<DOC>
[106th Congress House Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:72448.wais]
THE MIDWEST METHAMPHETAMINE EPIDEMIC
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
DRUG POLICY, AND HUMAN RESOURCES
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JUNE 26, 2000
__________
Serial No. 106-226
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
http://www.house.gov/reform
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
72-448 WASHINGTON : 2001
_______________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250
Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland TOM LANTOS, California
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut ROBERT E. WISE, Jr., West Virginia
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
STEPHEN HORN, California PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
JOHN L. MICA, Florida PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
DAVID M. McINTOSH, Indiana ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington,
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana DC
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
MARSHALL ``MARK'' SANFORD, South DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
Carolina ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
BOB BARR, Georgia DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
DAN MILLER, Florida JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
ASA HUTCHINSON, Arkansas JIM TURNER, Texas
LEE TERRY, Nebraska THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois HAROLD E. FORD, Jr., Tennessee
GREG WALDEN, Oregon JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DOUG OSE, California ------
PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
HELEN CHENOWETH-HAGE, Idaho (Independent)
DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
Kevin Binger, Staff Director
Daniel R. Moll, Deputy Staff Director
David A. Kass, Deputy Counsel and Parliamentarian
Lisa Smith Arafune, Chief Clerk
Phil Schiliro, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources
JOHN L. MICA, Florida, Chairman
BOB BARR, Georgia PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
ASA HUTCHINSON, Arkansas JIM TURNER, Texas
DOUG OSE, California JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
Ex Officio
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Sharon Pinkerton, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Charley Diaz, Congressional Fellow
Ryan McKee, Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on June 26, 2000.................................... 1
Statement of:
Frisbie, Joe, chief, Sioux City Police Department; Marti J.
Reilly, Tri-State Drug Task Force; and Penny Westfall,
commissioner of public safety, State of Iowa............... 10
Phillips, Linda, executive director, Siouxland Cares; and
Carla Van Hofwegen, president, board of directors, Hava
Java....................................................... 50
Schoon, Leroy, president, Schoon Construction; and Jamey
Miller, Rudy Salem Staffing Services....................... 70
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Frisbie, Joe, chief, Sioux City Police Department, prepared
statement of............................................... 13
Mica, Hon. John L., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Florida, prepared statement of.................... 5
Phillips, Linda, executive director, Siouxland Cares,
prepared statement of...................................... 53
Reilly, Marti J., Tri-State Drug Task Force, prepared
statement of............................................... 20
Schoon, Leroy, president, Schoon Construction, prepared
statement of............................................... 72
Van Hofwegen, Carla, president, board of directors, Hava
Java, prepared statement of................................ 62
Westfall, Penny, commissioner of public safety, State of
Iowa, prepared statement of................................ 27
THE MIDWEST METHAMPHETAMINE EPIDEMIC
----------
MONDAY, JUNE 26, 2000
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and
Human Resources,
Committee on Government Reform,
Sioux City, IA.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9 a.m., in
room 6, Sioux City Convention Center, Sioux City, IA, Hon. John
L. Mica (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representative Mica.
Also present: Representatives Latham and Thune.
Staff present: Charley Diaz, congressional fellow; and Ryan
McKee, clerk.
Mr. Mica. Good morning. I'd like to call this hearing of
the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human
Resources to order. I'm John Mica, and I Chair this
subcommittee of the Government Reform Committee of the House of
Representatives.
The order of business this morning will be first I will
begin our hearing with an opening statement, then I will yield
to other Members for their opening comments.
This morning our subcommittee has three panels to hear
from, and we will proceed in hearing those three panels and the
witnesses assembled this morning. Just for information of those
attending, this is an investigations and oversight subcommittee
of the U.S. House of Representatives, and this is one of the
hearings that we're conducting on the problem of drug abuse and
illegal narcotics. The title of today's hearing is Midwest
Methamphetamine Epidemic. We will proceed in that order.
As chairman of the Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human
Resources Subcommittee, it's my responsibility to help oversee
our Nation's drug control efforts in the U.S. House of
Representatives. We've come to Sioux City, IA, in the Heartland
of America this morning to conduct an oversight field hearing
in an effort to understand what's going on throughout the
Nation and particularly here in the Heartland dealing with our
Nation's drug crisis. Congressional field hearings are a very
crucial part of our work because they allow us to gain a
national perspective through the eyes of local citizens and
local officials. Today, we'll learn about the manufactured use
and trafficking of illegal drugs here in Iowa and the
surrounding regions.
I had a little geography lesson this morning realizing how
this is a tri-State area bordering South Dakota and also
Nebraska and the tremendous impact illegal narcotics have had
on these communities in this region of our country. Our focus
in this morning's hearing is the growing methamphetamine
epidemic that's ravaging the Midwest.
We're privileged to have with us today a congressional
leader who strongly supports efforts to protect our communities
from the ravages of illegal narcotics. I am here foremost at
the invitation of that Representative, Tom Latham, who during
my year and a half as chairman of the Drug Policy Subcommittee
has constantly reminded me about the need to pay attention to
all of America, particularly this region, and the impact of
illegal narcotics, and I thank him for his leadership in that
regard and also for the invitation to be with you today and
visit this community.
We're also joined by another leader in the House of
Representatives, John Thune, who represents the adjacent
district in South Dakota. He also has taken on a leadership
role in trying to find answers to this plaguing question that
we have a problem of illegal narcotics, and I thank him for
joining us on our panel this morning.
Growing up in rural America used to be a shield against the
seedier side of America's urban culture, including the problem
of illegal drugs.
Unfortunately, all that's changed. The National Center for
Addiction and Substance Abuse recently announced that the rate
of drug use among teens in rural America is now higher than the
Nation's large urban centers.
In a White Paper which was published last January, the
center found that eighth graders living in rural America were
104 percent more likely to use amphetamines, including
methamphetamines, 83 percent more likely to use crack cocaine,
and 34 percent more likely to smoke marijuana than kids in the
urban areas. These sobering statistics should serve as a wake-
up call to parents and community leaders across the Midwest.
Your kids are in fact at risk. Drugs are no longer just a big
city problem.
Nationwide drugs directly killed 15,973 Americans in 1998.
That's our last year of reported statistics. And many of those
unfortunately are young people. The number of all drug-related
deaths is much higher, and Barry McCaffrey, our national drug
czar, testified before this subcommittee and said we've lost in
the last year more than 52,000 Americans as a result of both
direct and indirect causes related to illegal narcotics. This
is in fact a staggering figure when you consider that in the
whole of the Vietnam war we lost 58,000 Americans. We're losing
that many almost every year in this battle with illegal
narcotics. Additionally drugs cost our society, and the range
is somewhere between $110 billion and a quarter of a trillion
dollars annually, $110 billion to a quarter of a trillion
dollars annually. Clearly much more must be done to combat the
scourge.
We're honored to have testifying before us today a number
of State and local officials as well as everyday citizens who
are actively engaged here in responding to the drug crisis and
its terrible consequence on the youth of this region. These
individuals serve on the front lines in preventing, educating
and treating illegal drug use, both in our schools and in our
communities as well as enforcing our laws. They are most in
need of our support and assistance at the Federal level, and
also in joining together in a cooperative effort.
This subcommittee is particularly interested in how many
communities and how our communities and regions are dealing
with the critical responsibilities of successfully implementing
our national, I say a national drug control strategy, not just
a Federal drug control strategy. It is important that this
again be a cooperative and coordinated effort. After all, State
and local officials have their finger on the pulse of the
community and can best respond to threats like the illegal drug
epidemic we're facing. In Congress we try to ensure that the
Federal Government is doing everything possible to assist you,
both in reducing the supply of illegal narcotics as well as the
demand for illegal drugs.
Today, we're focusing on regional challenges and threats,
like Iowa and again this tri-State region. As we'll hear,
illegal drug production, use and trafficking pose special
changes and dangers to the schools, communities, law
enforcement agencies and officials in this region. The State of
Iowa and the Midwest are increasingly becoming a primary
consumption area for methamphetamine. While many of the
methamphetamines are imported from large labs in Mexico and
California, within the last several years this area has
experienced a dramatic increase in the number of clandestine
methamphetamine manufacturing labs. In fact in looking at the
statistics that were provided to me by staff, from 8 meth labs
that were seized in 1995, that's only 5 years ago there were 8,
to I'm told more than 500 were seized in 1999, last year, a
dramatic number, particularly given the population of this
region.
These labs which use volatile precursor chemicals in
dangerous combinations pose an added risk to the dealers, to
law enforcement officials and to the entire community here.
In response to this terrible methamphetamine problem as
well as the continuing problems with a host of other illegal
drugs, Iowa along with Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, North and
South Dakota, has been designated by the Office of National
Drug Control Policy as a high intensity drug trafficking area
[HIDTA]. Our subcommittee is responsible for authorizing and
overseeing the HIDTA program. We have 31 HIDTAs now across the
Nation to help Federal, State and local law enforcement
entities better coordinate investigations, share intelligence,
resources and conduct law enforcement operations. Today, we'll
learn more about the effectiveness and operations of the
Midwest HIDTA, hope to have a report on that, including what
progress it is making in combating illegal narcotics in this
area.
I might say also that I'm extremely pleased at the
leadership Mr. Latham has taken in helping create a regional
training center here which I believe is the only center in the
United States to provide free training assistance to the local
agencies particularly dealing with the meth epidemic that you
have had here. I salute him on putting that effort together and
we'll hear a little bit about its success and challenges in
this hearing.
Again, I applaud the continuing dedication and
professionalism of the witnesses who appear before us today,
their willingness to share their ideas, their needs, their
recommendations with us. In Congress we always find the best
ideas from those that we represent, and we try to take those
ideas back and incorporate them in our policy, and it is
particularly important to our subcommittee that we find
successful solutions and cooperative efforts to face this great
challenge. And I might say too, I've been involved in many
things in business, in my life and personally, and I have never
seen a challenge like this that we face. It's just an
unbelievable challenge. I'm here in the Midwest today. We've
been in California. We've been in Louisiana, Texas. We've been
in Baltimore, around the Nation. And you aren't alone. We are
also facing an incredible challenge with this drug threat and
the problems that it has caused for not only this community but
our whole Nation.
I can assure you that the Representatives that we have here
today will be working with our subcommittee and with the other
committees involved in Congress to do everything we can to
assist you in ridding your community and others of the deadly
poison that is affecting our loved ones. I think all of us
recognize that this drug crisis demands a full utilization of
all available resources and very close cooperation in a
comprehensive regional and national effort. After all that's
what HIDTAs have been designed to do and it's our job in
Congress to monitor and ensure their success. If obstacles are
identified then we must move to decisively overcome them. This
community, this State and this Nation really can't afford to
wait. The drug crisis demands promising approaches and decisive
action, and we must act now.
Again I want to thank the witnesses for appearing before
us, and I want to thank my colleagues, Mr. Latham for the
invitation to be here, Mr. Thune also for his leadership on
this issue and both of them representing this area again on
this tremendous problem.
With those comments I'm pleased at this time to yield to
the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. Latham.
[The prepared statement of Hon. John L. Mica follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.002
Mr. Latham. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I very
much appreciate your taking special efforts to get here. We had
the opportunity to have breakfast together this morning and to
hear the saga of Mr. Mica making it to Sioux City yesterday
coming from upstate New York yesterday and the various flights
and challenges that you faced to get here. Very much
appreciated. And what is most appreciated is your tremendous
leadership in Congress on this most important issue I believe
as far as the future for our young people, and really gets to
the whole fabric of what our society believes it should be in
maintaining the kind of society that we can all be proud of. I
also want to thank John Thune, my very good friend and
neighbor, for being here and his leadership in Congress on this
issue.
We really became aware in the last 5 years of what is a
tremendously changing dynamic and problem in this part of the
country. As you stated before, back in 1995 there were eight
meth labs. Last year over 500. I think that's just what the
State officials found. In addition to that with the DEA records
there's another several hundred actually in the State of Iowa.
But this is an epidemic that has absolutely exploded before us.
With your leadership, Mr. Chairman, and efforts in Congress
and the administration, I think we've made some very positive
steps for, No. 1, looking at the interdiction problem, coming
from other countries, No. 2, being of assistance to local law
enforcement which has done a great challenge. There are
differing ideas in Congress as to how to approach this problem,
and who to support. I personally think that by supporting
people on the ground, local law enforcement, that that is the
way to go, because they are the ones that have to deal on a day
to day basis with the problem.
The education programs that we're seeing today in the
Siouxland area was 1 of the 12 original pilot programs as far
as the education efforts, and what we found there was that with
the media messages that were going out we had a great effect on
young children. But when we got to the high school age there
was much less effect. What the most important part of that
effort is is to finally have parents become aware of the fact
that if they will simply sit down and talk to their children
about this problem, that is in fact the most effective method
of influencing these children never to get involved in drugs.
And it's something that I think we as parents today think
someone else is going to talk to our kids. Unfortunately it's
going to be the drug dealer. If we don't talk to them somebody
else will, and that person doesn't have their best hope and
aspirations in mind for them. They want to sell them drugs.
Treatment has also become a very, and is always a very
important part of the four-pronged strategy that we're trying
to put forward. And that is something that we in Congress are
putting more and more money into, trying to make sure the
treatment is available. But as people here in this district all
know, and I've had 23 county-wide drug meetings, drug awareness
meetings throughout this 30-county district. And it becomes
more and more apparent that in fact what we have to do is to
have all parents aware of what's going on, be a joint effort
with communities, with the churches, with the schools, with the
community groups involved to really approach this problem in a
unified basis, to make sure that there is a statement in our
society about zero tolerance for drugs. And if we can do that I
think we've set a standard in our communities. We do not want
to destroy what is very, very good about the upper Midwest,
about Iowa, South Dakota, Nebraska, and this I think is the
biggest threat to the long-term well being and safety of this
whole part of the country.
So again I want to thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for
being here and making extraordinary efforts to be here. And I
really look forward to the testimony from great people who are
devoting their lives to addressing this problem, and these are
the folks here who are going to solve it. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Mica. Thank you. Driving tornadoes, thunderstorms,
going through three different airports to get here, I don't
think there's anything that would have kept me from this,
because Mr. Latham has repeatedly brought this community and
this region problem to my attention, and I was going to be here
come hell or high water. Again thank you.
I'm pleased now to yield to the gentleman from South
Dakota, Mr. Thune.
Mr. Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me echo my
colleague from Iowa and say welcome to Siouxland as we like to
call it here. Thank you for coming in the summer. We would
certainly welcome the opportunity to return the favor and
attend a hearing in your State of Florida in January perhaps. I
do appreciate the leadership you have taken on in this issue. I
would also say to my colleague from Iowa, Tom Latham, who is as
close to a delegation that I have since I am the only member
from South Dakota, we work very closely on a number of issues,
whether it's agriculture or water development or transportation
funding or anything like that in this part of the country, we
really do have to work as a team, so I appreciate very much the
leadership that Tom provides to many of those issues and the
impact that they have on my State of South Dakota.
I would just simply add to what has already been said and
say that this is a personal issue for me. I have two young
daughters, one of whom is in junior high and another who will
be in junior high in a year, and nothing is more important to
me as a parent than eliminating the scourge of illegal drugs
that is destroying minds and ambitions of our young people.
We just don't have any alternative. We have to snuff this
thing out. I think that my experience is in a lot of issues
like this that our faith-based institutions, our families, our
community-based organizations are much more successful in
helping solve and address these issues. Obviously there is a
national responsibility here in the area I think of
interdiction and cutting off the supply at the source, but when
it comes to prevention, when it comes to education, when it
comes to treatment, there are a lot of good things that are
going on out there, and we want to make sure that we are good
partners with local law enforcement, with those who are
involved in efforts to combat, fight illegal drugs, and we want
to work closely with you to make sure the resources are there,
the tools are in place and we can successfully put together
strategies that will help us really attack this problem.
It is a great concern. I never would have thought, I grew
up in the western part of South Dakota in a real small town,
that we would be talking about this in the terms that we are
today in a State like ours, and States like Iowa and Nebraska.
But we are a high intensity drug trafficking area. That's a
label, designation that is a concern, but it's also I think
welcome in the sense that it helps us attack this problem and
work collectively in putting together regional strategies that
will help us address it.
I am here today to listen and to learn and to find out
exactly what the dimensions of some of the issues and the
problems are, and then to hear from people who care very deeply
about this, about what we might do to better combat it.
So thank you for the opportunity to be here, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for being here. And, Tom, thank you for hosting us in
Sioux City, and I want to work collectively.
I was noting in the testimony here too the number of deaths
that are directly attributed to drugs, and those that are
indirectly, and I would say that one is too many. We need to do
everything we can to get to where we have this issue in hand to
where we're not losing any of our young people to this problem.
Thank you for the chance to be here. I look forward to the
testimony and I hope we have an opportunity to ask questions
later. Thanks.
Mr. Mica. Thank you, Mr. Thune. I didn't get to see Mr.
Thune earlier, but Tom and I did have coffee this morning
together. I told him I feel a little bit like coming home.
Actually my uncle who was the first Mica to go to college came
to Iowa and received his degree here. My first job on
graduating from college was in Iowa City where I worked for a
little over a year, and actually my last business venture was
in Aberdeen, SD. I started the cellular RSA service in
Aberdeen, so I felt a little bit of a kinship to this area and
pleased to be back, and to also conduct this most important
field hearing.
We'll now proceed, and Mr. Latham moves that we keep the
record open for a period of 2 weeks, and without objection that
is so ordered.
I might just say for those visiting, we do have a limited
number of witnesses who are testifying because it's impossible
to hear from everyone in these official proceedings. However,
the action which I just took and we passed by unanimous consent
would allow anyone who would like to submit comments or
statements for the record to submit them either to me as Chair
of the subcommittee, or to Mr. Latham or Mr. Thune for
inclusion and part of the official proceedings of today's
hearing, and that will be open for a period of 2 weeks.
Now as we proceed, I would like to go to our witness panel,
and we do have three panels today.
The first panel consists of Mr. Joe Frisbie, and he is the
chief of the Sioux City Police Department. The second panelist
is Marti J. Reilly, and Marti Reilly is with the Tri-State Drug
Task Force. And then the third witness is Penny Westfall, and
she is the commissioner of Public Safety for the State of Iowa.
Again let me explain, since I don't think you've testified
before our subcommittee before, this is an investigations and
oversight subcommittee of the House of Representatives. In that
regard we do swear in our witnesses. Additionally, in our
proceedings we would ask that if you have a lengthy statement
or statement beyond 5 minutes that you request and through the
chair I will move by unanimous consent that we make an entire
statement part of the record, a lengthy statement. We'll also
include data information or background material upon similar
requests to the Chair.
With those opening comments, if I could, would you please
stand to be sworn. Would you raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Mica. The witnesses, the record will reflect, answered
in the affirmative.
I'm pleased to welcome you before our subcommittee. Again
pleased to be here with you this morning. I'll recognize first
for his statement the chief of the Sioux City Police
Department, Mr. Joe Frisbie. You're recognized, sir.
STATEMENTS OF JOE FRISBIE, CHIEF, SIOUX CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT;
MARTI J. REILLY, TRI-STATE DRUG TASK FORCE; AND PENNY WESTFALL,
COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC SAFETY, STATE OF IOWA
Mr. Frisbie. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Latham, Congressman
Thune, thank you for being here today.
There's no question that the methamphetamine problem in the
Midwest, specifically in Sioux City, has reached an epidemic
proportion. We have a long history of addressing the drug
problem as a local problem. Communities in our tri-State area
have suffered jurisdictional problems in developing cases.
We've suffered a shortage of resources that prevent us from
addressing the problem beyond the street level.
In the past several problems have prevented us from
conducting investigations in an organized manner, such as a
lack of training funds, especially for smaller communities, a
lack of collaboration between agencies, the absence of a highly
organized sharing of information of intelligence systems, the
lack of an organized task force to conduct collaborative
investigations and a lack of Federal support beyond peripheral
involvement. We have made some progress. While effort was made
to address the problem in major metropolitan cities and ports
of entry, the Midwest remained an open and lucrative market
that offered little risk.
However, there have been some promising developments that
have been made over the last 8 to 10 years that have helped us
become more organized in our approach to dealing with the drug
problem in our area. In 1992, the Federal Government brought in
two DEA agents to Sioux City. In 1995, they formed a
provisional task force with the DEA with the help of
Congressman Latham. In 1997, again with the help of Congressman
Latham, we were able to establish a resident office for the DEA
here in Sioux City. In 1997, it had become apparent that a
significant number of individuals driving the drug culture in
our area were illegal aliens. Congressman Latham again helped
us secure an INS agent for our task force. In 1998 Congressman
Latham helped secure funds to build a facility in the Federal
building to house the task force. In 1999 again Congressman
Latham helped us turn the task force into a fully funded task
force.
The task force today is made up of 18 sworn officers, 2
analysts, 3 of these are DEA agents, 6 are Sioux City police
officers, and the remainder represent the States of South
Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa DNE, the South Sioux City Police
Department, the Woodbury County Sheriff's Office. Becoming a
DEA-sponsored task force allowed us to deputize all officers in
the task force giving them the jurisdiction to follow the cases
anywhere in the country. All this was made possible by
congressional help that we've received from such grants as the
Byrne and the HIDTA funding. Thanks to this support we are able
to address cases with as broad a scope as Sioux Falls, SD, Fort
Dodge, Norfolk and Omaha, NE, Worthington, MN, and many other
communities.
Recently HIDTA conducted a survey to assess the perceived
strengths and weaknesses in law enforcement agencies today.
Perceived strengths included a more cooperative approach to law
enforcement with better communication, sharing of equipment and
facilities, multi-jurisdictional task force which removed
boundaries among jurisdictions, fueled a law enforcement
cooperative effort and leading to the dissemination to not only
drugs but property and violent crimes as well. And better
prosecution has been secured by the U.S. Federal attorney's
office who has increased the number of prosecutors dealing with
the drug problems in our communities, specifically through
HIDTA grants which help us tremendously.
Perceived weaknesses revealed in the responses included
insufficient funding for equipment, investigations and
training, and insufficient manpower, especially in smaller
agencies to spare officers to attend training. Congressman
Latham approached me several years ago about the idea of
establishing a training center in Sioux City that would address
these problems. The goal of the training center is to provide
training to agencies previously not able to train effectively,
either due to a shortage of funding or manpower, especially
smaller agencies. Over the past 3 years we have provided
training to over 5,309 students within a 150 mile radius of
Sioux City. Training is offered in such courses as clandestine
laboratories, drug awareness recognition, the Reid technique on
interrogation for narcotics and many others.
Training through the center is offered free of charge to
officers of law enforcement agencies of Iowa, Nebraska, South
Dakota and a part of Minnesota. The response has been
overwhelming, but we need to work harder to reach the small
agencies that can't afford the loss of manpower to send
officers even if the training is free. The training center and
the seminars provide available opportunity for officers to
share information and make contacts that can later help them
develop cases in the future, and it's imperative that we
receive congressional support in this endeavor, we plan to
develop a multi-jurisdictional geographic information system
[GIS], to coordinate drug intelligence information for agencies
through the tri-State area.
In closing, you can see that where we came from and where
we are today are light years apart, and yet we have to travel
much further to eliminate the methamphetamine problem in our
country. I ask for your continued support for the programs such
as the Byrne and HIDTA grants, the multi-jurisdictional task
force that have provided proven methods for improving our
approach. We thank you for the support and urge its
continuation.
However, the drug problem does not exist in isolation.
Other problems considered include the illegal alien problem
that drives the drug trafficking problem and the need for
demand reduction programs.
Also, we have become victims of our own success. By further
contributing to the jails that are already filled beyond their
capacity, and it's a terrible problem all across the country.
We urge Congress to keep all these issues in mind as they
initiate and guide policy that guides both our local and our
national fight against the problem of methamphetamine.
Again I'd like to personally thank Congressman Latham for
his overwhelming support in this committee and Congress as a
whole for their efforts. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Frisbie follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.007
Mr. Mica. We'll withhold questioning until we have heard
from all the witnesses.
I'll recognize now Marti J. Reilly who is with the Tri-
State Drug Task Force. You're recognized.
Mr. Reilly. Good morning, gentlemen. My name is Marti
Reilly. I'm a sergeant with the Sioux City, IA, Police
Department. I have been a police officer for 19 years. My
current assignment is the Tri-State Drug Task Force where I am
the group supervisor.
The Tri-State Task Force is a multi-jurisdictional drug
investigation group located in Sioux City. The task force was
formed in 1995 to combat the ever-growing drug problem in
Nebraska, Iowa, South Dakota area which we refer to as the tri-
States. By 1995, it was obvious to those of us who worked drug
investigations that we had a larger problem, primarily with
methamphetamine, than we as individual agencies could handle
alone. With Federal assistance through the Drug Enforcement
Administration, local and State law enforcement agents could
work together as deputized task force officers. This did allow
us to operate without jurisdictional boundaries around us. That
didn't stop the drug dealers, and instead it was stopping us.
Our group today has 18 agents and officers working together
in a centralized office. The group receives funding from DEA,
through HIDTA, and through the Gothic grants.
I worked drug investigations in Sioux City for 7 years over
three different periods of time. I started working drug
investigations in 1988. The drugs we were seeing available on
the street at that time were powder cocaine and marijuana. I
stopped working drugs in 1990 and then returned to working drug
investigations in the fall of 1993.
In that 3-year period while I was gone the new drug that
hit the streets of Sioux City was methamphetamine and it hit in
a big way. The first seizure of methamphetamine that we had in
the Sioux City area was 92 percent pure, and we discovered a
pound at that time. That was controlled by a Mexican male
subject who was not interested in cooperating with law
enforcement on where his drugs came from.
This marked the beginning of a disturbing trend that
continues to this day. While the Hispanic population has grown
in our community, Mexican drug dealers have been able to blend
into neighborhoods and communities. While attempting not to
paint a picture with a wide brush, we have found that drug
dealers at the top of the distribution network in our area
predominantly are resident aliens or illegal aliens from
Mexico.
New terms have sprung up in the drug community, terms like
Mexican Meth and Mexican Mafia. The term Mexican Meth is due to
the fact that in our investigations the higher up the source
scale you seem to go, Mexicans seem to control the drugs. The
term Mexican Mafia seems to identify the methods used by these
drug dealers in the way that they conduct business.
We have very good Hispanic families in our community.
Dealers, like I said earlier, try hard to blend in. We have a
disproportionate number of Hispanics involved in drug
trafficking in this area. Meth laboratories or lab
manufacturing has somewhat increased in our area. It's not as
overwhelming as it is in the rest of the State, but our
particular area has increased mostly due to the quality of the
methamphetamine going down significantly and the prices
remaining the same. Therefore, they're getting into
manufacturing on small scales.
In the tri-State area we have approximately 120,000 people.
We received intelligence information reports of much larger
amounts than we could possibly support in this area. We in the
area are referred to as the hub city, a title that we are
working hard to change. One of the things that go hand in hand
with large amounts of drugs are large amounts of money. The
task force is working hard to interdict and intercept as many
and as much methamphetamine as we possibly can.
An area that we could use help in is with financial
investigations. Many drug investigations have a member of the
Internal Revenue Service working with them who specialize in
investigations. We do not have an IRS agent in our group. I
believe the seizing process away from drug organizations hurts
the drug organization more than seizing drugs.
Last, I request that this group seriously look into the
problem of illegal immigration in this country. The problem
facing us now is that we have to take the good with the bad.
The bad control drug trafficking in our area. We deal with
subjects who get arrested and flee back to Mexico. These
subjects have several identities and are gone out of the area
before their true identities are known. We also see many
transient transporters who show up with multiple pounds of
methamphetamine who know little of the organization or who are
willing to tell us anything about their organizations or
cooperating. We have found that only through cooperative
approaches to investigating and information sharing from law
enforcement has an impact on the problems that have been faced
in the Midwest. Thank you.
Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Reilly follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.012
Mr. Mica. As I said, we'll withhold questions till we've
heard from all of the panel.
On the panel the last witness is Penny Westfall and she is
the Commissioner of Public Safety for the State of Iowa. You're
recognized.
Ms. Westfall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We did bring along
additional graphs and information that we would ask----
Mr. Mica. Without objection those graphs and that
information will be made part of the official record. Please
proceed.
Ms. Westfall. Over the last 5 years Iowa has been subject
to dramatic increases in the number of meth labs that we have
seized. Due to that the Department of Public Safety created a
specialized team which is made up of members from different
divisions within the department, the Division of Narcotics
Enforcement, the Iowa State Patrol, the State Fire Marshal's
Office and chemists from the Division of Criminal Investigation
criminal laboratories. This team provides assistance to
Federal, county and State law enforcement through the State of
Iowa.
As you know, the labs have increased tremendously from a
small number to over 500 seized by the State last year. In
addition to that there were 300 seized by the city and county
law enforcement agencies, so we were over 800 labs seized.
Two manufacturing methods are used in Iowa, the Nazi method
and the red phosphorus. The primary one is the Nazi method. We
have seen a change in clan lab operations. Labs are getting
larger, capable of producing larger quantities of
methamphetamine. The pooling of efforts and precursors by the
smaller lab operators is occurring. The agents of the Division
of Narcotics Enforcement are working major methamphetamine lab
conspiracy cases involving multiple lab operators. Our
intelligence gained through cooperating individuals indicates
several out-of-state organizations view Iowa as a fertile
ground to set up large-scale operations.
The locations of Iowa's lab sites tend to be seasonal in
nature. As the weather warms, the clan lab operations move to
the rural open areas, and as winter approaches they become more
urbanized by migrating back indoors. We have found labs in
major metropolitan areas and in most rural areas. They have
been found in various locations, and we have several small farm
communities along the Iowa-Missouri borders that have
experienced a large number of labs.
The Department of Public Safety has sponsored four 40-hour
OSHA certified lab certification schools during 1999 to assist
local law enforcement agencies in combating the meth problem.
Sixty-nine sworn city officers and 11 firefighters attended and
were subsequently certified. We've also done several, four 1-
day re-certification courses. The Division of Narcotics
Enforcement, supported by the State Fire Marshal's Office,
presented 90 classes on methamphetamine clandestine lab
recognition to over 6,500 people. These classes were comprised
of sworn officers and full and voluntary firefighters.
The Iowa State Patrol established a full-time 11-person
highway interdiction team in July 1999 to deter the importation
of meth. Approximately 85 percent of our meth is believed to be
imported from outside States. The Iowa State Patrol has 48
troopers who are clan lab certified. These troopers reside
throughout the State and can respond to assist as needed.
Last year the Division of Narcotics Enforcement requested
and received additional sworn officers, permitting the
assignment of 11 agents to full-time meth lab enforcement
efforts. The State Fire Marshal's Office has seven lab
certified officers which respond to clan lab sites to assist in
the identification and removal of explosive substances and
devices when found. The State Fire Marshal's Office is
responding to more fires that are the result of accidents
occurring during the manufacturing of meth.
The Division of Criminal Investigation's crime laboratory
is also severely impacted by the number of active labs and
seizures. Prompt analysis of the evidence is critical to any
prosecution. Many of the lab sites seized require the presence
of a chemist. This in turn slows down the evidence analysis.
The DCI has six certified clan lab chemists. Last year they
earned over $21,000 in standby time and over $52,000 in actual
overtime at lab sites. This total is just under what is
expended for the remaining 40-member crime laboratory staff.
The current crime laboratory is severely limited in space. New
facilities are needed as soon as possible to meet the demand
for prompt testing. The passage of the National Forensic
Science Improvement Act is imperative.
These labs are extremely resource-demanding. Officers are
diverted from their regular assignments, requiring overtime
pay, the specialized equipment and physicals continue to rise.
The clan lab related overtime costs to the department exceed
thousands of dollars each quarter, including the
recertifications.
The specialized equipment required to safely enter lab
sites is cost-prohibitive to most agencies. Even a small lab
may cost $1,200 in expendable items. The actual cost of
physicals is also quite costly. They are truly a safety
concern. Lab sites are not only places where illegal substances
are produced, but innocent people are subjected to possible
explosion, fire and carcinogenic wastes. These labs are
manpower and resource draining, costing thousands of dollars to
clean up.
It is imperative that the DEA be funded for their lab site
cleanups and they help refund the States that had to cover the
costs when they ran out of money.
In closing, the labs create a true public safety hazard
that demands law enforcement response. We appreciate your being
here to address that.
Mr. Mica. Thank you so much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Westfall follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.023
Mr. Mica. I appreciate all of the witnesses on the panel
providing us with testimony this morning.
Let me start with a few questions if I may.
You've cited a couple of areas that are national
responsibility, and that we need attention on this problem. One
is the problem I guess of illegals coming into this area. What
percentage of illegals of those who are involved in this meth
production activity or criminal activity are illegals, is it a
small percentage?
Mr. Frisbie. I talked to Sergeant Reilly about this
recently, and the figure we come up with is around 50 to 60
percent.
Mr. Mica. Fifty to 60 percent.
Mr. Frisbie. Of the people that have been arrested in our
community for the drug problems, methamphetamine, have been
Hispanic, Hispanic individuals. They're highly over-
represented.
Mr. Mica. I'm talking, they're illegals, they're not people
who are here legitimately?
Mr. Frisbie. That's right.
Mr. Mica. What about cooperation from INS, a Federal
agency, in removing these individuals? I mean, if we have that
many people who are here illegally to begin with, not to
mention their criminal activity, it is a Federal responsibility
to remove them. Are you getting proper attention from INS, or
is there proper resources to deal with the illegal alien
problem here?
Mr. Frisbie. From the investigation standpoint, we have an
INS agent in the task force, but, however, the removal I think
is by justice, there has been a problem. And of course the
housing, where to put these people, the length of time it takes
to----
Mr. Mica. Process and move them out.
Are you also getting repeats now, are they coming back some
of them? You talked about some use of aliases.
Mr. Reilly. We have illegal re-entry problems. The thing is
that many times we have problems identifying them in the first
place. We do have an INS agent within our task force. The thing
is that they have to be convicted of a felony before
deportation hearings generally take place. So jail space is
becoming more and more burdensome toward beds available. I
think the standard is going to continue to raise on what it
takes to actually deportate.
Mr. Mica. That seems strange, because we get cases in
Florida all the time where people who are here innocent and
come in, they may have overstayed their stay, but they move
them out in a hurry.
Mr. Reilly. You're a lot closer than we are.
Mr. Mica. So that's one of your problems, geographic.
You said you don't have an IRS agent as part of your effort
here, and you said you can also go after these folks through
either a tax evasion or some financial improper activity. Was
that a recommendation?
Mr. Reilly. Yes, it was. IRS has a division called CID,
Criminal Investigation Division, that they're law enforcement
agents, not just accountants, who specifically work on money
laundering, and that's the type of agent we would like to see
assigned to our task force to assist us in the financial
investigations of some of these organizations.
Mr. Mica. I'd like to come away from these hearings with
something positive. Maybe we can do a joint letter from us to
local members, and may get some others to IRS. When I was
chairman of Civil Service, I had over 110,000 employees and
thousands of criminal investigators. Maybe we can get one for
this area. And if the staff will remind me, we'll initiate that
good recommendation.
We know, and I've heard testimony among all three of you
that we have Mexican illegals or Mexican traffickers involved
which is kind of mind-boggling considering again the Heartland
of America here. How far back are we able to trace these? I
know that you probably have a certain number of people who
immigrated here and worked here and conduct themselves very
well. But you have got this illegal or criminal activity, and
it must stem back to Mexico at least as far as supplies or
finance. Is there a good connect here? Is this something that
the DEA and FBI are following up on? And do we have the
cooperation of Mexican officials in going after the bad guys?
Chief.
Mr. Frisbie. I wish I could answer that.
Mr. Mica. You're not seeing that?
Mr. Frisbie. No.
Mr. Mica. Ms. Westfall.
Ms. Westfall. We work closely with the DEA and the FBI in
trying to develop the conspiracies and working with the Federal
drug task force. I can't speak directly as far as the
cooperation from the Mexican Government, but we certainly are
receiving the cooperation from our Federal agencies in
reaching, trying to reach the conspiracies. It's difficult.
Mr. Mica. Are there specific cases that you have been able
to go after and they're tracing them back to Mexican dealers,
and are we seeing success, or was there some lack of resource
or attention from the DEA or FBI to this area and your specific
problems? Be candid. If you don't want to tell me publicly,
I'll be glad, I don't want to embarrass anyone, and I know you
work with these officials. But our purpose in being here is to
get the resources here and to make certain that the Federal
agencies are cooperating with the locals, and sometimes that
doesn't always happen.
Mr. Reilly. Let me go ahead and explain a case to you to
kind of give you some idea what we see. We had an organization
that involved several family members that ran a business, an
auto parts business. In that business there were two, there was
one in Iowa, actually it was in Nebraska, and one in
California. We continually received information that this group
was responsible for large quantity shipments, 30 to 60 pounds
methamphetamine coming into this area every 2 to 3 weeks. We
intercepted through a courier that came out here without drugs
with her, but she had a pickup ticket at a local common
carrier. We went out and with her cooperation we seized that
auto part and x-rayed it. That auto part contained seven pounds
of methamphetamine, completely wrapped in fiberglass, painted
up to look like a spoiler on a car. When we started working
that conspiracy from that particular seizure, that business
disappeared. We sent agents immediately out to California
because we figured that that was where they were going, is to
the other auto parts store. They disappeared from there also
and were back in Mexico within days.
Mr. Mica. So the operation was linked to Mexican
traffickers, and this operation was just a front. Did the part
come in from California or from Mexico?
Mr. Reilly. From California. Most of what we see is it
seems like the Hispanic groups that control the drug
trafficking have their last setup in California. I believe the
chemicals come into California, they're manufactured in
California, they're shipped through the Southwest.
Mr. Mica. Being shipped through legitimate carriers, too?
Mr. Reilly. Not ordinarily. I would say a vast majority of
what is shipped is in compartmentalized vehicles. The
interdiction teams are seeing more and more hidden compartments
in semi-truck trailers, in regular vehicles. They're using
families to look like mom and pop and the kids in an RV that
may contain 30 to 60 pounds of drugs hidden in the vehicle. I
think our roadways are inundated.
Mr. Mica. You also testified that 80 percent of this stuff
is coming in already produced and you have got the labs on top
of it producing it here. You have described the transport and
entry of the product and some of the routing. What about
precursor chemicals that are being used in the local
production, what are we finding here?
Mr. Reilly. That we have seen in our area, and I'll let
Penny address the statewide, are mostly the meth labs where you
could get the precursor chemicals at a local hardware store,
more like a Wal-Mart type store.
Mr. Mica. So the precursors are not necessarily coming in
from Mexico?
Mr. Reilly. No. In fact, what we see the most of are
smaller labs that manufacture an ounce or less, and most of
those precursor chemicals are purchased at local department
stores.
Mr. Mica. Finally let me ask you about the HIDTA. We've put
a lot of money in the HIDTAs. It's sort of a food fight,
everybody going after the money. So many areas have such a
tremendous problem right now. We have limited resources, and
we're cutting the pie slices a little bit thinner. How is your
money spent here, and do you feel it's effective?
What I'd like to know is that some places build their own
little HIDTA bureaucracy. Some of them put money into different
agencies. Some of them have cooperative efforts. Perhaps you
could describe how your money is being spent and do you feel
that that's the most effective way? Then if we had a few more
dollars where would you target, Chief Frisbee?
Mr. Frisbie. We have six members of our task force right
now that are supported by HIDTA grants. Those, all six of those
people are investigators. Most of the money we have in our task
force at least is supporting investigative efforts. In fact
it's almost all of it really.
Mr. Mica. How do you physically operate? Do you have a
building? Some of these HIDTAs are buying buildings.
Mr. Frisbie. That's an interesting question.
When we first got in the business, we actually built our
own out of an old warehouse, and Congressman Latham came down
and took a look at it 1 day and said we probably should have
something a little better than that. We actually built a center
over in the basement of the Federal Building.
Mr. Mica. Using an existing Federal resource and converting
it. What about administrative staff?
Mr. Frisbie. One secretary. It's a fairly nice arrangement.
Mr. Mica. But the bulk of your money is going into
personnel that are actively involved in investigating?
Mr. Frisbie. Yes.
Ms. Westfall. Mr. Chairman, if I may, for the State, I
think speaking across the State, the HIDTA funds are essential
for continuing the enforcement efforts across the State. I know
with the Department of Public Safety, ours goes to personnel,
to overtime, to equipment. We just recently received, asked the
State, what are you needing for interdiction, and we added
equipment and items that they're needing also. So it's multi,
it covers several of the divisions within the Department of
Public Safety.
Mr. Mica. Your HIDTA money is really for multi-state
efforts, too?
Ms. Westfall. Yes.
Mr. Mica. What ends up--like in Iowa, is there some kind of
equitable distribution between Iowa, South Dakota and Nebraska?
Is Missouri in this area?
Ms. Westfall. Yes.
Mr. Mica. Tell me how that's divided and is that a fair way
to do it?
Mr. Frisbie. Mr. Chairman, if I may, if we could recognize
Tim Carter who is with us today from DNE, he was the chairman
of the board of the Midwest HIDTA, who could really address
these questions quite well, if that would be permissible.
Mr. Mica. I'll tell you what we'll do. We can add him to
the next panel. He's not on it. Or the last panel.
Ms. Westfall. We believe that it is being equitably shared,
although some of the States have not been as active as Iowa and
Missouri has. So as other States become more active, then their
requests are increasing for additional moneys, which means they
will be taking it from the States that have been using it in
the past. There are, I also understand, additional HIDTAs being
formed that will also----
Mr. Mica. My final question was again, we'll put more money
in this time. Fortunately, we're in a surplus position, and
more money will end up in HIDTAs overall. But then you get down
to the specific activity that should be supported. If you had
to list your top choices, one or two, where we might put more
funds, maybe you could, Chief Frisbie and Ms. Westfall, maybe
you could tell us what you would do with that, the biggest
need.
Mr. Frisbie. Obviously always there's a need for more
manpower for investigations.
Mr. Mica. So that would be the most effective use of our
dollars if we add them would be for additional investigative
staff.
Mr. Frisbie. Yes. Followed by prosecution.
And again I'll tell you, one of the biggest problems that I
see, I keep hearing about it on a national level, we have over
1 million people a year coming into this country illegally,
which I think is fueling the entire problem. It's absolutely a
huge problem. I don't know that this exactly ties to HIDTA in
any way. Something has to be done about the influx of people
into this country illegally. I think everybody understands
that.
The other problem is what bogs us down, some of the other
problems we're having is the administration of handling these
people once we do come up with them. When I said the jails are
a problem here, it's not an exaggeration. Our jails are
overflowing here to the point there's just no place to put
anybody anymore.
Mr. Mica. How many of those are illegal?
Mr. Frisbie. There's no solution to it. I'd have to ask the
sheriff for a breakdown, but there's a lot. The fact of the
matter is there's no relief anywhere for this. We've been all
over. We've been to the State. We've been out to DC, here
recently, talked about the problem, and quite honestly there
isn't anybody anywhere. We're very exasperated by this problem.
We just don't know what to do with it.
Mr. Mica. We also conduct oversight and investigations,
have that responsibility over INS. Similar problem we've been
hearing. We did a hearing north of Atlanta, GA. I think there
were 20,000 illegals in this small county north of Atlanta. I
couldn't believe those figures, but the same thing we're
hearing. That may be something else we could weigh in and
address. Did you want to comment in closing?
Ms. Westfall. We would use the additional moneys for
personnel costs and equipment. The expendable equipment, the
equipment that's routinely needed and is extremely costly, the
physicals that are required to keep a certified lab person
certified, all of that is very expensive. Those would be some
of the personnel costs that we would be utilizing.
Would also note that in your earlier questioning with the
INS, they have been very responsive to us. It's not unusual for
the State patrol to stop vehicles and find maybe 15 people in a
van, maybe 30 persons in a rental truck, the kind you don't
know how people have survived in such tight, tight quarters.
They try to be very successful. There was publicity in the last
couple of weeks of a stop north of Des Moines in the Story
County area where there were not enough INS personnel to
respond, so two people, without really knowing who they were,
had to be released because they couldn't come and take them.
But they are really attempting to respond as much as their
personnel can be allowed to.
Mr. Mica. Thank you. I'll yield now to Mr. Latham.
Mr. Latham. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank this panel very much for testimony. First
of all, I want to say as far as bringing another IRS agent in
here, I'll reserve judgment on that.
Mr. Mica. Maybe he can work on this.
Mr. Latham. To work specifically here, yes. I wish we had
time for all the entities to be on the panel here. I will tell
you the local law enforcement throughout the district, the
sheriff offices, Sheriff Amick back here does a great job. I
see the State patrol here, and the tremendous work that they
have had, the tremendous job they do. The State DCI, the INS. I
was going to say as far as INS, and we can get off into days of
discussion, at the local level they do everything they can and
I think do it very, very well. The people we have on the ground
here are outstanding, working with the Tri-State Drug Task
Force. We have a quick response team here in Sioux City. And we
have more than quadrupled the budget for INS. I am on one of
the subcommittees that funds it. It's not a matter of money.
Mr. Mica. It's the resources.
Mr. Latham. Well, it's a dysfunctional agency. It's
probably the most dysfunctional. As an organization, it's
systemic in the INS. The Federal DEA does an outstanding job
here in cooperation.
I do want to make one point about what we're seeing. We
don't always identify people who are here illegally with
intentions to sell the drugs and to destroy what we have in our
community. Let's not in any way stereotype a group of people
who I think are outstanding citizens and contribute greatly to
this community. And it's unfortunate that there is this element
who hides out in a tremendous part of our community. I'm always
nervous when we kind of sometimes lump people together, because
that simply is not the case. It's a tiny part of a community
that are using them as cover basically for their illicit
actions.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, back several years ago, and I've
seen maps were the upper Midwest actually was targeted and a
marketing plan put into place by the Mexican drug cartels for
this, this is the only part of the country that wasn't already
taken over by certain organized crime, so this is no accident
of what's happening here. There is a marketing plan in place to
kill our kids basically.
That's a statement again rather than ask questions here.
I would like to ask Penny, we talked a lot about law
enforcement, the challenges they face, what have you seen,
local fire departments, we have all these labs out here. We had
a situation over in Cherokee a couple months ago, 6 weeks ago,
with a house fire and basically they went in and found out
there was something strange. They were basically told to back
off. Found out later there were booby traps and things in
place. What do we do to assist in that way? And they're toxic
waste sites basically.
Ms. Westfall. We have 16 hazardous materials teams first,
to respond to your question, that are made up of fire personnel
across the State. They have a real interest in being able to
come in and assist law enforcement in the clan lab sites that
are not criminal sites. There are many that we find that there
is just not much evidence there, and they're really not
probably going to ever find somebody to charge with it. So we
have been working with particularly the hazmat teams at this
point to see about certifying them so that if it's not a crime
scene, law enforcement arrives first, they find it's not a
crime scene, allow them to remove themselves and go on with
other investigations, and have the people from the hazmat team
come in and clean up.
There's been a couple problems. One is a 40-hour DEA
certification required for site certification. The hazmat
material persons have an extensive amount of training on
hazardous materials. So we have been able to work with them to
get it to a 24-hour course, as I understand, 24-hour course for
the hazmat people that will be taught here at the training
facility, so that they will be certified, but without the cost
of going through that 40 hours.
But we also have a problem with who can clean up. Right now
there's only one or maybe a couple certified companies or
companies that the DEA will pay for that they will come in and
clean up. We are wondering if it wouldn't be possible, if it's
not possible on at least some of the smaller sites, that the
hazardous materials teams be allowed to clean them up and get
paid for them at a lesser cost. At this point we're being told
that can't happen, that it has to be the full group that comes
in, and if somebody takes the risk of having someone else clean
up hazardous materials, they will not receive the Federal
funding for that cleanup. That's certainly a tremendous risk.
In addition to that there were several fire fighters
trained as we went around looking at the hazardous, at the lab
recognition. We'd like to do additional training on that. We
don't have any plans at this time. We do have concern for
firefighters' safety. We have had deaths now from fire scenes,
where there has been an explosion or a fire. So we do have
concerns for their safety.
Mr. Latham. Joe, do you want to comment as far as your
training? And I want to publicly thank you for the tremendous
job that you have done at the training center out here. It's
been remarkable, the success you have had.
Mr. Frisbie. Thank you. Congressman, I'll tell you, I think
one of the problems that we'd like to address at the training
center in the future is we're still finding that it's extremely
hard to get the small communities to attend, the mom and pop
operations, the one, two, three, four-man departments. A lot of
that is even with the training being free, they have to have
somebody watch the community when they're gone, and in these
small communities that's a very hard problem. We're going to be
looking at going out and trying to do some recruitment with
these folks and encourage the sheriff's departments in their
areas and the local police departments to help each other out,
to backfill.
I talked to Sheriff Amick who has done that, where they
backfill while officers from the small communities are in the
training center. We're going to try to encourage some of that.
In the absence of that we're going to have to figure out a way
to pay for the backfill to get these officers in there. I think
this is crucial.
The larger communities have a lot more capability of
handling problems, because they have the investigative
resources, a lot more at least than the small communities
throughout the area. In the course of drug dealers realizing
there's a lot of activity that goes on out in the rural areas,
in the smaller communities--that's why we're trying to train
the smaller departments on drug recognition and to be able to
identify a lab when they see one.
And then we hold a seminar each year so that all of these
small entities and all of these people that have been taking
this drug training from us can get together with our task
force, and our task force comes in and talks to them about how
you actually set up a case, or what level you have to be at to
start a Federal case with them, or how to get assistance from
the drug task force, so that these small departments can go
from a one or two-man department to overnight they can be a 20-
man department if those resources are necessary to go out there
to aid and assist these folks and take care of this problem,
because this problem is no longer a local problem. It's a
regional problem. What's going on out here in the regional area
is affecting us as well.
So I think that's one area we have to put a lot more effort
into. And I think this training is absolutely crucial. If the
officers don't understand and cannot identify the drug problems
in their community or what it takes to do these investigations,
they're just basically out there doing their routine things and
they just can't identify it and can't deal with it.
The other thing that we'd like to see come out of the
training center is that the GIS system which I was talking
about, which is global information system, see if we can
develop that, which is another way of handling intelligence
information, where it's doing layering mapping, where you can
identify different places of whether they sell precursors,
where you have had known drug houses, and you start doing these
relationship maps and a much better system of intelligence
sharing. We think that that can make a tremendous difference.
We're trying to develop that right now. Hopefully in the future
we can get some support on that. We'll be talking to you about
that in the future.
Mr. Latham. Surprise.
Mr. Frisbie. One thing I'd like to say is or encourage
other locations or police officers or sheriffs or what have
you, that one of the best things I think that has happened for
us is being able to develop a relationship with the
congressional office such as yours, to come in and take the
time to talk to us, identify the problems. And I want you to
know that we really appreciate it when you come to town. I
never thought I'd see this in politics, but it actually happens
that Congressman Latham will come to town, it's not a photo op,
he actually comes in unannounced sometimes. We go in and look
at the training centers; comes in and talks to the men on the
task force to find out what's wrong.
We don't always need congressional hearings to get these
things done. I think more work gets done directly through the
Congressman's offices on individual bases, because we're
continually taking our problems to him. We're inundating him
with our problems.
Mr. Mica. He does the same thing to me.
Mr. Frisbie. I think that's extremely important to have
those lines of communications wide open. And we do hear, as you
can see over the last 8 to 10 years the progress we've made,
not even having a DEA office here. We worked out of a Sioux
Falls office 8 years ago. Now we're a fully funded DEA task
force here. That's tremendous progress. The only way you can do
that is through constant collaboration between ourselves and
Congress, not just in these kind of hearings here, but ongoing
when these hearings are over. I think it's extremely important,
because you're not going to hear it all here today.
Mr. Latham. Check's in the mail, Joe. We're going to run up
against time here. We knew this was going to happen.
Mr. Chairman, I wanted to express, there is an initiative
to help small local fire departments, have some resources. We
do a lot with law enforcement. But it's something that I've
been very supportive. I believe you have too. I think these
people along with local law enforcement are on the front edge
as far as danger, and the training that Joe can give them, and
also some resources as far as equipment for self-protection out
there on the local level, and these volunteer fire departments
are really stressed today. We really need to help there. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mica. The gentleman from South Dakota is recognized.
Mr. Thune.
Mr. Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chief Frisbie, I was noticing in looking at your resume,
you have a degree from that extraordinarily fine institution up
the road, University of South Dakota.
Mr. Frisbie. I also teach there, Congressman.
Mr. Thune. Your stock's going up all the time.
Just a question. We had in South Dakota the biggest meth
bust here in the last week, 8 pounds, some $200,000 street
value, and it was actually initially detected by the Postal
Service, because it came in a package that they thought looked
suspicious, and that's what prompted the investigation.
I'm wondering, you were using statistics here in part of
your dialog earlier with the chairman, in talking about the
amount of meth that is actually homegrown in labs and meth that
is imported. I guess I'm wondering in your experience, your
assessment of that, does a lot of this come from across the
border, not just into Iowa or Nebraska or South Dakota, but is
it coming from Mexico or outside the United States borders into
this country, and percentagewise how much of a problem is that
relative to that that is grown locally?
Mr. Frisbie. Talking to Sergeant Reilly here in the past
about this, the southwest part of the United States and Mexico
is my understanding where a lot of our meth is coming from. But
I think you would be better to address that.
Mr. Reilly. It would primarily be coming from California.
We still see large shipments of marijuana coming up that
sometimes accompanies methamphetamine that I believe probably
is grown in Mexico and brought up. But it seems as though
primarily the methamphetamine is coming from the southwest
United States.
Ms. Westfall. Our intelligence shows that about 85 percent
is coming in from outside the State. That was a couple years
ago at 90 percent, so it's decreased a small amount it appears
by intelligence. Primarily it's coming from Mexico into
California, then across. Of the people who are cooking meth
here in Iowa, they're primarily Caucasian, primarily upper
20's, early 30's, you may get into the 40's.
Mr. Thune. This is a question too, I guess, is how actually
does this get into the hands of our kids, I mean what is it,
the dealers, the distributors, once the supply comes in, how
then is it making it out there to the kids?
Mr. Reilly. In my report that I submitted I kind of looked
at the history of what we saw locally was almost grocery store
marketing. When we initially saw methamphetamine coming in, it
was extremely pure and it was given out pretty much, hey, I
just met you, I don't know the people around here, I don't
speak the language very well, here, have a half pound, go
distribute to your friends, bring me back the money. That type
of grocery store marketing, almost like free sampling started
it.
That became a peripheral network. That dealer had several
people then that he could deal down to, one person dealt to
several people, and trickle down.
You have to be at quite a high level to actually be dealing
with one of the bigger people in this community. You work
through several layers, and mostly those layers go through what
we have as a local population, Caucasian males, Caucasian
females, hand to hand to hand to hand several times before it
gets down to a small level that's getting to your kids in the
middle school. If you follow that up that seems to be where
it's coming from.
Mr. Frisbie. One of the problems that we're having with
local law enforcement of course is we spend so much time and
effort into the larger problem, trying to get to the sources.
One place some of my investigators and other people tell me
that is a bit of a problem is working the street level, because
all our efforts and our manpower and resources are dedicated
toward the larger cases, where the small cases, the street
level stuff we need to pay a little more attention to in the
future. And that usually will work its way into some of the
larger cases.
Mr. Thune. Sergeant Marti, I'm curious too as to the
efforts of your task force, to what degree does South Dakota
figure into those activities, I mean as far as what you're
seeing activity in our State, and I have a followup question to
that. But anyway if you could tell me.
Mr. Reilly. Many years we have attended meetings with the
agents who work the Sioux Falls area, and we've been beat up by
them for quite a long time saying all their dope problems are
in Sioux City, and if they built a snow fence across the
interstate they would have no problems. Quite honestly we work
together with agents from South Dakota. We have a South Dakota
agent now in our task force.
I don't think State lines have an effect on how a drug
trafficker traffics his drugs. It only affects law enforcement
really who has to deal with the jurisdictional boundary. I
believe that right now a lot of the drug problems that they do
have in Sioux Falls and throughout that little corridor between
Sioux City and Sioux Falls are fed through us. We are kind of a
hub city and I believe that a lot of the drugs are being
filtered through Sioux City to Sioux Falls. So through that
cooperative effort, and we deal with those agents coming down
and working with our task force to identify people, they may be
trained in their area but actually live as residents in our
area. We have worked quite a few investigations together to
combat the jurisdictional problem and the territorial problem
between the two States.
Mr. Thune. You talk about Sioux City-Sioux Falls corridor.
I suspect probably over to Yankton and areas like that, are you
seeing this going out into the rural areas, are you seeing much
activity in the smaller towns? Like I'm thinking west of
Yankton, you get to places like Tyndall, Tabor and up in
Freeman, those areas surrounding Sioux Falls and Sioux City.
Mr. Reilly. I believe because we are kind of a hub city,
and if you have a network distribution that the drugs probably
are filtering that direction, there are dealer sources out
there in the small communities who are getting their drugs from
somebody that would probably relate back to Sioux Falls, Sioux
City, the major cities of the two. There is probably a nexus
there. A lot of those people go undetected for quite a long
time. Actually you would think in a small community they would
be immediately identified, but people who traffic small
amounts, and if they know and have known for years their
clientele, people aren't willing to give them up as rapidly,
especially in smaller communities, because they're actually
relatives or friends.
So sometimes what would appear to be very opposite, it
would be very, everyone would be very upset in a small
community, I believe they are, but it goes undetected and
unknown for long periods of time. I do believe our drugs
probably filter into those smaller communities.
Mr. Thune. I guess I'm interested, Chief, in what you said
too about the whole training effort.
It would seem to me at least that part of the problem in
our small towns is going to be detection, making sure you have
people who understand what to look for. I think to me that
would be, just from my observation listening to you all speak
this morning, something that we are going to have to step up
our efforts on.
Mr. Frisbie. There is no question about that.
As a matter of fact, the intelligence sharing is going to
be extremely important there as well. We're actually building
our intelligence network by when those people come in to train.
We establish relationships with these other communities where
before they have been kind of isolated. We didn't see them
much. I think it's going to make a big difference. But we need
to step up our efforts in training those individuals in the
smaller communities. They literally have no training funds and
no capabilities, and that's a tragedy.
Ms. Westfall. Let me make a comment. One of the things that
you need to keep in mind though, too, is that as you increase
this training you will increase the amount of drugs being found
and the need for more expendable equipment and equipment for
the folks who are finding them.
When we did the training across the entire State, the 6,000
people, we wondered what impact that would have on the labs
being found, and our numbers show it went from 320 up to 800
some. We think at least some of that if not a lot of that
increase is due to what happens when you train the folks. You
need to not only provide for the training, you also need to be
willing to go further and provide those people with the
equipment and the capability to respond to what will be an
increase in found drug activity.
Mr. Frisbie. Like I said before, we often become victims of
our own success. This whole thing funnels to all kinds of
support services that are required once you get into these
things. When you start identifying more labs, you know, we
start buying pounds rather than ounces. It's not that it wasn't
out there, it's our efforts increased and our capability of
getting into these areas has been increased. Then we start
making more arrests. We're dealing with large conspiracy cases.
And I'll tell you a lot of our worries again, you look at
the jail situation, the ability to process the drugs at the
lab, different things of this nature, all support services out
there with the INS, if we can get that straightened out.
Mr. Thune. Last question, Mr. Chairman. Last question I had
on this is when you catch the bad guys what is the success rate
with prosecutions?
Mr. Reilly. One of the things that we see on the task force
level, we take many of our cases federally because a lot of the
cases are large and the thresholds are met for Federal
prosecution. The sentencing guidelines in the Federal system
are much different than what we see in the State of Iowa. We
have a problem in the State of Iowa with truth in sentencing.
It's extremely poor. What sounds like a good deal, that you
have got a drug dealer and he's going to get 10 years and he
actually does 18 months, that's pretty disheartening. In the
Federal system they will do 80 percent of their sentence.
And the sentencing is just a very good structure, and we
are having very good prosecutions in the Federal court system
in our area. To go along with that, and what Chief Frisbie just
mentioned too, as far as the support services to that, the U.S.
Attorney's Office in Sioux City in 1993 had one drug
prosecutor. Now they have five drug prosecutors. They had a
district, a Federal district court judge and a part-time
magistrate. Now they have a full-time magistrate and two
Federal district court judges.
One has taken senior status, but he's hearing full time
cases primarily. It's working. The Federal system works
slightly slower than the State system, but we are getting good
sentences. And the Federal bite is a bigger dog than the State.
Mr. Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the panel.
Mr. Mica. I'm pleased to hear the comments about Federal
prosecutions. They were going down, down, down. We finally got
them going up, up, up. We're under a tremendous amount of
pressure to change the minimum mandatory, from which I hear all
the local witnesses that we have before our panel, do not
change that. It is very effective, and it's a deterrent, at
least those that are active traffickers and we catch them and
convict them.
I was just telling Congressman Latham that now we have the
problem, we're getting prosecutions back up, but the
administration now has, we've just got a report back that the
sentencing is going down. So we're constantly trying to stay
after the Federal enforcement prosecution and the judicial fuss
to at least exercise the will of the Congress and the people I
think in this case.
I thank all of you for your testimony this morning. Chief
Frisbie, you had said that you wanted a HIDTA director to
provide some testimony. Who is that?
Mr. Frisbie. Ken Carter has been the past HIDTA director.
Mr. Mica. Rather than have him testify, we have to go
through the swearing in and all of that, we have the panel, I'm
going to ask unanimous consent that we submit questions to him.
We'll do that so his testimony will be made a part of the
record. And we'll have some specific questions that I already
outlined to you that you said he could respond to without
objection.
I do again want to thank each of you for coming forward. We
look forward to working with you, your local Members of
Congress, to see that we can do a better job at addressing some
of the problems you have outlined for us today. Thank you.
We'll excuse this panel.
Let me call the second panel. The second panel consists of
two individuals this morning. The first is Linda Phillips, and
Linda Phillips is the executive director of Siouxland Cares.
The second witness is Carla Van Hofwegen, and she is on the
board of directors of Hava Java, a local, I guess, faith-based
organization. And both of them are testifying before our
subcommittee today. Again I don't know if they were here when I
made the introduction or comments. We do ask you to limit your
oral presentation to the subcommittee to 5 minutes. You can
submit lengthy testimony or additional data or information upon
request to the Chair and that will be granted and made a part
of the record.
This also is an investigations and oversight subcommittee
of the Government Reform Committee. We do swear in our
witnesses. You will be sworn. If you will please stand, raise
your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Mica. The record will reflect that the witnesses
answered in the affirmative.
I would ask the record reflect that the Chair recognizes
first Linda Phillips, and she is executive director of
Siouxland Cares. You are recognized.
STATEMENTS OF LINDA PHILLIPS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SIOUXLAND
CARES; AND CARLA VAN HOFWEGEN, PRESIDENT, BOARD OF DIRECTORS,
HAVA JAVA
Ms. Phillips. Thank you. I have been the executive director
of Siouxland Cares for the past 10 years. And primarily what
Siouxland Cares is is a community anti-drug coalition. That's
probably the easiest way to define it.
First thing I want to do is thank Representative Latham. I
think had he not stepped in years ago to really identify drug
abuse as his No. 1 issue, we'd be talking about a lot of
different things today than we are right now. The problem would
be much, much worse. He has given us assistance as far as our
community anti-drug coalition, as far as the meth training
center, and the national anti-drug media campaign, he's also
given support there and we would be talking about a much more
serious problem, even though it is a serious problem that we're
talking about today.
I've seen the devastation that alcohol and other drugs have
caused to individuals, families, businesses. The one thing that
I do as an executive director is to really try to promote the
wonderful things that are going on in our community, and I will
do that in just a moment.
But first I want to share some statistics with you. I think
it's very, very important that you hear what's going on here
locally as far as the methamphetamine issue. Approximately 12
percent of the clients who are in treatment programs across the
State of Iowa have identified methamphetamine as their No. 1
drug of choice; 20 percent of those inmates have identified
meth as the No. 1 drug of choice.
I have worked for about 8 years with a group who is working
on drug-exposed infants in our community. In the past 3 years
we have had 32 drug-exposed infants. Of those six were exposed
to methamphetamine, or 19 percent of the positive screens. One
of those wonderful things that have happened once those ladies
are identified and the babies are identified is we have an
intervention team, and that intervention team is--their primary
focus is to get help for that mom and that family. Of our
students, 8 to 12 percent have used meth in the past.
We have taken several surveys over the past couple of years
and that's what has been identified. Those surveys have
identified that drugs and alcohol are available to most youths
in Siouxland. Students are most likely to use alcohol or other
drugs at a friend's house in the evening. Engaging in high risk
behavior is associated with alcohol and other drug use. And we
know that. We thought we made a dent on kids drinking and
driving, using drugs and driving. Something we've got to take a
major look at again, because they are using alcohol and other
drugs and they are driving. About two-thirds felt that it would
be difficult for them to get methamphetamine. That tells us
that one-third think it's pretty easy to get meth. That's an
extremely high number if a kid can go out and get meth on the
street. I think there are a lot of adults who have no idea
where they can get it; 92 percent of those kids thought that
meth was harmful, yet 9 percent of the seniors had used meth.
We know that increasing awareness efforts will change the
attitudes of kids. If they believe that a drug is harmful, they
will be less likely to use. We know that, it's research-based.
We do have several wonderful things going on in Siouxland.
We have Siouxland Cares, community anti-drug coalition. We are
part of a national youth anti-drug media campaign. We have a
wonderful Website with lots of data available to us. We have a
fairly new organization called the Siouxland Human Investment
Partnership, and it is our local empowerment board.
They also have a group called Community Alliance Treating
Substance Abusing Teens, which is an intervention team at the
high school level. We have a Tri-State Drug Task Force which
you've heard. We have the meth training center. We also have a
women's and children's treatment center run by Gordon Recovery
Center. Women are able to go to a treatment facility that is
residential and bring the children with them. That was one of
the barriers we had identified in getting women treatment, was
not being able to take their children with them.
We have a wonderful new drug court that is both a juvenile
and adult drug court. Community volunteers serve as panel
members. Again, all about rehabilitation. The Air National
Guard has in place a drug demand reduction program. The Iowa
Poison Center provides information and consultation to
emergency rooms about the toxic exposure such as
methamphetamine. We have HIDTA. We have a Healthy Siouxland
Initiative. We have identified drug abuse as the No. 1 concern
in our community. And of course we work quite a bit with the
Governor's alliance on Substance Abuse in Des Moines.
While we have many, many wonderful services, we need to
expand and strengthen our current prevention, intervention and
treatment program. We need to reduce the demand for drugs and
its availability. We need to provide parity for substance abuse
and mental health on both the Federal and State levels. We need
to provide a full array of treatment service options,
especially in the rural areas. They're very lacking there. And
we need to provide a continuum of care.
We've learned a lot of wonderful lessons from
Representative Latham on what we can do. Getting the Federal
Government behind us to assist us locally is absolutely
wonderful. We need to continue that. Again alcohol is our No. 1
drug. I would be remiss if I did not state that. And that we
need to take the lessons that we have learned from what we are
doing as far as methamphetamine and apply those to other drugs
as well. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Phillips follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.029
Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
We will withhold questions until we've heard the next
witness. That's Ms. Carla Van Hofwegen, and she is president of
the Hava Java board of directors. Welcome. You are recognized.
Ms. Van Hofwegen. It is an honor for me to testify today
before members of your subcommittee. I appreciate the
opportunity to address both my concerns about and response to
the methamphetamine epidemic in the Midwestern States of our
country.
As a life-long resident of northwest Iowa, I have observed
many changes in our society. Increased global communication has
made nearly any information almost anywhere in the world
accessible within a few seconds. Families comprised of a
husband and wife and their children are no longer the norm.
Close family ties that once connected three or even four
generations have been severed by a highly mobile society. The
combination of this availability of knowledge, the structural
change of the nuclear family and the decrease of
intergenerational ties has opened the door to many
opportunities to explore and experiment during increased hours
of free time with less individual accountability. Society is
ripe for the picking by people who profit from those who
purchase, use, and become addicted to methamphetamine and other
illegal drugs.
The problem of illegal drug use inevitably affects the
institutions of our society. School systems deal with those who
are using, those attempting to free themselves of the
addiction, recovering users, and those who choose not to use,
but who live, learn, or work in environments influenced by drug
users. During the 12 years from 1987 to 1999 I served on the
board of directors of Spencer Community Schools the use of
illegal drugs became increasingly evident. During the mid and
late 1980's acceptability of underage cigarette smoking and
alcohol consumption led to marijuana usage and eventually to
experimenting with other addictive drugs. While pot smokers of
the 1960's and 1970's looked on assuming that the reoccurrence
of marijuana use wasn't really a problem, many of the teenagers
of the 1990's progressed from smoking it to the use of other
illegal drugs, one of them the highly addictive and readily
obtainable methamphetamine, also known as meth, crank, crystal
or ice. This experimentation and use by teens and other young
adults has been further complicated by the fact that some users
are also parents whose children's lives are shaped by their
parents' unsafe choices. Thus, education systems find
themselves dealing with the problem at the preschool and early
childhood levels in addition to the middle, high school, and
post-high levels.
Families whose members become addicted to meth see the most
direct effects of the drug's stronghold on the users. As they
observe behavior and personality changes, they also have
concern for the user's safety. Perhaps most often they wonder
how they can help. Committing their loved one to treatment can
be very difficult, while waiting for the use to acknowledge the
need for treatment can be extremely worrisome and dangerous.
Research shows that a drug treatment program is most successful
when the addicted person voluntarily commits him or herself and
when the program helps the user realize his or her need to rely
on a higher power for the strength necessary to overcome the
addiction. Even the most successful treatment programs are not
always 100 percent failsafe after the initial treatment has
been completed.
Considering the negative societal ramifications of illegal
drug use and the tenuous results of drug treatment, the more
insightful way of responding is to attempt to prevent the
problem from occurring at all.
During the past 12 months I have been involved in the
organization and opening of a not-for-profit coffeehouse in
Spencer, IA, which welcomes people of all ages, but is
especially inviting to teenagers and young adults. The Hava
Java mission statement is: We will provide a comfortable
coffeehouse atmosphere with the purpose of building
relationships through Christian fellowship. In a non-
threatening safe haven using beverages, food, music, art,
actions and other means, we will convey the message of Jesus
Christ and his saving grace.
Hava Java is guided by an 11-member board of directors
comprised of community members from nine different churches in
Spencer. It is staffed by nine high school students and two
adults, which are part-time, paid employees, and one full-time
manager. A student advisory team made up of high school
students is being formed to give ideas and recommendations to
the board of directors. The team will function under the
supervision of two adults.
Many individuals, service clubs, churches, businesses and
other groups helped to meet startup expenses and are assisting
with ongoing costs as needed. Open for just 7 months, Hava Java
is striving to attain its goal to become self-supporting. The
only government dollars received have been in the form of a
grant from the city of Spencer. The grant, designated for
infrastructure needs, is made up of a small portion of the
moneys collected from a local 1-cent sales tax made available
to local not-for-profit organizations.
Hava Java is becoming known to our community and the
Spencer area as a hangout and a haven, a safe place to meet
friends, listen to good music, enjoy coffee, smoothies, sodas
and snacks, read a book, play a game, or study. It is a place
to have conversations about current issues or events, a place
to discuss decisions or choices that must be made. Patrons may
also appreciate live entertainment with a positive message and
encourage local budding artists. Future events for Hava Java
include improv nights, storytelling, poetry readings and other
drama and visual arts presentations.
It is the hope and prayer of the Hava Java board and staff
that its welcoming environment will nurture the development of
personal skills and significance through connections made and
relationships formed and strengthened within its walls, perhaps
the personal skills, significance, connections, and
relationships which are reason enough to help make the choice
to be drug free.
Thank you for your attention to this serious issue and your
consideration of how your subcommittee can aid our society.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Van Hofwegen follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.032
Mr. Mica. Thank you, Carla, for your testimony.
Ms. Phillips, how is your organization funded?
Ms. Phillips. We are a United Way agency.
Mr. Mica. Do you receive Federal funds?
Ms. Phillips. At this time we receive no Federal funds. The
only Federal funds that we have received is through the K-Mart
Foundation. That really isn't Federal funds, it's just
designation.
At this time we do not. We have applied for the Drug Free
Communities Support Program.
Mr. Mica. Your organization, Ms. Van Hofwegen, is strictly
a private and community-based. We're certainly spending a
tremendous amount of money and increasing it every year on this
effort, and in a multi-faceted manner. The last several years
we have started a $1 billion drug education and media campaign.
$1 billion. The administration wanted to spend public money. We
reached a compromise. The compromise was to have $1 billion of
Federal funds and then that matched by local donations. That
campaign has been a little bit over a year underway. Mostly
funding television, radio, some newspaper ads in a national
campaign in an effort on education and prevention. I'd like
both of you to tell me your candid assessment of what you have
seen so far of that Federal program.
Ms. Phillips. The national youth anti-drug media campaign,
is that what you're talking about?
Mr. Mica. Yes.
Ms. Phillips. We happen to be the local organization that
is listed on the print ads for that. What I have seen, because
I work with three youth groups around the community, probably
almost 200 kids. We sat and had a discussion about this, and we
said tell us about the ads, tell us about what you're seeing.
The one thing they said was the meth ads scare me. Why would I
be stupid enough to use meth. They scare me. They are very,
very good. I think that's the one message that we need to get
out. Again if they believe that it is harmful to them they will
not use.
Mr. Mica. Well, that conflicts a little bit with your
testimony, because you said 90 percent of them now believe that
it's harmful, yet you're running 8 to 12 percent of the
students have tried it in this locale.
Ms. Phillips. Have tried it, that's right.
They have tried it in the past. The campaign has only been
going for a couple of years.
Mr. Mica. Just about a year. Has there been any recent data
on the number of students now? Unfortunately I just had the CDC
report last week, the Center for Drug Control. The statistics
were absolutely alarming. It did follow your pattern about 8 to
12 percent of the students nationally had tried meth, cocaine.
In the Clinton administration I think it has doubled. Heroin is
up dramatically, and not quite but almost a doubling of
marijuana. And we had the folks in behind closed doors too to
give us their assessment after they released this report. But
since 1992-1993 we've seen an incredible surge, particularly
among young people. Is this an effective use of your tax
dollars?
Ms. Phillips. I'm going to tell you that we now have the
second annual survey that's being run right now probably to
find out what the results are of that. I think that's going to
tell us more on whether the methamphetamine use has gone down
or not and the kids' perception of harm, I think that's really
going to tell us a lot in this last year. The kids are seeing
the ads.
Mr. Mica. The meth ads are particularly effective. I guess
they have been targeted for those kids because you have such a
high incidence here. Maybe you could give me your assessment,
Ms. Van Hofwegen.
Ms. Van Hofwegen. To be honest, I'm not real familiar with
your ads.
Mr. Mica. You haven't seen the ads. That's very revealing.
Ms. Van Hofwegen. They may have been on the radio, I may
have heard them on the radio.
Mr. Mica. That's one of the problems when people have not
heard them. Some of them are targeted toward parents,
specifically going out to parents, even grandparents. Then part
of the problem is the intensity of the ads, have they reached,
again you want to target and you want to have the saturation to
have impact. We don't mind spending the funds on these
programs, but we want them to be successful, and we have to
have some measurement of their success. Finally if you were
going to recommend that we put Federal dollars into some of
these programs, education and prevention, how would you do
that? And we have a problem a bit because your organization
particularly is faith-based. We're trying to loosen some of the
strings. Actually the most effective treatment programs have
been in fact faith-based, and in most cases they run 60 to 70
percent success rates, where the public-funded programs run
that percentage in failure. Are you inclined for us to use
taxpayer dollars in that fashion or what fashion to be most
effective? Either/or both?
Ms. Van Hofwegen. I would encourage the use of the tax
dollars to be targeted toward parents. I feel having been on a
school board for 12 years that I see that that's where the
education is successful. If the parents are aware of what they
need to do to prevent their children from experimenting with
drugs, and if you can get that point across, the dollars won't
have to be spent in the schools and elsewhere. I feel like
there are so many parents that feel like they are powerless
against what their kids are facing. If we can empower parents
to remain parents through the high school years, I think that
will be the most effective way to spend it.
Ms. Phillips. I guess I'm one of these people that think
real globally and I think that you have got to focus on the
prevention, the education, the intervention, the treatment, the
aftercare. It's not just a single focus. When you asked me
before about the national youth anti-drug media campaign,
that's one facet of what we need to be doing. Does it need to
be stopped? No. It should be strengthened. Why? Because it's
one facet of what we need to continue. We need to continue
identifying model programs. We here in Woodbury County are
using the comprehensive strategy process which is through the
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Planning. It focuses
on risk factors. What puts kids at risk?
One of those is substance abuse. What puts kids at those
risks? Let's identify those and then build a community plan.
Make us be responsible for what we think locally we need to do.
So when you ask where would we put the money, I'd say empower
the local communities to take that funding and build a program
that they need, using research-based, data-driven model
programs. We will make that commitment to you that we will do
that with funds that we receive. Yes, the media campaign is
definitely one part of it.
Our community has been a tremendous advocate of public
service announcements, media campaigns. We run two PSA contests
now for youths, one for radio, one for television, and I had a
person from the local Sioux City Journal say why aren't we
doing that in the newspaper. So we've got a lot of support
locally for those kinds of things. We've got to continue to
focus on that prevention and education which we have not gotten
money for in the past, the prevention programs.
Reducing the demand. The supply will be there as long as
the demand is. We've got to reduce the demand. And we need to
recognize at the same time, our treatment right now, the amount
of dollars in treatment is very inadequate. We've got a lot of
people, you know, we've got 12 percent admitting that meth is
their No. 1 drug of choice, how many people aren't getting
treatment who could admit that meth is their No. 1 drug of
choice. We need to look at those issues. There are a lot of
people not getting treatment just because of the cost of it.
I personally, again I'm a real global type person. If we
could give treatment to any kid that needs it, any kid that
needs treatment, we would be saving so many dollars down the
road because we know that treatment works, and prevention
works. And as a local community we are working very, very hard
to identify risk factors to try to reduce those.
Mr. Mica. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Latham.
Mr. Latham. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to first of all, as far as the drug education
program, as I mentioned earlier, Siouxland was 1 of the 12
pilot areas in the country when this was first proposed. And we
were unique here in a little program we call incidentally the
Latham Project, but to go out--surprise, I know. We were the
only ones who went out and solicited contributions from the
private sector here. I am just so proud of this community and
the region here. Gateway gave us $100,000. UPS gave us $30,000.
And that was matched with the Federal dollars. Duluth, MN, was
our control city, in comparison with Siouxland after 5 months
of the program. And I think what Linda is talking about is
there's hopefully a long-term effect. What we found was that
there was a greater awareness with the parents, which is
critically important, but the biggest impact that it had was on
the fourth, fifth, sixth graders and lesser through the middle
school, and very little effect, while it scared them it was
only temporary in the high school age, in that class or that
group.
I think it's going to be a long-term situation before we
actually find out whether the message sticks with our young
people, and with the impact that it has had. The most important
thing we can do is wake up the parents and tell them to talk to
their kids. I mentioned that earlier too. But statistically and
everything else, the parents still have the greatest influence
on that child. After having done 23 convoy drug meetings here
in the district, we always set an hour and a half aside for the
meeting. I can set my watch. In 45 minutes someone will finally
get to the point, is there a way to get to parents.
And my question would be to you, both of you, how do you do
that? I mean, Linda, you do it with your organization, with
your experience, Carla, on the school board and faith-based. If
you had a meeting today you would have the best parents that
talk to their kids come to the meeting. The people who you need
to get to are staying home or they're off having their own
marijuana, drinking beer some place. How do you get to them?
Ms. Phillips. I'm a parent of three teenagers, going
through all of these issues.
Mr. Latham. You're way too young.
Ms. Phillips. I know. Way too young, right.
We had this in the late 1980's, early 1990's, the parent
networking. I don't know about other parents, but I am told
that I'm the only person out there asking questions. I'm the
only person doing this, and I'll bet if you would talk to 10
parents they would tell you that their kid is telling you that
they're the only ones.
I think what we need to do is we need to as parents figure
out that we do have a role in this. I mean we need to be, and
we can change behaviors based on what we do, which is exactly
why kids are drinking a lot more now and we're seeing that
number is because of the parents' influence. Oh, thank
goodness, it's only alcohol. And that is the attitude that kids
get. If we are much more strict with the kids, if we're talking
to each other and we know what's going on, we know that
someone's parent isn't home, we know what's going on, we're
talking to each other and we quote catch them, it does make an
impact. We are able to influence their behavior. Consequences
are so important. Sometimes it's hard as a parent to give those
consequences when you look around you and no one else is doing
it.
What we need to do is switch what the norm is. Switch the
norm to non-use. Switch the norm back to where it was before.
We need to do that. And as parents we can do that. Takes a lot
of energy, takes a lot of time, but it doesn't take very much
money, and that's the one thing that we need to remember. That
doesn't take money. That's talking. That's getting parents
together. It takes people just to be empowered to do that.
Ms. Van Hofwegen. I would agree with everything she said.
I'm also the parent of two teenagers, and it is very important
to keep the lines of communication open with your children.
However, I do think there's sort of a hopeless feeling when you
say that the parents are either at home smoking their own
marijuana or in the bars. I think it's really important, and I
don't know if there can be any government dollars that can help
you do this, those of us who really care about kids in our
community to become a parent, a father or a mother figure to
kids, and become that person that's really important in their
life, to make the communication and connection. I don't know if
there's any special way to do that.
I think that for these kids, if their parents aren't going
to take responsibility, then someone else does need to. Whether
it be our churches or community organizations. I know in our
town there is a Big Brother and Big Sister organization that is
really doing a good job at making an attempt. I think we as
community members better take over.
Mr. Latham. I just wanted to say one additional thing about
my pride of this community. When we got the money to run the
ads on top of the PSA announcements, and incidentally our media
here in Siouxland, in the State of Iowa did over half of the
PSAs before. So that's a tremendous contribution. And what was
really fascinating and something I never thought I'd hear a
complaint about was the fact that our media people were
somewhat offended that we would pay them and actually would not
take the money. It was incredible. And it says a lot for this
community.
Mr. Mica. Thank you. The gentleman from South Dakota, Mr.
Thune.
Mr. Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to credit
both of you for the things that you're doing, obviously some
great efforts are underway. To say that it seems to me when
you're talking about prevention of course the best prevention
is a mom and dad that love their kids enough to spend time with
them, to take them to church and subject them to the kind of
influences that will keep them away from bad choices. You know,
we're always looking for a government solution to something
that's fundamentally a family oriented issue.
I guess I'd be curious to know, Carla, you mentioned here
in your statement too that you have served on a school board
for 12 years. What things in your mind could we be doing in the
schools? I mean what activities could we do to help, the kids
have their sort of communities, their family, hopefully their
church and they spend an awful lot of time at school. From that
aspect of it how do we, what can be done at the school levels
to help deter them from getting involved in drugs?
Ms. Van Hofwegen. I think a shift in the attitude of the
schools toward parents. I was a teacher before I was a school
board member. I remember in the late 1970's seeing signs on the
doors of the middle school, please report to the office,
visitors are welcome but please report to the office. It's sort
of a stay out type of statement.
I think schools are really trying to let parents know they
want to work with them. They know if they open up the lines of
communication, especially in those homes where there are
difficulties, that the students will see the families and the
schools trying to work together. I also think that we
discouraged groups like PTAs for sometime and now they're
trying to resurrect interest in them again. At least in our
community, they're trying to get a parent group in each of our
schools in the community. And I think that will help. There
again, you often get the parents who already, sort of have it
all together that come to those meetings. But we need to
encourage other parents to do that as well.
I do know the public school in Spencer is also getting
involved more on the preschool level, which is the area that
truly you're going to prevent problems. If you can get involved
with the families at that point, that will help. The school
doesn't have all the answers. I do see a big change from when I
was a teacher until now. The teachers have a much bigger
responsibility toward those kids. It's very important to
include the families in the educational process, and to
encourage them to give their input, to let them know that
you're working together to help the students.
Ms. Phillips. Could I respond?
Mr. Thune. Sure.
Ms. Phillips. One of the things that we have here, it's
just been started for a few years, so we don't know the long-
term impact on it, but we do have what we call social health
groups at our schools, and that is run through the Action
programs and the SHIP, but what it is is where a team of
parents--excuse me, a team of educators are meeting with
Juvenile Court Services and meeting with the other various
agencies, the Department of Human Services in our community and
they are identifying at a very young age some of the problems,
behaviors within these kids in the schools, and they are then
basically forming a case management plan, bringing the family
in and discussing what's going on. I think we're going to see a
great impact in the future from really surrounding the
resources and our whole thing with the comprehensive strategy
is the right resource for the right youth at the right time.
That's what we're really trying to do, is to surround that
kid and provide a safety net for them as they move up in the
years. Because one of the things we've identified is academic
failure beginning in early elementary school--in late
elementary school, excuse me. If those kids are not going to
get what they need at an early age they're going to fail.
They're going to be a statistic to us and they're going to be
in the community and we're going to have problems with them.
Our school board and local agencies are really working hard for
that.
Another thing I just have to say is I am an advocate of
DARE. I know there are a lot of people who have knocked DARE
down and drug it through the coals. I am an advocate. In that
year that they are in DARE, whether it's 11 weeks or 16 weeks,
talk to those kids, those kids are going to tell that you
they're not going to use drugs and they're going to identify
people who are using drugs and they're going to realize all
those things. But then don't teach the kid anything else about
it and expect them to remember it.
When we were in another hearing at one point they were
talking about teach your kid math in the fifth grade and expect
them to remember it when they get to high school? It's not
going to happen. We need structured curriculum in our schools
from kindergarten, preschool actually, kindergarten all the way
through, curriculums that talk about it, that talks about
methamphetamines. You can't expect the teachers to go out and
research all of these things and bring them back to their
classroom. Some do that. But it's going to be very
inconsistent.
We need structured curriculum. We need to be telling these
kids the same message, and it needs to be very clear and it
needs to be very consistent. If we're not going to do that,
there's not going to be the big hope at the end that they're
all going to remember what's going on, because they're not
going to remember it if we're not constantly telling them,
which is one of the reasons that these ads are good. They're
giving the same clear consistent message. And they're there all
the time telling us that. We need to always be reminded,
whether we're young people or adults.
Mr. Thune. I appreciate that. Now there is going to be a
followup question to my original question on what schools can
do as to whether there ought to be a structured part of the
curriculum that addresses that. In visiting with law
enforcement people and even with kids themselves, these
problems are cropping up at a much earlier age. A lot of times
we used to think it was high school before you were subjected
to all these temptations and pressures. But anymore they're
saying they start to identify these trends not just in middle
school but prior to that, and I do think there has to be an
after DARE or something that reinforces that message as they
move on into the higher grades too. And I'm a big fan of the
faith-based approach and the things that are going on out
there, it's a wonderful program and I want to credit both of
you for the things that are happening. I think it's all part of
the solution. But we definitely have our work cut out for us.
It's a challenge, and I guess we're all obviously looking for
anything that we can do to enhance the successful things that
are already underway and to find out if there are things that
we aren't doing that we ought to be doing. Thanks for your
testimony.
Mr. Mica. Thank you, gentlemen. And I also want to thank
both of these witnesses for coming forward today and providing
our subcommittee with their insight and recommendations. And
particularly thank you for the contribution that you're making
in your communities and localities, in again what is one of the
most serious challenges I think any one of us face as parents,
Members of Congress or involved citizens. We thank you so much,
and we'll excuse you at this time.
And I'll call our third panel. Our third panel consists of
two witnesses this morning. The first panelist is Leroy Schoon.
The second, and I'm sorry, he is with Schoon Construction. The
second panelist is Jamey Miller, and he is with Rudy Salem
Staffing Services. Both of these individuals I want to welcome
also.
Again, this is an investigations and oversight subcommittee
of Congress. If you have lengthy statements we'll make them a
part of the material on request to the Chair. With that I'm
also going to swear you in. If you will please stand, Raise
right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Mica. The witnesses answered in the affirmative. Let
the record reflect that. I'd like to welcome both of you this
morning.
At this particular time recognize Mr. LeRoy Schoon for his
testimony and comments. I understand you have a drug testing
program as part of your employment, and we're anxious to hear
about your experience. Thank you, sir. You're recognized.
STATEMENTS OF LEROY SCHOON, PRESIDENT, SCHOON CONSTRUCTION; AND
JAMEY MILLER, RUDY SALEM STAFFING SERVICES
Mr. Schoon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Schoon Construction,
Cherokee, IA. We specialize in fiber optics and general
excavation construction. We work with municipalities and
communication companies. We employ approximately 130 employees
in our organization.
In 1999 our company implemented a 100 percent pre-
employment drug screening. We were having trouble finding good
employees, so we decided we have to do that. And we went first
to a random drug screening of 50 percent throughout our entire
company, and we were not getting results we needed. We went to
100 percent, and it has done tremendously well. We will spend
approximately $10,000 in the year 2000 for drug screening new
applicants and random drug testing.
Drug screening has helped eliminate the illegal drug use in
our workplace. But we feel it does not cure the drug problem in
the work place and in the community. The reason for that is we
have people that we have to come up, they come up with drugs,
we have to terminate them or suspend them to get evaluated and
get rehabilitated. They don't go to rehabilitation. They go
down the street and go to another employment and find
employment that they don't have to be drug screened. Our
opinion is that we're just transferring our problems and
confining it into one area.
I'd like to list below some of the problems the employers
have with illegal drug users in the workplace. We've
experienced these. Employees are injured or killed. Equipment
gets damaged because of not being alert. Property damage claims
rose tremendously high to people that you're working with. The
quality of work goes down. Poor productivity is a big result.
As a result of this, insurance costs skyrocket for all
employers because the insurance costs are shared through
everyone. So if one company does a good job and three companies
don't, we still help pay for that. We feel the solution is that
we need to have 100 percent drug screening for all employees.
Our company has already seen an improvement in applicants.
We've had better applicants come in the door because the other
ones aren't going to come in because they aren't going to get
through anyway. Reduction of property damage and workmen's
compensation claims since we have run this program has been
reduced. We have a better experience model for our insurance
carrier.
If we can solve our problems, we need all sectors of
business and government to work toward the same goal. Thank
you.
Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Schoon follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.033
Mr. Mica. We'll now hear from Jamey Miller. He's from Rudy
Salem Staffing Services. Mr. Miller, you're recognized.
Mr. Miller. My name is Jamey Miller. I work with Rudy Salem
Staffing Services. I also run a safety division out of that.
Back in about March 1998 I was approached by Senator Steve King
and asked if I would be interested in conducting onsite drug
testing. I thought, hey, that's an opportunity for me to be,
just getting out of the Navy and stuff, moving back to my home
town, I felt it was a good opportunity for me to grow and stay
in the community. That ended up branching out into stuff like
what LeRoy's doing here.
The Drug Free Workplace Act was passed in April 1998, and
I've been going on since then. I've seen firsthand what drugs
can do to a person, their family, their bank account, their
life and their future. I also know the extremes that people
will go through in order to pass a drug screen. They try to
adulterate their urine. They will put anything from bleach in
there to dirt, whatever. If you can think of it they have tried
it. There's all sorts of remedies out there. Some of them work,
some of them don't. If you're trying to get a job and a good
paying job, you have a 50-50 chance of passing or getting
caught, it's really not worth the hassle.
If you already have a good job and you're doing drugs and
they implement the random drug screen at your workplace you're
going to get caught, so it's not worth losing your job.
I think the firsthand experience I've had has made me very
knowledgeable in this field of onsite drug testing. In the past
26 months I've personally administered 1,396 onsite drug tests.
I've had 1,107 negatives, and I've had 289 people walk out on
me, or I could assume those would be positive. Basically that
means to me that 289 people refused to take the test and deny
themselves employment. I guess their bad habits are more
important than feeding their kids and paying their bills.
I think that the new Drug Free Workplace Act has done some
good, but I think right now the employers around here, I only
have maybe two or three accounts or clients that are
participating in this. I think they're afraid. Right now the
unemployment rate in Sioux City, the last I heard was like 3
percent, so most of those people are either housewives or
disabled people or they're retired or whatever. So the rest of
the people around here are working. Basically I think about 74
percent of the population in Sioux City uses drugs, this is
from my point of view. It's hard when you're trying to run a
staffing service. Our business is helping people find a job,
but how are you supposed to employ these people when they can't
even walk through the door and pass a drug test. There's a
definite problem here, and it's right here, right here in Sioux
City.
Then we also have an office up in Spencer, IA. And as they
were mentioning before, when I was hired by Salem Management to
be the safety director they had a mod rate that was so high
because of injuries due to accidents on the job and people not
paying attention to what they're doing, it cost $200,000 or
$300,000 a year for a small business to have work comp
insurance. I also do OSHA compliance, EPA compliance and stuff
like that. Since I've implemented my policies and stuff, we
have dropped our mod rate down, just the corporate office, down
to point 65 which is pretty good for a staffing industry.
However, the problem we're having now is that we opened up
an office in Spencer about 5 years ago, Spencer, IA, and Sioux
City's got quite a large, a lot more population here compared
to Spencer, and now Spencer, their mod rate or their work comp
claims are doubling what I have down here in Sioux City, and a
lot of that has to do, I believe, with the drug abuse.
So I'd like to wrap it up by saying that's all I have to
say.
Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
I compliment you both for the initiatives you've taken to
try to ensure a drug free work place and work force. I think
it's a model for other companies. If we had more private sector
participation in this regard, we'd have a lot less drug abuse.
One of the problems that we have is we do have people who use
drugs, and we have the problem of trying to get them into some
effective treatment. Have any of you had experiences, do you
have any part of your program, Mr. Schoon, which puts these
folks into treatment or gives them some opportunity to be
treated if they're found with a positive result?
Mr. Schoon. What we've tried to do, if we have a person
come up we call hot, we will pay for the evaluation.
Mr. Mica. So you do give them an opportunity to clean up
their act?
Mr. Schoon. Yes. If it takes rehabilitation, if it's a real
serious case, we'll try to find them some temporary work or if
they succeed we'll offer them their job back.
Mr. Mica. What kind of success have you found with that
treatment or rehabilitation?
Mr. Schoon. What we have found is our success hasn't been
good. They will go for rehabilitation maybe for 3 or 4 days,
they leave and go find other employment, they say I have to
make a living. We cannot pay them the salary while they're
getting rehabilitated. In Iowa here just what happens, they
will go down the street and find a job, and they will continue
their habit.
Mr. Mica. So the lasting of effective treatment is a
problem and then also getting individuals to stick to treatment
or follow it through is part of the problem?
Mr. Schoon. That's correct. We've had one case where a
young man, he left employment, we suspended him, he was
supposed to take 3 weeks of rehab.
He didn't continue that. He quit. He went to Des Moines to
get a job. He said he had to make a living. He come back and
about 9 months later, he said he had been cured, he
straightened out. OK. You have got to take a new drug screen,
we'll give you another chance to hire. I took him up, paid the
fee at the hospital for drug screen, this is $47 for us. Come
up hot. The applicants will come in and they're first informed
that we do drug screening. It's no problem, I'm not on it. We
take them in, it will come back, they're hot. Or they will call
back the next day and say I can't work for you, I'm going to
come up hot. So we've already spent the money.
Mr. Mica. One of the problems we have, contrary to the
perception out there, is actually Congress has more than
doubled the amount of money for treatment if we take in all of
the different programs since 1993, and the last 5 years under
the Republican control, the Congress has increased the
treatment some 26 percent.
I don't think any of us have a problem with increasing the
money for treatment. The problem is getting effective treatment
programs, one, and then also getting people to even go to the
treatment. We held a hearing in Baltimore where people who have
been sentenced for offenses met most of the requirements, and
part of their sentencing is to go to treatment. Less than 50
percent show up even under court order.
Of course you're dealing with a situation where you have
absolutely no control over these individuals, only the
possibility of their being employed, and with a tight job
market here and throughout the country, they just go somewhere
else is basically what you're both testifying. Are you seeing
the same thing? Mr. Miller.
Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. In our line of work we deal with
people, top executives all the way down to general laborers
daily. I deal with the whole spectrum of the population. What
we're finding out is--I opened up a day labor here in Sioux
City about 2 months ago, and our building is located right next
to the Federal building. In any given day, there are 10 people
that come into my office and I can't put any of them to work
because they're hot.
Mr. Mica. They have a drug problem.
Mr. Miller. They're either drunk or----
Mr. Mica. Drugs or alcohol.
Mr. Miller. Yeah, there's something wrong with them. We
can't put them to work. They can't speak right, they stutter.
Too much of a risk. But they have to eat. They have to live. So
most of these guys sleep under bridges. They live at the Gospel
Mission, things like that.
Mr. Mica. Is there anything that we're doing that we could
do a better job at from the Federal standpoint or through,
we're now block granting or sending money to the States, send
money to local programs, is there something you see a greater
need for that we aren't doing or that we can do in cooperation
with local agencies to address this problem?
Mr. Miller. I think part of the way to kind of fix this
would be to let employers know that they have the option, the
way the Drug Free Workplace Act, the way the law is written,
you don't have to send a person to treatment. I mean just
depends on what you want to do with that person. Right now the
employment rate is so low that you're afraid, if we do this
random thing, we're going to lose all these people. I think the
biggest thing we need to do is educate employers as far as
implementing drug testing. It's OK to do a random test. You're
not going to lose your whole work force, I don't think. That's
your choice.
Mr. Mica. Anything, Mr. Schoon?
Mr. Schoon. I'd like to comment on that. We have found
since we implemented the 100 percent drug screen and the pre-
employment, we're finding a better rate of applicant coming in.
I think it's scaring some of the other ones that are on drugs
away. I went to different contractors, fellow contractors and
said, hey, you know, you need to get on a drug screening
program, you need to do a drug screening program. We're kicking
them out of our place, they're coming down to you and going to
work, and I said pretty soon you're going to have everybody
hot. What's it going to do to your workmen's comp and your
general liability. It's going to make your risk higher. He
said, well, what are we going to do, we need help. That's one
of the problems they're faced with. They think, you know,
money's not the issue I don't think. It's just an incentive for
the employers to be able to go in and do this. Maybe the
insurance companies need to offer more incentive for employers
who are doing a good job with drug screening and that would
help encourage the ones that aren't doing it, realizing there
are a lot of smaller companies out than we are, but the
resources are there. If there are only ten employees they can
still get this done.
Mr. Mica. Thank you. Let me yield to the gentleman from
Iowa, Mr. Latham.
Mr. Latham. I want to be very brief. We have both to be
tonight in Washington, we cannot miss a flight here today.
There's much debate and has been for years in Congress about
the Federal role on funded mandates on States and small
business. Are either of you suggesting from the Federal level
that we should mandate drug screening in the workplace?
Mr. Schoon. I think, Mr. Latham, it needs to come from our
Iowa Legislature.
Mr. Miller. I agree.
Mr. Latham. I would agree with you. I don't think--it is a
State situation and based at that level and also at least
allowing individual businesses to drug screen so there's no
prohibition as some people would like to have. That was a
debate that went on for several years. I know about the State
legislature not even allowing you to screen in the workplace. I
appreciate that. Thank you both very much for being here.
Mr. Mica. Thank you very much, Mr. Latham.
The gentleman from South Dakota, Mr. Thune.
Mr. Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm glad to hear that
in Iowa you are State's rights advocates as we are in South
Dakota. I just have one observation or question. You mentioned
the cost of drug testing. Have either of you done an analysis
of what the lost productivity cost is? Can you quantify that as
a percentage of your bottom line or dollar figures in any way?
Mr. Schoon. I have not been able to do that. I do know
we're tracking for costs and time spent in interviewing
employees and taking them up for drug screening, but a factor
of percentage of sales I don't have that at this time.
Mr. Miller. Neither do I.
Mr. Thune. I know it's probably rather difficult to come up
with, to put a quantitative, attach that to it, but I think
it's obviously a concern in the workplace, and it's got to be
not just the cost of drug screening and all that, but I would
think too just the loss of productivity as a result of the
effects the drugs have on people who are using.
So anyway I again appreciate very much your testimony. I
will yield back to the chairman as well in the interest of
time, but appreciate you taking the time to do what you did.
Mr. Mica. I also want to thank each of you for coming
forward and sharing with us your experience and the
contribution you have made in the workplace, work force setting
an example which you have done. That's to be commended. If
every employer stepped in and followed your lead, we would have
a lot fewer problems, and we appreciate your insight.
I particularly appreciate the insight of all the panelists
today, the law enforcement, the local community, both private
and public, that have testified before our subcommittee. Each
of these field hearings gives us better insight as to what's
going on throughout the country, so we can do a better job in
Washington trying to address some of the serious problems that
we're facing.
Again, Iowa, South Dakota, this whole region is not alone
being victimized by illegal narcotics. This is an incredible
national challenge. I get to see it chairing the subcommittee,
and it again is one of the greatest challenges I think we have
ever faced in Congress, as parents, as community leaders or
employers. So I thank you for the invitation.
Mr. Latham. I thank you, Mr. Thune, for joining us today.
Both of you represent incredible geographic areas. Mr. Thune
has a huge, huge, huge district. I can't even imagine
representing an area that large.
I saw on the map this morning the size of Mr. Latham's
district. You do an incredibly responsive job again in
representing the people of this area, they're great people. As
I said earlier, I had a chance to live among, work among and be
part of the business community and have the greatest respect
for you. So I thank each of you for allowing me to come here
and hopefully learn and work with you as we move forward to
meet this challenge.
Mr. Latham.
Mr. Latham. Yes. I just want to again thank you for making
the extraordinary effort to be here.
Mr. Mica. It was.
Mr. Latham. And again I hope the folks here recognize the
tremendous responsibility the chairman has, and the leadership
in Congress that you have shown has been incredible on this
issue, and it's been an honor and a real privilege for me to
learn from you and to work with you, and I appreciate it, as
well as my great friend and colleague here and my neighbor,
John Thune. I just want to thank each of you.
Mr. Mica. Thank you again so much. There being no further
business to come before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice,
Drug Policy, and Human Resources, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2448.046