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

24–946 PDF 2006

FIGHTING METH IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND: ASSESSING THE IMPACT ON LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AND CHILD WELFARE AGENCIES

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

DRUG POLICY, AND HUMAN RESOURCES

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT REFORM

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

JULY 26, 2005

Serial No. 109–101

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html

http://www.house.gov/reform

(II)

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM

TOM DAVIS, Virginia, Chairman

CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut

DAN BURTON, Indiana

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota

MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania

CHRIS CANNON, Utah

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio

DARRELL E. ISSA, California

GINNY BROWN-WAITE, Florida

JON C. PORTER, Nevada

KENNY MARCHANT, Texas

LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina

CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania

VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina

——— ———

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California

TOM LANTOS, California

MAJOR R. OWENS, New York

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York

PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland

DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri

DIANE E. WATSON, California

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland

LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California

C.A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of

Columbia

———

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont

(Independent)

MELISSA WOJCIAK, Staff Director

DAVID MARIN, Deputy Staff Director/Communications Director

ROB BORDEN, Parliamentarian/Senior Counsel

TERESA AUSTIN, Chief Clerk

PHIL BARNETT, Minority Chief of Staff/Chief Counsel

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE, DRUG POLICY, AND HUMAN RESOURCES

MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana, Chairman

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina

DAN BURTON, Indiana

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio

CHRIS CANNON, Utah

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan

GINNY BROWN-WAITE, Florida

VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

DIANE E. WATSON, California

LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California

C.A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland

MAJOR R. OWENS, New York

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of

Columbia

EX OFFICIO

TOM DAVIS, Virginia HENRY A. WAXMAN, California

J. MARC WHEAT, Staff Director

NICHOLAS COLEMAN, Professional Staff Member and Counsel

MALIA HOLST, Clerk

TONY HAYWOOD, Minority Counsel

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Hearing held on July 26, 2005 ............................................................................... 1

Statement of:

Burns, Scott, Deputy Director, State and Local Affairs, Office of National

Drug Control Policy; Joseph Rannazzisi, Deputy Chief, Office of Enforcement of DEA; and Laura Birkmeyer, Assistant U.S. Attorney,

San Diego, and chairperson, National Alliance for Endangered Children ................................................................................................................ 10

Birkmeyer, Laura ...................................................................................... 25

Burns, Scott ............................................................................................... 10

Rannazzisi, Joseph .................................................................................... 18

Young, Nancy K., Ph.D., Director, National Center on Substance Abuse

and Child Welfare, and Director, Children and Family Futures; Valerie

Brown, National Association of Counties; Freida S. Baker, deputy director, Family and Children’s Services, Alabama Department of Human

Resources; Phil Byers, chief deputy, Rutherford County, NC, Sheriff’s

Office; Sylvia Deporto, deputy director, Riverside County, CA, Children’s Services; Betsy Dunn, investigator and peer supervisor, Tennessee Department of Children’s Services, Child Protective Services

Division; Don Owens, chief, Titusville, PA, Police Department; and

Sheriff Mark Shook, Watauga County, NC, Sheriff’s Department ........... 68

Baker, Freida S. ........................................................................................ 106

Brown, Valerie ........................................................................................... 97

Byers, Phil ................................................................................................. 114

Deporto, Sylvia .......................................................................................... 120

Dunn, Betsy ............................................................................................... 123

Owens, Don ................................................................................................ 130

Shook, Sheriff Mark .................................................................................. 147

Young, Nancy K. ........................................................................................ 68

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:

Baker, Freida S., deputy director, Family and Children’s Services, Alabama Department of Human Resources, prepared statement of .............. 108

Birkmeyer, Laura, Assistant U.S. Attorney, San Diego, and chairperson,

National Alliance for Endangered Children, prepared statement of ........ 27

Brown, Valerie, National Association of Counties, prepared statement

of ..................................................................................................................... 99

Burns, Scott, Deputy Director, State and Local Affairs, Office of National

Drug Control Policy, prepared statement of ............................................... 13

Byers, Phil, chief deputy, Rutherford County, NC, Sheriff’s Office, prepared statement of ........................................................................................ 117

Cummings, Hon. Elijah E., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Maryland:

Article dated July 8, 2005 ......................................................................... 35

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 41

Deporto, Sylvia, deputy director, Riverside County, CA, Children’s Services, prepared statement of .......................................................................... 122

Dunn, Betsy, investigator and peer supervisor, Tennessee Department

of Children’s Services, Child Protective Services Division, prepared

statement of ................................................................................................... 125

Owens, Don, chief, Titusville, PA, Police Department, prepared statement

of ..................................................................................................................... 133

Rannazzisi, Joseph, Deputy Chief, Office of Enforcement of DEA, prepared statement of ........................................................................................ 20

Shook, Sheriff Mark, Watauga County, NC, Sheriff’s Department, prepared statement of ........................................................................................ 150

Page

IV

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by—Continued

Souder, Hon. Mark E., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Indiana:

Photographs ............................................................................................... 2

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 6

Watson, Hon. Diane E., a Representative in Congress from the State

of California, prepared statement of ........................................................... 49

Young, Nancy K., Ph.D., Director, National Center on Substance Abuse

and Child Welfare, and Director, Children and Family Futures, prepared statement of ........................................................................................ 71

(1)

FIGHTING METH IN AMERICA’S HEARTLAND:

ASSESSING THE IMPACT ON LOCAL LAW

ENFORCEMENT AND CHILD WELFARE

AGENCIES

TUESDAY, JULY 26, 2005

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE, DRUG POLICY,

AND HUMAN RESOURCES,

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM,

Washington, DC.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:08 p.m., in room

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mark E. Souder (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Souder, McHenry, Mica, Gutknecht,

Foxx, Cummings, and Watson.

Also present: Representatives Osborne and Cooper.

Staff present: Marc Wheat, staff director and chief counsel; Nicholas Coleman, professional staff member and counsel; Pat

DeQuattro, congressional fellow; Malia Holst, clerk; Tony Haywood,

minority counsel; and Jean Gosa, minority assistant clerk.

Mr. SOUDER. The subcommittee will come to order. Thank you all

and thank you for coming. Today we continue our subcommittee’s

work on the problem of meth trafficking and abuse—a problem that

is ravaging the entire Nation and putting a severe strain on law

enforcement agencies and child welfare programs, particularly at

the State and local levels.

Displayed on the video screens are a series of photographs that

capture a young woman’s 10-year progression and downward spiral

resulting from meth addiction. These graphic photos demonstrate

the real-life impact of meth abuse.

[The information referred to follows:]

2

3

Mr. SOUDER. This is actually the ninth hearing on meth held by

the subcommittee since 2001. In places as diverse as Indiana, Arkansas, Hawaii and Minnesota, I have heard gripping testimony

about how this drug has devastated lives and families. But I have

also learned about the many positive ways that communities have

fought back, targeting the meth cooks and dealers, trying to get addicts into treatment, and working to educate young people about

the risks of meth abuse.

Meth is one of the most powerful and dangerous drugs available,

and one of the easiest to make. It can be ‘‘cooked’’ using common

household or agricultural chemicals and simple cold medicines, following recipes easily available on the Internet. The drug is highly

addictive and has multiple side effects, including psychotic behavior, physical deterioration and brain damage. Death by overdose is

a significant risk.

Most meth comes from the so-called ‘‘super labs’’ in California

and northern Mexico, and Congress currently is exploring ways to

address that growing problem. However, it is frequently the smaller, clandestine or ‘‘clan’’ labs that generate so much damage and

misery for local communities. The amount of meth that is created

at these smaller labs is relatively small, yet the impact the labs

have on the community is staggering, due to the environmental

damage and health risks that they create.

The National Association of Counties [NACo] recently published

two surveys which detail the impact that meth is having on law enforcement agencies and child welfare services. The surveys, entitled, ‘‘The Criminal Effect of Meth on Communities,’’ and ‘‘The Impact of Meth on Children: Out of Home Placement,’’ surveyed hundreds of counties nationwide on the effects of meth. The NACo law

enforcement agency survey reported that nearly 60 percent of responding counties stated that meth was their largest drug problem.

The surveys provide further evidence of how the meth epidemic

is quickly spreading across the Nation, from rural to suburban and

urban areas. In the NACo survey directed toward law enforcement

agencies, the information on meth-related arrests and meth cases

overall was staggering. Of the 500 responding counties in the past

year, 67 percent reported increases in meth-related arrests. Counties in the southwest reported particularly disturbing results, with

76 reporting such increases. Over half of the agencies surveyed

stated that at least 1 in 5 jail inmates are serving meth-related

sentences.

The surveys also demonstrate that children are increasingly becoming the primary victims of meth abuse. The surveys found that

40 percent of child welfare agencies reported an increase in ‘‘out of

home placements because of meth in the past year.’’ This abuse unfortunately includes physical and mental trauma, and even sexual

abuse; 69 percent of county social service agencies have indicated

that they have had to provide additional, specialized training for

their welfare system workers and had to develop new and special

protocols for workers to address the special needs of children affected by meth. Community Health and Human Services, as well

as child welfare services, such foster care, are being overwhelmed

as a result of meth.

4

Officials at every level of government, Federal, State and local,

must take effective, coordinated action to address the meth epidemic. U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales recently declared

that, ‘‘in terms of damage to children and to our society, meth is

now the most dangerous drug in America.’’ As Members of Congress, we need to take a careful look to see what additional legislation and resources are needed.

First, what forms of direct assistance, particularly in the expensive realm of environmental cleanup, should the Federal Government provide to local agencies when dealing with meth lab busts

and their aftermath? Second, what kind of specialized training can

and should the Federal Government provide to State and local

agencies, both in law enforcement and the child welfare service

areas?

And third, what are the ‘‘best practices’’ for dealing with children

found at meth labs sites?

In Indiana, just in the last few days, as most of the Members of

Congress had been saying, there have been multiple major arrests,

events in western Indiana, eastern Illinois. One of these guys got

into an anhydrous ammonia tank—a 1,000-gallon leak that they

had to evacuate many blocks of town and then eventually the

whole area, a problem that we faced in a number of rural areas in

my district and across Indiana.

We had a recreational vehicle plant that had a rumor that they

had the problem so they did a quick drug test and found a third

of the people at the plant where the average income is over

$72,000, hardly a low-income area, that one-third were high at

work that day, most on meth but also including marijuana and cocaine.

A big story over the weekend was about one of these workers

who, he and his wife, both were very professional, had been destroyed as they started with marijuana, moved to meth at this

plant and had their lives wrecked. And this story is becoming far

too frequent in community after community, and is starting to hit

our major metro areas.

As we heard in St. Paul, MN, two big cities where the data—by

next year, the national agencies will be reporting the data coming

in from these counties and all of a sudden, this meth will go from

8 percent to much higher in these cities and the data is behind.

It is one of our biggest collection problems that we have when we

look at this committee and as we do our oversight hearings. Our

data is often 2003 drug data and the issue is moving so fast in the

category of meth, it is flat-out wrong right now.

At today’s hearing, we will hear from the Federal, State and local

agencies that fight on the ‘‘front lines’’ against the meth epidemic.

We welcome Mr. Scott Burns, Deputy Director for State and Local

Affairs from the Office of National Drug Control Policy; Mr. Joseph

Rannazzisi, Deputy Chief of the Office of Enforcement at the Drug

Enforcement Administration; and Ms. Laura Birkmeyer, Assistant

U.S. Attorney in San Diego, CA and chairperson of the National Alliance for Drug Endangered Children.

On the second panel we will hear from Dr. Nancy Young, Director of the National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare,

which is funded by the Federal Substance Abuse and Mental

5

Health Services Administration [SAMHSA], and Director of Children and Family Futures; Ms. Valerie Brown of the National Association of Counties; Ms. Freida Baker, deputy director of Family

and Children’s Services at the Alabama Department of Human Resources; Chief Deputy Phil Byers from the Rutherford County, NC

Sheriff’s Office; Ms. Sylvia Deporto, deputy director of Riverside

County Children’s Services in California; Ms. Betsy Dunn, investigator and peer supervisor from the Tennessee Department of

Children’s Services, Child Protective Services Division; Chief Don

Owens of the Titusville, PA, Police Department; and Sheriff Mark

Shook from the Watauga County, NC Sheriff’s Department.

We thank everyone for taking the time to join us this afternoon,

and look forward to your testimony.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Mark E. Souder follows:]

6

7

8

Mr. SOUDER. I yield next to Mr. McHenry.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for

bringing attention to this important issue. Today we are discussing

fighting methamphetamine and trying to bring attention to this

matter. I think it is named appropriately ‘‘Fighting Meth in America’s Heartland,’’ because that is mainly where it is occurring in

small and rural communities across this Nation, and so it’s becoming an epidemic in places like my district in western North Carolina, and we are struggling to battle this issue.

I certainly appreciate Chief Deputy Sheriff Philip Byers and his

wife, Sheila, for being here today. They will be part of our second

panel. I look forward to introducing them at that time.

We have two expert panels today to talk about the staggering effects that meths have on our Nation. I think it’s most important

that we hear from our sheriffs’ offices especially, and our State-run

child service programs, because they have the unique challenge of

dealing with this in small communities across America where this

epidemic is occurring.

In 2004, over 3,357 children nationally were found to be connected with seized meth labs. This is an issue of severe concern for

this Congress and for this committee. The problem is growing, but

it is not a faceless problem, as our witnesses will testify today. The

debilitating mental and physical effects of this drug, the production

process, and the way it touches everyone, especially in rural communities, are not being overlooked.

In North Carolina alone, Medicaid costs, in part, have increased

due to the rise of children that have been taken out of homes with

meth labs. Beyond that, the medical expenses that society will

bear, that our governments will fund, and we as taxpayers will

fund, because of this meth addiction that our folks are dealing

with. I think it’s important that we promote awareness about this

spreading problem that we protect our children and provide resources to those on the front lines so that we can take on this key

area of concern.

I would like to welcome all of our witnesses today. Thank you for

taking time to be here before Congress. It will be a unique process

for you. Some of you have been here before, but for those that have

not, it should be definitely a learning experience for both of us.

Thanks so much.

Mr. SOUDER. Ms. Foxx, do you have an opening statement?

Ms. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank both

the chairman and the ranking member of the subcommittee for

holding this hearing and for their continued effort to fight the dire

methamphetamines problem in this country. I want to thank the

members of both panels for the work you do in your communities

in collaborating with Congress today in this constructive dialog on

how to best address this problem nationwide.

I am honored to have one of my constituents and community

leaders here today as a member of the second panel. Sheriff Mark

Shook of Watauga County, my home county, has truly become an

expert and leader in this area through his outstanding work over

the past several years. As a former patrol officer and detective,

Sheriff Shook has over 20 years experience from the law enforcement side before being elected Watauga County sheriff 3 years ago.

9

At that point, he wrapped his arms around the meth problem

and tackled it at full force. He understands the curse that meth

has been on our community and has done a terrific job in attacking

the problem from all angles. He has been extremely effective in

educating our community about meth, and my first knowledge

about this problem came from a workshop that he held in our community, attended by over 100 people. I have known Mark his entire

life, and we share a passion for the beauty of the mountains of

northwestern North Carolina.

Methamphetamine production and abuse have been a scourge on

the beautiful mountain area that Mark and I care deeply about.

Sheriff Shook and I have teamed up to minimize and eliminate the

problem. With his leadership and tireless efforts, we have made

great strides.

I am honored and proud to have Sheriff Shook here today to

share his success with Congress, and I hope his story can be a benefit to the subcommittee and other communities that are afflicted

with meth abuse.

The challenge meth abuse poses is strong, serious and immediate, and so, too, must be our response. The outstanding job Sheriff Shook has done at the local level must be duplicated at the Federal level if we are to eradicate meth from our communities.

I look forward to receiving the testimony of our panelists and

hope we can use the feedback to create a firm legislative response

to the meth problem.

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Gutknecht.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Just very briefly, Mr. Chairman. Again, thanks

for this hearing. More importantly, thank you for taking the subcommittee around the country to hear from folks from all areas of

our Nation. This is a huge and a growing problem. We learned, for

example, in the Twin Cities, that there is a growing sense among

law enforcement that no longer is this a drug which is just being

produced in rural communities, that more and more of it is actually

coming in from Mexico, across our borders, which raises even more

interesting questions that we at the Federal level need to address.

So, again, thank you for this hearing and thank you for your dogged pursuit of this particular issue.

I yield back.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you, I would now like to recognize a nonmember of this subcommittee, Mr. Cooper, who wants to introduce

a Tennessee witness. Tennessee has been one of the hardest-hit

States. Your delegation has been great, including the gentleman

with us today in helping us to fight meth. I recognize you for the

purpose of your introduction.

Mr. COOPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really appreciate your

leadership on this issue because I know of no greater scourge our

rural area faces than meth. Tennessee has been hard hit. We are

about second worst State in America, and that is not a distinction

that any of us wants to hear.

I am particularly proud that Betsy Dunn will be joining us on

the second panel, because she is the model of what a Child Protective Services worker should be. She has been at it for 16 years and

we know it is a high turnover in her profession. She is serving in

10

one of the toughest areas of the country. Our hometown of

Cookesville is beautiful, a university town and wonderful, but all

around Cookesville, our areas have been very hard hit by meth.

Many of us have read horror stories by the famous author Stephen King, but I think Betsy can tell us scarier stories than anything that Stephen King has written about, because her stories are

real and they are affecting our kids every day in large numbers.

Our State went ahead and the State legislature took

pseudoephedrine off the pharmacy shelves. I hope that our adjoining States and all the States in the country will consider steps to

do that, to do anything they possibly can, anything to alleviate the

scourge.

But we are very proud of Betsy and her pioneering work over the

years. You make us proud, Betsy.

Thank you.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to submit written statements and questions to the hearing record and that any answers to written questions by the witnesses also be included in the hearing record. Without objection, it is so ordered.

I ask unanimous consent that all exhibits, documents and all

other materials referred to by Members may be included in the

hearing record and that all Members may be permitted to revise

and extend their remarks. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Our first panel is composed of Mr. Scott Burns, Deputy Director

for State and Local Affairs, Office of National Drug Control Policy;

Mr. Joseph Rannazzisi, Deputy Chief, Office of Enforcement of

DEA; Ms. Laura Birkmeyer, U.S. Assistant Attorney, San Diego

and chairperson for the National Alliance for Endangered Children.

Would each of you stand, as an oversight committee it’s our

standard practice to ask our witnesses to testify under oath.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. SOUDER. Let the record show that each of the witnesses responded in the affirmative.

Mr. Burns, thank you for joining us. You are recognized for 5

minutes.

STATEMENTS OF SCOTT BURNS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, STATE

AND LOCAL AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL

POLICY; JOSEPH RANNAZZISI, DEPUTY CHIEF, OFFICE OF

ENFORCEMENT OF DEA; AND LAURA BIRKMEYER, ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SAN DIEGO, AND CHAIRPERSON, NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR ENDANGERED CHILDREN

STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Thank you, Chairman Souder, and distinguished

members of the subcommittee for inviting me to discuss our national efforts against meth. I am particularly honored, Mr. Chairman, to be here with Mr. Rannazzisi and Ms. Birkmeyer, both renowned experts, not only in this country, but worldwide. Mr.

Rannazzisi, as you know, is not only a respected DEA agent, but

a lawyer and a pharmacist.

Ms. Birkmeyer, a fellow road warrior, we see each other crossing

the country, is not only an assistant U.S. Attorney who has spent

11

years in the courtroom prosecuting methamphetamine cases, but

she is truly a voice and a champion for children in this country on

these issues. So I am honored.

I am also honored to be here with my brothers and sisters in law

enforcement from rural America. As you know, Mr. Chairman, before coming here to work for the President and the drug czar, I

spent 16 years as a prosecutor in a small town. I learned about the

destructive aspects and nature of methamphetamine firsthand. I

worked with police officers who were put at risk by having to respond to, enter and sit on meth labs. I worked with city councilmen

and city commissioners and others to try to figure out a way to pay

for the overtime while we waited for a DEA chemist or work crews

to come in. I met with innocent neighbors who lived near houses

who were turned in meth labs. I have learned of children whose

parents were found to be under the influence of meth and suffered

neglect as a result.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, this is a bad drug. The toxic waste,

6 or 7 pounds of waste associated with each pound of methamphetamine is produced, children poisoned and toxicity levels at the lab,

burns from explosion, I see Congressman Cooper here, I know that

we were out in Tennessee at the burn unit and the children and

those suffering from meth explosions, the violence associated with

this drug and the costs to incarcerate and clean up. It affects and

destroys individual lives, as we know, of families and communities.

So the national drug strategy has to be balanced. As you know,

our priorities are prevention and treatment, and also a marked destruction, dismantling drug trafficking organizations. We believe

the strategy, with your help and your leadership, has yielded success through the monitoring the future survey and the household

survey, those measures that we look to determine whether or not

we are doing any good—17 percent reduction over the last 3 years.

Our strategy to reduce drug use in America has not, however, been

focused on one illicit drug at the expense of another, but seeks to

reduce all illicit drug use in this country. The increase in treatments for meth over the past few years, especially in the western

and midwestern States, illustrates the devastating impact of the

drug on many adults.

The good news, however, is that the surveys show that methamphetamine use among teens is down 25 percent over the last 3

years. Hopefully, the message is reaching them that we can

buildupon those reductions with respect toward children.

I will be brief, because I want to take questions, but I want to

just basically outline some of the efforts in combating the meth

problem on a Federal level, the Drug Endangered Children Program, and Ms. Birkmeyer will talk about that in depth.

The NAMSDL, or National Alliance of Model State Drug Laws,

Sherry Green and others that are in her office putting on training

in summits and town halls across the country. The HIDTA program, more initiatives in the High Intensity Drug Trafficking

Areas Program, are focused on methamphetamine than any other

singular drug. You talked about the NACo survey and the perception or determination that methamphetamine was a No. 1 problem.

The HIDTAs are charged with determining the threat in their

area and responding appropriately and more initiatives to target

12

methamphetamine than any other single drug. The national methamphetamine chemical drug initiative, again one that Ms.

Birkmeyer oversees in the HIDTA program, that brings together

the best and the brightest of law enforcement officers across this

country to talk about trends and ways to make the problem smaller.

The administration has kept level the request for funding for

cleanup in Federal law enforcement, as Mr. Rannazzisi will talk

about, has done a phenomenal job, especially of shutting down the

flow of pseudoephedrine from Canada into the United States, over

a 90 percent reduction in interdiction. The methamphetamine advertisements or PSAs that you, Mr. Chairman, and others were so

helpful in bringing to fruition, will be coming out.

I chair the Synthetic Action Plan that brought together my office,

as well as the Department of Justice, and just about everybody in

the intergovernmental world in Washington to sit down and try to

come up with recommendations to bring to the Congress with respect to how to make this problem smaller.

I personally thank you for your leadership and for your courage,

to take on these issues, as was mentioned, you are not only here

in Washington but out in the field. I have been to Indiana as you

know, twice to try to assist and just about every other State in the

country, talking about this issue.

I ask that my full statement be made part of the official record

and I look forward to your questions, thank you.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Burns follows:]

13

14

15

16

17

18

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Rannazzisi.

STATEMENT OF JOHN RANNAZZISI

Mr. RANNAZZISI. Thank you, sir. Chairman Souder and distinguished members of the House Government Reform Committee,

Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources, on behalf of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Administrator, Karen P. Tandy, I appreciate your invitation to testify

here today regarding DEA’s effort to combat methamphetamine

trafficking and abuse across the United States.

I just want to say that I am both honored and humbled to sit

here at the table with Ms. Birkmeyer and Mr. Burns. They have

given us outstanding—nothing short of outstanding support in our

fight against drug abuse, and they should be recognized for that.

Today, few communities in the United States have not felt the

crushing impact of methamphetamine, which goes far beyond the

actual trafficking and abuse of this drug. The DEA is well aware

that combating this drug requires a multifaceted approach to law

enforcement.

In addition to our domestic and international enforcement efforts, the DEA is battling this drug through the efforts of our office

of training, hazardous waste disposal program and victimless witness assistance program. Training is vital to ensure that officers

conducting laboratory investigations are provided with safe and efficient procedures and equipment which allows them to work in

these dangerous environments.

Since 1998, with funding originally received to the communityoriented policing program [COPS], and then through direct annual

appropriations, the DEA offers a strong training program for our

State and local counterparts. Each of our training courses exceeds

OSHA-mandated minimum safety requirements and is provided at

no cost to qualified local law enforcement officers.

Since 1998, we have trained over 8,600 State and local law enforcement personnel plus an additional 1,900 DEA employees to

conduct clandestine laboratory investigations, dismantle seized labs

and to protect the public from methamphetamine toxic waste. As

part of this training, approximately $19 million in meth lab personal protective equipment has been provided to State and local

law enforcement officers. The DEA has also conducted training for

our foreign counterparts and has also provided awareness training

for our U.S. military in Afghanistan.

Today our hazardous waste program, with the assistance of

COPS, supports and funds the cleanup of a majority of the laboratories seized in the United States. This program promotes the safety of law enforcement personnel and the public by using qualified

companies with specialized training and equipment to remove hazardous wastes seized at clandestine drug labs. The average cost of

the cleanup during the initial contract was approximately $17,000

and currently the average cost is approximately $2,000.

To further reduce the cost of clandestine lab cleanups, in fiscal

year 2004 we join the Kentucky State Police to join a pilot clandestine lab container program in Kentucky. This program has streamlined the laboratory cleanup process and has resulted in the reduction of operational costs, the length of time officers must remain on

19

the lab site and overtime costs to law enforcement agencies. The

current average cleanup lab time cost in this project is approximately $350 per site.

More than any other controlled substance, methamphetamine

trafficking endangers children to the exposure of drug abuse, neglect, physical and sexual abuse, toxic chemicals, hazardous waste,

fire and explosions.

A key goal of the DEA victim and witness program is to provide

assistance to victims of methamphetamine, particularly drug-endangered children. Each of our field divisions has a victim-witness

coordinator to insure that all endangered children are identified

and that the child’s immediate safety is addressed at the scene by

appropriate child welfare and health service providers.

Assistance has also been provided to vulnerable adults, individuals of domestic violence and customers and employees of businesses, such as motels and hotels such as where methamphetamine

has been produced and seized.

We also provide training on drug-endangered children to Federal,

State and local law enforcement and to national State and local victims organizations. In order to provide the public with current information on methamphetamine and drug-endangered children, the

DEA participates in numerous local, State and national conferences

and exhibits.

In conclusion, the DEA is attacking the methamphetamine epidemic on all available fronts. In addition to our domestic and international enforcement efforts, we provide vital laboratory training

equipment to law enforcement officers from across the country. Our

hazardous waste program, with the assistance of grants to State

and local law enforcement, supports and funds the cleanup of a majority of the clandestine laboratories seized in the United States.

Over the years, this program has become more efficient, and we

have engaged in efforts to further streamline this process and reduce the cleanup costs. Through the victim-witness assistance program, we are providing assistance to methamphetamine victims.

Chairman Souder, distinguished members of the subcommittee,

thank you for your recognition of this important issue and the opportunity to testify here today. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rannazzisi follows:]

20

21

22

23

24

25

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you, Ms. Birkmeyer.

STATEMENT OF LAURA J. BIRKMEYER

Ms. BIRKMEYER. Chairman Souder and distinguished members of

the subcommittee. It is a true honor to appear before you today to

discuss the plight of America’s drug-endangered children. I am the

Executive Assistant U.S. Attorney in the southern district of California, and I have prosecuted methamphetamine and precursor

chemical cases for most of my 18 years there.

But today, I address you as director of the National Alliance for

Drug Endangered Children. The alliance encourages communities

to intervene on behalf of children and to establish Drug Endangered Children [DEC], multidisciplinary programs to rescue, defend

and shelter and support these children.

Methamphetamine is running ferociously throughout the country, and in its wake, often unseen and overlooked are thousands of

children. Drug endangered children are at enormous risk in homes

where meth is manufactured or where parents live a methamphetamine life-style.

If this were a different venue I would present to you the hundreds of pictures and video clips we have collected of deplorable living conditions evidencing the homes of these children. Words don’t

adequately describe the filth, chaos and danger there. Their

homes—where their sheets, if there are any, are never washed,

where children’s bedrooms are used to store drugs, where toxic

waste from methamphetamine manufacturing is routinely poured

down kitchen sinks and bathtubs in which children are later

bathed. There are homes where the plumbing doesn’t work, food in

the refrigerator is moldy and rotten, and where if there is any food,

many times it is contaminated because often times methamphetamine and methamphetamine chemicals are stored there.

There are also the homes where doorbells ring all day and night

during binge cycles and where a constant stream of strangers, exfelons, registered sex offenders and poly drug users come and go to

use meth. The air is filled with second hand methamphetamine

smoke that is precipitating out on surfaces throughout the house.

The children are ‘‘parentified,’’ they are left to look out for themselves and their younger siblings while their parents binge, sleep

and cope with their drug habit.

I could also spread before you murdered, burned, bruised and

maimed children who are victimized by these same adults. This is

just the tip of the iceberg. All of these children, even those that

emerge without serious bodily injury, suffer enormous psychological

harm, degradation and lack of nurturing. Methamphetamine affects the body, and particularly the brain in a way that lingers long

after ingestion occurs.

NIDA Director Nora Volkow and others have just begun to show

that methamphetamine alters brain chemistry for months and

years after the drug use ceases. The affects on the brain alter parental behavior and impair the ability to parent. Often parents in

drug treatment do not recover in sufficient time and prove competent enough to be reunified with their children.

Just yesterday, the alliance brought together a working group of

drug treatment experts to identify the most effective methamphetVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:37 Mar 28, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\24946.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
26

amine programs and to evaluate and recommend programs which

address the total needs of family and their dependent children.

We are also in the process of designing an awareness program

used to notify drug treatment providers who are sometimes unaware of the dangerous consequences for dependent children when

their parents relapse. I know you are familiar with the El Paso Intelligence Center statistics.

You also probably know that we cannot count the total number

of drug-endangered children in this Nation. We know that the El

Paso numbers are not complete. Some counties are starting to

count their drug endangered children on their own and in my home

county, DEC teams have taken more than 400 children into protective custody in the past 12 months. Significantly more than 95 percent of those come not from meth lab homes but from homes where

adults use methamphetamine or traffic in methamphetamine.

Drug endangered children teams comprised of law enforcement,

child welfare workers, medical professionals, psychologists, prosecutors, and where possible, working closely with drug courts and

court-appointed special advocates, are an effective response.

Drug endangered children, once they are found by law enforcement and protected by child custody are evaluated for placement

in safer environments as non-offending parents, family members or

in the foster care system. And a prosecutor will later determine if

it’s appropriate to file child endangerment charges or to permit reunification with parents.

As those children enter foster care they stress a system that

searches for a way to coordinate a provision of services. Many communities are reporting that we need better preparation of foster

parents for the behavior and medical issues attendant to children

exposed to methamphetamine environments. State and counties

have different resources and structures, and there is no one-sizefits-all for implementing a model of DEC. In order to implement

that process, last year we started the National Drug Endangered

Children training program administered by my office, which provides cost-free break to requesting States.

We send out experienced training teams consisting of law enforcement officers, prosecutors, doctors and nurses, the people that

actually do this day in and out. In the last 18 months, we have

trained more than 5,500 professionals for multiple disciplines in 20

different States. I wish to finish with a note of hope. The psychologists who work with the alliance say that these children are resilient. If given the opportunity and a caring environment they will

strive. We have, as one of our goals, the hope that they will not

be tagged ‘‘crank babies’’ as if they are irreversibly damaged. We

believe, and it is our fervent shared belief, that by rescuing these

children, we can break the cycle of drug abuse.

Thank you. I would be happy to answer any questions you may

have.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Birkmeyer follows:]

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you, I would recognize Mr. Cummings.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the witnesses for their testimony. Mr. Chairman I will give my statement

at this time. Methamphetamine or meth is hardly a new drug, but

in recent years, it has quickly become one of the major drug threats

facing this country. According to a recent report by the National

Association of Counties, entitled the Meth Epidemic in America,

meth is now the No. 1 illegal drug threat facing most of the 500

counties that participated in a survey of local law enforcement

agencies. Moreover, the drug’s destructive impact on families has

contributed to a significant increase in child welfare rolls as we

have just heard in hundreds of counties across the Nation, according to the same record. The New York Times described meth’s devastating impact on families in a compelling article published on

July 8, 2005, entitled, ‘‘Drug Scourge Creates its Own Form of Orphan.’’

I would ask unanimous consent, Mr. Chairman, that article be

submitted as a part of this hearing’s record.

[The information referred to follows:]

35

36

37

38

39

Mr. CUMMINGS. A powerful stimulant that affects the central

nervous system, meth is derived from a chemical compound contained in over-the-counter nasal decongestants and bronchial inhalers as well as in certain weight loss treatments. Meth can be

smoked, snorted, orally ingested or injected and is known by a variety of street names depending on the form in which it is used.

Meth frequently is produced in a powder form, resembling granulated crystals and also in a rock form known as ice, which is referred by those who smoke the drug.

Meth causes an increase rush and a high that can last up to 12

hours. The side effects of meth use are dangerous and sometimes

fatal. They include convulsions, high body temperatures, stroke,

cardiac arrests, arrhythmia, stomach cramps and shaking. Meth is

highly addictive and abuse of a drug can cause violent behavior,

anxiety, insomnia in addition to psychotic affects such as paranoia,

hallucinations, mood swings and delusions.

Persistent users develop a tolerance for the drug that requires

the user to take increasing amounts to achieve the desired affects.

Meth can be manufactured using ingredients purchased in U.S. retail stores. Most of the production of U.S.-consumed methamphetamine is domestic, occurring both in large super labs, which

produce unprecedented amounts of high purity methamphetamine,

as well as in small, clandestine labs found in homes, apartments,

hotel rooms, rented storage space and trucks. Many methamphetamine labs produce as little as 10 pounds a year, but their environmental costs in the cleaning up of toxic wastes from these sites can

be huge. Because the ingredients are not only toxic but extremely

volatile in combination labs also pose a serious danger to the socalled meth cooks who make the drugs, as well as individuals living in close proximity to the activity.

All too often, these individuals are the young children of smallscale manufacturers. They are not only at great risk of physical

harm, from explosions, exposure to toxic chemicals, but they are

very often the victims of family neglect or abuse, because the drug’s

affects on their parents or other relatives.

A National Association of Counties report, and ‘‘New York

Times’’ article described, these circumstances have led to a large

number of children being taken from the custodial control of their

parents and placed in foster care. Sadly the health and behavior

affects that result from prenatal exposure to meth and from severe

family neglect or abuse make meth-addicted parents especially

challenging for foster parents to care for and very, very difficult to

place. Absent effective treatment for the parents of displaced children, reuniting families, torn apart by meth, may be impossible.

Traditionally, meth has been concentrated in the western States,

especially California, Arizona and Utah. In recent years, the midwest region has experienced tremendous growth in both trafficking

and production, and that activity is spreading into the southeast

and northeast regions. Meth abuse has not yet become a major

problem in the communities of Baltimore City and Baltimore-Howard counties that I represent, but the rapid spread of meth production, trafficking and abuse in the United States, underscores the

fact that America’s drug problem affects all parts of America and

40

that no community, absolutely no community, is immune to the introduction of a dangerous new drug threat.

Today, on our first witness panel, we will hear from officials who

are responsible for shaping, coordinating and carrying out the Federal response to the growing meth epidemic, including preventing

its spread to the East Coast and urban districts like the one that

I represent.

We will also hear directly from law enforcement and child welfare officials from States and localities that are suffering the myriad of problems that affect communities where meth is produced

and consumed.

Federal legislative efforts to address the meth epidemic have focused on limiting over-the-counter access to products containing

precursor chemicals as well as providing support for law enforcement and the cleanup of toxic sites. There is no doubt that these

are important objectives that Congress and the administration

should pursue.

At the same time, Mr. Chairman, I believe that it would be impossible to underestimate the importance of drug treatment in addressing this epidemic. Research from the Center for Substance

Abuse Treatment shows that meth addiction can be effectively

treated and that the benefits of treating meth addiction are similar

to the benefits derived from treating addiction to other drugs. Use

of the drug is sharply reduced. Criminal activity and recidivism decline. Employment status and housing status improve, and overall

health improves—a healthy drug-free employed person in a stable

housing situation is a person who is far more likely to be able to

function in civil society and be a responsible, loving parent—of insuring that people who have become dependent on meth have access to effective treatment is therefore essential to stopping this

epidemic that is sweeping across our great Nation.

So, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for continuing to shine a light on

this issue. I thank each of our witnesses for appearing with us

today.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Elijah E. Cummings follows:]

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

Mr. SOUDER. Before we move to questions, Mr. Mica, do you wish

to make an opening statement.

Mr. MICA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you for recognizing

me. I didn’t get a chance to make an opening statement, but if you

would permit me just to make a few comments.

First of all, I thank you for this hearing. I rarely try to write and

direct the actions of this subcommittee, although I had the honor

and privilege of being a former Chair of this panel. But as you

know, I requested that we look at this issue. The meth issue is totally out of hand. I have worked on this subcommittee with you

and other predecessors back at—before Denny Hastert.

We have tackled crack and cocaine issues. I have worked with

Mr. Cummings in trying to clean up Baltimore and some of the

challenges we faced in that community and other communities. We

have been through heroin. We have tracked down perpetrators to

the Andes, we have put together multibillion dollar programs to go

after drugs at their sources, illegal narcotics at their sources. We

have been through the designer drug phase.

Now we are at an interesting juncture where we have done some

good things in some of those areas. But this problem is in

everybody’s backyard in this Congress and in every community

across the country. It’s almost totally out of hand. It’s our worst

drug nightmare come true, because the ingredients are easily accessible in drugstores. The recipes are on the Internet.

If you look at crime tragedy and social problems in this country

right now, spousal abuse, child abuse—I remember one time hearing the story of—it is affecting every aspect of our society. All the

social levels, whether it’s a rich family that puts their baby—the

mother puts the baby in a microwave and tries to fry her, or in

some of the poorest backwaters of our country, this is a serious

problem, out of hand. I honestly don’t know what the answer is. I

think if you get to treatment, it is probably too late. They have already destroyed lives and families, because, again, of the insidious

nature of this drug.

We have to look at again, education. We may need to haul some

folks in. I am anxious to hear what they recommend. We need to

look at our laws. We need to look at enforcement, whatever it

takes. But this situation is totally out of hand, and we have to

come up with some solution to bring all the resources possible to

address this.

So I thank you for calling this hearing. I am anxious to not only

hear the testimony, but also hear some of the solutions that are

suggested by some of the expert witnesses you have assembled. So

thank you and I yield back.

Mr. SOUDER. Ms. Watson, do you have any opening comments?

Ms. WATSON. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, for putting together this hearing today. Because eliminating drug smuggling and

distribution throughout the United States is vital in keeping our

communities safe. The Department of Justice contends that in my

home State of California, we have over 80 percent of the Nation’s

meth labs, and, therefore, we are the leading exporter of this deadly drug.

In 2002 to 2004, 142,749 people were treated for meth treatment

in my State alone. I am very troubled by the fact that I believe that

48

over 12 million Americans, ages 12 and older, have tried methamphetamine at least once in their lives. These statistics are startling as well as devastating. And our youth, being the future of this

Nation, and the fight to decrease the distribution of this drug,

along with all other illegal substances, should be at the forefront

of all of our efforts.

Throughout this hearing, we will discuss the impact on

methamphetamines on the child welfare system. We are seeing a

growing trend where every day more and more children are entering the foster care system because of meth, because of its manufacturing or because they are selling it. Our children are suffering

from their parents’ addiction to meth. Most of our youth who end

up being users were introduced to meth by their parents or by

other family members. The scope of the methamphetamine problem

is not just the users and distributors problem, it is the problem of

everyone who touches the life of someone who is using this harmful

substance.

Methamphetamine use and distribution have disastrous consequences across America’s heartland and beyond. So we must do

everything in our power to expand access to treatment, strengthen

our prevention services and continue to support research that will

help us get rid of this problem here in the United States. We need

to be focused on supplying treatment that will not only get the

abuser off of drugs, but supply them with a job, help them remain

out of jail and be a positive contributor to society.

So, Mr. Chairman, I thank you again for putting together this

hearing, and I would like to thank the witnesses for their willingness to come and testify. I hope that we can all work together to

effectively tackle the abuse of all illicit substances that are ruining

our streets and killing our children every day.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Diane E. Watson follows:]

49

50

51

52

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. Like Congressman Cooper, Congressman Osborne is not a member of this committee, but he has been

a leader in the fight against meth. Would you like to make any

comments.

Mr. OSBORNE. No statement.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Burns, before this hearing, you met with the

bipartisan caucus leaders, Congressman Calvert, Congressman

Larsen, Congressman Baird.

Mr. BURNS. Yes.

Mr. SOUDER. They had specifically asked you to come back with

what the Federal Government was doing in a coordinated way to

tackle the problem of meth. Could you elaborate on that a little bit

and what your plans are to come back to the meth efforts we have

been organizing aggressively here in Congress? And we would like

to hear what the administration is doing.

Mr. BURNS. Yes, let me start by saying, as many of you know

who have followed this issue, we had great successes in stemming

the flow of pseudoephedrine from Canada into Central Valley, CA,

Congresswoman Watson, your State. We saw a drastic reduction in

the number of super labs, super labs being a lab that can produce

10 pounds or more methamphetamine in a 24-hour period.

We saw those labs, we believe, go south to Mexico. So the strategy this the administration had, Ms. Birkmeyer and Mr.

Rannazzisi and our brothers and sisters in law enforcement and

across the country, had a year ago has changed. This is not an

issue that you can come up with the solution, that is, forever going

to work. So I look forward, and I am pleased that the meth caucus

has agreed to sit down with us and look at the immediate and best

practices we can employ to making the problem smaller.

With respect to moving the meth to Mexico, for example—and I

have talked about a synthetic action plan that we have come up

with. There are efforts underway and the meth caucus has agreed

to assist us in dealing with China, Hong Kong, Czech Republic and

Germany and other countries that export pseudoephedrine, primarily and formerly to Canada, but now primarily to Mexico. Any

assistance that can be provided in conjunction with the administration will be well received.

Ms. Birkmeyer and the national methamphetamine chemical initiative, now I am talking about the domestic side of methamphetamine, bringing together law enforcement officers from Florida and

from Nebraska and from North Carolina and every State in this

country, Indiana, to look at best practices and to make recommendations to us with respect to what will work—who better

than the women and men in the field and in the trenches of these

sheriffs and folks behind us that give us——

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Burns, I appreciate that.

Mr. BURNS. Sure.

Mr. SOUDER. What we want to see are not the piecemeal efforts

which have been extraordinary. We want to see a coordinated effort. This is not a new drug. It didn’t just suddenly burst on the

scene. We held the first hearings under Mr. Mica in Congressman

Ose’s district right before California passed their childhood

endangerment law, and it had to be at least 8 years ago when this

hit California. It has been steadily moving across the country.

53

What we see are individual HIDTAs having to come bottom up.

We see individual programs being coordinated around the State.

We see no national coordinating meth strategy. What I would like

to see is not how is this piece and how we are going to do this and

that.

In the past 3 weeks, we have passed more pieces of legislation

on meth which the administration could have been doing, which

the administration could have done, but didn’t do. We are going to

keep the pressure on. What the meth caucus wants to hear are not

the pieces but the overall strategy. How does this strategy tackle

this?

The Canada bust was tremendous. It dried up a portion of the

pseudoephedrine across the border. There are only nine of these

plants in the entire world. This isn’t that hard. It is not going to

be that easy, but we want to see a coordinated strategy.

Just a little over a week ago, the Attorney General said that

meth was an epidemic, which is not what we have been hearing out

of the government, and he said it is the most dangerous drug in

America. Does ONDCP agree with that? Do you think that is the

most dangerous drug in America?

Mr. BURNS. I don’t think anyone would disagree with Attorney

General Gonzales and his statement regarding the destructive nature of methamphetamine. I don’t know that he called it an epidemic.

Mr. SOUDER. That is a quote.

Mr. BURNS. I made the same statement in Portland, OR, a couple

of weeks ago. Based upon my experience there is no more serious

drug in the country. But as you know, and as the Office of National

Drug Control Policy, we also have to deal with heroin in the northeast where they would laugh if you told them there is a meth epidemic. We have to deal with gangs in Chicago who would laugh if

we told them there is a meth epidemic. We have to deal with the

fact that there are more kids in treatment for marijuana than all

the other kids combined and 751⁄2 million are using that drug. We

have to be able to address all of the drugs and all of the problems

on a comprehensive——

Mr. SOUDER. So you don’t agree it is the most dangerous drug

in America. In other words, its rate of increase, the way it grabs,

it’s impact on the State and local law enforcement. Look, I want

to say for the record, you have been an ally on this internally——

Mr. BURNS. Thank you.

Mr. SOUDER [continuing]. And it has been very difficult. But we

are not arguing that cocaine isn’t a dangerous drug or that heroin

isn’t a dangerous drug, but they are relatively flat. What we are

seeing, as many of the African-American interim big city organizations realize they can cut out the Colombians, go straight with the

Mexicans, and when they convert over to meth, we are going to see

an epidemic like never before in America as it hits the areas where

they don’t have an epidemic.

That is why the Attorney General says it is the most dangerous

drug and we want the ONDCP to acknowledge it. One of those is

my next question. The President with the active backing of ONDCP

proposed cutting the HIDTA, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking

Areas Program by 60 percent, which we have restored, in fact inVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:37 Mar 28, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\24946.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
54

creased, eliminating the Safe and Drug-free Schools State grants,

which we put the money back for in Congress, eliminating the

Burn grants to State and local law enforcement, which we will hear

on our critical second panel, wiping out the Meth Hot Spots Program, which we have restored.

Now the question is, are ONDCP and the administration ready

to say we were wrong—and as we go to conference here, are they

going to back us on the meth questions—and if you are not prepared to say that today, I hope you will take it back to the Director

of ONDCP and the White House that Congress has spoken. We

need you not to come up and say, look, we are working on the meth

piecemeal. We need you to stop cutting the budget on how we are

trying to address it. We need you to back up the U.S. Congress as

we try to move it forward and back up the State and local law enforcement, the DEA agents, in the field so they can stop this before

we bemoan 2 years later that the statistics ate us alive.

Mr. BURNS. I will deliver the message, Congressman, I hear you

loud and clear, I think we heard it loud and clear in the House and

the Senate with respect to HIDTA and other assistance in State

and local law enforcement.

As you mentioned prior to the hearing, I met with the meth caucus, met with Congressmen Larsen and Baird and Calvert and admitted that we would make an attempt to do it in a package fashion and not piecemeal and comprehensive. You and I see each other

enough. You can make sure I do that.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Rannazzisi, is it the DEA position that India,

Mexico, Germany, China, are cooperating with us at this point on

the precursors? We put it in the State Department bill last week

for data collection. What other tools do you have that we could help

with?

Mr. RANNAZZISI. Well, I believe we are getting good cooperation

from our international counterparts. Mexico—we are in constant

contact with Mexico and Mexico recognizes the problem, recognizes

that pseudoephedrine, as many could go into their country and we

are working very closely with them, with their competent authority

that handles the chemicals. They are looking at the problem just

as strongly as we are.

As far as the other countries you mentioned, all of those countries have been more than cooperative with us, you know, on specific information. If we ask them, you know, they will provide the

information. We all sit on the same international committees. It is

not a one-on-one—it is more of a—like U.N. committees, for instance. We sit on U.N. committees, Operation Topaz, committees

like that, where we actually share information on chemical flows

through the world. So the cooperation is good.

Now, on the second part of your question, I am sorry, could you

repeat that, please?

Mr. SOUDER. We would like specific suggestions you might have

to enable us to make DEA more effective as you try to intercept

the pseudoephedrine coming in. It is coming from a few known

places, we have the data on that, known cooperation, there are obviously certification processes that the drug czar can recommend,

administration can recommend and decertify countries if they don’t

cooperate. What kind of cooperation do we need in that area?

55

Mr. Placido, when he testified here a number of weeks ago, he

promised he was going to provide a list to this committee a list of

how DEA and the organized way it has been tackling meth, not—

kind of generally gave us a couple of good programs he was working. My understanding is, is that still going through clearances?

We need to see those documents.

We want to know what systemic way DEA is tackling this issue

as a critical part of components. If I can add one last thing, you

had the Kentucky program that was really interesting. That one of

the things we have learned in the process here is our asset forfeiture laws may be weaker than they need to be as far as seizing certain assets in the home cooker cases. If you have any suggestions

or informal advice you want to give to us as we develop those kinds

of pieces of legislation and move forth in ways we might be able

to put that in some of the cleanup costs, what we could do to go

forward and help promote that program like you have in Kentucky,

because that would be a big break through for local law enforcement.

Mr. RANNAZZISI. As far as what we are doing and what we need

to do to go further, as far as the chemicals, that is something I am

really not prepared to talk about. But I will get back to you, and

I will get Mr. Placido and make sure those documents are completed and vetted and sent to the committee.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. Mr. Cummings.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. I want to thank all of you

very much for your testimony. I want to go to you, Mr. Burns, and

I just want to correct you on one thing. You had said in response

to the chairman, one of the chairman’s question, you said that if

you, and you can correct me if I am wrong, I am not sure if I am

paraphrasing that completely accurately, you said if you were to go

to the northeast and said that there was a meth epidemic, that

they would laugh at you, something of that nature?

Mr. BURNS. Yes.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Well, I am here to tell you that I am in the

northeast, and we don’t laugh at that, because we realize that for

any person in this country, to suffer from drug addiction is like the

entire country is suffering, whatever the drug may be. In my area

it’s heroin, and it is crack cocaine. But I believe that the people

who go through that and see their families destroyed, see their

communities destroyed, see their children’s hopes and dreams not

delayed, but snuffed out, they sympathize with anybody, anywhere,

who is going through a similar problem, no matter what the drug

of choice might be.

I just want to make that clear, because I think it’s very important that all of us understand that no matter what the drug is, the

destructive nature of drugs is universal, and it has no boundaries.

But let me just go to something else. In my opening statement,

I talked about the effects of this meth, and I talked about violent

behavior, I talked about psychotic effects. He talked about hallucinations and delusions. One of the things I think that concerns me

greatly about methamphetamine, is that they can do the same

thing that we have seen done in the inner city of Baltimore. They

can create narco-terrorist’s right in your own neighborhood.

56

They don’t have to come from overseas somewhere. People are

afraid to even go into their houses or come out of them. People are

afraid that their own children will kill them. That is a very, very

serious business. And so when Mr. Souder talks about solutions to

the problems, I am just wondering exactly, why is it—and perhaps

you might be able to help me with this, Ms. Birkmeyer.

Why is it that you think that 47 percent of the methamphetamine abusers are women? Why do you think that is?

Ms. BIRKMEYER. I am not an abuse expert.

Mr. CUMMINGS. OK. Maybe one of the gentlemen can tell me.

Ms. BIRKMEYER. I have learned through my travels, though, that

because methamphetamine is a weight loss drug and women sometimes have the desire to appear to be slender, that it is appealing

to them. It is a drug that gives you quite a bit of energy. And so

in places that are rather—that you wouldn’t think as being areas

ripe for drug use, mothers who are raising a lot of children use it

to stay awake.

Many young women are fed methamphetamine by boyfriends or

by peers and become addicted to it. So it is a drug that crosses

every sphere, as you all have noted, and it is very dangerous to

women. And it has particular impact, because it is drug that is

popular to women, it has particular impact on children.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Speaking of children, what would you like to see

the Federal Government do with regard to the issues that you raise

as far as parents not being there for their children? Because it appears that we may very well be creating a new negative

generational cycle, that is, a generational cycle of drug addicts.

We have seen it, by the way, in my district where the mother,

the child, the grandmother, grandfather, generation after generation of addicts.

You know, how do we try? I mean, what can the Federal Government do to deal with their problem? Because it does not seem that

there is any letting up of folks who are becoming addicted. And at

the same time, while we are trying, Mr. Burns and many others

are trying to address the problem, we still have little children who

are simply trying to grow up, not pulling themselves up by their

bootstraps because they don’t have any boots and no straps. They

are just trying to make it.

And so how do we make sure that we—what can the Federal

Government do to help folks in positions like yours, locals and

States, deal with these kinds of issues? I am talking about the children aspect of it.

Ms. BIRKMEYER. I am hoping that beyond today’s hearing you

will permit the National Alliance to work with you, and I would

love to be able to submit to you some plans and suggestions.

I mentioned earlier the fact that we believe very strongly in

drug-endangered children [DEC] teams. And I can’t submit to you

how important that is. I would suggest that the reason we have

seen these generational problems is because, in the past, we left

the kids behind. After law enforcement did their hard work,

cleaned up a house, arrested folks, seized drugs, the child was

handed off to the first non-felon that walked through the door, was

never identified as a crime victim and was often reunited with parVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:37 Mar 28, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\24946.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
57

ents as soon as they got out on bail. And nobody was recording that

child as somebody that we needed to pay attention to.

The DEC team philosophy is completely different. It elevates the

role of that child as a victim. It ensures that child welfare workers

work in partnership with law enforcement. And one of the things

that we urge at the National Alliance is, it is not just about the

rescue.

Good for us that we rescue, good for us that we identify that

child, but we need to follow that child long term. We have to make

sure that immediately they get a medical exam appropriate for the

type of environment they are found in. We know that we have to

do developmental exams on them to see what this environment has

done to them. We know we can’t return them to parents until the

parents are competent to be parents. And so that is a long-term

goal.

I think we have done a fairly good job. Nobody was talking about

drug-endangered children 5 years ago. I mean, I am sure all of you

were in one sense or another, but we weren’t identifying it as a national crisis or problem. I think we have made strides in terms of

awareness. We have a long way to go. There is a lot that needs to

be studied.

There is some ground-breaking research that has occurred, DEA

chemists assisting the National Jewish Hospital and Medical Center in Denver, CO, and Dr. John Martyny have gone a long way

to start the research we need to do about what are the true effects

of the meth environment? How is it really contaminated? We have

yet to really study what happens to a child in that environment.

You can’t use a child as a guinea pig, of course, so we need to

look at the children we are taking out of there and see, long term,

how do they suffer? What are the developmental delays that we

see?

We know that our treatment programs and even the great programs like drug court have to acknowledge the fact that there are

children in the background when you are treating the adult, that

if the adult has a relapse, you can’t then send the adult home who

may ignore or, worse yet, harm the child.

So I think we are doing a decent job on consciousness raising.

I would appreciate the opportunity to work with you and this

committee in the future to submit suggestions. We have got a long

list.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much.

Mr. SOUDER. Yield to the vice chairman, Mr. McHenry.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will make this very

brief, and it is a simple question.

What is your one suggestion for Congress in order to—what is

the one thing we in Congress can do to attack this meth problem?

And we can just start from left to right. I would like to hear your

one suggestion, if you could just boil it down, keep it short and simple. I only have 5 minutes. I am not the chairman, I am not the

ranking member.

Mr. BURNS. Well, I think Chairman Souder hit the nail on the

head. I mean, sometimes it is difficult for us in the administration

to keep up with Congress and the legislation that is being proposed

and find out who is going where and when and why.

58

I think, if I had one suggestion to make, it would be that we

make a concerted effort to sit down and come up with a comprehensive package to address the issue. That would be my one recommendation.

Mr. RANNAZZISI. I think that the recommendations that were put

forth in the National Center Drug Action Plan should be taken seriously. And, basically, they are a very good starting point as far

as where we should be down the road to combat methamphetamine.

Ms. BIRKMEYER. Mr. Burns stole the words right out of my

mouth, and that is, a comprehensive approach. It is something that

the National Methamphetamine Chemicals Initiative has been

pushing since 1999. But particularly with respect to children, I

think every time you look at this aspect of methamphetamine—

and, mind you, drug-endangered children aren’t exclusive to meth;

you well know that a cocaine home or a marijuana home or a heroin home can be just as dangerous and terrifying to a child. But

it really is all about comprehensive approach and thinking every

time we do something, how is this going to affect children and how

can we make sure that we get them the services they need.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you.

Mr. SOUDER. Ms. Foxx.

Ms. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Burns suggested that the meth problem is not as bad or as

broad as cocaine, heroin, and others. In our experience in North

Carolina, meth certainly is a much bigger problem than other illicit

drugs. If what you say is correct, however, it may not be correct

for long.

What I mean by that is, widespread meth abuse is relatively recent, and meth may replace heroin, cocaine, and others as the

worst drug problem in America. Hindsight shows us something we

could have done differently when cocaine and heroin problems were

developing. Learning from those lessons, what can we do to adapt

them to fight meth ahead of the curve?

Mr. BURNS. Well, and perhaps I haven’t articulated well, I was

talking about looking at the problem from a national level.

And if I can go back, Ranking Member Cummings, and just respond briefly to your comment, I would never insinuate or state

that there is anything humorous about any of this. I was talking

about, on a national level, trying to look at cocaine and methamphetamine and marijuana.

I buried a brother 52 years old on July 8th who suffered the disease of addiction for 27 years. He was in a mining accident and

never got off pills and never got off alcohol. My mother understands it, my remaining brother understands it, and I understand

it. And there is nothing funny about it.

With respect to your question. All problems are personal. When

I came to Washington, DC, from Cedar City, UT, the No. 1 issue

that I brought, an area of expertise, was methamphetamine. Perception is reality. You are correct, however, that in different parts

of the country, different law enforcement agencies and policymakers have to deal with their present problems.

What are we doing to send the message from the West Coast to

the East Coast about best practices? Ms. Birkmeyer and Mr.

59

Rannazzisi have been with me on numerous town halls and summits and meetings to try to bring together Federal, State, and local

law enforcement, to bring together members of communities.

We talk about educating people in the business community. We

talk about the drug-endangered children program and training we

can put together. We talk about educating law enforcement. We actually bring people from the West Coast to the East Coast.

I have been to Maine and New Hampshire and Connecticut and,

most recently, Rhode Island. We are working on a summit there to

talk about methamphetamine before they even have, frankly, a lab

problem or meth problems, to try and get ahead of the problems.

So that is what we are doing in the administration.

Ms. FOXX. Thank you.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Mica.

Mr. MICA. OK. Mr. Burns, this is a great report—I sent it to you,

Mr. Chairman—from the Washington Times done by a Guy Taylor.

They did a series. This one, this part of it, is entitled Meth’s Infection: Labs Spread Bitterness to Communities, a series—part of a

series.

In this he says, ‘‘In Tennessee, the Department of Child Services

investigated meth-related cases involving more than 750 children

from just last October to February alone.’’

Let us take another State quoted in here.

‘‘Indiana reported a thousand raids’’—that is your home State,

Mr. Chairman—‘‘on mom-and-pop meth labs. One of the sheriffs of

Vigo County said the annual cost of running the jail jumped from

$800,000 7 years ago to $31⁄2 million last year. And he said 80 percent of its more than 250 prisoners are held on meth-related

charges.’’ Furthermore, this report says, ‘‘more than half of the

local law enforcement representatives in 45 States surveyed this

month by the National Association of Counties, NACo, listed meth

before marijuana and cocaine.’’

That is an epidemic, OK? The Attorney General said it is an epidemic, the county and local officials are saying it is an epidemic.

This is the most out of control I have ever seen, since I have served

in Congress, of any narcotic. And we had them in the mid-1990’s,

dropping like flies in central Florida from the heroin epidemic,

when we had people dying in those numbers.

My question is, on the education side, what kind of a targeted

program and how much of our resources in dollars or percent of

dollars are we spending to address this? Could you tell me?

Mr. BURNS. I couldn’t give you a figure with respect to——

Mr. MICA. Well, that scares me if you can’t give me a figure.

Mr. BURNS. Well, then be scared, because I can’t. I mean, I can

get back to you and try and figure out how much goes toward——

Mr. MICA. See, now that scares me, too, because when you have

these kinds of statistics and we don’t have a plan and we don’t

know how much money we are spending on it, there is something

wrong.

This is an epidemic. This meeting to sit down should have occurred a long time ago. This isn’t something just new on the block.

Mr. Souder and I were—he told you about 7, 8 years ago; and

this has continued to build, and now it has reached a crescendo.

It is affecting everybody. And we need a plan with—you know, we

60

helped get the education programs started in this subcommittee.

We want those dollars spent where there is a problem, so some of

that money needs to be diverted, a program needs to be developed.

Hell, if we operated our campaigns this way, well, let us just sit

around and think about it, maybe we can target this group after

the election, none of us would be here. And one of the reasons we

put together a National Media Campaign was because we could

focus attention, a message, and get it to where the problem or the

issue was, the people that we want it to affect.

Quite frankly, I am disturbed because I don’t see that happening.

From a law enforcement standpoint, we have one—let us see. We

have the deputy officer of drug enforcement and Laura Birkmeyer,

Joseph and Laura. What is the law enforcement—do we need to

change Federal law? Do we need—what do we need to do? Do you

have specific recommendations? Is there something missing that

we can’t do? I know the administration came up with changing

some of the emphasis from the HIDTAs, and I supported that. It

didn’t meet very well here in targeting money, because the HIDTAs

were supposed to go after high-intensity drug traffic.

Is that part of the problem, not the resources to get there?

Money? Or is it laws? What is it from the law enforcement standpoint? One at a time.

Mr. BURNS. Well, sir, as far as the resources, again, currently,

that is something that I couldn’t answer at this hearing. It is something I would have to go back——

Mr. MICA. Well, OK.

You know what I would suggest, Mr. Chairman? We get the Attorney General and some of his folks, we get DEA and their folks,

we get the U.S. attorneys, and anyone else who is involved in this,

and we bring them together on an immediate basis. We need a

plan.

You know, the kids have this ‘‘Sounds like a plan?’’ I don’t hear

anything that sounds like a plan. So we need a plan to deal with

this from the law enforcement standpoint.

I love treatment. You know, treatment is great. But I will tell

you, by the time you are treating these people, it is way too late

in the game. They have already destroyed their lives, their families’

lives, their kids’ lives, and everybody else’s lives in the process.

The other thing, too, we haven’t done, Mr. Chairman. We need

to go back and look at the way we are collecting statistics. Statistics today versus the way we have required these being put together don’t show us the whole picture. I don’t know if the subcommittee needs to work on legislation.

We are looking at the whole picture. You know, we look at

26,000—now we are up to—drug overdose deaths, drug-related. We

are looking at drug-related deaths; we aren’t looking at the murders, we aren’t looking at the statistics on children that are put

into State and protective care. We don’t look at all the other things.

I read the paper the other day. A kid killed somebody and he was

on meth. Now, that kid is going to go to jail. Maybe that will get

recorded somewhere. The poor person that was killed in the accident is a drug-related death. I will bet you that wasn’t counted.

61

But we need a plan. I would say that you demand that the law

enforcement people, starting with the Attorney General, who has

said, as you said, this is an epidemic, that we get together.

Have you all sat down? Has DEA sat down with anyone from the

Attorney General’s, the U.S. attorney’s offices, and discussed this

issue?

Mr. BURNS. Absolutely.

Mr. MICA. But you don’t have a plan?

Mr. BURNS. We do have a plan. Right now between working with

ONDCP on the——

Mr. MICA. He doesn’t have a plan.

Mr. BURNS. Well, I have a plan if you will let me answer. I am

trying to respond to your question, Congressman.

Mr. MICA. You came before this subcommittee and you can’t cite

or recite to this subcommittee, which is in charge of our national

drug policy, what resources are being targeted. You can’t even

agree on whether this is an epidemic, which the Attorney General

or other officers of this administration are saying.

We need a plan. I need to know how much money we need. If

you need more resources, this is the subcommittee that can do it.

If we need more enforcement tools, we need to change the law. We

need to do it now rather than later. This is hell on wheels as far

as doing damage to the very basic fabric of our society, so we need

a plan.

I need to talk to John Walters. We need to talk to Alberto

Gonzales, and we need a plan. We need a summit on this issue immediately and we need people making decisions, getting legislation

here, getting you the resources that you need to do the job.

I am not criticizing you. I am just saying, this is something that

we have to come together on somewhat in the vein of what you

said, but we should have been doing it earlier rather than later.

I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SOUDER. Are there any specific recommendations in that

book you are waving?

Mr. BURNS. I am sorry?

Mr. SOUDER. My understanding is, there are no specific recommendations in that report?

Mr. BURNS. There are specific recommendations.

Mr. SOUDER. That those are things you are looking at?

Mr. BURNS. Yes.

Mr. SOUDER. But they are not recommendations.

Mr. BURNS. We have two more meetings of the inner working

group; and as I mentioned today to the meth subcommittee, after

we meet in the intergovernmental arena, we plan to sit down with

the meth caucus and with Members and try and come up with a

comprehensive plan.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman—see, you know the way this works,

they are deciding budgets right now, finances. So if you need

money for this, resources, you need to get us the information. We

are looking at next year doing this. If you need changes in the law,

we need to know now rather than later. Whatever it takes, this

needs to be put on an emergency, expedited basis if we are going

to get anything done.

62

We have this little break in here. You should come back before

we come back with specific recommendations, with a plan for the

education drug money. If you need a supplemental, we will do a

supplemental, whatever it takes. This is slaughter on the streets

of the United States.

We have identified the problem. It is not Plan Colombia; we have

been there, we have done that. It is not designer drugs; we have

been there and done that. This is meth popping up everywhere,

and we have to get a handle on it. So you guys come up with a

plan.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Osborne, did you have any comments?

Mr. OSBORNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have a comment.

Obviously there is a little frustration here, and I can——

Mr. BURNS. I really didn’t sense that.

Mr. OSBORNE. And it was building within me as I sat. And, you

know, the question was, what one thing would you suggest? And

I heard you say, well, we need a comprehensive plan. I guess that

is—but it seems like there ought to be more of a rifle shot.

I mean, some of the things that come to mind: Education, there

are power points, there are very graphic videos that could be shown

to every child in the United States if you wanted to do that. We

could target parents, make sure they understood the scope of the

problem.

As far as I am concerned, from where I am living, meth currently

is the biggest threat to the United States, maybe even including al

Qaeda—and I mean that seriously—in terms of the very fabric, the

very structure of our Nation. And to have the administration apparently not even be aware of this, that this is the No. 1 drug problem, was really difficult to hear.

A couple other things: Funding, we went from $1 billion for

Byrne grants 2 or 3 years ago to $300 million. We have cut it by

one-third, and the chairman and others have fought to get a little

bit back. But obviously I would think somebody would say, well, we

need more money for this, because that is where it interdicts it, on

the street, is in the Byrne grants, in the HIDA grants, in the

COPS. HIDA has been a fairly level; COPS, we are struggling.

Laws, do we need a national standard? Right now, each State is

coming up with a standard, and so what is happening, you are

pushing the traffic from one State to another: Where is the toughest State? And then the one that isn’t very tough, well, they are

going that way.

Do we need a national standard as far as how we handle

pseudophed? Do we make it a schedule 5? What do we do? Those

are things you could talk about.

What are some of the penalties for the manufacture and sale?

Should we make this something like life? Should we make it 30

years? What should we do? We have talked about rehab.

And then last, the precursors. We have introduced—the chairman and others this last week, we introduced an amendment

which I think made some sense to target the five largest exporters

and importers of pseudophedrine. And what we have said is, OK,

if you don’t cooperate with the Drug Enforcement Administration

and let them know where those shipments are going so we can

63

track and find the superlabs, then we cutoff your international aid;

you don’t get any money from the United States.

I didn’t hear any comment on that, but we have tried to push you

to see. We called, many times, the DEA, my staff and I, over the

last 3 or 4 weeks and we tried to say, what can we do? And we

couldn’t seem to get an answer. So there is frustration here.

And I am sure you are doing the best you can, and we are not

trying to throw rocks at you, although I guess we are. But we are

saying there is a sense of urgency here, and we need specifics, we

don’t need generalities at this point.

So I really don’t have any further questions. I just wanted to express my feeling of frustration as well as several others up here

and from where I am seeing the problem out in the countryside.

And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. And before wrapping up this panel, I

just want to restate a couple of basic points, in that we appreciate

all of your service, we appreciate the fact that some things have

been done on methamphetamine; and in certain areas, very critical

things, such as what we thought at one point was taking down 40

percent of the pseudophedrine company, in the company in Detroit

bust, now we find out it wasn’t; that what our frustration here is,

I have never seen—and all of you know, we couldn’t have been

more aggressive on the cocaine in Colombia, and heroin, drug-free

schools, community grants, drug testing programs.

It is not that I don’t believe all that is important. I understand

there is nobody on meth who doesn’t start on marijuana. Tobacco

and alcohol can be gateway to drugs, to many things, but, hey,

there is a direct line from marijuana into meth that we are seeing

around the country. And I appreciate that difficulty.

What our frustration here is, is that this has been a building pattern moving from west to east. And when it hits a zone, nothing

is like it. Now we are seeing it go from rural to small town, and

seeing it hit the first cities. And when it hits a city, as the U.S.

attorney said in Minneapolis—which is no small town, the Minneapolis size, about a million and a half—it hits. And when it hits

that, it changes its form, it just overwhelms a city. On the St. Paul

side, the district attorney there said that they went from nothing

to 85 percent in 12 months of children under child protection, were

all of a sudden under meth. From nothing to 85 percent. Only three

mom-and-pop labs in St. Paul.

The rural counties are saying we have mom-and-pop labs, these

clandestine labs, but it is a different form of meth that hits the cities. But when it hits, in Omaha, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and a few

of those cities are the first big cities hit at the edges of Detroit,

edges of New Orleans. And as it marches east, the question is,

what is the strategy to stop it?

So what we heard in the budget is—and Mr. Mica’s question,

what is the prevention program? Well, what we heard was, Safe

and Drug-Free Schools isn’t working. Well, where is the proposal

to make it work? What I would like to hear out of ONDCP is specific suggestions, as the drug oversight office, of how we can improve as we move to redoing No Child Left Behind, which will include Safe and Drug-Free Schools.

64

We have basically a year and a half; let’s figure out how to make

this program work. Don’t zero it out. It’s the only prevention program we’ve got at the school level. In the National Ad Campaign,

what’s happening in meth is it’s bubbling up. I have never seen in

all my years of working in narcotics as a staffer, and now as a

Member, something that is coming up from the grass-roots, rather

than the people in charge, figuring out how to get ahead of it. We

now see the survey at the county level doing it. You see this freelancing among Members of Congress. How do we come up with a

Meth Hot Spots program?

It was every year the administration zeroing out, and it gets bigger. It is one of the only programs in this budget thing that it is

like the administration says, zero it out. It was at $12 million, it

comes back at $18; zero out it, and it comes back at $25. This year

it was zeroed out at $32 and it is back at $38. Why? Because members know that the grass-roots of the problem is Meth Hot Spots.

You would think somewhere in that 5-year plan that somebody

would have said, you know, this isn’t going to go away; maybe we

ought to manage it, maybe we ought to figure out where the Meth

Hot Spots programs ought to be, rather than trying to zero it out,

if the Members of Congress are going to put it in.

And it is even the leadership of both sides of the House right

now. This started as a Member bottom-up attack, basically, on the

appropriations bills and the authorizing bills because we couldn’t

get a meth week, we could get the bills through.

So what we did in a bipartisan way is, we sat down together and

said, we are going to make every week a meth week until somebody figures this out, and every single bill that comes through this

floor every single week we are going to attach meth amendments

until somebody comes up with a strategy.

This isn’t the way you tackle narcotics. And I hope that each

agency is figuring out that this isn’t going to stop. We are just

going to keep it up until somebody comes up with a strategy. And

it will be a hit-or-miss, random type of thing that the people in

charge of coming up with a strategy need to say, what do we need

to do interdiction internationally? What do we need to do in law

enforcement? What do we need to do for children? What do we need

to do in prevention?

And say, OK, now let us prioritize this: What do we do to get

ahead of the curve rather than chase behind it? And that that report, good as it is—our staffs have gone through it—the group is

still working on drafting things even though we are 6 to 8 years

into this pattern of steady marching, lack of stabilizing the rural

areas, move to small town, and now starting to move into urban

areas.

How many years do we have to see the same pattern at an increasing rate in the United States until there is something where

we have concrete recommendations, not another cotton-pickin’

meeting, and that it needs to move in that direction. I believe you

are getting the message.

I agree with Director Tandy that we have to get in and look at

the systems that are bringing this in, because we need to hear from

the administration that they support Chairman Boehlert’s bill on

cleanup and that we can do that.

65

How do we move this Kentucky program into a larger scale so

we don’t overwhelm the locals? What can we do in the child

endangerment question and understand that, look, local officials

are dealing with this stuff, but to get it in a systematic way in each

of your departments as they are tackling the many things and narcotics efforts that they are doing. And we applaud their efforts.

At the same time, what this is, is if you can’t get on top of it and

make this a crash program, it is going to be micromanaged with

lots of different pieces, without a strategy. And that is what is happening.

And it is going to continue happening, and this committee is trying desperately to say, lead. You are the executive branch. You are

doing this day to day. You have agents in the field. Because the

way you do this is not having us do random amendments coming

up, but we couldn’t figure out any other way to do it.

Any comments?

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Cummings.

Mr. CUMMINGS. I will just be very brief.

When you are sitting here in the Congress and you often—I

think meaningful life is one way one’s self has constant self-examination and where one tries to figure out if what one is doing is

being effective and efficient.

And I have to tell you, as I sit here, I couldn’t help but wonder

whether this is effective and efficient, because it seems as if on

both sides of the aisle we all agree that we have a very urgent situation.

Many years ago people thought that they had an urgent situation

in the inner cities. Now, in Baltimore, there are 250-plus murders

in a population of less than 650,000 every year. There would be

many, many more if we did not have one of the best shock trauma

centers in the world. That doesn’t even go to all of the hospital admissions, it doesn’t go to all the children being left behind, it

doesn’t go to the AIDS that is spreading through needles.

And I guess what I am saying is that in some kind of way we

have to be effective and efficient. We really do. While I—you know,

I think that we have to really protect ourselves against terrorist attacks and things of that nature. I am telling you, what I said a little bit earlier, I meant it; we have terrorists in our own houses.

And until we get a comprehensive plan and actually execute that

plan, we are going to be saying the same things over and over

again 10 years from now, only the problem is going to be 30 times

greater.

And so I would beg you—I would ask, but asking is too cheap,

because there is some little child right now who is going without

a parent; there is somebody probably in high school who is thinking

about going on a date with somebody on Saturday night, where

they are going to be introduced to this stuff, and it is going to ruin

them for the rest of their lives. And while we are talking and while

we are bickering and trying to figure this out, folks are going to

suffer.

So that is why I am just so glad that the word ‘‘urgency’’ has

been used here. I don’t want the Nation to be an area with a population of 650,000 and 250-plus murders. And you know what hapVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:37 Mar 28, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\24946.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
66

pens? There comes a point in time when you begin to celebrate the

fact that you didn’t get up to 300 murders. That is deep.

And so it is that I hope you all will listen, and listen carefully—

particularly you, Mr. Burns—and will take back that message of

urgency. It is not enough to say, we are still getting it together.

People are dying and suffering, and generations are being created.

New generational cycles are being created, like Ms. Birkmeyer

said. And when we are dancing with the angels, there will be people who are suffering for what we didn’t do under our watch.

Mr. SOUDER. Ms. Foxx, did you have a comment?

Ms. FOXX. Well, I just wanted to say that I really appreciate

what the chairman and the ranking member have said, and the

comments from Representative Mica and Representative Osborne.

I have been very disappointed in the responses that we received

today, too, so much so I wasn’t sure how to respond to you all.

But I think that we have to say to you, stop traveling so much,

stop having summits, and do a little work on the issue that we

brought to your attention.

I think the chairman is very right. You can either give some

leadership to this, or you can see the Congress micromanaging

what you are trying to do. And I would love, frankly, to see a

schedule of the trips and how much money has been spent on it,

and then see what results you got from it; because I think everything you do should be giving you some results, and we are not

hearing that at all.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. And I do want to say something I said

earlier. And I know Mr. Burns has raised some of these questions

internally, and hopefully we just strengthened your hand in working with the State and locals. But we want the message to go back

clearly to ONDCP: You have to lead.

DEA has attempted this, a little bit different type of a thing for

DEA to tackle, but you have been at the grassroots level doing it.

We need to figure out how now to have a look at what you have

been doing at the grassroots level and say, look, how can we do this

systematically rather than each HIDTA coming up with a strategy,

each DEA task force.

In my area, the DEA leads the task force, and they are obviously

having to deal with meth cases. How can we figure out, like we do

on cocaine and heroin, how to do this systemically? And I look forward to working with you.

And thank you for bringing the attention to the children question, because often, as we are looking at the law enforcement question, we forget that, A, you lock up the parents, what happens to

the kids? And how do we deal with this? I think, like crack babies,

we will find that the kids are pretty resilient if we can get to them

and get them out of the house and protect them while we get their

parents dried out and back functioning as parents.

I thank this panel. I look forward to continuing to work with

each of you.

Would the second panel please come forward.

Dr. Nancy Young, Director of the National Center for Substance

Abuse and Children Welfare, and Director of the Children and

Family Futures; Valerie Brown, National Association of Counties;

Freida Baker, Deputy Director of Family and Children’s Services,

67

Alabama Department of Human Resources; Chief Deputy Phil

Byers, Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office of North Carolina; Sylvia

Deporto, Deputy Director of the Riverside County Children’s Services of California; Betsy Dunn, Investigator, Peer Supervisor, Tennessee Department of Children’s Services, Child Protective Services

Division; Chief Don Owens, Titusville Police Department, Pennsylvania; and Sheriff Mark Shook, Watauga County Sheriff’s Department, North Carolina.

Before you sit down, if you will find your places and stand. I will

swear each of you in.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. SOUDER. Let the record show that each of the witnesses responded in the affirmative.

And, Ms. Foxx, would you like to welcome your North Carolina

sheriff and friend again?

Ms. FOXX. I would. We are really very pleased to have Sheriff

Mark Shook from Watauga County with us here. As I stated in my

comments earlier, I have known Sheriff Shook all his life. That is

an unfortunate comment on my age. But his family and my husband’s family, particularly, have grown up together for a long time.

Mark has done remarkably well as a law enforcement officer in

Watauga County, and we are so fortunate to have him as Sheriff.

His family is still my neighbor, and they are doing a great job, and

we are very pleased to have him. This is his first trip to D.C., by

the way, so he sort of had a trial by fire on his first trip.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. McHenry, do you want to introduce your Sheriff?

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am pleased today to have the Rutherford County Chief Deputy

Sheriff, Philip Byers, here today. Philip is a man that has great experience. Though a constituent of mine in Rutherford County, he

actually went to school in your district, Congresswoman Foxx, at

Appalachian State University. That is where he got his B.S., and

he also attended Western Carolina and obtained his Master’s in

public administration there.

He is a man who loves education. As a former teacher and a

business owner, he is still very involved in that field, both volunteering in Rutherford County as well as his duty with the Sheriff’s Department. He has had 14 years of law enforcement experience, and 4 years of that as the Chief Deputy in Rutherford County.

And Rutherford County is an area that has tackled severe methamphetamine problems over the last few years, and it has the second leading number of meth labs of any county in North Carolina.

And the reason why I believe the number is so high is not only because of the issues that we are dealing with in Rutherford County,

but because of the good work of the Sheriff’s Department there to

root out these meth labs. Just last week they busted their 13th

meth lab this year.

And so I appreciate the hard work of Phil.

I certainly appreciate him traveling to Washington, DC, with his

new wife, Sheila, and I thank you both for being here.

68

And it is Philip’s first time testifying before Congress, so, Mr.

Chairman, I just ask you to go easy on him. But if you don’t go

easy on him, I am sure he can hold his own.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SOUDER. And I take it you didn’t know him as he grew up?

Mr. MCHENRY. I did not. Maybe he knew me.

Mr. SOUDER. And I hope we didn’t scare you off with the first

panel.

I thank each of you for coming today. I would like to yield to Dr.

Young for her statement.

STATEMENTS OF NANCY K. YOUNG, Ph.D., DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CENTER ON SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND CHILD WELFARE, AND DIRECTOR, CHILDREN AND FAMILY FUTURES;

VALERIE BROWN, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES;

FREIDA S. BAKER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, FAMILY AND CHILDREN’S SERVICES, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES; PHIL BYERS, CHIEF DEPUTY, RUTHERFORD

COUNTY, NC, SHERIFF’S OFFICE; SYLVIA DEPORTO, DEPUTY

DIRECTOR, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA, CHILDREN’S SERVICES;

BETSY DUNN, INVESTIGATOR AND PEER SUPERVISOR, TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN’S SERVICES, CHILD

PROTECTIVE SERVICES DIVISION; DON OWENS, CHIEF,

TITUSVILLE, PA, POLICE DEPARTMENT; AND SHERIFF MARK

SHOOK, WATAUGA COUNTY, NC, SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

STATEMENT OF NANCY K. YOUNG, Ph.D.

Ms. YOUNG. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Souder, members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to address

you today. As the Director of Children and Family Futures, I direct

the National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare. We

are funded by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services

Administration, and also by the Administration on Children, Youth

and Families. However, my testimony today are the views of myself

and not the Federal agencies.

There are six points that I would like to discuss today that are

detailed in my written statement, including a list of suggested actions.

First, to summarize some data about child welfare trends and

about who is coming into treatment. Despite the increase in folks

accessing methamphetamine treatment, the overall trend in child

welfare has continued to decrease since 1999. At this point, the increase of persons seeking treatment for methamphetamine, we

have not seen an overall increase in that trend for children coming

into care. Details of those data are in the written testimony on

page 3 and page 4.

Even in California, with a decade of experience in addressing

methamphetamine disorders, the number of kids in care over the

past several years has continued to decrease. This contrasts with

the cocaine epidemic of the late 1980’s and early 1990’s in which

the foster care population increased by half. The alarming information about who is coming into treatment is about methamphetamine and the dramatic effect it has created with child welfare

services in that rural communities have been affected and that

69

there has been a sharp increase in treatment admissions for

women with primary methamphetamine dependence.

Among adolescents in treatment for methamphetamine, the majority are girls. Most disturbing is the upward trend of pregnant

women coming to treatment with marijuana dependence and an

even higher rate of increase for pregnant women with methamphetamine dependence. About 10 percent of the births in our country

are affected by prenatal substance exposure. Page 10 shows a table

of drug use by pregnant women. That is about 400,000 infants per

year.

My second point is the critical need for child welfare to differentiate between the various types of children affected by methamphetamine. All children of substance abusers are at risk of

abuse and neglect. But there are six different ways in which children are affected specifically by methamphetamine use: parents

who use; parents who are substance dependent; parents who use

during pregnancy—I should say mothers who use during pregnancy; parents who manufacture or cook in the home; parents who

traffic methamphetamine; and parents who operate superlabs. The

majority of methamphetamine-afflicted children in child welfare

are those whose parents abuse or who are methamphetamine dependent.

Risks to children and the interventions for their families vary a

great deal based on these different categories, and child welfare is

challenged to appropriately screen for these groups. They are challenged to have access to quality assessments and to ensure that

families have timely and comprehensive family treatment resources

so that they might recover and reunify.

My third point relates to the characteristics of persons needing

treatment, especially women. Alarmingly, the majority of women in

treatment for methamphetamine who may have also abused or neglected their children were, in fact, abused and neglected themselves as children. One-third of women in treatment for methamphetamine reported childhood sexual abuse.

Here, the challenge for child welfare is twofold: to appropriately

engage with mothers who need treatment, as well as to provide significant substance abuse prevention efforts to children currently in

care. I currently know of only one State that targets specific prevention efforts at the children in foster care.

Fourth, treatment effectiveness studies—and we have heard it

already today—have shown that rates of recovery for methamphetamine use disorders are similar to other drugs of abuse. This message needs to be widely disseminated among child welfare agencies

and the public.

Fifth, there are models of effective child welfare and substance

abuse services working together. In Sacramento County over the

past decade they have implemented six significant system and

practice changes. They are seeing dramatic results in their outcomes.

They intervene at the very first court appearance for all parents

with substance abuse allegations with a message of hope and recovery. The full text of my testimony gives the details of their outcomes by primary substance on page 18. Parents with methamphetamine dependence are reunifying with their children at

70

rates similar to parents with alcohol and cocaine dependence, nearly twice the rate of reunifications before their system reforms.

This didn’t happen overnight. As I mentioned, they have been

working on it for a decade, on the substance abuse and child welfare efforts.

Finally, what can be done? We must remember and learn from

the cocaine epidemic and its impact on child welfare. We must not

let child removal escalate without effective prevention and treatment in place. We must not let a generation of children be mislabeled. Rather, we must ensure that they receive the early intervention and special education services that they need. As an adoptive parent of two children with these issues, I know first-hand

that these other system interventions are critical for biological, foster, and adoptive families to raise these children to reach their full

potential.

We must recognize that in many ways we are flying blind on this

issue. Child welfare does not routinely collect information about

families with substance use disorders, and treatment agencies do

not collect data from parents about children who may be at risk of

abuse and neglect.

In most States, we are operating on data about prenatal substance exposure that is more than a decade old. The last such

study in California was in 1992, and I believe Ms. Watson played

a significant role in making that happen. It has not been repeated

since that effort.

We need better data from hospitals and the maternal and child

health systems on prenatal and at-birth screenings so we can appropriately monitor, intervene, and provide services for families

with prenatal substance exposure. We need to continue to invest in

better training for child welfare workers so that they can recognize

methamphetamine and other substance use disorders. And we

must continue to invest in better training for substance abuse

treatment agencies to ensure supports are in place for family treatment and interventions for the children.

When we refer parents to treatment as a condition of keeping or

reunifying with their children, we must make sure that the treatment is state-of-the-art, comprehensive, allows families to be treated together, and most importantly, to meet the intent of the Adoption and Safe Families Act, that those interventions are timely.

I hope that I will get the questions about what would you specifically do, because I have a list. Thank you very much.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Young follows:]

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

Mr. SOUDER. Ms. Brown.

STATEMENT OF VALERIE BROWN

Ms. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member

Cummings, for allowing me to appear this afternoon on behalf of

the National Association of Counties on this critical issue of methamphetamine abuse. My name is Valerie Brown, and I am a county

supervisor from Sonoma County, CA. That would be Congresswoman Watson’s California.

The National Association of Counties [NACo], is the only national organization that represents county governments. With over

2,000 member counties, we represent over 85 percent of the Nation’s population.

A growing issue for NACo counties is methamphetamine abuse.

Methamphetamine, or meth, is consuming a greater share of county resources because of its devastating and addictive nature. For

Congressman Mica, I will boldly tell you, counties need more

money. In many parts of the Nation, county jails are becoming

overwhelmed with inmates on meth-related charges. Investigating

and busting meth labs is producing longer hours for county law enforcement. Along with these law enforcement consequences, meth

treatment, cleanup, and removing children from meth houses are

all painful reminders of a community dealing with meth.

Because of the need for data, NACo commissioned two surveys

on the meth epidemic, and I would like to make three key points

on these surveys and NACo’s policy on meth.

First, as our survey confirmed, methamphetamine abuse is a national drug crisis that requires national leadership.

Second, a comprehensive, intergovernmental approach is needed

to combat the methamphetamine epidemic. Necessary components

must include law enforcement, treatment, prevention, education,

public health, cleanup, research, and restricting the sale of

pseudophedrine.

Third, existing programs such as the Justice Assistance Grant

Program, foster care, and mental health and substance abuse programs are critical to the fight against the devastating effects of

methamphetamine.

To elaborate, I will touch on NACo’s survey on law enforcement.

In the 500 responding sheriffs’ departments, 87 percent report increases in meth-related arrests starting 3 years ago. Mr. Chairman, two of the States that reported 100 percent increases in

meth-related arrests during the last 3 years are your State of Indiana and my home State of California.

Additionally, 58 percent of county law enforcement agencies reported that meth is their largest drug problem. Meth outpaced cocaine at 19 percent, marijuana at 17 percent, and heroin at 3 percent.

Meth-related arrests represent a high proportion of crimes requiring incarceration. Fifty percent of the counties estimated that

one in five of their current jail inmates are there because of methrelated crimes.

In Orange County, CA, of the 11,500 new probation cases each

year, 60 percent test positive for meth. In my home county, the

98

sheriff’s department estimates that 85 to 90 percent of our drug arrests are related to methamphetamine.

Numbers are increasing so rapidly, counties are having a difficult

time ramping up our services to address the problem.

We surveyed child welfare officials from the 13 States where

services are provided at the county level. Children living in environments where meth is produced are considered drug endangered

due to toxins, neglect, and abuse. Forty percent of all the child welfare officials in the survey reported increased out-of-home placements because of meth in the last year.

During the past 5 years, 71 percent of the responding counties

in my home State of California reported an increase in out-of-home

placements. The Midwest reported similar findings, with 69 percent in Minnesota and 54 percent in North Dakota.

In addition, 59 percent of county officials reported meth has increased the difficulty of reuniting families. An ER physician, who

also serves as county commissioner, stated at our recent annual

conference that a premature baby born to a meth-addicted mother

costs approximately $1 million before the infant leaves the neonatal center. His center currently houses three drug-addicted babies.

NACo believes that these figures confirm the need for a comprehensive and intergovernmental strategy to fight this insidious

drug. A multidisciplinary approach has proven effective in several

communities that have been facing this drug for many years.

One such program is in Pierce County, WA, where a social worker accompanies law enforcement officials to meth busts to assess

the effects of that environment on the children present. This level

of cooperation starts at the top, as Pierce County Sheriff Paul Pastor recently stressed at a NACo meeting. Fighting methamphetamine in our communities requires a team-oriented approach with

all departments, which is very costly for counties.

Last, I would like to make an appeal for some existing Federal

resources. One critical program is the Justice Assistance Grant

Program. These funds could be used for local law enforcement, for

prevention, education, and treatment. Many counties use this funding for regional drug task forces especially in rural America. However, the administration zeroed out this program in its fiscal year

2006 budget request. NACo strongly supports restoring JAG funding during the appropriations process to deal with the problems of

meth production and use.

In conclusion, I would like to again thank you, Mr. Chairman

and Ranking Member Cummings, for the opportunity to appear

today on behalf of NACo. We will be conducting future surveys on

meth abuse and look forward to reporting our findings and working

with you to resolve this issue legislatively.

Thank you, and I will be happy to answer any questions.

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. And I can’t tell you how much that survey helped us at a very critical time.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Brown follows:]

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

Mr. SOUDER. Ms. Baker.

STATEMENT OF FREIDA S. BAKER

Ms. BAKER. Good afternoon. Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak with you about the impact of crystal meth on children and families in Alabama. I have been a social worker for nearly 24 years, and I have worked with families who struggle with a

lot of things, but this crystal meth epidemic is as dangerous and

challenging as anything we face.

Without question, crystal meth poses a significant threat to vulnerable people in Alabama. The Department of Human Resources

has several challenges with meth-related issues at the State level.

First, we must ensure the safety of children and provide effective

services to individuals affected by the drug.

Second, we must prepare our workers through both education

and direction.

And, third, we must craft policy and procedures so that consistent methods and safeguards are in place in each of the State’s 67

counties.

There are important implications to the agencies that serve these

children and their families in that, unlike other abuse or neglect

scenarios, the home environment not only poses an immediate

health threat to the children, but to any individual charged with

providing services in that home as well.

Alabama’s child welfare training curriculum has a newly expanded focus on substance abuse, but now, in addition to clinical

training around the dynamics of substance-abusing families, workers must also be taught very specific meth-related investigative

skills and cautions.

Select training for social work staff now often mirrors law enforcement in terms of function and role with meth. Workers are

now, for example, routinely taught to look around outside the residence for suspicious items used in making or using meth, such as

vents or piping sticking up from the ground, or booby traps, wires,

surveillance cameras that appear to be there for no intended purpose. And even with Alabama’s caseload standards, we find that an

already-strained child welfare work force with young, inexperienced

staff is further burdened with the complex dynamics of crystal

meth. We find that workers leave the agency because of personal

risks, the nature of these cases, and the challenges of working with

these families.

Crystal meth has further complicated this multi-faceted issue in

public child welfare. The number of children in the custody of Alabama’s DHR has increased over the past 3 years. In 2001, there

were approximately 5,400 children in foster care at year’s end, and

in 2004 that number had risen to 6,346 and continues to rise.

Reports of child abuse or neglect related to crystal meth have

risen dramatically in Alabama, and these increases reflect our system’s response to changing needs and issues.

Removal of children from their families is traumatic, and the

added complications of meth use compound this trauma. If children

are removed from active meth homes or labs, workers are instructed not to take any of the children’s clothing or belongings

from the home as they may be contaminated. Familiar clothing,

107

toys, blankets are often helpful for children in this distressing situation, yet meth prevents even those small gestures for them.

If there is obvious contamination of the clothes the child is wearing, clothing is to be discarded and left at the scene; then the child

must shower as soon as possible. The child’s personal things are

left at the scene to minimize contamination of other areas or people.

In 2001 only 3.9 percent of the Alabama admissions to foster care

were due to substance abuse. Last year in Alabama, nearly 20 percent of admissions into foster care were a result of family substance abuse. The treatment community in Alabama has recognized the addiction crystal meth imposes. John Schafer, the executive director of Pathfinder, a 12-step spiritually based in-house

treatment program in Huntsville, reported that 45 percent of the

entries there over the last year have been due to crystal meth. The

faith community in Mobile has embraced the clientele at the Shoulder, a private Christian-based inpatient treatment facility for substance abuse. Employees at this facility, when faced with funding

shortages 3 years ago, voted to take a decrease in pay in order to

keep serving the community and report crystal meth as significant.

Even in counties where numbers of children in care have remained

stable, they cite crystal meth as being a much more frequent reason for removal than 18 to 24 months ago. Statewide efforts are

underway to explore all the treatment scenarios and to standardize

protocol. The problem calls for coordination with law enforcement

agencies, safety instructions and, should the need arise, decontamination instructions.

Troy King, Alabama’s attorney general, has designated a task

force to address issues caused by crystal meth. DHR staff are members of the task force. The Alabama legislature recently passed the

legislation regulating items that can be purchased to make crystal

meth. The Governor’s office has faith-based substance abuse initiatives, but meanwhile, the system’s response to issues of imminent

danger is to assess safety quickly and plan accordingly. Traditional

resources and new creative strategies must be employed across all

the human services agencies if we are to prevent and treat the

abuse of crystal meth and all substances. America’s children and

families deserve our best efforts. Thank you for your time and attention. I am grateful for this opportunity.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Baker follows:]

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

Mr. SOUDER. Chief Byers.

STATEMENT OF PHIL BYERS

Mr. BYERS. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members, I must

first admit that being a political junkie and a C–SPAN junkie, I

feel like I know each of you personally and have spent many, many

hours with you at my home. It is indeed an honor to be here with

you and to, first of all, thank you for what you are doing and a

service that you provide to this Nation.

I am just one little chief deputy from—well, I am just one chief

deputy from Rutherford County, NC—maybe not little. But I thank

you for what you are doing, each and every one of you, for this Nation and for these hearings.

Rutherford County, NC, is a rural county. Again, we are in western North Carolina. We are comprised of 566 square miles and

63,000 residents. Rutherford County has historically relied upon a

manufacturing-based economy, textile and furniture industries

being the two largest employers. We have lost most of our textile

jobs during the past 5 years, and the majority of the furniture industry jobs are also gone. Unemployment rates loom between 8 and

10 percent, far above the national average.

Rutherford County and her citizens will recover from the loss of

manufacturing jobs with continued good leadership. The economic

situation will improve if and only if we can curtail the present

methamphetamine epidemic that we are facing. And yes, Congressmen and Congresswomen, it is an epidemic.

Methamphetamine addicts and cooks are driving some of Rutherford County’s most costly social problems, including domestic violence, child abuse, mental illness, homelessness and the spread of

hepatitis and AIDS. Rutherford County continues to struggle with

social and economic setbacks caused directly by methamphetamine

addicts and the manufacturers.

The North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation reported the

following responses to meth labs in Rutherford County as follows:

2003, 34 lab responses; 2004, 43 lab responses; and as of June 30th

of this year, 25 lab responses. Of those, five children were taken

from meth labs in 2003; 2004, that rose to 24 children that we removed from meth labs. This year, as of June 30th, the number is

up to 22. In 2004, in North Carolina alone, 124 children were removed from homes where methamphetamine labs were in operation; 24 of the children were residents of Rutherford County. This

year, 2005, has already seen 22 children removed from homes

where meth labs were operating in Rutherford County.

Many of the children removed from meth labs are abused and neglected and will suffer emotional consequences for the remainder of

their lives. The number of children present in methamphetamine

labs is expected to continue to increase at an even higher rate. As

the number of children present at the laboratories increases, more

will suffer the physical and psychological effects associated with exposure to dangerous chemicals, and the number of related abuse

and neglect cases will increase.

Without a doubt, the most innocent victims of the meth epidemic

are the children who are exposed. Chemicals contained and used in

meth permeate through the rooms, thus leaving children exposed

115

to meth chemicals that can cause headaches, nausea, dizziness and

even damage to the brain, liver, spleen, kidneys and immune system. In 2004, 2,700 children were found to be affected by methamphetamine labs seized by law enforcement officials nationwide.

Children were present in 34 percent of the total labs seized in the

United States.

The North Carolina General Assembly, Governor and Attorney

General are working in conjunction with local and State law enforcement to combat the ills of methamphetamine production and

addiction. In 2004, the criminal penalty for manufacturing methamphetamine was increased from a Class H felony to a Class C felony. Prior to December, the punishment for manufacturing meth in

North Carolina was 6 months probation. This guarantees—the new

class C felony guarantees prison time for anyone found guilty of

manufacturing.

And again, the General Assembly is working to pass an additional methamphetamine lab prevention act. If approved, the act

would limit the sale of Pseudoephedrine allowing the product to be

sold without a prescription only by a registered pharmacist. The

purchaser of the Pseudoephedrine would be required to present the

pharmacist with a photo ID and must be 18 years of age. The name

and address would be obtained, and identification could be used

and entered into the record for consumers and for law enforcement

use. Pseudoephedrine purchases would be limited to no more than

9 grams of any mixture of the product or any products containing

a controlled substance within a 30-day period. This law, if passed,

will benefit the law enforcement community, but that and that

alone are not enough.

Restricting the sale of Pseudoephedrine products should occur in

all 50 States. Rutherford County is contiguous to South Carolina,

thus presenting only a short drive for Rutherford County citizens,

Rutherford County cooks, if you will, to obtain Pseudoephedrine.

Rutherford County will continue to face economic setbacks as a

result of methamphetamine addiction. The Rutherford County

Sheriff’s Office recently transferred two vacant positions to the narcotics division and obtained one new position through local funding.

This expansion was due solely to demand being placed on our office

by the increased meth labs and methamphetamine addiction. Additional funds will be necessary to pay overtime to our officers working the methamphetamine cases. The meth epidemic has caused a

tremendous burden on local law enforcement budgets, and without

State and Federal assistance, the moneys will not be available.

We have to this day been an area of local meth cooks making and

selling the product. We have begun to seize Ice from Mexico and

from super labs throughout the United States. Ice trafficking will

continue to grow in Rutherford County, resulting in additional

problems and abuses associated with meth addiction. We must

place stronger and tougher restrictions on the Mexican border or

Ice will continue to pour into the United States and into Rutherford County, and we will begin to experience an additional plague.

Social Services has also found themselves in budget shortfalls

due to meth labs. The Rutherford County Social Services is currently in need of foster parents to accommodate the ever-increasing

number of children being removed from homes where meth labs are

116

present. Social workers are constantly called to assist law enforcement when children are discovered to be living in meth labs. The

department is also working to investigate and deal with child

abuse and neglect cases as a result of meth addiction. Local mental

health agencies are working to develop a successful treatment program for methamphetamine addicts. Current meth addicts have a

recovery rate of less than 10 percent. Mental health resources will

continue to deplete until a successful treatment program is developed to treat the long-term effects of meth addiction.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Byers, you are quite a bit over your five. Could

you just go to your recommendations? And your whole statement

will be included in the record.

Mr. BYERS. Absolutely. The recommendations that I would like

to make are: No. 1, restrict the sale of Pseudoephedrine products

nationally; tighten the Mexican border to help prevent meth trafficking from Mexico; address the Pseudoephedrine market in Canada and China; longer prison sentences for meth traffickers and

meth producers and anyone who involves children in the trade or

allows children to reside in a home used for meth production; continue to prosecute meth manufacturers at the Federal court system; longer sentences are beneficial to local law enforcement; continue funding interstate drug interdiction teams; and work with

mental health care providers to develop a better recovery and

treatment plan.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Byers follows:]

117

118

119

120

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you. Now you haven’t just watched it; you

have been on C–SPAN.

Ms. Deporto.

STATEMENT OF SYLVIA DEPORTO

Ms. DEPORTO. Thank you ladies and gentlemen.

I am Sylvia Deporto. I am the deputy director for children’s services in Riverside County, CA. I began with the department in 1992

as a social worker, and methamphetamine was the No. 1 problem

of substance abuse for child welfare at that time. I sit before you

today on July 26, 2005, and I tell you that methamphetamine is

the No. 1 substance abuse problem in Riverside, CA, for Child Welfare Services. It is an epidemic.

The Riverside County Drug Endangered Children Program is one

of the most innovative multi-disciplinary projects to date. The Drug

Endangered Children Program utilizes the Sheriff’s Department,

Child Protective Services, the District Attorney’s Office, public

health, nursing, medical personnel, courts, HazMat and environmental health to intervene on behalf of children who have been exposed to drug use, sales and manufacturing environments.

Drug endangered children are found living in about 45 percent

of home-based methamphetamine labs covered within Riverside

County. That figure causes great concern because one in every six

illicit labs is discovered as the result of fire or explosion. The Children’s Research Center Data on Safety Assessments for California

Counties indicates that approximately 50 percent of children in

Riverside County are removed from their parents by child welfare

involve parental substance abuse.

In Riverside County, we have four law enforcement drug teams.

Each of these teams has at least one social worker assigned to

them full-time to assist with drug labs. Social workers must take

the children removed from the drug labs directly to a hospital for

evaluation and testing as part of the DEC program. The social

worker may wait in an emergency room with the children for up

to 6 hours. Many of these children have been neglected, demonstrating signs of malnourishment, lack of physical and dental hygiene, physical and/or sexual abuse and test positive for chemicals

due to exposure.

Riverside County recently purchased four Community Resource

Vehicles specifically for use by law enforcement and child welfare

at drug labs. Due to the chemical exposure, the children need to

be cleaned with water immediately, and in the past, this has occurred outside with a hose. The community resource vehicle will

provide a place for the child to be cleaned in a shower and provided

with clean clothes and fed while the social worker interviews them.

Children who are placed in the custody of Child Welfare Services

require continued medical followup and evaluation. The social

workers must ensure that these children are tested regularly for

their chemical levels, and this information must be recorded in

their health history. Many of these children have not attended

school on a regular basis and must be provided with special education services to bring them up to grade level. Both foster caregivers and educators struggle with a multitude of behavioral problems and learning disabilities from these children due to prenatal

121

drug exposure to methamphetamine. Riverside County has initiated several drug courts, in superior, dependency, delinquency and

family law, in an attempt to address the severity of our drug problem, its effect on the multiple agencies and, most importantly, its

effect on our children.

I remember a case when I was still a field worker. The parents

were methamphetamine abusers and were hiding from CPS with

their children. They were located living in a very rural part of Riverside County in a small travel trailer. As we were taking the children, the parents were attempting to flee. The trailer was filthy,

and the smell was overwhelming. At the office, the children stated

to me that they used the bathroom outside just like the dogs do.

They washed in the hose, and it was very, very cold. And they

dumpster dived for their dinner every night. Children should not

know a life like this.

I urge you to take notice of the severity of our Nation’s problem

with methamphetamine abuse. There are severe long-term consequences for our Nation and extreme costs. If you consider what

we are currently spending on specialized law enforcement teams,

hazardous materials teams, environmental clean up, child welfare

and foster care, medical and educational costs to address the needs

of these children, the dollars are overwhelming. We should put

those dollars into prevention and treatment instead of in clean up.

I thank you today for the opportunity to share this information

with you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Deporto follows:]

122

123

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you very much.

Ms. Dunn.

STATEMENT OF BETSY DUNN

Ms. DUNN. Chairman Souder and distinguished members of the

subcommittee, I thank you for inviting me here to testify.

My name is Betsy Dunn. I am a Child Protective Services case

manager at the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services, and

I am here to talk to you today about the worst form of child

endangerment that I have ever seen. It happens when methamphetamine takes over a family’s life and threatens to destroy everything, especially the children who have the misfortune of living

beneath the same roof as their drug-addicted parents. I want to

talk about some of the most pressing child welfare issues I face.

We need to offer collective support for these children. They need

counseling that addresses their abandonment and attachment disorders. Our caseworkers and law enforcement officers need specialized training in dealing with these situations. Right now, we just

don’t have enough to offer all the help we need to try to get these

children’s lives back on track.

I live on the Cumberland Plateau, the highlands where middle

and east Tennessee meet. It is beautiful country, and it has long

been my home. Cookville is a growing city, but it still feels like a

small town. And for the past 16 years, I have been a Child Protective Services case worker for the State of Tennessee trying to help

some of Putnam County’s neediest and most vulnerable children.

But the meth children are far different from anything I have

ever seen before. The pressures on the State Child Welfare System

are enormous in part because of the surge in meth-related custody

cases in the past 5 years and, to a large degree, because of the way

the addiction devastates the long-term well-being of the children

who come from these homes. These are potentially life threatening

environments to which these children are being exposed. The

adults who are supposed to be these children’s caretakers have become totally consumed by this drug and have turned their backs

on these youngsters. It is not uncommon for us to see, say, a sibling group of three with the eldest child being 7 years of age, that

7-year-old becomes not only the primary caretaker for his or her

siblings but the parents as well. These children’s worlds have been

totally destroyed. They endure physical and sexual abuse. These

children are living in a world where they don’t belong.

In addition to finding better ways to crack down on the specific

ravages of methamphetamine-related child abuse, we have to recognize that these children require intensive and long-term help

once we get them out of these dangerous environments. We have

some good news, though. Now local, State and Federal law enforcement officers, prosecutors and child welfare experts routinely work

together to combat this problem. Last year, Tennessee Governor

Phil Bredesen assembled a methamphetamine task force that

helped identify crucial legislation that Tennessee needed to fight

the epidemic in our State. The Department of Children Services

Commissioner Viola Miller asked me to serve on this task force.

The meth problems in Tennessee, after all, are highly concentrated

in my part of the State, so I see this firsthand.

124

Thanks to new restrictions on the display and sale of ephedrine

and Pseudoephedrine, I am happy to say that it looks like meth lab

busts are going down in my part of the State. But that is not to

say that we still don’t have a fearsome problem on our hands.

And the most heart-breaking part of it is the children who live

in these homes with parents who are addicts. These aren’t like

other abuse and neglect cases that we see. When a child is taken

out of a meth environment, this child loses everything that is familiar to them. They lose their clothes, their toys, everything because it is all considered contaminated, and that is what makes

this so tragic. These children lose everything. They have lost their

parents, and now they have to start over. In many cases, these

children have raised themselves. There is a dull affect in their expression, and there is not a lot of emotion. There hasn’t been any

consistency in their lives because they live in environments that

are deplorable. Some of these children don’t even sleep in beds.

They sleep on the floor. They have terrible hygiene. Their teeth are

rotten, and no one is taking care of them.

When the Department of Children’s Services caseworkers remove

them from these conditions, they become our main responsibility as

we try to address their physical, social and emotional difficulties.

We struggle to find the services to address their needs. We do the

best we can, but we just don’t have enough. The majority of the

children that we remove and place into custody are now because

of methamphetamine-related issues. The foster homes have been

totally flooded with these children. Therefore, if you remove a child

for physical abuse or sexual abuse, you are going to have a hard

time finding a placement because of all the other placements being

taken due to methamphetamine.

In closing, I would like to tell you about a case that I worked approximately a year ago, and the child’s name is Jeffrey. He was a

17-year-old mentally limited child. He was removed out of a methamphetamine lab. When interviewed by me, Jeffrey was able to tell

me that his mother was doing bad stuff in the home, and it made

him sick. He was able to describe step by step how to make methamphetamine. The most difficult part of this case was the fact that

Jeffrey had just undergone a liver transplant. But I am happy to

report that Jeffrey turned 18 years of age last year. In fact, our

birthdays are on the same day, and we celebrated our birthdays together. We were able to save Jeffrey, but there are so many other

Jeffrey’s out there that we just don’t know about. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Dunn follows:]

125

126

127

128

129

130

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your

concern for the kids.

Chief Owens.

STATEMENT OF DONALD D. OWENS

Chief OWENS. Chairman Souder, Ranking Member Cummings,

and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I thank you for

inviting me here today to discuss the challenges and problems related to methamphetamine that we have encountered in Titusville,

PA.

My name is Donald Owens, and I am the chief of police for the

Titusville Police Department. I have been with the department for

22 years and have been chief for the past 5 years. In my years of

service, dealing with methamphetamine in my community has been

the greatest challenge that I have faced. Prior to 2001, few people

in Titusville had ever heard of methamphetamine. Things were

about to change however. That year, the first major meth ring in

Titusville was busted. The individual thought to be responsible for

bringing meth to the region was arrested. Meth purchased from

him during the investigation was reported to be some of the purest

that the lab had ever found. In part, this probably helped build

Titusville’s reputation as the meth capital of western Pennsylvania.

It was reported that individuals from as far as 300 miles were coming to Titusville to get this new drug.

In 2001, when we first realized we had a problem, four labs were

seized in the region. By 2004, the number of labs seized had grown

to 69, which was over half of the total number of labs seized in

Pennsylvania. Over a third of the 69 labs in the region were directly tied to Titusville. In April 2001, nearly 60 individuals from

the Titusville area had been arrested on meth-related charges.

Looking at statistics on labs seized or arrests made does not tell

you the whole story how methamphetamine affects a community.

It doesn’t tell you about the strain placed on the police. It doesn’t

tell you about the devastating effects of this drug to a community.

The methamphetamine epidemic in our community presents many

challenges to police. Some of the more serious concerns are manpower, money and increasing crime rates. Since 2001, the number

of overtime hours put in by officers on the drug task force has more

than tripled. When seeking grants to help our overtime costs, hiring officers or purchasing equipment, we find that, in the post-September 11th America, funding is geared toward larger cities or in

dealing with threats from foreign terrorists. I would never say that

foreign terrorists do not pose a serious threat to our country. But

small town rural America is dealing with its own form of terrorism,

the methamphetamine epidemic, and it is crying for help.

The methamphetamine epidemic has created other manpower

issues as well. The Titusville Police Department has always had a

very strong community policing policy which included conducting

walk-and-talks through the neighborhoods in the downtown areas

and presenting community education programs. Unfortunately,

since 2003, our community policing efforts have been centered entirely around the methamphetamine issue. In 2003, we undertook

a community education program to make residents aware of the seriousness of the meth problem. And we never anticipated the overVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:37 Mar 28, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 D:\DOCS\24946.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1
131

whelming response our education efforts generated. The number of

tips received has significantly increased. We could assign one officer to spend their entire 40-hour work week doing nothing but

keeping up with intelligence reports and following up on leads.

The problem is that we don’t have the manpower to focus solely

on meth. We do have other crimes that we must investigate as

well. In 2001, while the State’s violent crime rate was going down,

Titusville’s violent crime rate doubled. Serious crimes such as burglaries and assaults have increased. We are finding that many of

these more serious crimes are related to methamphetamine.

The Titusville Redevelopment Authority has worked hard to

bring businesses into town but has expressed their concern that the

methamphetamine problem may have businesses hesitate to move

to Titusville. Without economic growth, the city may have to eventually cut back on services, including police. Taxpayers in the city

are not going to be able to bear the burden as more houses are removed from the tax rolls because they have been condemned or

torn down due to meth.

The conditions in meth houses are deplorable. We were once told

by a narcotics agent who had worked in inner city Philadelphia and

had entered some of the worst slums in some of the worst neighborhoods that he had never seen anything as bad as some of the

living conditions in meth houses in the Titusville area.

We have been working with Congressman John Peterson to address the methamphetamine problem and develop strategies to deal

with it as it moves across the State. Congressman Peterson has

been instrumental in bringing agencies across our State together to

address this problem, and I would like to take this time to thank

Congressman Peterson for all of his help.

What are the solutions to this problem? I don’t think there is

going to be a quick fix to this problem any time in the near future.

This drug has a stronghold on rural America. Additional financial

resources on the State and Federal level are needed. I would certainly encourage Congress to continue funding programs such as

the COPS program through which departments like Titusville may

be able to hire additional officers to combat the methamphetamine

problem in our region.

In order to truly understand what methamphetamine does to a

community, just look how it has changed Titusville’s reputation.

Titusville has been known as the birthplace of the oil industry

since the discovery of oil in 1859. The city has always been well

respected throughout the region as a good place to live. Titusville

is now better known as the meth capital of western Pennsylvania

and has become the brunt of many jokes. In an Associated Press

article talking about how meth is becoming a major problem in Hawaii, Titusville was mentioned as an example of meth’s effects on

rural America.

Rural America needs help. Rural America needs opportunities

like this to express our concerns to you, our Representatives in

Congress. Rural America needs someone to listen and to take action before the methamphetamine epidemic completely swallows us

up.

132

I thank you for listening to me today, and I thank you again for

the opportunity to speak here. And if you have any questions, I

would be happy to answer them.

[The prepared statement of Chief Owens follows:]

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you.

And if I can take this opportunity before we hear our clean-up

batter witness, Sheriff Shook, that I appreciate the specifics you

have. If you all have additional information, as with each hearing,

we have a hearing book associated with it, but as we try to pull

together a meth report, these individual cases are helpful if you

want to add others as well. And also if there is a way we could get

some original copies of the pictures you have in this document if

others have it as well, it will make any report we put together

more effective.

Sheriff Shook.

STATEMENT OF MARK SHOOK

Mr. SHOOK. Chairman Souder, distinguished members of this

committee, methamphetamine was something we heard about but

believed was a far away problem, a California problem.

In the spring of 2002, a 312-square-mile semi-rural western

North Carolina county with a population of 48,000 full-time residents was seriously impacted by the scourge of methamphetamine,

and we were not prepared.

I am the sheriff of Watauga County, NC. I have been a law enforcement officer for nearly 20 years, and in this time, I have

worked in many facets of local law enforcement. I have been a patrol officer, a detective and now sheriff. During my years of service,

I have investigated murders, rapes, property crimes and even automobile crashes. Each of these significantly effect the people involved. The effects I’ve seen in our county from methamphetamine

is not localized like these other crimes. Methamphetamine impacts

in some way everyone around it.

Methamphetamine has penetrated our communities like the disease that it is. It is our families that are hardest hit. Methamphetamine addicts do not hold jobs. They do not contribute to our society. These individuals are users, plain and simple. They use our

community’s resources. They steal from their family members.

They break into their neighbors’ houses. They become physically

aggressive to those around them, often to the people they love, even

their children. Finally, they rob and kill because of perceived needs

and paranoia.

So many times we have seen firsthand the hardest hit victims

are the defenseless, the young children who are forced to live in

conditions that are appalling by any standard. Time and again, we

have raided active clandestine methamphetamine labs and found

children living in those contaminated structures. We have seen

baby bottles soaking in sinks full of chemical waste from methamphetamine production. I have taken teenagers from their parents’ methamphetamine lab and found coffee filters with wet meth

in their pockets, fresh from a methamphetamine cook. I spoke with

a 6-year-old boy who lived with his mother and father in a meth

lab. The 6-year old boy told me step by step the process his mom

and dad used to manufacture meth, step by step. This child’s parents had used him many times to assist them in cooking methamphetamine.

In January of this year, two small children were abducted at

gunpoint from a foster home in Wautaga County by their biological

148

parents. The children were in protective custody because their parents were operating a meth lab in their house. These methamphetamine addicts found out where the children were housed, got a pistol, drove there and held the foster family at gunpoint while they

took the children. Four days, an AMBER alert and one car chase

later, we recovered the children, thankfully unharmed, in our

neighboring State of Virginia. The parents were immediately arrested and searched. Again, they were carrying methamphetamine.

The children are now back in foster care, and the parents are in

jail awaiting trial on kidnapping, armed robbery and methamphetamine manufacturing charges.

In our small county we have had methamphetamine-related

homicide, robberies and sexual offenses. In a county where murders

are few and far between, most of the murders that have occurred

in our county recently have had various ties to methamphetamine.

Houses, mobile homes and apartments have burned due to the

flammability and toxicity of the chemical mixtures people use while

trying to manufacture methamphetamine. Many of these amateur

meth cooks have been badly burned while trying to cook methamphetamine.

Clandestine meth labs represent the single greatest threat to the

safety of emergency responders in our country. I have officers in

my department that have been injured investigating meth labs. Six

volunteer firefighters from one department in our county have been

injured, one seriously and permanently, while working to extinguish meth-lab-related fires. These injuries are not from the fire

itself nor a fall. These injuries are from the toxic fumes produced

by the methamphetamine cooking process. We have been lucky in

Wautaga County, NC. None of our responders have been killed.

But around the country, firefighters, paramedics, law enforcement

officers and many others in the public safety and public service industry are seriously injured or killed every year from the on-thejob exposure to these labs.

I was elected sheriff in 2002, and before my election, when I was

detective at the sheriff’s office in the year before I took office, I noticed a trend developing in cases I was investigating. I kept hearing the word meth. I was vaguely aware of methamphetamine from

training and word of mouth, but I really didn’t know much about

it. What I did know was that meth was being identified with more

and more criminal activity. A murder I worked earlier in the year

turned out to be a meth lab dispute. Suspects in assault cases were

citing methamphetamine as a contributing factor in their behavior.

I came to understand that the community was suddenly awash in

methamphetamine. I saw firsthand the damage resulting from people using this drug.

I knew we had to take action, and we did. We began an aggressive campaign against methamphetamine and people producing it.

Some 80 meth labs later, officers in my department can point to

tremendous success. We have been instrumental in passage of

State laws that provide enhanced punishment for meth producers.

We have made many arrests that lead to our serious meth producers receiving sentences ranging from State probation to more than

40 years in Federal prison. It is now difficult to find a clearcut

meth lab in our county. There are still a few in operation, and we

149

are closing in on those. We do not find dump sites where lab-related materials are illegally dumped. But these have declined also.

We have worked hard to deter people from manufacturing meth

and to make it more difficult to get the necessary materials. We

have worked to educate our citizens, and we have developed relationships with our retailers. We established a three-county meth

task force dedicated to the investigation and seizure of meth labs

and arresting those responsible for their operation. We are continually fighting the methamphetamine epidemic.

Even with these efforts and the success that we have had, the

use of methamphetamine is still prevalent in our area. We believe

the majority of it is being brought in from western States and Mexico. We are fighting a battle working every day to rid our country

of methamphetamine, and we are doing a good job. But we need

help. We need laws passed controlling the sale of Pseudoephedrine,

a necessary ingredient for meth production. States such as Oklahoma have passed legislation making it very difficult for meth producers to produce or steal large amounts of Pseudoephedrine.

Laws controlling the over-the-counter sale of Pseudoephedrine

have had a significant impact and have contributed to a substantial

drop in meth production in the States passing them. North Carolina is considering similar laws but has not adopted them as of yet.

The passage of Federal legislation controlling sales of

Pseudoephedrine will have the single biggest impact on illicit meth

producers.

One of the primary reasons for our successes are the partnerships we have been able to develop. Gretchen Shappert and Karen

Marston of the western district of North Carolina U.S. Attorneys

Office; John Emerson and Walt Thrower from the DEA; Mark Triplett and David Schauble from the ATF; Van Shaw, Rick Hetzel and

David Call of the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation;

and Charlie Byrd of the Wautaga County District Attorney’s office,

these are the names of some of the dozens of law enforcement officers and agents and prosecutors that have come to our small county and worked with us, educated us and stood beside us seizing

labs and putting these criminals in prison.

Clandestine meth laboratories have moved east for some years

now and have made it all the way across the country. They are a

local problem, a State problem and now most of all a national problem. I anticipate that all of us in this room today will be discussing

methamphetamine for some time to come. Thank you for your time

and service to the citizens of the United States of America.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Shook follows:]

150

151

152

153

Mr. SOUDER. Thank you.

I am going to yield to the committee vice chairman, Mr.

McHenry, to start the questioning. And I’ll be back in just a couple

of minutes.

Mr. MCHENRY [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

At this time, I would like to recognize the ranking member, Mr.

Cummings, for his round of questions.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much.

First of all, let me say to all of you that we appreciate what you

do every day. This problem is one that I think kind of snuck up

on a lot of folks. And you know, as I listen to your testimony and

listen to some of it, we have a TV in the back room there. I heard

all of it. It strikes me that you are facing a problem that is much

bigger than a lot of Americans can even imagine. And you need

help.

When you were speaking, Ms. Dunn, I mean about the kids, and

others of you have too, it just struck me that these are human

beings. And so you get stuck in a situation where you are trying

to take care of these children, and I guess you have but so many

resources or alternatives, and yet and still I am sure you go home

at night just, you probably can barely eat dinner trying to figure

out, well, what is going to happen to these children. And in that

vein, I just wanted to know, what is the most important factor that

needs to be addressed when trying to reunite families that have

been pulled apart as a result of meth use in the home? I mean,

what is the difficult part of putting the family back together?

Ms. Dunn.

Ms. DUNN. Yes, sir. I think the most difficult part in reunifying

these families, in our area—and I can only speak for Tennessee—

we don’t have any drug treatment. We have intensive outpatient.

Sir, that is not going to work. That is something that we are in

desperate need of, some type of treatment. I mean, a parent can

go to intensive outpatient treatment for maybe 90 days, but that

is not going to cut it. These parents are addicted to a drug that is

stronger than anything I have ever seen. And I have been in this

field for a long time, and I have seen a lot of drugs. But I have

never seen a drug that could make a parent turn their back on

their child, never.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Chief Byers, you were talking about C–SPAN.

You know, you’re on C–SPAN right now. Congratulations.

Mr. BYERS. Thank you.

Mr. CUMMINGS. The clean-up piece, that is a—we have heard a

lot of testimony in other hearings about clean-up and how much

time it takes and resources. How many people on your force?

Mr. BYERS. Sir, we have a total of 60 sworn officers.

Mr. CUMMINGS. So I guess when you have to clean up, there is

a problem.

Mr. BYERS. There is a big problem. And the only clean-up crews

that we have who are certified to go into the labs are in Georgia

and Tennessee. So one problem we run into is, when we discover

a lab, it might be 24 or 48 hours before a chemist can come in and

check all the chemicals. A chemist has to come first from the State

bureau and check the lab, and then the clean-up crew comes in,

which is paid for by the Drug Enforcement Administration. But

154

still, it might be 2 days that we have an officer or even two officers

assigned to that lab, and nothing can go on. So we are using manpower just to guard the lab, if you will. And the danger continues

as the water, the environment continues to be plagued with that

while we were waiting on a clean-up crew, and that is just—we are

thankful that they are there. And we are thankful the Federal Government is paying for it, because we certainly couldn’t afford the

clean up. We couldn’t afford it whatsoever. But it is very time-consuming and maybe 2 days before the lab can be cleaned up, tying

up our officers as well as Federal and State officers.

Mr. CUMMINGS. How does that affect your other efforts with regard to law enforcement? I mean, you know, one of the things

that—I practiced law for many years, and I think that when people

see, the criminal folk, when they see that there is an opportunity

to do their criminal act, then they take advantage of it. And I was

just wondering, you know, does that send a message, now? They

know you’ve got to deal with that kind of issue. They know you’ve

got a limited force. I mean, have you seen problems in other areas,

that is, criminal activity?

Mr. BUYER. Absolutely, Congressman. In 2004, when our SBI

and our department responded to 43 labs in Rutherford County,

crime was up double digits in larcenies, property crimes as a whole,

simple assaults and domestic violence, and all those are directly related to meth and meth manufacturing. So, yes, we have seen a big

swing.

Mr. CUMMINGS. How about you, Chief Owens?

Chief OWENS. They would pretty much follow along the same

lines. Any time we get involved with the methamphetamine, you

see additional crimes being committed because of the drug itself.

And it is, the deplorable conditions that these people are living in

is conducive to additional problems for children and youth, too.

Mr. CUMMINGS. What would you all—my time has run out, but,

what would you all want to see us do as a Federal Government to

help you? I mean, if you could just answer that in just a very, very

few words. I mean, whoever, some of you may not even want to answer that. But I am just curious.

Ms. YOUNG. Prevention. Mass prevention efforts. The public

needs to be educated about this issue. We need to educate pregnant

women about use during pregnancy for methamphetamine as well

as all of the other substances that affect their children. We need

to make sure that obstetricians know about this issue and that

they are screening effectively and providing intervention so that we

can prevent that damage. The public doesn’t, as many Members

have already said today, may not be really recognizing what the

long-term consequences are, and mass education about this issue

really needs to happen with a doubling of our prevention efforts.

Ms. BROWN. NACo actually supports four of the bills that are circulating through the congressional levels now; some that deal with

clean up, some that deal with Pseudoephedrine restriction. And we

want you to know that we really appreciate what you have been

doing. I think that the direction of moving in a comprehensive way

is the only way that I think we can address this problem and

maybe get to a place where we feel like we have achieved a goal

at the end.

155

And I think everyone who has testified has said that all levels

have to be involved; not levels of government but all departments

within counties that are dealing with it, all departments within cities, that the Social Service component needs to be side by side with

law enforcement, and that there needs to be this understanding

and that treatment is a valuable component of that. So we would

be supportive and we have a president this year that is from

Umatilla County, OR, who has recognized the importance of methamphetamine and raising that awareness and has made it his initiative. So you will hear much from us in NACo about the need to

look at this from all different sectors with a comprehensive approach I think is the best.

Ms. BAKER. If I may, I would agree with the education piece and

also sort of the spirit of, all hands on deck. I mean, the whole piece

around collaboration with law enforcement and others. It is real

easy to sort of be tempted into thinking that foster care is a premium solution, and you know, children need to be safe and have

permanency and well being in their lives. And without treatment,

without the education and prevention piece and treatment, we may

be creating another generation of youngsters who would be well

cared for by the State, I would hope, but who deserve permanency

and connections with their families.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, if I may I just have one question,

one more question that I think may be helpful to some police chiefs

who are watching this right now. Just recently, in Maryland, we

had a situation—it has not been a big problem in Maryland. But

we recently, I mean within the last 2 weeks, had a situation in a

rural section where a lab was discovered. And I am just wondering,

when you were talking, Chief Owens and perhaps you can help us,

Sheriff Shook and others, when, if you had—looking back, when

you first saw it, is there, are there some things that you wish you

had done and maybe just kind of—you know, I am not saying you

underestimated, I don’t know what happened—but I mean, in other

words, that you wish you had done at that moment, as soon as you,

the moment you saw something happening and that, if you were

giving advice to other chiefs, what would you say? You understand

the question.

Chief OWENS. I do. I think one of the things we did is we did a

community presentation. We went around the area with an educational program, a Power Point program, went to all the outlying

areas. And we are very rural in nature. Went to the fire departments and talked with the EMS and fire departments and groups,

and we also took it into our schools. We talked to them at the

school level. And I think when we started showing them some of

the pictures that some of the—that came across big with them. I

mean, sometimes, like they say, a picture, you know, paints 1,000

words. But I am going to tell you, that is pretty devastating when

you start looking at some of those pictures that were up here on

the board today, and I think that gets people’s attention, so I do

believe education is part of it.

And I think you need to act as quickly as you possibly can when

you realize that you have a problem, and fortunately, we have done

that. But unfortunately, this epidemic is so sweeping, and it takes

no time at all before it is overwhelming. It happens that quick. And

156

it is real trouble for people trying to deal with budgets and trying

to deal with the problem as well.

Mr. SHOOK. When we started finding our problem, the first thing

we did was get the education for our law enforcement, our emergency services, our health departments, our Social Services. We

also made a pact with our Chamber of Commerce and our retail establishments and educating them, the hotel owners associations,

the renters, because it is a community problem. It is not a law enforcement problem. It is a community problem, and everyone in

that community has to deal with it. That is where I am proud of

our county, because we have banded together, and we have made

a difference in our county. But I think education working hand in

hand and limiting the availability of Pseudoephedrine products will

take care of the meth problem because, without Pseudoephedrine,

there is no meth.

Mr. CUMMINGS. OK. Thank you all.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you, Mr. Cummings.

And certainly, this is a bipartisan issue. I mean, the concern that

we have as a committee on this epidemic of methamphetamine

across our Nation, it is very serious, and this Congress takes our

job seriously in making sure that we have the laws and everything,

the resources available to combat this problem. The interesting

thing about this panel is that none of you are from Washington,

DC, but surprisingly, you make sense. Wait a second. I guess those

two things actually go together. No, it is wonderful that we actually have these are on the front lines here today to give us recommendations. What is so surprising about the eight-member

panel that we have here is that you have twice as many recommendations, no actually probably more like 100 percent more

recommendations than the first panel did. And I think it is wonderful that you all are here to convey that.

My questions for my local law enforcement leader, Mr. Byers,

you spoke about Rutherford County. And the meth problem is

touching Rutherford County like it is many rural counties across

America. We are not exempt or immune to it. You spoke about the

economic issues in your opening statement, that you and local law

enforcement have to deal with. Can you go more into detail about

the economic impact?

Mr. BYERS. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

The money is being spent in Rutherford County. Our Medicaid

budget, the local budget portion for Medicaid in Rutherford County

last year increased $700,000. That doesn’t sound like a lot in

Washington dollars, but I’ll assure you, in Rutherford County dollars, that is a lot of money. And most of that money went to those

who are afflicted with methamphetamine and methamphetamine

addiction. We are seeing a tremendous amount of money spent in

our local detention facility. We have a 210-person detention facility,

and right now, our budget is at $1.7 million for that facility. And

a lot of that money is going to health care. The biggest spending

that we are going to see with methamphetamine and of course the

worst thing is the loss of life of course. That is the No. 1. But the

big spending is going to come in the future with health care costs

for liver and kidney failure, for diabetes, for heart attacks. And we

are seeing those things in our detention facility now. So the one

157

thing that is rising constantly in law enforcement in Rutherford

County is the medical expenses we have at our 210-man facility,

our detention facility. That is going to continue to grow. We have

inmates who are suffering from everything from diabetes as a result of meth abuse to heart failure to kidney and liver failure to

HIV. And that is going to continue not only in Rutherford County

but with the Department of Corrections in the Federal prison system. We might as well get ready to spend a fortune of money for

health care.

Mr. MCHENRY. Well, this is certainly an issue. And in terms of

local law enforcement, the resources you need, are you getting

those, the funding you need to meet the demand that this is placing on your people?

Mr. BYERS. Congressman Cummings asked earlier about what

would we do, the one thing. And I think avoiding the head-in-thesand mentality, if you will. You know, it was in California. It started east. Oklahoma. Then, you know, people in North Carolina said,

it’s never going to affect North Carolina. It will never make it to

North Carolina. Well, it made it to North Carolina. We in the west

were fighting it. We were fighting it hard. And we had counties in

eastern North Carolina who were saying, it’s not a problem. We

don’t have methamphetamine. Charlotte-Mecklenburg, had their

first meth lab last week, their first for this year. So for CharlotteMecklenburg and the chief there, it may not be a tremendous problem, but I promise you it will be. And resources in law enforcement, we have had to move people from other positions to narcotics. Our narcotics division has doubled in size based on

methamphetamines and will continue to grow. And we are asking

for some additional funding.

But in a county with 9 percent unemployment, it’s hard to ask

that county commissioner for a lot of money. He gives you a long

look when you ask for tax dollars when you’ve got 9 percent unemployment. So it is more than just local issues, for local law enforcement dollars, not a lot of money being seized.

When we were in the cocaine business—and not that we are not

in it still, we made a lot of arrests for cocaine. I know you were

mentioning in Baltimore. But we would seize homes and cars because it was a seller’s market. We would get a little money come

back into law enforcement to help offset some of the expenses. With

meth addiction, they have nothing. They’re broke. They don’t have

a dime. They’re stealing lawnmowers and chainsaws to buy the ingredients to make the meth. So we are not seizing any property.

We are not seizing homes, cars. All we are doing is spending

money. So there is nothing coming back to the coffers, and we are

standing there before our commissioners and before our State legislators and before our Congressmen with our hands out asking for

help. So it is affecting us tremendously.

Mr. MCHENRY. What is the single best thing we can do in Congress to help your fight? If you could touch on that, then we can

go to Chief Owens and Sheriff Shook.

Mr. BYERS. That’s a tough one for me because I have really got

a couple or three. But the first thing is to ban or restrict—ban is

not a good word—restrict the sale of Pseudoephedrine products.

And it can’t be just State by State, because, again, the people, the

158

cooks in Rutherford County are going to drive 15 minutes and steal

or buy all they want in South Carolina. So it needs to be a national

restriction of the sale of Pseudoephedrine products. And that would

be No. 1.

And then I would have to say, looking at the borders of Canada

and Mexico, and Ice is beginning. We are going to change in Rutherford County from a manufacturing base where we have our cooks

that go out and buy the ingredients, make the meth. Now we have

a lot of addicts running around Rutherford County; 6 percent recovery rate, so that is going to continue to grow. And now that the demand is there, it’s supply side economics. The demand is there. The

Ice from Mexico will hit the streets wide open. Congressman, you

know what that’s like in Baltimore as far as dealing with other

drugs. So we need to really look hard at what’s coming in from

Mexico and the Pseudoephedrine coming from Canada.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you.

Chief Owens.

Chief OWENS. I certainly agree with Chief Deputy Byers. One of

our problems is that our meth is not being imported. It is being

made locally. And that is one of our biggest problems. What we

need is manpower and money and to address the problem from a

law enforcement perspective. And that is where our issues are.

Mr. MCHENRY. Sheriff Shook.

Mr. SHOOK. I think limiting the sale of Pseudoephedrine. We also

need manpower. Our State Bureau of Investigation is understaffed.

Their lab is unstaffed, their chemists. We need more chemists because most of the SBI lab chemists that are doing the DNA testing

and other testing in the lab settings are having to leave those laboratories and come out into the field to process meth labs. So that

is putting backlogs in murder cases and rape cases and other law

enforcement problems. So we need manpower, and we need some

restrictions on the main ingredient that causes this problem.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you all so much for your testimony. I saw

a number of head noddings when we came to Pseudoephedrine and

certainly the universal issue here in the base of all that we are

talking about. So thank you so much for your testimony.

Ms. Watson.

Ms. WATSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And I just want to say to the panel that we are very, very appreciative that you came today to not open my eyes but open our eyes

as to the gravity of this problem. And it was said from the Chair

that there is no one here from D.C.; well, thank goodness you came

in from across the country just to show the expanse of this problem.

I want to address my comments to Valerie Brown. And thank

you so much. I am personally involved in a case as we speak. And

I was listening to your recommendations as to what you need to

fight this problem. You are not helped by the fact that I think

America is a drug culture. All you have to do is put on the TV, turn

on the radio or read the paper, and they are selling you something

to put you to sleep, to wake you up, to quell the pain, etc. So our

children become used to taking drugs. There is a case of a young

woman who had been on meth probably 10 years, and it affected

her heart. It affected her kidneys. It affects heart, kidneys. Let’s

159

see. And she’s diabetic. She flatlined three different times. She

went through the county hospital services in Sacramento. Her

mother had been in as a patient for neurosurgery. She had a baby

daughter, 18 months old. This was a household heavily impacted

by that one child who was 19 at the time that she fell ill.

Now here is the question I have to ask: She went through four

different hospitals. When she was doing better, they put her in a

taxi and sent her home. Her mother couldn’t take care of her, because she was recuperating from her surgery and she had not filed

all the papers with the county, the mother for the daughter, 19.

I got involved and had a meeting at the hospital and said, you’ve

got to keep this patient here, she is critically ill.

Well, they finally put her on a list for a transplant. Her heart

has a hole in it from this continuous long-term use of meth. The

problem is that she could not go into foster care because she was

over 18 years old. The hospital did not want her to stay there because any time she goes out, she used meth again.

And the social worker said there is no placement. We can get a

senior placed or an infant placed, but there was no place for a person who was 18 and beyond.

If we look at this whole problem from beginning to end, there are

holes in it, because we don’t know enough or we haven’t really done

the national studies, I think, as to what should be part of the treatment.

Ms. Brown, what would you suggest we do with that young

woman who is 20 now, and needs help, needs aid? She is at home

with her mother, who is incapacitated. She has a daughter. She finally qualified for in-home support services, but she needs to be,

at this current time, institutionalized because, what I can tell, is

that the continued use over a long period of time of meth has affected her thought processes as well.

Ms. BROWN. And they, Congresswoman, are under assault as

well. Hospitals are under assault. So it seems like it doesn’t matter

where you go in the health care system, it’s not providing the kind

of care and treatment that we are looking for. One of the most encouraging things I think that we have here is actually from Paul

Pastor up in Tacoma, WA in Pierce County. And he said they had

brought in a gentleman who was talking about their treatment program, and he said, you know, people kind of believe that methamphetamine is such a bad thing that there is no treatment that

can ever cure or help or fix it.

We have been doing an active study. We have active data. That

data does tell that story. It says we can work with people in the

community. There is great encouragement from the treatment of it,

from the health care, all the people here.

We are having a hard time accessing a system with less and less

dollars, not only that we have available to us from our county revenues, but from our Federal revenues. Medicaid and foster care is

under assault. Really, how can you expect to continue to provide

for all of these people that we are currently seeing coming into the

system needing care when we don’t have the resources to do it?

We are really trying, greatly, just to take care of those that are

there now, that they have become the urgent care instead of just

the urgent. So I absolutely agree with you, the system needs to

160

look at the treatment and the health care end as well as the law

enforcement as well as the cleanup. It has to be total.

And just something I wanted to add that has not been mentioned

at all today. We look at cities and we look at counties, and we look

at how they’re dealing with the problem. But we have States in the

Northwest that they are predominately BLM land. And there is no

one watching that store. And we find that the mobile society of

meth producers in their vans will go anywhere that we are not.

So they will go to the back lands, into Nevada, into Idaho, into

Montana and into Wyoming. And it gets filtered right down to

Rutherford County, NC, only now it’s in a form that is salable.

There needs to be a national approach, and that is one of the reasons we suggest we need the top priorities. We need the national

leadership that you can provide.

Ms. WATSON. Let me just thank you so very much for those comments and go back to Dr. Young. As a Director of the National

Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare, my question to you

is do we have a plan? Are we thinking through how we can make

our treatment programs, prevention programs national, comprehensive? And as I said, there was a hole in the treatment. After

the hospital kicks this child out, there was nowhere that would

take her. So they sent her home in a taxicab where she couldn’t

be cared for there.

So as I said, there are holes along the way. And I agree with Ms.

Brown. It has to be comprehensive. It has to be linked across the

States. And people should not be able to go from State to State and

find that they can get away with it in Utah and not in California,

but in Utah they can.

What is your thinking on that? And are we discussing it in a

commission type structure?

Ms. YOUNG. I don’t know about in terms of a commission type

structure. I do know that our organization has worked with about

eight States at present in the 21⁄2 years that we have been operating to create comprehensive State plans to address the substance

abuse issue in child welfare.

Those States have looked comprehensively across treatment and

intervention for children and the child welfare interventions to put

plans in place to do just what you’re talking about. I think there

are communities that have been serious about this issue for quite

some time. I cite Sacramento County in my written testimony, and

you see the recovery rates that they’re achieving regardless of the

type of substance that is being used. And you see the faster reunifications that are happening by doing some very specific things, ensuring that comprehensive services are available very early in the

case, even before the court has taken jurisdiction in a case in which

children have been removed. They are offering services from day

one. And they have defense counsel on board to say to parents,

your best chance, your best hope is engagement in a recovery process in order to regain the custody of your children. They have been

at this for some time. They’re seeing positive results. There are

places around the country that have put those kinds of plans in

place.

Is it widespread enough? No. Probably not. Are they ready to address the methamphetamine issue? I think that we need to be a bit

161

ahead of the game. You certainly recognized the cocaine and the

crack epidemic 15 years ago. I think this is our opportunity to ensure that comprehensive family based treatment and prevention efforts are in place for these families.

Ms. WATSON. Thank you so very much. I just want to say to the

Chair, I know I am out of time. But maybe we can ask some of

these good people to come together and give us the framework for

maybe a piece of legislation, because this is a serious problem and

it is killing our children. It is destroying our households, and it destroys our society. So maybe we can ask, through the Chair, for

them to give us a report, what would they like to see us do in legislation.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. MCHENRY. Without objection, I think the committee would

accept any further testimony you want to add or recommendations

in particular that you would like to add to your testimony today.

Without objection, that is ordered.

At this time, I would like to recognize my colleague from North

Carolina, my neighbor to the north and west, Ms. Foxx.

Ms. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am going to ask you all

to answer, with one word, a question, each one of you. And then

I want to ask a question.

Mr. Burns said that the methamphetamine problem is not as

great as cocaine and heroin. I just want you to go down the line

and say, do you agree or disagree? I only want one word from each

one of you. So start with Dr. Young.

Ms. YOUNG. Boy, that is so hard.

Ms. FOXX. One word.

Ms. YOUNG. No. I would not agree. Wait. Excuse me. Would you

rephrase? Because I want to make sure I am answering the right

way. He said it was not as bad a problem? Depending on how you

phrase it, I would say no. That is not correct.

Ms. BROWN. I agree with Ms. Young—Dr. Young.

Ms. BAKER. Do you agree or disagree with Mr. Burns?

Ms. BROWN. I disagree. I think it an epidemic of epidemic proportions.

Mr. MCHENRY. One word. Mrs. Baker.

Ms. BAKER. Disagree.

Mr. BYERS. Disagree.

Ms. DUNN. I would disagree.

Chief OWENS. Disagree.

Mr. SHOOK. Disagree.

Ms. FOXX. Thank you very much. So let the record show everybody disagreed.

Sheriff Shook, could you tell us what, if any, Federal programs

or State programs have been helpful to you and what you have

been doing to fight the meth problem?

Sheriff SHOOK. The formation of our meth task force through the

State Bureau of Investigationis partnering with other county agencies, city agencies, the ATF, DEA and the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

We have also gotten a grant in our county, the endangered children’s grant. That has helped us team with our mental health facilities, our Department of Social Services, and all the community

groups combined have really made a difference because we have

162

also gotten another grant that our Department of Mental Health

is working with, Meth Affects Families, and they are doing a very

good job working with the parents trying to reunite them with the

children.

I personally got to go to one of the counseling sessions with one

of their clients. She was asked to bring someone that made an impact on her life with her meth problem, and she chose me to come.

That was a very big honor for me.

But just to see the communities pulling together and getting

these Federal and State grants, that is what we have to have to

fight this problem. And we all have to pull together, local, State

and nationwide.

Ms. FOXX. What you’re saying is that there is an attempt at a

comprehensive approach based on the collaboration that has gone

on and that has been the message that we have been hearing from

folks?

Sheriff SHOOK. That is correct.

Ms. FOXX. Thank you very much.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you, Ms. Foxx. At this time, I just want

to, on behalf of the whole Committee on Government Reform and

the subcommittee here today, I would like to thank you so much

for taking time out of your schedules. It is wonderful to actually

have people in the front lines here giving real recommendations

and real policy objectives in the needs of our local community. It

is very refreshing. It is about this time in Washington on a Tuesday when most Members of Congress are ready to get back home

and back to reality, and I appreciate you all injecting a dose of reality to our day here in Congress. And I sure appreciate your testimony. Thanks so much. You’re dismissed. And at this time, this

meeting is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 5:21 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

[Additional information submitted for the hearing record follows:]

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

Æ