Congress has had a longstanding interest in Mexico's counter-narcotics efforts. (1) Beginning with legislationoriginally enacted in the mid-1980s, Congress required the President to certify annually, subject tocongressional review, that drug producing or drug-transit countries had cooperated fully with theUnited States in drug control efforts during the previous year to avoid suspension of U.S. aid. (2) Mexico was fully certified infollowing years, but Congress closely monitored these certifications, and resolutions of disapprovalto reverse the presidential certifications were introduced in 1996-1999. Following the election ofopposition candidate Vicente Fox as President of Mexico in July 2000, several Members called formodification of the certification procedures or exemption of Mexico from the process, but legislativeaction was not completed. President Bush certified Mexico as fully cooperative on March 1, 2001,and no resolutions of disapproval were introduced in 2001. In April and September 2001, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee reported out twomeasures ( S. 219 and S. 1401 ) that would have suspended the certificationrequirements for three years, but no final action was taken by Congress on the measures. InDecember 2001, Congress passed the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act for FY2002( H.R. 2506 / P.L. 107-115 ) that waived the drug certification requirements for FY2002for all countries, and instead required the President to designate only countries that had demonstrablyfailed to meet international counter-narcotics obligations. In September 2002, Congress enacted theForeign Relations Authorization Act for FY2003 ( H.R. 1646 / P.L. 107-228 ) that, inSection 706, made permanent a requirement that the President designate in mid-September of eachyear, before the beginning of the fiscal year, the countries which have demonstrably failed to meetinternational counter-narcotics obligations. Acting under these modified requirements, President Bush has made the requireddesignations for fiscal years 2002 through 2005, and Mexico has not been mentioned by U.S.officials, except to say that it has been performing well and is far from failing to meet internationalcounter-narcotics standards. (3) According to the Department of State's Bureau for International Narcotics and LawEnforcement Affairs, Mexico is the principal transit country for South American cocaine enteringthe United States, the leading foreign source of marijuana, and a principal source of heroin. It is alsoa major producing and transit point for methamphetamine and other synthetic drugs. (4) Agency experts agree thatMexico's share of illicit traffic in the various areas has remained high over the years, although thereare some variations in the estimates. The methodology for making the estimates (whether derivedfrom seizures or some other means) is not regarded as entirely adequate, and the estimates may beaffected by changing trafficking patterns and demand as much as enforcement efforts. With regard to cocaine, the major drug of concern, the State Department's INCSR reportcovering the year 2003 states that "an estimated 70 percent of the U.S.-bound cocaine shipments passthrough [Mexican] territory." The Drug Enforcement Administration's Country Profile for 2003 forMexico states that "an estimated 70 percent of all cocaine originating from South America destinedfor the United States transits the Mexico-Central America corridor." (5) These estimates appear to bea higher percentage than reported in previous years. The INCSR covering 2002 stated that"approximately 65 percent of cocaine reaching the United States passes through Mexico and watersoff the Pacific and Gulf coasts, " and the INCSR covering 2001 stated that Mexico was the transitpoint for "more than one half of the cocaine sold in the United States." With respect to heroin, the INCSR report covering 2003 states that Mexico produces less thanfive percent of the world's opium poppy, but because of the geographical proximity to the UnitedStates it is "the supplier of some 30 to 40 percent of the U.S. heroin market -- especially in stateswest of the Mississippi." This appears to be a slightly higher estimate than in the past. The INCSRreport covering 2002 stated simply that geographical proximity to the United States "allowscultivators and processors [in Mexico] to supply a disproportionately large share of the U.S. heroinmarket." A U.S. Customs official stated, in March 2001 hearings, that 14% of the heroin seized inthe United States comes from Mexico, while an independent study indicated that Mexico is thesource of 29% of the heroin used in the United States. (6) In other areas, the INCSR covering 2003 reports that Mexico "is by far the leading foreignsource of marijuana consumed in the United States," and "is also a major producing and transit pointfor methamphetamine and other synthetic drugs." Moreover, the report says that Mexican drugtraffickers have steadily increased operations in all illicit drug sectors in the United States, and havecome to dominate most of the distribution centers. Mexico continues to be a majormoney-laundering center, in which trafficking organizations exploit Mexican banks and financialinstitutions to transfer significant amounts of illicitly obtained currency through the global financialsystem. Favored money laundering methods include the smuggling of U.S. currency into Mexicoand the movement of the funds back into the United States via couriers, wire transfers, and armoredvehicles. In short, Mexico's share of illicit traffic has remained high over the years, and seemed toincrease in 2003 in major areas, especially in the supply of cocaine and heroin to the U.S. market. Mexico's role as a base for drug traffickers and as a center for money-laundering persisted andperhaps increased as well. The following three tables show State Department estimates of Mexican drug control effortsin three areas -- seizures, arrests, and eradication -- from 1998 to 2003. Supplementary informationcovering the first six months of 2004 is also provided as reported in the written version of PresidentFox's Fourth Report of the Government. (7) Caution should be exercised in considering the changes in thevarious areas as an indication of Mexico's seriousness in controlling drug trafficking. The trendsmay also be affected by the demand for the drugs, the amount of drugs produced or available, thesophistication of the drug traffickers, the intelligence and capabilities of Mexican counter-drugagencies, the effectiveness of reporting and monitoring methods, the effect of weather conditions oneradication efforts, and competition from alternative drug suppliers. Turning to Mexican seizures of drugs in 2003, the results portrayed in Table 1, as reportedby the State Department, demonstrate a mixed result compared to 2002, and compared to the averageof the previous five years (1998-2002) that have been calculated to minimize the effects of annualvariations. The results generally show negative results in the seizures of cocaine, opium, and heroin,while showing positive results in the seizures of marijuana, methamphetamine, and drug labs. Morerecent Mexican data for the first six months of 2004 show positive results in the seizures of opium,heroin, and marijuana. Table 1. Mexican Seizures of Illicit Narcotics,1998-2003 Sources: Data are from the U.S. Department of State, International Narcotics Control StrategyReport , March 2004, Part I, pp. 159-168, especially the Table on p. 168, with updated data on illicitdrug labs from Mexican official reports provided by the Department of State. Seizures are measuredin metric tons (mt) and kilograms (kg). Seizures of cocaine, which many consider to be the key test, increased significantly, from12.6 metric tons in 2002 to 20.0 metric tons in 2003, according to the State Department. This is a59% increase from one year to the next, but the increase is from what appears to be a particularly badyear. The result for 2003 was still a 15% reduction from average seizures of 23.40 metric tons inthe previous five years (1998-2002), and it surpassed only two of the previous five years. Mexicandata for January-June 2004 show seizures of cocaine at 13.1 metric tons, a 17% reduction comparedto January-June 2003, but a respectable result if projected at the same rate until the end of 2004. Seizures of opium declined from 310 kilograms in 2002 to 189 kilograms in 2003, accordingto the State Department, a 39% reduction from the previous year, and a 30% reduction from theaverage of 409 kilograms in the 1998-2002 period. This was the lowest level of seizures in the lastsix years, except for 1998. Mexican data for the first six months of 2004 show seizures of 269kilograms of opium, a 50% increase compared to the first six months of 2003, and a positive resultif projected to the end of 2004. Seizures of heroin declined 41% from 282 kilograms in 2002 to 165 kilograms in 2003, asreported by the State Department, and this result was a 49% decline from the average seizures of 240kilograms in the 1998-2002 period. However, Mexican data for January-June 2004 show seizuresof heroin up to 154 kilograms, a 166% increase compared to January-June 2003, and a result morein keeping with recent performance, especially when using the much higher Mexican data for 2003. Seizures of marijuana increased 24% from 1,633 metric tons in 2002 to 2,019 metric tons in2003, according to the State Department, making the seizures the largest in the last six years, and a 33% increase over the average of 1,522 for 1998-2002. Mexican data show seizures of marijuanafor the first six months of 2004 at 790 metric tons, a 44% increase over the first six months of 2003,but a result that would be below recent results if projected to the end of the year.