

greatest payback before I would throw in with—— 

Mr. THOMPSON. So which one of these fine gentlemen’s agency is 

not providing the proper performance measurements that you think 

are important to be able to measure? 

Mr. STANA. Well, one thing we would like to see is a comprehensive strategic planning framework, where you have the risk assessments done, we know which areas are most vulnerable to the Nation and are of the most consequence and to be able to see that ICE 

is putting its resources on those investigations, on those areas. 

We see that these investigative areas will remain static for years. 

We have always devoted so many resources to drug trafficking 

within certain—so many to general alien investigations, so many to 

financial investigations. When you go out and do talk to the agents, 

many of them are very solid investigations. Some of them are not. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Dinkins, are you prepared to provide that information to the committee? 

Mr. DINKINS. Sir, at this time we are actually—when I came on 

in January as executive associate director, I started a process to 
51 

completely redo our performance measures. We need not just to 

count outputs, and not all arrests are equivalent and don’t have the 

same outcome. That is what we are in the process of doing now and 

we hope to implement in fiscal year 2111 to be able to start a baseline and then move into the 2012. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, by October 1, would you provide the committee whatever those performance measures are? 

Mr. DINKINS. Yes, sir, we can provide those. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

At this time I will recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania, 

Mr. Dent. 

Mr. DENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

After reviewing that video that we all witnessed a few moments 

ago, I absolutely find it incomprehensible that the Department of 

Justice could be suing the State of Arizona on this issue of enforcing Federal immigration law. 

Mr. Dinkins, my question to you as an official from ICE, can you 

explain to me your understanding of what constitutes a sanctuary 

city? 

Mr. DINKINS. As reference to a sanctuary city, they are often considered locations that—I guess in general terms, so I don’t have an 

exact definition and nor is, I believe, there a legal definition—but 

somewhere local law enforcement would not be interested in assisting other law enforcement in identifying and removing criminal 

aliens. 

Mr. DENT. Either they might refuse to cooperate or discouraged 

or prohibited from cooperating. 

Mr. DINKINS. Absolutely. By their—— 

Mr. DENT. By their local city councils and mayors. 

Mr. DINKINS. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DENT. So if you are familiar with the locations of the sanctuary cities, and I am sure you know which ones they are, how 

have you modified your enforcement efforts to account for this utter 

lack of local cooperation? 

Mr. DINKINS. It can be challenging. However, our focus truly is 

the criminal enforcement and dismantling criminal organizations. 

Generally speaking, even in a sanctuary city, when it rises to gang 

members that we are looking for and other criminal organizations, 

generally speaking, law enforcement are still going to assist in 

that—just not in the civil enforcement. So from my area of expertise in the criminal enforcement—— 

Mr. DENT. Don’t you find it troubling that local communities 

would not want to help you, assist you in dealing with drug dealers 

or human smugglers, that they are prohibited or refuse? Doesn’t 

that create additional burdens for your agents? 

Mr. DINKINS. Generally speaking, in my area it doesn’t create additional burdens for us—only in the situation where we are not actually able to build a criminal case. But it does come at a cost. 

Mr. DENT. Do you believe we should have more collaboration between local and State law enforcement and Federal immigration 

enforcement? 
52 

Mr. DINKINS. I think we actually have some very strong partners 

out there throughout the country, State and locals, partners. We 

have some great relationships, so I think that we are actually on 

a pretty solid basis. 

Mr. DENT. Have you received and given or are you aware of any 

special guidance given to Federal immigration personnel with regard to enforcement efforts in these sanctuary cities? 

Mr. DINKINS. No. It is more of a—there is no policy that we 

would issue. I mean, our job still remains the same, regardless of 

what the posture is of the local community. 

Mr. DENT. So then, how are you dealing with cities that harbor 

illegal aliens, including criminal aliens that you were referencing, 

that fail to report their presence? They make arrests routinely, 

these local law enforcement entities. They make these arrests, and 

if they fail to share information that would be valuable to you, 

what do you do? 

Mr. DINKINS. Well, I can tell you that it is a, I would say, risky 

business that they are participating in, and I say that because 

today you may arrest somebody, you may not know their status, 

and the next day they may create a felony and a crime against one 

of the individuals in your community. So we still go after, we still— 

regardless of what the posture is of the local community, our job 

remains the same wherever you are at in the United States. 

Mr. DENT. So it seems that they are an impediment to efforts, 

then? 

Mr. DINKINS. I wouldn’t say an impediment, because it is our job, 

and we are going to do it with without the local assistance. So it 

doesn’t impede us from doing it. 

Mr. DENT. But their assistance certainly would be helpful, one 

would think. 

Mr. DINKINS. In many cases we utilize them to collaborate with 

local law enforcement. 

Mr. DENT. Now, Attorney General Goddard, does Arizona have 

sanctuary cities? 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Dent, I am not 

aware of anywhere the policy is not to cooperate fully with the Federal officials. 

Mr. DENT. Even in Phoenix and Tucson? 

Mr. GODDARD. Especially Phoenix and Tucson. 

Mr. DENT. Okay. Good. How will the new Arizona law change 

local law enforcement practices in Arizona’s communities? 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Dent, difficult to 

say. There is a very extensive article in today’s Washington Post 

that takes one of the police chiefs, who is clearly in the hot seat. 

He is in Benson, Arizona, which is—you could say that sort of the 

focus of a lot of the traffic that you saw in the film goes through 

that area. 

His evaluation, and I have to defer to the people on the ground, 

was that he was confused by it. He thought there were some Federal enforcement issues that he did not fully understand, and he 

didn’t think his officers did. But he thought his job would be pretty 

much unchanged by the passage of Senate Bill 1070 in terms of the 

investigations and the issues that they were dealing with in Benson, Arizona. 
53 

Mr. DENT. Could you also explain the disconnect between the 

Federal Government filing a lawsuit to block implementation of Arizona’s immigration law and refraining from taking action against 

so-called sanctuary cities that refuse to cooperate with Federal 

Government on immigration matters? 

Do you understand that disconnect? I mean, a lot of us are troubled by this disconnect that this Federal Government is suing your 

State—— 

Mr. GODDARD. Right. 

Mr. DENT [continuing]. At the same time seems to be ignoring 

the fact that there are sanctuary cities that don’t particularly—are 

not interested or refusing to collaborate with ICE. 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Congressman, I can only speak for my experience in Arizona, where we encourage all law enforcement to cooperate with the Federal authorities and to do their utmost to turn in 

criminal aliens when they are in their organization or when they 

are under arrest. So I am afraid I don’t understand the question 

as to what the disconnect is that you are referring to. 

Mr. DENT. Well, I mean, doesn’t it bother you as the State’s top 

law enforcement officer that your State is being sued for trying to 

complement Federal law enforcement while at the same time sanctuary cities are given a pass and are being ignored by our Justice 

Department? 

Mr. GODDARD. You are speaking throughout the country? 

Mr. DENT. Yes, throughout the country. 

Mr. GODDARD. I would stipulate that there is perhaps an inconsistency there, Mr. Congressman. 

Mr. DENT. One would think. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you, Mr. Dent. 

At this time I recognize the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. 

Pascrell. 

Mr. PASCRELL. Well, Mr. Chairman, it was my understanding 

when I got the invitation to this hearing today, as all the committee Members had, what we were going to discuss. I am glad 

that the attorney general of the State of Arizona has come before 

us in the most professional way. 

I know that you have to defend, basically, what the officials in 

your State—that is your job and your sworn duty. But I must say 

you have presented it in a very, very professional way to the questions that we should be talking about. That is smuggling. 

I did not know we were coming here to portray liberals, conservatives, Democrats, Republicans, and their reactions to—I am not 

going to be trapped—I am not going to be trapped into that situation. This is something for all of us, not just Arizona. I am reluctant to criticize your State about that for a number of reasons. 

Although I believe that not only we should be concerned with 

smuggling, but the exploitation of these folks that are coming 

across the border, and I think the attorney general would agree 

with me on that count. We had 8 years of very little work being 

done to find, arrest employers who hired these illegal aliens. So 

what is good for the goose is good for the gander. There is a lot 

more than simply films to see who is coming across the border. 
54 

Let me ask you a question, by the way, Mr. Dinkins. How many 

of these 3,300 people that we are talking about here in that period 

of time which the report focused on have come from nations of interest like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran? How many of them 

have come from those countries of the 3,300? 

Mr. DINKINS. Sir, I don’t have any breakdown on that specifically. I can look and see if we have captured that information, but 

I don’t have that. 

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Fisher. 

Chief FISHER. Sir, I wouldn’t know the breakdown of that 3,000 

as well. 

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Stana. 

Mr. STANA. No, I don’t have the number. I know about 5 percent 

of the apprehensions are OTMs, but within that I am not sure of 

the exact number. 

Mr. PASCRELL. So we are talking about nations that are definitely troublesome to us—worse than that—that some of them harbor terrorists. Some of you used the word ‘‘terrorists’’ and I thought 

maybe we are going to find out something we didn’t know today. 

Can any one of the panel tell me the terrorists that we have captured among those 3,300 people? Does anyone have any information along those lines? 

Ms. Kephart. 

Ms. KEPHART. Actually, I asked that information in my FOI request nearly a year ago, and I was denied that information, being 

told it was too sensitive. 

Mr. PASCRELL. Could you get that back to us, Mr. Dinkins, if at 

all possible? 

Mr. DINKINS. Yes, I will. 

Mr. PASCRELL. I would appreciate that. 

We have got to have—and I think the attorney general said so, 

and some other people have highlighted—we have to have performance measurements. There is no excuse for that, because we can’t 

make comparisons. If you are going to have a baseline, you know, 

how are you going to see whether you are doing better or doing 

worse? Simply putting more people on the job does not make it necessarily, as Mr. Stana pointed out, accomplish what we want to accomplish. 

I am interested also in the trafficking of guns and weapons 

across the border. Mr. Attorney General, can you tell us anything 

about that? 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Pascrell, I can tell 

you a little. We undertook a couple of years ago, along with Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the prosecution of a number of gun 

dealers who were using straw buyers, specifically individuals who 

signed the forms in violation of Federal law and never actually 

picked up the gun. They had a third party come in, choose the gun, 

and then transport it to Mexico. 

We prosecuted several of those cases successfully. One, unfortunately, did not result in a conviction, but we were able to seize the 

gun store proceeds because of the illegal activity that it had been 

involved in. So we are very aware that a very large number of the 

military grade weapons that end up in the hands of cartel members, unfortunately, are sold in the United States. 
55 

Mr. PASCRELL. Thank you. 

Mr. Dinkins, who is doing the smuggling? Who is controlling the 

operations? Is that United States citizens? Is it United States nationals? Is it undocumented aliens? 

Mr. DINKINS. Sir, in reference to weapons smuggling? 

Mr. PASCRELL. No. In respect to the smuggling of aliens across 

the border. 

Mr. DINKINS. Predominantly, it is foreign nationals, and that is 

one of the challenges in addressing the financial component of the 

millions and billions of dollars that are made from human smuggling is most of that is generated outside of the United States from 

various organizations, who have a small piece of the puzzle, who 

are providing smuggling routes all the way from Africa and Asia 

all the way through to ultimately the United States, earning money 

along the way. 

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, if I may conclude by simply saying 

that there is no excuse that the attorney general of the United 

States of America has not responded to the requests. We know 

what they need in terms of the seizures, these assets seizures. If 

we don’t have the cooperation of the Justice Department, that is 

just not going to happen. 

But I want some parity here. We are going to talk and we think 

that we are going to stop, whether it be a fence, whether it be the 

cockamamie system that they talked, you know, that they started 

to put into operation 5 years ago, which we spent so much money 

on that doesn’t work. 

Yes. And suddenly I turned. 

But the point of the matter is we need the cooperation from all 

agencies here. Aliens are not bad people. To portray them as that 

and paint with a wide brush does not bring us closer to the solution. So I am here to be of help to the State of Arizona, and I am 

sure all of us are. But there is no Democratic or Republican way 

to solve this problem. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank the gentleman from New Jersey. 

They will call us to vote in a couple of minutes, so if nobody else 

joins us—there are three Members left; 5 minutes apiece and we 

will, you know. As you know, the first vote is 15 minutes, so if we 

can try to stick to the 5 minutes, we will cover everybody. 

So at this time I recognize the gentlewoman from Arizona, Mrs. 

Kirkpatrick, for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. Thank you, Chairman Cuellar, and thank you 

for this hearing. 

Chairman Thompson, I thank you again for your trip to Arizona. 

I continue to hear from folks you met with that day how appreciative they are to have had an opportunity to talk with you about 

this problem. 

It is a busy time in Arizona, Attorney General. Thank you very 

much for coming to Washington and appearing before this committee. As you know, border security and immigration are among 

the most important issues that our country faces right now, and 

growing more and more serious for Arizona. I think we are Ground 

Zero for this issue, and I know we have been talking about it for 

years and years and calling on the Federal Government to fix the 

problem and secure the border. 
56 

I very much appreciate your distinction between border violence 

in Mexico, where it is going up, and border violence in Arizona, 

where it is going down. I think it is important to remember that 

in the context of the discussion. I also really appreciate your effort 

to keep that from spilling into Arizona, and I wish that maybe first 

you would explain the burden on State and local law enforcement 

because of the Federal Government’s refusal to fix this problem. 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Chairman, Congresswoman Kirkpatrick, 

thank you very much. Well, first there is cost. The incarceration of 

criminal aliens costs the State literally hundreds of millions of dollars every year, and the SCAAP funds that are supposed to flow 

have not. That is a continuing source of both pain—financial pain, 

because we have by far the disproportionate number of those individuals to hold in incarcerated fashion. 

But it is also a sense of great resentment. When earlier the talk 

about Senate Bill 1070, I think that is kind of a touchstone that 

has led to that reaction in the State of Arizona. 

Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. I am happy to hear the administration is 

going to start this surge of manpower to the border. To what extent 

do you think that is going to help? Do you think it goes far enough? 

What more needs to be done? 

Mr. GODDARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congresswoman. I absolutely support it. We are grateful for the help. What I would 

plead for to this committee and to Congress is that we provide the 

kind of evaluative standards that have been discussed in this hearing, the ability to say how you measure progress. 

A lot of talk has been made, and I am afraid a lot of words have 

been wasted, talking about securing the border without defining 

what that means. I can’t applaud more what the GAO has said. We 

need objective standards. 

I have one. We know who the leaders of the Mexican drug cartels 

are, and unless we can, in jointly working with the criminal authorities in Mexico, take those cartel leaders out and dismember 

their organizations—and we have lots of experience doing that in 

the United States going after organized crime—we need to do it on 

a bi-national basis. 

I hope that can be one of the objective standards. Every time we 

arrest and incarcerate a leader in a cartel operation, we will have 

moved closer to real border security. 

Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. Thank you. I also appreciate your efforts in 

shutting down the money. I know shutting down the wiretapping 

was a huge step in that direction. I introduced a bill that would 

stop the prepaid cash cards from going across the border. I think 

you said $40 billion is going south. What other things do you think 

we should address to stop that? 

Mr. GODDARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congresswoman. It is 

approximately 40 between human smuggling—I may not be too 

confusing here—human smuggling is maybe a $2 billion industry, 

significant but dwarfed by comparison with drug smuggling, which 

is, according to estimates that I have seen, between 35-plus. So 

that is a huge amount of money. 

I believe the combined—the Ranking Member mentioned a 

minute ago combining all the resources of the country. Certainly, 

through the Bank Secrecy Act and other antiterrorism efforts, we 
57 

can find out where this money is flowing, and then make every effort to stop it. 

I thank you for your efforts to stop the stored value instruments 

as being one measure of moving money across the border. Right 

now you can take a card that has a stored value in excess of 

$10,000, walk across the border with that, and there is nothing in 

the American law, nothing in U.S. law or regulations that make 

that an illegal act. I think it should be. 

Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. I heard from the Border Patrol agents when 

I was at the border that they see this happening, and there is nothing they can do about it, which is why I introduced a bill that— 

again, thank you very much for your testimony. 

Mr. GODDARD. It is a gaping hole in our security fabric that so 

much money goes virtually unimpeded across the border to the illegal cartels. 

Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. I agree. 

I yield back. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you, gentlewoman from Arizona. 

This time I recognize my colleague from Texas, Mr. Green. Mr. 

Green. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I thank the witnesses for appearing. 

I especially want to thank those who serve on the front line for 

what you do. It means a lot to us to know that you are there, performing a difficult task under exceedingly difficult circumstances. 

Mr. Attorney General, if I may, I would like to visit with you for 

just a moment, because there are some things that I think we need 

to put in the record that I am confident I know the answer to, but 

I think it is good to place these things in the record. 

Mr. Attorney General, you believe in the Constitution of the 

United States of America, do you not? You do? 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Chairman, thank you, Mr. Green—— 

Mr. GREEN. Can you just—formality—for my purposes, because 

I have little time. 

Mr. GODDARD. May I just say yes or no? 

Mr. GREEN. Yes, sir, if you would. 

Mr. GODDARD. Yes, sir. 

Mr. GREEN. Okay. I know you do, and I just want it for the 

record. You believe that enforcement of the Constitution is of paramount importance, do you not? 

Mr. GODDARD. I do. 

Mr. GREEN. Would you agree that you are duty-bound to challenge laws that you perceive to be unconstitutional as they relate 

to your State as the attorney general for the great State of Arizona? 

Mr. GODDARD. I make every effort to do so, yes, sir. 

Mr. GREEN. Do you also agree that the attorney general of the 

United States of America is duty-bound to challenge laws that he 

believes to be unconstitutional as they relate to the United States 

of America? 

Mr. GODDARD. Congressman Green, you are—— 

Mr. GREEN. I am asking you—— 

Mr. GODDARD. Excellent questioning. 

Mr. GREEN. It is an excellent question, and I—— 
58 

Mr. GODDARD. Fortunately, you are not actually—— 

Mr. GREEN. Excuse me, if I may. It is really a very simple question. It is as simple as the question that I posed to you as the attorney general for the great State of Arizona. You are duty-bound to 

challenge what you perceive to be unconstitutional laws, are you 

not? 

Mr. GODDARD. I am, sir. 

Mr. GREEN. Why would you not, if you have a difference in opinion, because I think the attorney general of the United States of 

America has a similar duty, why would you not assume that the 

attorney general of the United States of America is duty-bound to 

challenge laws that he perceives to be unconstitutional as the relate to the United States of America? 

Mr. GODDARD. Congressman Green, I believe the attorney general of the United States must do, in furtherance of his own, everything that he believes necessary to—— 

Mr. GREEN. And pursuant to the Constitution. 

Mr. GODDARD. I may disagree with him on interpretation. 

Mr. GREEN. You can disagree as to what he thinks, but if he 

genuinely is a man of honor, sworn to uphold the Constitution of 

the laws of the United States of America, if he genuinely perceives 

a law to be unconstitutional, does he not have the duty to challenge 

that law, just as you have a duty to challenge laws that you perceive to be unconstitutional? 

Mr. GODDARD. Congressman Green, if that is his sincere belief, 

he has no choice. 

Mr. GREEN. So you would also agree, I think, that one of the 

things that separates the United States of America from many 

other places around the world is the way we resolve our disputes. 

We go into a third party. We have the Executive and then we have 

the Legislative and then we have the Judiciary. We go into that 

third branch of Government. We take our disputes there. Whether 

we agree with the results or not, we respect the results from the 

judiciary, do we not? 

Mr. GODDARD. Yes, sir. 

Mr. GREEN. That separates us from so many other places in the 

world, where they use automatic Kalashnikovs, commonly known 

as AK–47s with a muzzle velocity that can cut a person in half. 

They use automatic Kalashnikovs to resolve their disputes. We 

don’t resort to that kind of barbaric behavior. Some do, but in the 

main we don’t do that. 

The reason I call this to your attention, Mr. Attorney General, 

is because when I hear people saying the attorney general should 

not file a lawsuit, that we ought not be suing Arizona, it is wrong 

to sue Arizona, if the attorney general of the United States of 

America perceives a law to be unconstitutional, he is duty-bound 

to do what he is doing, is he not? 

Mr. GODDARD. Congressman, the way you phrase this—— 

Mr. GREEN. Is he duty-bound to do this? 

Mr. GODDARD [continuing]. The answer is yes. There are many 

things—— 

Mr. GREEN. Yes, okay. Well, I phrased it this way, because we 

want to talk about the Constitution of the United States of America. That is what this is all about. If you were the attorney general 
59 

of the United States of America and you thought a law to be unconstitutional, would you be duty-bound to challenge that law? 

Mr. GODDARD. Yes, I would. 

Mr. GREEN. Why can they not accord the same integrity, the 

same honor, the same measure of truth and veracity to this attorney general that we would accord you? Rhetorical question you 

need not answer. Let me—— 

Mr. GODDARD. Thank you, Congressman. 

Mr. GREEN. Okay. Finally, let me share this. The gentleman 

from the GAO has indicated that we need a comprehensive plan, 

strategic plan. I think that is the exact quote—comprehensive, 

strategic plan, correct? 

Mr. STANA. Strategic plan framework—— 

Mr. GREEN. All right. Quickly, let us do this. Do you agree that 

in a comprehensive, strategic plan we should deal with the guns 

that flow south? 

Mr. STANA. Yes. 

Mr. GREEN. Mr. Attorney General, have you made any recommendations in terms of what we should do—I read your testimony; I didn’t see any here—as to what we should do to stem the 

tide of guns flowing south? I know you have taken affirmative action, for which I salute you, but there are things that we may be 

able to do to tweak the law. 

Have you made any recommendations? You said you had this 

gun show or gun exhibit or something that you worked with and 

you prosecuted, and you were unable to get at that. But do you 

have recommendations to deal with the guns? I have not heard recommendations to deal with the guns. Who has a recommendation 

to do with the guns? 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Congressman—— 

Mr. GREEN. Let the record reflect that no one has responded, 

which in my opinion means that no one has a plan that they are 

recommending to do with the guns. 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Congressman, I am just a State official, but 

certainly the straw-buyer problem—— 

Mr. GREEN. Well, you are a State official that—excuse me, if I 

may. You are a State official, but you still recommend a means by 

which we deal with the money transfers. All right, why are you 

now going to be just a State officials when it comes to the guns? 

Mr. GODDARD. Because I am not an authority on that level of a 

National problem. 

Mr. GREEN. Well, you were a State official that wanted to follow 

the money—— 

Mr. GODDARD. I think I may be—— 

Mr. GREEN [continuing]. Until you decided—— 

Mr. GODDARD. The straw buyers are a significant problem—— 

Mr. GREEN. I understand. 

Mr. GODDARD [continuing]. And I hope that this Congress can 

take a better—— 

Mr. GREEN. I understand. I understand. My time has expired, 

but I do want to thank you. Listen, I believe you to be an honorable 

man—all of you. So please accept what I have said as one American who wants to uphold the Constitution that makes this country 

the great Nation it is. 
60 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank the gentleman from Texas for his line of 

questions. 

Members, they called us for votes. We have got about 12 minutes, 12 minutes 30 seconds. Again, I want to make sure that we 

give Mr. Mitchell and Ms. Jackson Lee the time for the questions. 

I am going to ask Members to please try to stick to the 5 minutes 

so we can go, because it would be very difficult to come back after 

votes. 

So at this time I will recognize the gentleman from Arizona for 

5 minutes. Mr. Mitchell. 

Mr. MITCHELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for allowing me to join this battle. 

The question I have is with Mr. Stana. Before I begin, I just 

want to thank you again and also Mike—Mr. Dino—for the work 

that you have done and your team over at the GAO for all the hard 

work they have put into this report. 

Mr. STANA. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. MITCHELL. As you know, I am especially concerned about the 

epidemic of drop houses. We have literally hundreds of them in the 

Phoenix metro area, and they are dangerous magnets for violent 

crime. The GAO report notes that authorities have been frustrated 

by the existence of a loophole in the Federal law that prevents 

them from using civil forfeiture to seize homes used as drop 

houses. 

Under current law they can use civil forfeiture to seize vehicles, 

even airplanes, even votes, but not the actual houses that are being 

used for drop houses. As you know, earlier this week Representative Brian Bilbray and I introduced a bipartisan bill to close that 

loophole and allow authorities to use civil forfeitures to these 

houses whose homeowners knew or should have known that their 

house is being used as a drop house. 

I was hoping that you might be able to explain a little more detail about why this extra authority is so important. 

Mr. STANA. It is important, because oftentimes alien smuggling 

organizations use these drop houses to hold the aliens that are not 

owned by a member of the drug smuggling organization. They are 

rental properties. In order to establish that the person who owns 

the rental property is fully knowledgeable about what is going on 

in that house and is part of this criminal activity is a very high 

bar. 

By going to a civil asset forfeiture law, you would not have to establish that the owner of the property was fully aware of the illegal 

activity going on inside and was complicit in it. You could seize the 

property rather than charge the owner, and then at a later time 

you would sort out his complicity or non-complicity. 

It is extremely important in this case. You may have read in that 

report that a SAC in the Phoenix district had a map on his wall 

when we visited with 300 pins in it—city of Phoenix, 300 pins— 

knew that each pin represented a stash house that he couldn’t 

touch. He said if he had civil asset forfeiture authority, he could 

at least address some of them. 

Mr. MITCHELL. One last question very quickly. The GAO recommends that ICE examine investigative techniques employed by 
61 

the Arizona attorney general and his task force. Specifically, did 

GAO recommend that ICE study the way in which the task force 

followed financial transactions at wire transfer companies like 

Western Union? Can you explain how the GAO thinks this information could be used by Federal law enforcement to disrupt alien 

smuggling? 

Mr. STANA. We discussed with the ICE people in the field how 

they used their financial investigative resources, and what we 

found is they do it in a rather unsophisticated way, sort of episodeby-episode, case-by-case. 

What Arizona has done is mine the data, much like credit card 

companies do, to see if people who are abusing maybe stolen credit 

cards, to identify patterns and connect dots, and to see where some 

illegal activity may be. That is the kind of activity that is proactive, 

mines the data and these criminal activities by certain structured 

transactions, which we think is really important. 

Mr. MITCHELL. Thank you. 

Just one last question to the attorney general. Again, thank you 

for taking time to be here. I was wondering if you had any recommendation for both how specifically you think ICE could make 

use of both the techniques that you developed as well as the wire 

transfer data that you have secured from Western Union and other 

wire transfer companies. 

Mr. GODDARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Mitchell. 

I just want to urge in the most urgent terms that this committee 

and this Congress make it clear that this is—GAO has recommended a study. 

What we do works. What we have done in the State of Arizona 

all by ourselves has identified millions of dollars of illegal money 

transfers, and we have seized many of them, and we have changed 

behavior. ICE can profit from that immediately. 

We now from Western Union have all of the information on both 

sides of the border involving wire transfers. Using our statistical 

analysis, we can determine where the hotspots are. From there we 

can find out where the most likely illegal transfers are. Then we 

can go forward and either seize them or use it as an investigative 

lead. 

I really want to emphasize this, because one of the great ways 

that we have been able to use the wire transfer information is to 

follow the money. Literally, you follow it to the drop house and 

from the drop house to the leader of the local organization and 

from the leader of the local organization to the people who are controlling them, often in Mexico. 

We can take down the whole organization. That is what we need, 

together with ICE, to be doing border-wide. We have been doing it 

in Arizona, but the cartels simply move their operations to other 

States or other parts of the country where they are not being 

watched. 

So it has to be a border to border—I mean, excuse me—the entire 

border, the whole 2,000 miles, needs to be subjected by ICE, I 

would submit, to an analysis of all the wire transfers. That will 

stop the illegal movement of money by wire. It won’t stop it all, because they have other methods at their control, like stored value 
62 

cards, but let us cut out the movement illegally of money across the 

border by wire. 

Mr. MITCHELL. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank the gentleman from Arizona. 

Members, we have 6 minutes and 42 seconds, and I do want to 

finish with the two remaining Members. I would ask them to try 

to stick to the 5 minutes. 

At this time I recognize by attendance order. It will be the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Sanchez, and then we will finish 

with Ms. Jackson Lee from Texas. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have a question. Can someone on the panel—I don’t know; 

maybe it is Homeland Security or maybe it is CBP—tell me how 

many known terrorists have we captured crossing from the northern border? 

Chief FISHER. Congresswoman, I do not know off the top of my 

head. I can find out. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. More than one? 

Chief FISHER. I beg your pardon? 

Ms. SANCHEZ. More than one? I am thinking specifically of the 

millennium bomber—— 

Chief FISHER. Yes. 

Ms. SANCHEZ [continuing]. That came across Seattle and came to 

Los Angeles. Okay. Do you know how many have come from across 

the southern border? 

Chief FISHER. Not so in my head, ma’am, no. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. Okay. If you could give me those numbers, because 

I think it is a ‘‘none’’ from the southern border that we found, and 

I think it is several from the northern border. 

I also want to ask you, because people have been saying that the 

Federal Government has done nothing to work on this issue of people coming into our country without the right documents or illegally. Can you tell me what, Chief, what you have seen and what 

ICE has seen in the last, let us say, 3 or 4 years with respect to 

our efforts? 

Or has Congress helped you in any way? Have we put more positions on for you? Have we given you more money? Have we put 

more pilot programs? Have we done nothing? 

Chief FISHER. No, you have not done anything, and yes to all of 

the above. We thank you for the support. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. For example, I think over the last 5 years, more 

or less, you have grown from about a 4,000-person entity to maybe 

about 20,000 positions. Is that correct? 

Chief FISHER. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. A majority of that is placed at the southern border, 

is it not? 

Chief FISHER. That is correct, yes. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. Okay. What about ICE? What new programs, what 

new monies—have we done nothing to try to stem this illegal crossing going on either on the southern or northern border or at all our 

coastline, which is immense, where people are coming in through 

the airport? 
63 

Mr. DINKINS. Absolutely not, ma’am. This committee and the 

Federal Government have given ICE a lot of resources. Just this 

last year we have sent 160 additional agents to the southwest border alone, so we have done great. We have been receiving funding 

for border enforcement security task forces, BEST task forces. Ten 

of those are on the southern border, so there has been a lot of action in the last few years, absolutely. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. Thank you, gentlemen. 

Now, I will probably ask the same question of our good friend 

from the GAO and more importantly, maybe, that question of has 

it been effective. 

Mr. STANA. The Government has put countless billions of dollars 

into border enforcement—you know, more people, fencing, cameras, 

sensors and so on. The apprehension rates have gone up, so you 

can’t say that nothing has been done. Of course, being from the 

GAO, were always looking for opportunities to do things better, and 

there are opportunities to do things better. But it is not accurate 

that nothing has been done. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. Thank you. I appreciate that. 

I yield back the rest of my time, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you very much. Thank the gentleman from 

California. 

At this time I recognize our last questioner, Ms. Jackson Lee 

from Texas. Thank you. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Chairman, thank you very much. As we are 

monitoring the floor for the number of Members voting, let me rush 

to my questions and follow the line of questioning from the 

gentlelady from California and ask both ICE and Customs and Border Patrol, if you will—I call it Patrol, but Protection, CBP—to provide me what you are doing with all those resources. 

Mr. Fisher? Why did we get the GAO study that indicates that 

we have been less than altogether effective with respect to alien 

smuggling? 

Chief FISHER. Well, coached that way, ma’am, I would not agree 

that we are not effective with the combination of that personal 

technology and infrastructure over the year. We have seen success. 

We have seen efficiencies. We do have metrics on how we compare 

and contrast that. Given the time, I won’t go into the detail, 

but—— 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. So what do you take issue with the GAO’s 

presentation? 

Chief FISHER. Well, to suggest that with all the increased resources that U.S. Customs and Border Protection has done nothing 

and hasn’t seen any increases, whether in efficiency or effectiveness, I would not agree with that. We have—— 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. So point to some examples. 

Chief FISHER. Some of examples is level of activity, which means 

that the amount of people that are trying to enter this country in 

between the ports of entry, those detected entries have gone down. 

The number of people that we have—— 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Can you provide the committee those numbers? I don’t know if they are in your testimony, and I apologize. 

I would like to see those numbers on a graph. 

Chief FISHER. Absolutely. 
64 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me ask the gentleman from ICE. I thank 

you for your service. I think it is important to see concrete numbers, because we all have pushed legislation to increase your numbers. 

Gentleman from ICE, let me first of all thank you for understanding that rays don’t work and you have a new procedure in 

dealing with employers. But I understand that you have been 

called by local jurisdictions to run here and run here. How can you 

leverage yourself to be more effective—— 

Mr. DINKINS. Yes, and that is—— 

Ms. JACKSON LEE [continuing]. On alien smuggling? 

Mr. DINKINS. Yes, ma’am. That is really where the GAO report 

hits at home is that we do have some responsibilities within the 

Office of Investigations, Homeland Security investigations at ICE 

that probably could be handled better over detention and removal. 

We have been making stages. I have commissioned a study to see 

not only along the southwest border, but a lot of those need to be 

done across the entire United States. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Will you have within a period of time—and I 

yield to the Chairman for the time frame—a report on the measures that you have made and actual success graphs showing increase in dealing with alien smuggling, increase in the success of 

capturing alien smugglers? Can you provide us with that? 

Mr. DINKINS. Yes, I can. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me move to the GAO, because we are— 

what is the crucial point that you want to make to us as members 

of what should be leveraged in terms of the resources? 

Mr. STANA. I would say three things. First and foremost, I would 

look to advancing their financial investigative techniques. I think 

you have got to attack the money streams that go to these criminal 

organizations. 

Secondly, I would make sure that the people that they have on 

the roles are doing their job the most effective way that they can. 

All too often we see instances where they are doing non-investigative work. Hiring, training, and employing criminal investigators is 

expensive, and you don’t want them just papering suspects. 

The third thing is I think it is crucial that they get performance 

measures in place so they can see how well they are doing, what 

is working, what is not, what you should improve, and what you 

just ought to kill. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you. 

Mr. Goddard, I am glad that you are here and sorry that you 

have to sit in the hot seat. I can very enthusiastically disagree with 

Arizona on its approach and on its law. I believe that you cannot 

help but engage in racial profiling even as you have amended the 

law. I assume that—are you counsel in the court as relates to the 

case that our U.S. attorney, United States attorney general has? 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Chairman, Congresswoman Lee, I am not, by 

rather unusual act of the Governor of Arizona, who wanted to take 

that defense and hire the lawyers yourself, so—— 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. So she is using outside counsel? 

Mr. GODDARD. I recused myself from the defense. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. All right. Well, maybe it is because of the integrity that you have. 
65 

But let me just indicate that you have done well on helping with 

the money-laundering issue. My question is if this law was to prevail, what role does the attorney general of Arizona have in its enforcement? If the law that was passed that I consider to be racial 

profiling, what role do you have in that enforcement? 

Mr. GODDARD. Mr. Chairman, Congresswoman, an excellent 

question. Obviously, we oversee and work with the county attorneys, who are the primary actives in terms of criminal prosecution. 

But this is primarily for the law enforcement on the ground, for the 

officers and the deputy sheriffs. So I can’t say we have no role, but 

it would be limited probably to receiving complaints, if there were 

any, as to anyone felt that they had been unfairly arrested are 

treated. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Will you uphold that component of the responsibility vigorously? 

Mr. GODDARD. Yes, ma’am, I will. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me just yield back, Mr. Chairman, and indicate that the attorney general is correct in his approach for challenging what is a vile and unconstitutional approach to immigration reform. I believe the Congress has an obligation to help you 

to help the men and women who are before us, those in law enforcement, and pass comprehensive immigration reform, and pass 

it now. I yield back. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Jackson 

Lee, for her line of questioning. 

At this time—I see there is time remaining for our votes, so we 

are going to be leaving at this time. But I do want to thank all the 

witnesses for the valuable testimony and for the Members for their 

questions. 

The Members of this subcommittee may have additional questions for the witnesses, so I would ask you to, you know, please respond as soon as you can. Again, we want to thank all of you all. 

To the attorney general, welcome again to the District of Columbia, and have a safe trip back. 

To all the witnesses, thank you. We appreciate all the work that 

you do for our great country. 

At this time, hearing no further business, the subcommittee 

stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

Æ