<DOC>
[107th Congress House Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:80843.wais]
EMERGING THREATS: METHAMPHETAMINES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
DRUG POLICY AND HUMAN RESOURCES
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 12, 2001
__________
Serial No. 107-81
__________
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
80-843 WASHINGTON : 2002
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (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 MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
STEPHEN HORN, California PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
JOHN L. MICA, Florida CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington,
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana DC
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
BOB BARR, Georgia ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
DAN MILLER, Florida DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
DOUG OSE, California JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
RON LEWIS, Kentucky JIM TURNER, Texas
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DAVE WELDON, Florida WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
CHRIS CANNON, Utah DIANE E. WATSON, California
ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida ------ ------
C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho ------
EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Tennessee (Independent)
Kevin Binger, Staff Director
Daniel R. Moll, Deputy Staff Director
James C. Wilson, Chief Counsel
Robert A. Briggs, Chief Clerk
Phil Schiliro, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana, Chairman
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
JOHN L. MICA, Florida, BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
BOB BARR, Georgia DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
DAN MILLER, Florida JIM TURNER, Texas
DOUG OSE, California THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia ------ ------
DAVE WELDON, Florida
Ex Officio
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Chris Donesa, Staff Director
Nick Coleman, Staff Member
Conn Carroll, Clerk
Denise Wilson, Minority Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on July 12, 2001.................................... 1
Statement of:
Brooks, Ron, chairman, National Narcotic Officers
Associations Coalition; Douglas K. Dukes, sheriff, Noble
County, IN; Doug A. Harp, deputy sheriff, Noble County, IN;
Henry M. Serrano, chief of police, city of Citrus Heights,
CA; and John McCroskey, sheriff, Lewis County, WA.......... 110
Keefe, Joseph D., Chief of Operations, Drug Enforcement
Administration............................................. 71
Rook, Susan, public affairs director, Step One............... 187
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Barr, Hon. Bob, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Georgia, prepared statement of.......................... 223
Brooks, Ron, chairman, National Narcotic Officers
Associations Coalition, prepared statement of.............. 113
Dukes, Douglas K., sheriff, Noble County, IN, prepared
statement of............................................... 164
Harp, Doug A., deputy sheriff, Noble County, IN, prepared
statement of............................................... 168
Keefe, Joseph D., Chief of Operations, Drug Enforcement
Administration:
Followup questions and answers........................... 92
Prepared statement of.................................... 74
McCroskey, John, sheriff, Lewis County, WA, prepared
statement of............................................... 131
Ose, Hon. Doug, a Representative in Congress from the State
of California:
Article dated October 8, 2000............................ 8
Prepared statement of.................................... 66
Rook, Susan, public affairs director, Step One, prepared
statement of............................................... 189
Serrano, Henry M., chief of police, city of Citrus Heights,
CA, prepared statement of.................................. 144
Souder, Hon. Mark E., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Indiana, prepared statement of.................... 3
EMERGING THREATS: METHAMPHETAMINES
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 12, 2001
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and
Human Resources,
Committee on Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mark E. Souder
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Souder, Ose, Gilman, and Cummings.
Also present: Congressman Baird.
Staff present: Chris Donesa, staff director; Nick Coleman,
staff member; Conn Carroll, clerk; Conor Donahue, intern; Sarah
Despres and Tony Haywood, minority counsels; Denise Wilson,
minority professional staff member; Jean Gosa, minority
assistant clerk; and Lorran Garrison, minority staff assistant.
Mr. Souder. The subcommittee will come to order.
Good morning, and thank you all for coming. We hope to
concentrate many of our subcommittee's upcoming drug policy
hearings around a few core issues posing fundamental questions
and challenges to our efforts to keep America drug-free. This
hearing is the first of a series on ``emerging threats.''
Narcotics and other drugs that are relatively new drugs of
abuse or those which have dramatically increased as a threat to
our communities. In examining these emerging threats, we hope
to bring public attention to them for both policymakers and
parents, as well as to consider whether existing drug control
institutions and policies are adequate to address and combat
them. In the near future, we hope to discuss such emerging
threats as ecstasy and other synthetic drugs and abuse of the
prescription drug Oxycontin. Today, however, we begin with what
has quickly become a monumental problem for America throughout
our Nation: methamphetamines.
Methamphetamines, or ``meth,'' has quickly spread across
the Nation to become one of the most pressing narcotics issues
for State and local communities and law enforcement in those
areas. I don't think that there is a member of this committee
or of the House, particularly those who represent rural areas,
who has not seen numerous and disturbing reports of small
``Beavis and Butthead'' meth labs being seized in their
communities. These labs are of immediate concern because they
make almost every county in America its own source for a
powerful drug of addiction with unpredictable effects--along
with all of the accompanying negative consequences, including
violent crime and environmental damage. Each pound of
methamphetamine produced results in 5 to 6 pounds of toxic
chemical waste, which is simply left to enter groundwater. It
is difficult to control the growth of these labs because of the
perverse economic incentives to push the drug--just $2,500
worth of chemicals can make 4 pounds of methamphetamine with a
street price of $163,000.
But even these laboratories are the tip of an iceberg
compared to the large-scale operations run by organized crime,
predominantly in California and the Southwest United States. It
is by no means an exaggeration to say that the State of
California is, for all intents and purposes, a narcotics source
country for methamphetamines. A large proportion of the meth on
the streets of the United States is produced or transported in
and through California. We face a tremendous national challenge
in ensuring that not only California, but all 50 States, have
adequate resources to combat this emerging threat. In addition,
we must consider whether additional controls are necessary for
precursor chemicals and other ingredients that are the key to
the illicit trade. And we must examine whether our system
adequately takes into account the special challenges of
treating meth victims and addicts through prevention and
treatment.
I would also like to recognize and thank the House Meth
Caucus, of which I am a member and with which we have worked to
put together the hearing, particularly Congressman Calvert and
Congressman Baird. I appreciate their bipartisan leadership in
raising awareness of these issues and look forward to
continuing to work with them.
Today we have excellent witnesses to discuss emerging meth
trends. From the administration, on our first panel is Joseph
Keefe, Chief of Operations for the Drug Enforcement
Administration. On our second panel, we will be joined by a
number of knowledgeable State and local law enforcement
officers. Ron Brooks is the chairman of the National Narcotics
Officers Coalition, and has also been a good friend and
resource for this subcommittee and a tireless advocate against
illegal drugs. From Indiana is Sheriff Doug Dukes and Deputy
Doug Harp from the Noble County Sheriff's office. They are our
second set of witnesses from Noble County in our last two
hearings; it may not surprise you to know that Noble County is
in my district and has had a growing narcotics problem, but has
been tackling it aggressively. From Congressman Ose's district,
we have Chief Henry Serrano from Citrus Heights, CA. And at
Congressman Baird's suggestion, we will hear from Sheriff John
McCroskey from Lewis County, WA. Our third panel will discuss
meth's effects on our families with Susan Rook from the Step
One Center in North Carolina.
Thank you all for coming. This should be an excellent
hearing on an important issue, and I look forward to your
testimony.
I would now like to recognize Mr. Cummings for an opening
statement.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Mark E. Souder follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.003
Mr. Cummings. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. As you
know, methamphetamine abuse is spreading across the country
like a forest fire, and it is fast on the rise in the areas to
which it has spread. Once concentrated almost exclusively in
California, the manufacturing, trafficking, and the use of
methamphetamine has expanded over the past decade and a half to
many other areas of the country. Outlaw motorcycle gangs in the
West and Southwest have been supplanted by professional Mexico-
based dealers and wildly dispersed independent producers as the
primary traffickers of this drug.
At the same time, meth use has become increasingly
prevalent among segments of our Nation's youth. Although so-
called crystal meth made its appearance in major cities in the
mid-Atlantic and the Northeast only 3 or 4 years ago, the rapid
growth of the problem in the South, Midwest, and Northwest
suggests that meth abuse in these areas will not long remain a
mere blip on the radar screen. Needless to say, that is not
good news for my home town of Baltimore, where heroin and other
drugs, such as cocaine, already wreak havoc in far too many
lives, and methamphetamine poses a serious additional threat.
Indeed, one of the dangerous aspects of meth abuse is the
tendency among users to couple it with other drugs, including
heroin and alcohol. But meth use alone is dangerous enough in
itself. Like crack cocaine, but the more long-lasting effects,
methamphetamine targets the central nervous system, increasing
the heart rate, blood pressure, body temperature, and rate of
breathing. It can also produce fits of hyperactivity, euphoria,
a sense of increased energy and tremors. Chronic and high-dose
abuse can result in paranoia, hallucinations, schizophrenia-
like symptoms, and is often accompanied by violence and other
criminal and anti-social behaviors. Indeed, in the areas of the
country where meth use is prevalent news reports abound of
meth-induced domestic violence, murders, suicides, thefts,
burglaries, and other crimes.
Compounding the health and social dangers of
methamphetamine use are a host of other dangers that accompany
its manufacture. Unlike other hard-core illicit drugs, meth can
be, and often is, manufactured by an amateur chemist from a
precursor of chemicals contained in legal commercial products.
Home-made meth lends itself to a small-scale trafficking on the
fringes of the meth market and accounts for much of the rapid
spread of the meth abuse problem.
The volatility and toxicity of the chemicals involved in
such production, moreover, result in make-shift labs being the
frequent sources of explosions, fires, and toxic damage to the
environment. Children who reside in homes where these labs are
operated are exposed to all of these dangers, and studies
suggest an array of health problems in the newborn children of
meth-addicted mothers traceable to maternal meth abuse.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I know how very concerned you are
about the growth of the meth epidemic in Indiana and in the
Midwestern region of our country. For the same reasons which I
have just described, I want to make sure that my State of
Maryland and the mid-Atlantic region are not similarly
overtaken by methamphetamine abuse.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about their
experiences and how we can effectively combat the rapid spread
of this problem. Thank you very much.
Mr. Souder. Thank you. Congressman Ose, do you have an
opening statement?
Mr. Ose. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding
this hearing on an issue that generally is not getting the
national attention it needs, and that is, as my colleague has
said, the growth and use of methamphetamines. In the interest
of time, I'm going to make a brief opening statement and ask
unanimous consent that my full statement be entered into the
record.
Mr. Chairman, the growth and use of methamphetamines
threatens every part of our society. Our communities and
environment are endangered by those who use and make the drug
around them, even as the drug destroys users and those around
them. Combating meth has been one of my top priorities since
coming to Congress. In fact, it predates even arriving here.
Having been elected in early November 1998, by November 18 I
had begged, cajoled, browbeat, and eventually persuaded the
chairman of the full committee to put me on this subcommittee
after 11 phone calls. I think Kevin Binger was very tired of me
by the end of November 1998, but it is a pleasure to be on this
committee.
I plan to continue to work on this subcommittee. I am a
member of the Congressional Meth Caucus. I am going to do
everything I can to see that Congress acts quickly to address
this issue.
I want to thank the witnesses who are joining us today to
talk about meth. I especially want to thank two that I have had
personal experience with. The first is Ron Brooks, who is the
Chair of the National Narcotic Officers Associations Coalition.
Ron is on the second panel. His knowledge and personal
experience have been an invaluable resource to me and my staff,
and I am appreciative of it.
And I am particularly pleased to welcome the chief of
police from Citrus Heights; that is Henry Serrano. Henry is the
chief of police in a city that I helped establish in
California. Mr. Serrano's team protects my district, and they
also have some insightful testimony today regarding some
innovative strategies they are using in northern California to
stop the spread of meth.
As Mr. Cummings said, meth is a particularly large part of
the drug crisis in California, and it would take hours to truly
explore in detail what meth is doing in California. So, to
expedite that, if you would, Mr. Chairman, I would ask
unanimous consent to submit for the record an article published
in numerous California newspapers last October titled, ``A
Madness Called Meth.'' I have given each of the members a copy
of it. It is a lengthy read. I do commend it to your
consideration. It is quite informative, and it is from my home
town newspaper. As they say in the media, they are a major
Sacramento newspaper.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.060
Mr. Ose. This committee has itself examined what meth is
doing in California. In February 1999 we were in Woodland
having a field hearing. We had a lot of testimony from law
enforcement there, a lot from people who had been using meth,
and I am pleased to say that the interest in that issue has
continued since.
Congress does need to act on this issue, and it needs to
act soon. I note with particular interest the efforts at CJS on
funding some of these issues, and I look forward to working
with you, Mr. Chairman, and hearing the testimony from the
witnesses today as we move forward. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Doug Ose follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.064
Mr. Souder. I thank you for your continued interest and
leadership. We learned a lot in the California hearing that you
instituted and traveled together to South America to many of
the source countries, and you have been very involved in the
hearings. I appreciate your leadership and continued interest,
particularly in calling attention to the meth question, as you
saw it explode in your district.
We have been joined today by Congressman Bruce Baird of
Washington State. I have asked him if he would sit up with us
today and he is going to participate in the hearing. He is the
co-chairman of the Meth Caucus in the House and also one who
has pushed this committee and Congress toward leadership in the
meth area. Congressman Baird?
Mr. Baird. I would like to thank the chairman and the
ranking member for holding this hearing today. As founder of
the Methamphetamine Caucus, it is particularly important that
we raise the profile and awareness of this terrible scourge
within the Congress and the law enforcement community.
My own background on this very briefly: I was a clinical
psychologist before coming to Congress and had firsthand
experience treating meth addicts. I will never forget a meth
addict who I asked what it was like to be hooked on meth and he
said, ``Doctor, if my kids were over here and they desperately
needed me and there was methamphetamine over here and I needed
methamphetamine''--and at that point he began to cry--he said,
``I'd go for the methamphetamine.''
We don't want a drug that powerful in our society
destroying lives and destroying our families, and hearings like
this and actions at the Federal level can help our local law
enforcement officials. I look forward particularly to the
testimony of Sheriff John McCroskey, who I will introduce in a
few minutes, who is on the front lines of this battle every
single day in our rural county of Lewis County.
But, again, to keep my remarks short, I want to thank the
Chair and the ranking member, and I look forward to the
comments from the witnesses.
Mr. Souder. I apologize, I referred to Brian as Bruce. I
gave him a promotion. I think Bruce Baird used to be a forward
on the Ft. Wayne Comets hockey team.
Mr. Baird. That's my brother actually. My brother will be
pleased to hear that. [Laughter.]
Not the hockey player, though.
Mr. Souder. Before proceeding, I would like to take care of
a couple of procedural matters. First, I ask unanimous consent
that all Members have 5 legislative days to submit written
statements and questions for the hearing record, and that any
answers to written questions provided by the witnesses also be
included in the record. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Second, I ask unanimous consent that all exhibits,
documents, and other materials referred to by Members,
including those mentioned by Congressman Ose in his opening
statement and the witnesses, may be included in the hearing
record, and that all Members be permitted to revise and extend
their remarks. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Third, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from
California, Mr. Calvert, and the gentleman from Washington, Mr.
Baird, who are not members of this subcommittee and committee,
and any other Members of the House who may wish to participate
in the hearing be permitted to do so after all members of the
subcommittee have completed their questioning in each round.
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Now on the first panel, Mr. Keefe has come forward. Would
you stand while I administer the oath?
[Witness sworn.]
Mr. Souder. Let the record show that the witness has
answered in the affirmative.
You are recognized for your opening statement. As you know,
we typically ask our witnesses to summarize their testimony in
about 5 minutes. We will include a fuller statement in the
record and any other insertions that you would like to do.
STATEMENT OF JOSEPH D. KEEFE, CHIEF OF OPERATIONS, DRUG
ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Keefe. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I am
pleased to have the opportunity to appear before you today to
discuss the serious methamphetamine problem facing our Nation
today. I would especially like to take the opportunity to thank
you for your continued support of Federal, State, and local
drug law enforcement.
I would like to also apologize that I have a cold and it is
very difficult for me to speak clearly, but I will continue.
Over the past several years, established drug trafficking
organizations based in Mexico and California have seized
control of the illicit methamphetamine trade. The principal
reasons for their rise to dominance is the ability of these
organizations to exploit the existing, well-established
transportation and distribution networks on both sides of the
border, as well as their ability to illegally secure large
amounts of precursor chemicals.
These drug trafficking organizations have revolutionized
the production of methamphetamine by operating large-scale
laboratories in Mexico and California that are capable of
producing unprecedented quantities of methamphetamine. Almost
all of the superlabs operated in the United States are located
in California. These organizations operate only a small
percentage of the total methamphetamine laboratories seized
nationally. However, these labs produce an estimated 80 percent
of the methamphetamine manufactured in the United States.
These criminal organizations have saturated the western
United States with methamphetamine, established their
distribution cells in other regions of the United States, and
have now moved their methamphetamine to markets in the
Midwestern and Eastern United States. Current DEA statistics
indicate that in fiscal year 2000 DEA alone seized 1,848
clandestine laboratories and that the total number of
laboratories seized by Federal, State, and local law
enforcement officers nationwide was over 6,500.
Methamphetamine is a very simple drug to produce. A user
can go to retail stores and easily purchase the vast majority
of the ingredients necessary to manufacture the drug. Precursor
chemicals such as pseudoephedrine can be extracted from common,
over-the-counter cold medications. Unlike Fentanyl, LSD, and
other types of dangerous drugs, it does not take a college-
educated chemist to produce methamphetamine.
The highly toxic and flammable chemicals involved make
these rudimentary laboratories ticking time bombs that require
specialized training to dismantle and clean up. Even with this
training, law enforcement officers and/or firefighters are
often injured responding to methamphetamine lab explosions and
fires.
The threats posed by clandestine labs are not limited to
fire, explosion, poison gas, and boobytraps. The chemical
contamination of the hazardous wastes contained in these labs
also poses a serious danger to our Nation's environment. Each
pound of methamphetamine generated in a clandestine lab can
result in as much as 5 pounds of toxic waste, which clandestine
lab operators routinely dump into our Nation's streams, rivers,
and sewage systems to cover up the evidence of their illegal
operations. The average cleanup cost per clandestine lab in
fiscal year 2001 is estimated to be $3,400. The cleanup of
superlabs can cost over $100,000.
The violence associated with methamphetamine traffic and
use has also produced a collateral impact on our communities.
Mental health agencies warn that methamphetamine abuse can be
linked directly to a myriad of social and economic problems to
include child abuse. Domestic violence, poverty, homelessness,
spousal and child abuse, as well as homicides abound among
methamphetamine users. Children and infants are susceptible to
permanent health damage resulting from inhalation of chemical
fumes. In calendar year 2000, 1,872 were present or residing at
clandestine laboratories at the time of enforcement
intervention.
In response to the methamphetamine threat, DEA established
the National Methamphetamine Strategy. The primary focus of
Strategy calls for a strong and highly aggressive enforcement
effort that is aimed at chemical companies, chemical brokers,
and large domestic/Mexican trafficking organizations involved
in the production, transportation, and distribution of
methamphetamine and its precursors.
Operation Mountain Express was especially successful in
targeting traffickers of methamphetamine precursor
pseudoephedrine. A number of multijurisdicational
investigations targeting these pseudoephedrine traffickers,
many of whom were Middle Eastern region origin, resulted in
numerous arrests, seizure of large quantities of
pseudoephedrine, and $11 million in U.S. currency.
An additional response to the methamphetamine problem has
been to initiate an aggressive training schedule to increase
the number of clandestine laboratory safety schools. Since
1997, DEA has conducted numerous clandestine laboratory schools
and certified over 4,400 special agents and State and local law
enforcement personnel across the country.
Criminal drug trafficking organizations involved in the
methamphetamine trade are one of the greatest threats to
communities and citizens across this Nation. Their power,
influence, and growth are presenting new challenges to law
enforcement agencies that are addressing this threat. The DEA
is deeply committed in our efforts to identify, target, arrest,
and incapacitate the leadership of these criminal drug
trafficking organizations. In addition, DEA will continue to
work to improve its efforts to ensure a safe future for both
our law enforcement personnel as well as our citizens.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear
before the subcommittee today. At this time I would be happy to
respond to any questions you may have on this important issue.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Keefe follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.075
Mr. Souder. Thank you. As you may have heard, we have a
vote on the Journal and then we're going to have a motion to
adjourn. We're doing campaign finance reform, and it is a
controversial subject so it could get a little hairy today at a
couple of times, depending on who got their amendments allowed
and who didn't.
At this time, Mr. Gilman, do you have a statement you would
like to read?
Mr. Gilman. Just, Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that you are
conducting this hearing. It is an extremely critical issue, as
we address all of the substance abuse problems throughout the
world, and methamphetamine has become a nightmare in many of
the nations across the globe. I think it is extremely important
that Congress review what we can do to have a more effective
approach to this worldwide problem. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Souder. Thank you. I am going to go ahead with some of
my questions. I have the advantage of being able to watch the
clock on the floor here, too. Then Congressman Ose was going to
try to come back over to continue it, but I don't know, when he
gets over there and finds out that there is a second vote,
although there may be a delay, he may come back, reconvene, so
that he can get some of his questions in. We will at that point
suspend again, and I am sure the other Members will have some
questions, too, and I may have some additional.
First, what I would like, DEA has said that 85 percent of
the methamphetamine trade is controlled by well-organized drug-
trafficking organizations out of Mexico and Columbia, but
particularly Mexico, and organizations based in California. So
are the Mexican and Californian organizations in this 85
percent, are they controlling the production or just the
distribution?
Mr. Keefe. Both, sir.
Mr. Souder. Both?
Mr. Keefe. I would say 80 percent of the methamphetamine
produced in the United States is produced by Mexican
trafficking organizations who also, then, are involved in the
distribution through various levels to the street levels, sir.
Mr. Souder. Now you referred in your testimony--and we are
going to hear from other witnesses today--about the explosion
of these small labs and that you refer to that individuals
can't make their cocaine and their heroin, but they can make
their meth. You're saying that total is less than 20 percent of
the country, those who produce their own meth?
Mr. Keefe. That is our estimate, sir, yes. Both smaller
labs, personal use, I would say less quality, sir, and those
are the 20 percent.
Mr. Souder. And in those smaller labs, are they just
distributing in a narrow area around them to their friends and
for personal use?
Mr. Keefe. Yes. Yes, sir.
Mr. Souder. Whereas, how does the meth move--in other
words, if you are coming from Mexico and California
organizations and moving toward the Midwest, you have a mention
of Minneapolis. How is that being--does it get into schools?
How does a trafficking organization set up in meth different
than it might in cocaine and heroin?
Mr. Keefe. It may not move that much differently, sir, but
what we see with the methamphetamine specifically out of
California is a very strong command control by the Mexican
trafficking organizations in California with networking now, as
we mentioned, to cells in the Midwest and through the East
Coast. We see a tremendous amount of movement across the United
States through the command control, through the highways, of
moving the methamphetamine to their cells in the Midwest or
Atlanta, GA or up into Portland, ME, where they then distribute
it down to the street level, sir, to the local clientele.
Mr. Souder. One of the things that we have seen in Indiana
and other parts of the country is, as immigrants come in,
particularly illegal immigrants who are basically necessary to
sustain our work force because our employment rates are so low
in the Midwest, small amounts of different drugs, including not
only marijuana, cocaine, and heroin, but increasingly
precursors or methamphetamine may be being brought that help
finance the early stages or just give additional cash. Is that
a pattern you've seen?
Mr. Keefe. Absolutely, sir. I would say, as we have seen
through the nineties the economy grow, we've seen a number of
hard-working Mexicans coming into the United States, moving
throughout the country, working as construction workers, at
restaurants, wherever the case may be, and setting up an
infrastructure which makes it easier for the traffickers to
move into the community because there are already hard-working
people there. They assimilate themselves in small areas like
Indiana, where law enforcement may not be aware of them, may
not be understanding of how they move it. It's very difficult
communication-wise, culturally, to understand how these
traffickers can just set up and they appear overnight. They're
very well-organized, sir.
Mr. Souder. When immigrants may bring small quantities in
and may then not be involved long term, or involved long term,
or may be what could be called ``mules,'' are they part often
of a trafficking organization that has dispersed their load or
does it tend to be more random than that?
Mr. Keefe. Well, that would be up to the individual.
Obviously, a mule may just try to make some money to get across
the United States to get started. He or she may say, ``This is
the way I want to choose. I'd rather that than work hard.'' And
they'll continue to try to work for the organization. If they
work hard and are successful, that may give them the
opportunity to move up into the organization to more trusted
positions and stuff like that. Or it could be people just did
it one time and decided this is not what I wanted to do. Maybe
a friend got arrested, and they said, ``I don't want to go to
jail in the United States.''
Mr. Souder. Do you see the particular problem that we were
talking about as--do you have any way to quantify what
percentage of the total trade that might be, and would you put
that in the 80 percent you were talking about or in the 20?
Mr. Keefe. It's tough to percentage, sir. What I would like
to say with the 80 percent was--I'm confusing myself or you--is
we estimate that 80 percent of the methamphetamine manufactured
in the United States is controlled by the Mexican trafficking
organizations. I could not honestly tell you how much
methamphetamine is also coming into this country controlled by
the Mexican organizations. What I was referring to in the 80
percent is what is actually manufactured here.
Mr. Souder. Certainly, at San Ysidro, where you can see all
the pharmacies right by the border on both sides, it is
probably not just aspirin?
Mr. Keefe. Mexican trafficking organizations for years and
years have smuggled everything they can into this country,
drugs obviously very predominant in that.
Mr. Souder. Mr. Gilman, we have 5 minutes left.
Mr. Gilman. Yes, a couple of quickies.
Mr. Souder. OK.
Mr. Gilman. Do you have enough personnel? I note that some
new personnel are going to be added for the meth attack. Do you
have enough personnel and funding in that office?
Mr. Keefe. Mr. Gilman, we always say we could use more
personnel and we're always working through our budget process
to request that.
Mr. Gilman. And you are making requests for additional
personnel?
Mr. Keefe. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gilman. The 2000 act provided funding for the
University of Iowa to continue research in rendering anhydrous
ammonia, one of the chemicals that is used in producing meth,
useless for meth production. Can you give us an update on that?
Mr. Keefe. I'm not positive, sir, where that is. Obviously,
the goal of that is because so much is stolen from farms for
very small labs primarily that it's needed, so that we can help
the farmers and the law enforcement people in those communities
that are inundated with those stuffs because it's so easy to
use to make methamphetamine. But I can get the answer, sir.
Mr. Gilman. If you do have any information, could you
provide it to this committee?
Mr. Keefe. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gilman. One more question: There's a news report out of
Oklahoma that meth test backlogs have been forcing judges to
dismiss a case saying that there is a tremendous backlog at the
State drug testing lab. Is that a problem nationwide?
Mr. Keefe. I'd have to get you that answer, sir. I do not
know the answer. I can get you that.
Mr. Gilman. Can someone provide us with that information?
Mr. Keefe. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gilman. And if there is such a backlog, what can we do
to try to help with that? Thank you.
Mr. Keefe. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gilman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Souder. Thank you. The subcommittee now stands in
recess.
[Recess.]
Mr. Ose [assuming Chair]. We will now resume the hearing.
Yes, Mr. Keefe?
Mr. Keefe. Tampa, FL has been a stronghold for a long time
for methamphetamine labs and distribution, both the labs,
formal labs, and the distribution coming across. We see it in
Atlanta, GA. We see it in North Carolina. I think we could
honestly say, sir, we see it in every State.
Mr. Ose. So the labs basically have, if you will, moved
from what might have been West Coast-centric focus and they
have started to branch out into other areas of the country?
Mr. Keefe. Sporadically, sir. Still the majority, the 80
percent, we still see in California.
Mr. Ose. Is there something unique about California other
than its geographic proximity to Mexico?
Mr. Keefe. Again, I think you have the command control is
very strong out there for these organizations. Geographically
is correct, but that doesn't mean that they won't move out to
other areas. As law enforcement steps up pressure more and
more, we often see the traffickers move to the paths of least
resistance.
I think the key for us for the laboratories, in looking at
these organizations, is we need to stay after the command
control groups to help us get to the laboratories and to the
distribution, sir.
Mr. Ose. All right. Generically, when you manufacture meth,
it's got a good stink to it, you need wide-open areas--a ``good
stink,'' that's a technical term.
Mr. Keefe. It is.
Mr. Ose. You need wide-open areas. You have to dispose of
the used chemicals. So you're largely in a rural area. I mean
you occasionally see it manufactured in somebody's garage in an
urban area----
Mr. Keefe. Yes, sir.
Mr. Ose [continuing]. Which just boggles my mind how
somebody doesn't notice.
Mr. Keefe. Right. They must have a cold like me, sir.
Mr. Ose. Allergies. I'm allergic to gridlock. [Laughter.]
From the professional side, what do you see the trend being
in these labs? Do you suspect that it is going to stay focused
in California from the manufacturing standpoint or do you see
it moving into other parts of the country?
Mr. Keefe. I would be concerned as anything that it would
move, sir. It's always potential to move it to those areas you
mention, the parts of the country, rural areas where they can
set up the larger labs, because of the smell, because of less
law enforcement presence. Those issues could force it, yes,
sir, and we're always looking for that, sir.
Mr. Ose. We are talking about the manufactured side. I want
to go for a minute to the end-user side. Do you have any
information about what the demographics are of people who are
susceptible to use of methamphetamine or the demographics of
who is using methamphetamines? Is it in affluent areas? Is it
urban areas? Is it rural areas? Is it the slaughterhouse work
force? What are the demographics of this?
Mr. Keefe. It's often--and I don't know totally all the
demographics--it's often been referred to as the poor man's
stimulant, but I don't think we can just say that anymore. I
think there's so much available out there that people that want
to have the opportunity to smoke it, or whatever, to try it,
it's there available for all across the board, all the
demographics.
Mr. Ose. Now the stuff that I have read has indicated to me
that this is largely embedded at present in, frankly, the White
population. It has not traveled or evolved into Hispanic or
Black populations to the degree that it exists in White, even
though that is changing. Is that accelerating?
Mr. Keefe. I don't have figures on that, sir, but I would
only say the potential is definitely there for that to happen,
yes, sir.
Mr. Ose. OK. So it really knows no bounds? It knows no
bounds?
Mr. Keefe. Absolutely not, no.
Mr. Ose. I mean we find it in urban New York; we find it in
rural Nebraska; we find it in rich areas, poor areas?
Mr. Keefe. That's correct, sir.
Mr. Ose. What about age groups?
Mr. Keefe. Younger individuals, but I would think the
people that have been using it for longer, you'll see them into
the thirties, if they last, physically last.
Mr. Ose. It does beg a question. If someone is walking down
the street, what are the characteristics of someone who is
using methamphetamine?
Mr. Keefe. That's totally high at the time?
Mr. Ose. A repetitive user, either high at the time or----
Mr. Keefe. Kind of high-strung, probably very thin, looks
very worn, very antsy.
Mr. Ose. How about their teeth? Are their teeth black? Gums
are black?
Mr. Keefe. Probably. Well, their health would come from
lack of food, lack of sleep, taking care of themselves. Yes, a
habitual user would show all those traits, sir.
Mr. Ose. Congressman Baird talked about patients of his who
the strength of the drug basically overwhelmed their parental
instincts. Is that consistent with what professionals in your
area of the field are experiencing?
Mr. Keefe. I would say, from my experience, it's true.
Mr. Ose. What kind of ramifications exist for, say, child
protective service agencies and the like?
Mr. Keefe. It's going to be very difficult for them, very
difficult.
Mr. Ose. The recent increase, 1996, 1998, and 2000, in
criminal penalties for methamphetamine production, possession,
and sale, have those been helpful with respect to
responsibilities you possess regarding production and sale of
methamphetamines?
Mr. Keefe. Certainly increase is always helpful, sir, no
question. To what degree, obviously, because of what we still
see, it hasn't deterred a number of these organizations from
taking that risk because of the financial gain that they have.
Mr. Ose. Are there any changes in any of those statutes
that you would recommend?
Mr. Keefe. I'd probably have to look into that and respond
to you, sir.
Mr. Ose. If you could get back to us on that----
Mr. Keefe. Yes, sir.
Mr. Ose [continuing]. That would be helpful.
One of the issues that exists--and my district's largely
rural; Congressman Baird's is largely rural; Congressman
Cummings' is a very urban setting; Mr. Souder has a mix. Many
of the counties or the local government entities in my area
spend upwards of 60 or 70 percent of their law enforcement or
justice budgets on drug trafficking, drug treatment, drug
cases, drug prosecutions, and the like. Do you have any
information as to the degree to which methamphetamine as a
percent is reflected in those wholes?
Mr. Keefe. No, I don't, sir.
Mr. Ose. You don't? All right.
Congressman Latham and I have sponsored legislation in the
106th Congress regarding the precursor chemicals to
methamphetamine. How do we figure out how to control those so
that they don't basically get moved into illicit production of
drugs? These regulations or these constraints, do you have any
feedback about how effective they have been?
Mr. Keefe. Not that I could answer to you right now, sir. I
could get you that answer.
Mr. Ose. Do you have any suggestions as to how we might
improve control of these precursor chemicals?
Mr. Keefe. I think through outreach programs with the
chemical companies here in the United States, keep discussing
with them, explaining to them to look for people, companies and
what-not, that aren't normally purchasers, or large quantities;
ask some questions. Wonder where your product--ask where it's
going downstream and not be afraid to let law enforcement know
when they see suspicious things. Don't just turn your eye or
head away just because of the money that's involved. Help us
out.
Mr. Ose. Is the DEA doing anything to establish a
clearinghouse or an ability to track the precursor chemicals
from manufacturer to end-user?
Mr. Keefe. No, sir.
Mr. Ose. You do not have that ability?
Mr. Keefe. No, sir.
Mr. Ose. OK. Has the industry been cooperative, in your
opinion?
Mr. Keefe. I think it's improving, sir. I think we still
need to keep working toward it.
Mr. Ose. Is there anything Congress can do to facilitate
that relationship?
Mr. Keefe. Again, I would look into that, if I can get back
to you on that sir.
Mr. Ose. All right.
You talked about the staffing levels earlier with Mr.
Gilman. I think he asked a question to that. The 2000
Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act authorized $15 million
in additional funding for the HIDTA program specifically to
deal with methamphetamine and amphetamines. Can you give us
some sense as to how that money is being used to address the
problem?
Mr. Keefe. No, I can't, sir.
Mr. Ose. Perhaps we could followup with a written question
on that.
In the 2000 act there were also some research and
educational programs that were authorized as they relate to
combating methamphetamine use. Can you give us any update on
the status of those programs?
Mr. Keefe. No, I cannot, sir.
Mr. Ose. All right, we will put that question in writing
also.
Mr. Keefe. Yes, sir.
Mr. Ose. I don't have any other questions.
Mr. Keefe, we are going to go to the next panel. I want to
thank you for appearing before our committee. We will be
directing some written questions to you. I would appreciate
response from DEA accordingly to help us do our job here. We
are grateful for the work you do.
I just want to tell you, I didn't beg to be on
Appropriations; I didn't beg to be on Ways and Means; I begged
to be on this committee for a specific reason, and I don't
intend to let go. So I appreciate your help.
Mr. Keefe. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Ose. If there is anything I can help you with, you let
me know.
Mr. Keefe. Thank you very much, sir.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.086
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.087
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.091
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.092
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.093
Mr. Ose. All right. We'll have the next panel, please. We
need to have Mr. Ron Brooks, Mr. Doug Dukes, Chief Henry
Serrano, and Sheriff John McCroskey.
I am sorry, we have Deputy Sheriff Doug Harp here, too.
All right, noting the absence of those two individuals, we
are going to go ahead and swear in the three of you, and then
when the others get here, we'll repeat the swearing in for
them, so we can proceed with the testimony. So if the three of
you would rise?
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Ose. Let the record show that the witnesses answered in
the affirmative.
We are going to go alphabetically today. We are going to go
for 5 minutes. If somebody else comes in, we will let them have
the chair and proceed. Otherwise, we will recess again, so I
can go vote.
Our first witness today is Mr. Ron Brooks. So, Mr. Brooks,
for your opening statement you have 5 minutes.
STATEMENTS OF RON BROOKS, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL NARCOTIC OFFICERS
ASSOCIATIONS COALITION; DOUGLAS K. DUKES, SHERIFF, NOBLE
COUNTY, IN; DOUG A. HARP, DEPUTY SHERIFF, NOBLE COUNTY, IN;
HENRY M. SERRANO, CHIEF OF POLICE, CITY OF CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA;
AND JOHN MCCROSKEY, SHERIFF, LEWIS COUNTY, WA
Mr. Brooks. Mr. Ose, Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of
the subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before
you to discuss the explosion of meth production in what I
believe is the most dangerous drug epidemic to threaten our
Nation. I'm appearing as the chairman of the National Narcotic
Officers Associations Coalition, which represents 50,000
narcotic officers from 36 State associations. I'm an active
narcotic officer with more than 26 years of service in
California. I currently serve as the Special Agent-in-Charge
for the California Department of Justice Bureau of Narcotic
Enforcement's San Jose Regional Office. During my career, I
have seen firsthand the damage and destruction caused by
illicit drug use, and while heroin and cocaine have
traditionally been considered our most dangerous illegal drugs,
they pale in comparison to the destructive potential of
methamphetamine. Also, unlike those drugs, meth is domestically
produced in clandestine labs and is truly America's home-grown
drug epidemic.
Meth labs have a profound impact on the quality of life in
the communities in which they operate. In addition to the
devastating effects on users, the most disturbing meth-related
statistic is that California police officers found 795 children
inside toxic meth labs in 1999. Another danger is meth's impact
on the environment. Five to seven pounds of highly toxic
chemical wastes are dumped, are produced for every pound of
finished methamphetamine, and that waste is dumped throughout
the State in our farmlands, rivers, streams, and cities.
It's important to realize that when a law enforcement
officer sees a clandestine meth lab, they are interdicting the
drug at its original source. Because of this, we have a real
opportunity to dramatically reduce its availability, but we
will not succeed if sufficient resources are not allocated to
attack the large-scale meth-producing organizations operating
in California and flooding our Nation with meth.
Mexican national crime cartels that now control the meth
trade have command-and-control structures in Mexico, but
maintain manufacturing and distribution hubs in California. By
operating in the United States, these cartels are able to
produce and distribute meth without having to risk smuggling
drugs across our heavily guarded borders.
While fewer than 300 meth labs were seized in the United
States in 1992, that number rose to 921 by 1995, with more than
half of those seized found in California. By the year 2000,
8,923 lab incidents were reported by law enforcement to DEA's
El Paso Intelligence Center, with 2,239 of those incidents
occurring in California.
But lab seizures alone don't tell the whole story. Of
greater significance are the relatively small number of
superlabs operated in California by Mexican cartels which
generate the bulk of the meth consumed in the United States.
Last year California reported the seizure of 138 superlabs,
which are defined by DEA as yielding 10 pounds or more per
reaction. Through June of this year, 79 superlabs were reported
seized in California, and the number of very large production
labs, 100 to 300 pounds per reaction, has increased
dramatically.
These factory labs are why California continues to produce
85 percent of the Nation's meth. One superlab can produce as
much meth as 400 or more of the user labs described earlier.
The California Department of Justice developed a California
Methamphetamine Strategy [CALMS], in 1996 to counter the
growing meth problem. CALMS was funded from fiscal year 1998
through fiscal year 2000 at $18.2 million for the
methamphetamine hotspot section of the community-oriented
police and services cops' budget. The 84 additional agents
hired as a result of CALMS have resulted in a 90 percent
increase in California meth seizures from 1997 to 1999, along
with similar increases in lab seizures. We're very grateful to
Congressman Ose for leading the entire California delegation's
efforts to continue funding the CALMS program in fiscal year
2002.
But, to be very honest, Mr. Chairman, the meth hotspots
program is not adequate. One of the biggest problems State and
local law enforcement face in confronting the meth problem is
the cost of investigating and cleaning up lab sites. States'
budgets can absorb only so much of the extra expense. In this
case, Federal assistance is not only needed, but in the case of
the CALMS program has demonstrated dramatically effectiveness
in increasing lab seizures. I would urge the Congress to
consider expanded methods of providing financial assistance to
State and local law enforcement for meth enforcement, whether
through increased funding for hotspots or a separate
authorization that would meet the needs of all States.
As a national representative of narcotic officers, I would
hope that every meth-plagued State receives adequate Federal
meth enforcement assistance, but I think that it's clear that
California's meth problem disproportionately affects the entire
Nation. Meth is the one drug that we can truly choke off if
sufficient resources are dedicated to the eradication of
superlabs.
Chairman Souder, I want to thank you, as well as Mr. Ose
and the members of this subcommittee, for your leadership and
all that you do to address and pre-empt the effects of drug
abuse in our country. As a veteran narcotic officer, I consider
that methamphetamine is worse than any other drug that I've
seen, and as a father of two teenagers, I hope that the
Congress will do all it can to assist law enforcement in
confronting this problem.
I have provided the committee with an additional handout
which, if it would be appropriate, I would like to have entered
in the record. I would be happy to take any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Brooks follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.094
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.095
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.096
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.097
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.098
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.099
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.100
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.101
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.102
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.103
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.104
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.106
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.107
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.108
Mr. Souder [resuming Chair]. Thank you. I am going to turn
to my colleague, Congressman Baird, to introduce the next
witness.
Mr. Baird. I thank the Chair. It really is a privilege for
me to introduce Sheriff John McCroskey. Sheriff McCroskey
represents Lewis County, which is a rural Washington State
county, lots of timber country and a county that's been hard-
hit actually economically by some of the timber cutbacks. But,
in spite of that lack of financial resources, they have faced
really a plague and an epidemic level increase in meth labs.
In the nine counties in my own congressional district,
there has been a 474 percent increase in meth lab seizures
between 1997 and 2000. There were 46 labs seized in 1997, but
218 in the year 2000, and just the first 4 months of this year
alone there were 120 labs seized. At this rate, there will be a
further 66 percent increase in this year.
Sheriff McCroskey, as I mentioned, has really been one of
the leaders in Washington State on this issue. He and his staff
have done just remarkable work cracking down on the labs,
trying to stem the tide of this. They are in a county that has
one of the highest per capita admissions for treatment in our
State, and it's a real privilege to have Sheriff John McCroskey
with us to talk about the challenges facing rural officers.
Sheriff McCroskey, please proceed.
Sheriff McCroskey. Thank you, Congressman Baird, Chairman
Souder, Ranking Member Cummings, and my own Congressman. I
appreciate the opportunity to be here today. I thank you all
for the opportunity. It's a privilege, and having said that, I
want to also warn you that I sometimes am candid. I know your
time is valuable and I will be direct.
Lewis County, for your information, is located one corner
at the base of Mt. St. Helens, one corner at the base of Mt.
Ranier. It's divided by Interstate 5, which runs all the way to
California, and for whatever reason, they have decided to
market their meth up in our way. That's why Washington is now
No. 2 in the country and Lewis County No. 1. As a matter of
fact, Lewis County seizes more labs in our little county, a
rural county of 70,000 people, than some States.
So what needs to be done? You're going to hear a lot--and
I've looked at my colleague Sheriff Dukes from Indiana's notes;
I'll try not to replicate things that have already been said.
Let me tell you, first, that our most successful strategy has
been the uniformed patrol officer. They're most likely to find
it. The most labs we seized in 1 day was three or four, and it
was done on a routine traffic stop. It happens all the time. My
street crimes unit, which right now has been absorbing the
patrol when they are in uniform in marked cars, working
neighborhood problems--we've already talked about the odor of
meth--and working those kinds of cases, something called
``knock and talk.'' They're very effective. They've made a
number of--they make more lab seizures and find more labs than
our drug task force, which is partially federally funded. The
reason that occurs, sir, is because of the rules that are
placed upon our drug task forces. They don't have the
flexibility, at least in their minds, to do some of the minor
offenses, the small users, the little things that lead to these
labs. Consequently, that is a problem for us.
We find kids in labs as well. If a parent put a firearm up
to the head of a juvenile with one bullet and played Russian
roulette, everybody would look at that with horror and they
would have a complete fit, and there would be punishments that
would fit this. We find children, babies crawling in labs all
the time. It's not treated the same way. We find meth oil,
which is similar to apple juice, sitting next to an apple juice
bottle available to a child, and that is looked at differently.
Yet, can you just imagine what would happen?
Our schools, talk to teachers; it's inundated. I talked to
a treatment provider for juveniles before I came--she's part of
my committee from the Meth Summit--in August. Most of her
business is methamphetamine-related.
What can you do? Control ephedrine and pseudoephedrine,
period. They're not rocket scientists. They can't make it
unless they have that stuff. Precursor laws in the old days
with the old labs changed the entire process. It had an effect.
This would, too.
There needs to be severe penalties. In Washington State we
have ``three strikes, you're out.'' We have not yet been able
to convince the Governor that manufacture of meth should be a
strike because, as I said, it affects every aspect and every
facet of our communities, our schools, our public and social
services, our law enforcement, our fire. It's affecting our
communities, and it's burying us.
My 44 sworn, or thereabouts, when I am fully staffed, I
could devote them all to fighting meth, doing meth, and they
would do nothing else. That's how bad it is getting in rural
Washington, 70,000 people, mostly Federal property.
Expand and fund the drug task forces. We are currently and
constantly under attack. It seems like we're pitted against
treatment, prevention, and enforcement. We seem to be fighting
for the same dollars. It's not fair. I will tell you that we
need to find a way to better blend those things together and
not fight about the money, but make sure we have what we need.
This may come as a shock to you, but drug treatment for
meth is a dismal failure. It is a dismal failure. So dumping
tons of money in there may not be the way to go. Should we do
it? You bet, but prevention/enforcement seem to be a better
tool.
I know when I arrest a meth manufacturer, someone dumping
chemicals, poisoning our children, and they're in jail, I know
they're not manufacturing meth. If I knew they were there for a
long time--it took us about 20 years to get this last fellow.
He's gone for 30 years, but it took a long time and a lot of
arrests for manufacturing meth to get him there.
Crime is a direct result. There is violent crime, abuse,
domestic violence, all of that stuff, and those people are out
driving cars, folks, on the highways with your families and
mine. They're out there, and they're much more difficult to
deal with.
Somebody asked about, what do they look like? If you spot
one, ever see one once, you'll know after that. They look
pretty wild.
Where we can really help us is with lab response teams,
support our State patrol, our State lab. We can't afford to
have a lab team. It's too expensive. But we have them in place.
Our drug task forces, some of them have them in place. We're
trying to get some more of our people trained by the DEA. Their
training is very helpful. So we have a minimal response, but
it's not enough.
Speaking of the DEA, please, when you send help to rural
counties, if you send 10 DEA agents to Lewis County, it's like
a scab on the front of your nose; everyone in the county knows
they are there. They're not able to use our informants. They're
not able to blend. We need to find a way to better blend that,
and that's policy. It's not the officers; it's the
policymakers. We've got to blend them better, and that can be
done.
Standing at the counter of my jail 1 day--what does meth do
to teeth--a man standing right there talking to me, his tooth
fell out on the counter. It rots them. The chemicals rot them
from inside out.
When they go into the jail, they are taken off any--they've
been deemed by somebody to be disabled and qualifying for
benefits until they come into a county jail, and then the
locals have to pay those medical, dental, and mental health.
Speaking of mental health, we've had a 1,300 percent increase
in our jail for mental health referrals since 1988, I think,
and it's a direct result of substance abuse, in the last 4 or 5
years, methamphetamine.
I know a lot of talk has been about asset forfeitures which
has occurred up here on the Hill. Please remember why it was
put in place in the first place, and meth is not an asset
forfeiture target-rich environment. The DEA may have a lot of
big Mexican and well-organized; ours are primarily mom-and-pop
stores, mom-and-pop little outfits. They're disorganized. If
anything, they do communicate by teaching each other how to
manufacture meth, and that's about it. In fact, the fellow who
went away for 30 years was our leading instructor in the
manufacture of meth for others, and we couldn't get rid of this
scourge.
Asset forfeiture, there are problems with it. There are
abuses of it, but, please, when you hear about these horror
stories, use a surgeon's knife as opposed to a meat cleaver
approach. If you think about the fact that most of the time the
problems that you hear are horror stories--and they're real;
they are real and they are serious, but maybe we can deal with
ones that are wrong as opposed to every one of us and putting
us all in the same bucket.
When I left, my under-sheriff was trying to respond to a
Federal organization--and this is a continuing problem--
required by them over the Internet on line and, as normally
happens, it's not working. We've got to find a way--I'm a
policymaker; you all are policymakers; the leadership of DEA is
policymakers, the FBI. We have to find ways to better mate up
so that we get the best bang for the buck.
I want to thank you all for the time to be here. I
appreciate the opportunity to address you. As my colleague
said, I would be happy to answer questions as well.
[The prepared statement of Sheriff McCroskey follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.109
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.110
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.111
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.112
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.113
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.114
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.115
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.116
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.117
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.118
Mr. Souder. Thank you. You certainly scared me from driving
I-5. [Laughter.]
We're going to wait to introduce Chief Serrano until--oh,
Congressman Ose is back. OK, I will let you do that. I didn't
see you sneak in there.
Mr. Ose. I tell you, Chief, I don't know about these guys.
Mr. Souder. That's why you're in such good athletic shape,
from all these runs back and forth here. [Laughter.]
Mr. Ose. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure today to introduce
Chief Henry Serrano. Chief Serrano comes to us today
representing the law enforcement department of the city of
Citrus Heights, which I was involved in founding, and we
successfully accomplished that after 14 years in 1996, November
5, 1996, if I recall correctly.
Chief Serrano runs a department of about 60 officers as a
part of a larger sheriff's organization for the county. He is
under contract to the city. Henry is the second chief of police
to serve in the city of Citrus Heights. He's basically on loan
to us from the sheriff. He has done an outstanding job and has
had significant experience in the innovative ways in which
local government in an urban setting can use its resources to
combat not only methamphetamine, but drug use, drug abuse in
particular. I am pleased that he is able to join us today and
has taken time out accordingly. Mr. Chairman, thank you for
allowing him to testify.
Chief Serrano. Mr. Chairman and members of the
subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to be here with you
this morning to provide you with testimony regarding how
methamphetamine is impacting our community. I'm also deeply
appreciative to our Congressman, Doug Ose, for all that he does
and for making my appearance here this morning possible.
Across America drug abuse is the common denominator in much
of the overall crime problem. Drug abuse drains precious public
resources and causes irreparable damage to members of our
communities. As with many communities, my city of Citrus
Heights, located in Sacramento County, CA, has its share of
drug abuse problems. Methamphetamine is the primary drug of
abuse in the city of Citrus Heights and that region.
I am here today to share with you, with this committee, my
concerns about the rapidly spreading use of methamphetamine.
Because of the location of Citrus Heights and our proactive
approach to deal with this problem, I may be uniquely qualified
to comment on the methamphetamine epidemic.
Studies have shown that Sacramento County had the highest
incidence of methamphetamine use amongst male arrestees in the
United States and was third in female arrestees. Nearly 70
percent of the people arrested in Sacramento County test
positive for at least one illegal drug at the time of arrest.
Furthermore, a study of students at our city's high schools
indicates that over half of the high school students report
having used illicit drugs.
Studies show that methamphetamine is spreading from the
West Coast across the United States. Based on current trends,
methamphetamine will become a major problem for U.S. cities
coast to coast. Public and private health care services are
adversely impacted by drug abuse. Sacramento County has a
higher rate of methamphetamine-related hospital emergency room
admissions than any other county in the State of California.
Children are often victims of drug abusive parents or care
providers. Child Protective Services in California report that,
when it intervenes to protect a child from a drug abusive
family, methamphetamine is invariably a root cause. One in
every 10 babies born in Sacramento County test positive for
drugs or alcohol.
Violent and unpredictable behaviors of persons high on
drugs pose a safety risk for both the public and law
enforcement across America. In 1999, a subject who was under
the influence of methamphetamine attacked two Citrus Heights
police officers. During the incident he was shot. In 2000, a
violent, highly publicized hostage situation occurred in Citrus
Heights. A subject who was under the influence of
methamphetamine held an 84-year-old man hostage and threatened
to stab him in the throat. The subject was shot and killed by
an officer.
With the formation of the Congressional Caucus to fight and
control methamphetamine, a bipartisan group of 68 Members of
Congress, including some of yourselves, has nationally
acknowledged the gravity of this epidemic.
What can be done to change this scenario? The Citrus
Heights Police Department has developed an innovative and
proactive drug abuse reduction model combining prevention,
education, enforcement, and training. Through a reality-based
education of students and members of the community,
collaboration with stakeholders, and early intervention through
highly specialized law enforcement training and enforcement,
the Citrus Heights Police Department has taken a first critical
step toward a healthy and more productive community.
The police department would like to implement and expand a
drug reduction/prevention program that will serve as a model
for other law enforcement agencies across the United States.
Our goals are to employ drug recognition experts [DREs], to
intervene and act as resources to other officers enforcing
drug-related laws and DUI laws.
In the United States only about 1 percent of officers have
this DRE training. In my agency approximately 20 to 25 percent
of the officers are DRE-trained, and my goal is to have 50
percent trained and certified as experts.
We work collaboratively with the University of California,
Davis, Department of Psychiatry, working to create a reality-
based, innovative and progressive drug education program for
students and other key stakeholders in the community. We
provide drug abuse education materials and support service
references to drug-addicted arrestees and their family members
and friends. We also identify unsafe environments for children
where drugs are prevalent and work with Child Protective
Services to place children in safe living situations. We seek
to provide support services to elderly persons or
developmentally disabled people who are neglected by drug
abusive relatives or caregivers. Our agency works to obtain and
analyze data regarding youth exposure to drugs and
effectiveness of drug education, prevention, and media
campaigns to develop more effective age-appropriate education
materials. We are in the process of developing and implementing
a survey for students and citizens regarding the availability
of drugs and patterns of abuse to assist in the development of
effective strategies for drug prevention. We will analyze and
incorporate data from surveys to develop a profile of the
methamphetamine users: habits, patterns of use and purchase,
and other psychological traits to aid in the enforcement
efforts and education of other law enforcement officers, and,
finally, to design and implement a program evaluation survey to
evaluate outcomes of the school education component, including
the effectiveness of the course over a 3-year period in
preventions of patterns of drug abuse.
I truly believe that drug abuse is, first, a community
problem, and therefore, first, must be addressed at the
community level. A broad-based program, such as the one I have
just described, is necessary for every community plagued by
drugs. It is only when every community can do its part to
reduce demand for illegal drugs that significant headway can be
made into what is really becoming a national problem.
My department is doing what it can, but we need to do more.
We will always strive to be in a leadership role to reduce drug
abuse and improve the quality of life in Citrus Heights and,
hopefully, the Nation.
Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, thank you very much for the
opportunity to be with you this morning. I would like to have
the additional documents I have provided entered into the
record. I hope my testimony has been effective in highlighting
the problems, and I look forward to working with you toward a
solution. I would be pleased to take whatever questions the
subcommittee may have.
[The prepared statement of Chief Serrano follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.119
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.120
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.121
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.122
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.123
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.124
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.125
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.126
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.127
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.128
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.129
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.130
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.131
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.132
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.133
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.134
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.135
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.136
Mr. Souder. Thank you very much. Sheriff Dukes and Deputy
Sheriff Harp, will you stand? We need to swear you in.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Souder. Let the record show that the witnesses have
answered in the affirmative.
It's my privilege today to introduce Sheriff Dukes as well
as Deputy Sheriff Harp to the committee. We have worked
together for many years on the drug problem. He was one of the
sheriffs in my district that early on recognized we had a drug
problem, and along with Judge Cramer, other leaders in the
county, have put a national award prevention program in place.
They have one of the first grants and efforts in the community
coalition, in addition to the youth prevention, the one where
they're consulting and working with businesses as to how to
identify drug problems and get people into the prevention
programs.
It's been a full-force pressure, and working particularly
with Sheriff Snyder over in Elkhart County, where you have a
lot of common problems moving back and forth. Because of the
nature of the communities on the western side of Noble County
and the eastern side of Elkhart County, we have seen much more
aggressive law enforcement and kind of an early warning system
in northeast Indiana as far as the drug problem. It's a great
privilege to have you today and we look forward to your
testimony.
Sheriff Dukes. Thank you. It is an honor to speak to you.
It is an honor for me to be here today, and we thank all of you
for inviting us.
We're from a rural community, 43,000 people, 10 percent
Hispanics, legal Hispanics. We have a large number of illegal
Hispanics living in our community.
My department is 18 persons. I have one drug officer and
one field detective. It wasn't until 1996 that we made our
first methamphetamine arrest. Since then, we've been
overwhelmed. Our department has collected just in the past year
approximately 150 ounces of meth. That's a half million dollars
worth of street value--in little, lone Noble County.
We have some stories to tell you. We keep a jail of 230
beds. It used to be 36 beds. We have an average population of
approximately 200 in jail. I could stay here today and tell you
story after story after story of the bizarre incidences with
just methamphetamine. I'll summarize, if I can. I know I'm
limited on time.
A woman, 27 years old, mother of three, found face down in
a coma, clinically dead, now has gained 100 pounds, babbles
when she talks and has a tube running out of her brain. Bad
methamphetamine--because you can't tell the difference. This
was made from Decon, baking soda, and battery acid; looked like
methamphetamine. These are the kind of things our youth have
trouble with.
An ex-athlete, 19-year-old girl, running naked down
railroad tracks. It was so difficult to--she weighed 95 pounds.
She was so difficult for us to handle that we shipped her to
the Department of Corrections for safekeeping. They called us
and told us to pick her back up. We couldn't control her; they
couldn't control her. Methamphetamine.
A subject that was arrested for disorderly conduct broke
the lock on our holding cell, a little guy, very meek the next
day, apologetic. It took seven confinement officers to hold him
down and subdue him, high on meth.
An inmate, tackled because he was trying to do a swan dive
from the top bunk, high on meth.
Twenty juveniles arrested in a burglary ring, the sole
purpose for the thefts, the burglaries: methamphetamine, to
purchase methamphetamine.
A subject, really bizarre, high on methamphetamine, that we
were following, playing with a chainsaw in his front yard,
trying to have fun with his buddy as he was gunning the
chainsaw. Finally arrested that day, came in, took his clothes
off, which is frequent, masturbated on the floor and actually
had sexual intercourse with the floor drain--solely high on
methamphetamine.
A senior high school dropout in rural--one of our three
little schools, making $4,000 a week. He dropped out of school.
He said, ``I could have made more, but I couldn't hardly spend
the $4,000 they were giving me.'' Flying to Phoenix, AZ and
getting right back on the plane and coming back, never got
caught until he got caught in Tulsa coming back by an
interdiction team. He had a body suit. All he was doing is
going around and filling the body suit full of methamphetamine
and coming back. He stated they had 400 clients, as he called
them, mostly high school kids from our community.
These are just a few examples of bizarre behavior. I could
talk all day long. Meth is the drug of choice in Noble County.
There are some statistics and some things I'd like to tell
you real quickly. The National Drug Intelligence Center stated
that the State police laboratories, meth laboratories, have
doubled every year except for 1999, when they tripled.
In our local paper, in Tuesday's edition, it said that an
Indiana State police officer shut down 128 labs in 1999, 315 in
2000. We're right around 500 right now. It is overwhelming.
A quick note from the Internet: You want to know where to
make methamphetamine. That's what the kids do; they hit the
Internet, 200-and-some recipes on the Internet, but one of them
I found real interesting, a Partnership for Free Drug America,
where it states that, ``It has been brought to my attention
that many people in this country cannot easily get the drugs
they crave,'' and it goes on to talk about methamphetamine.
``Methamphetamine is one of the most fun drugs around. It makes
you smarter and increases physical performance. Meth lets you
work around the clock, so you can be a more productive
worker.'' This is the stuff our kids get a hold of.
I want to thank you. I could tell you stories all day long.
It is a major problem. And, Mr. Gilman, we have two DEA agents
in our 11 counties. We could have two working full time in our
county or twenty working full time in our county. There are not
enough DEA agents. There are not enough undercover drug agents
in our area.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Sheriff Dukes follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.137
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.138
Mr. Souder. Sheriff Harp.
Sheriff Harp. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to
share with you our thoughts and concerns about the
methamphetamine epidemic in our community.
In 1995, I was privileged to be asked by Sheriff Dukes to
begin work as the first undercover narcotics officer in the
history of our small department. Having worked for several
years as a street cop, I felt I had a pretty good understanding
of the drug traffic and use in our county. I felt, like most
people, that the big drug dealers were in Detroit, Chicago, and
Ft. Wayne, and that most of our local dealers picked up their
dope from them and sold it then in our county. In addition, I
knew that we had LSD, marijuana, and cocaine in our community.
Methamphetamine, I thought, was primarily for the truckers and
the bikers. What I found out over the course of the next 2\1/2\
years was I didn't have a clue about the scope of the drug
problem in Noble County, IN.
My first exposure to meth was in 1996 when a deputy stopped
a Yugo on a traffic violation. The Yugo had an overwhelming
odor coming from the vehicle. The car had a plastic gas tank in
the back that had a hose attached to it that was vented out the
rear of the vehicle. The tank was frosted over and bulging at
the seams. The deputy knew that something was amiss, but he
really didn't know how to proceed. So he did what he had been
trained to do, and he had the vehicle impounded and brought to
the lot of the sheriff's department.
Imagine, if you will, how stupid we felt when the lab team
from Indianapolis got there in full gear and breathing
apparatus, as we're standing there in our civilian clothes and
uniforms and watching them approach this car. Fortunately for
us, it was a learning experience that we lived through, and it
could have ended very tragically for all the officers involved.
As we processed the car, I was amazed at what we found. There
was Coleman fuel, lithium batteries, brake fluid, Red Devil
lye--all the things they were using to manufacture
methamphetamine.
During my tenure working narcotics, approximately 80
percent of the drug cases that I investigated involved the sale
and manufacture of methamphetamine. Clan labs started appearing
throughout northern Indiana, not the major labs that are common
in the Southwest, but primarily mom-and-pop labs.
Over the course of the next several months we arrested one
Noble County resident in Noble County with 5 pounds of meth,
learning later that we had missed another 14 pounds. Another
resident was interdicted in Kansas with over 20 pounds of meth
which he had purchased in California and was bringing back to
Indiana. On both these things, what I found interesting was,
when you consider the average price of meth, it's $1,600 a
pound, and it wasn't going to Ft. Wayne, Detroit, Chicago. It
was coming directly to Noble County, IN.
In another instance a female resident was arrested after
receiving FedEx packages containing methamphetamine from
California. Subsequently, she was convicted, served her time,
was released, and we arrested her again not too long ago for
manufacturing meth in her apartment.
One of the things, as I was putting this together and
reviewing the information I had, is the surrounding theme with
methamphetamine is the violence, and our county is no exception
to this rule.
In 1997, we arrested a female for dealing meth and cocaine
from her home. A search warrant was conducted of her house, and
we discovered several semi-automatic assault rifles, a sawed-
off shotgun, and a bullet-proof vest.
In 1997, search warrants were conducted on two separate
locations in Noble County on a Hispanic dealer who reportedly
had ties to the Mexican mafia. The suspect was not located;
however, several guns were, including a 50-caliber Desert
Eagle. The suspect was later shot and killed in Mexico,
reportedly over a drug debt that he owed.
In 1999, while executing a search warrant on a suspected
meth dealer, the suspect attempted to shoot officers with a 9-
millimeter handgun. Officers returned fire and killed the
suspect. An autopsy conducted on the suspect revealed that he
had toxic levels of methamphetamine in his system.
In the year 2000, a search warrant was conducted in
neighboring LaGrange County and the suspect set his house on
fire and then shot at police officers who returned fire,
killing the suspect.
Recently, a search warrant was conducted on a clan lab in
our county and a deceased infant was found in a duffel bag. The
mother of the child, a 16-year-old juvenile, admitted that she
was a regular user of meth and was using meth during her
pregnancy. She stated that the child was stillborn and she had
carried the child in the duffel bag for several weeks.
Across the country violence has increased as a direct
result of meth usage, and I believe that it will continue to
escalate as meth becomes more and more popular.
Last night in Noble County, deputies arrested a person with
28 grams of meth. This would have been a major news story for
us, 5 or 6 years ago, and today I doubt that it makes the front
page.
In my lifetime I don't believe that rural America has ever
had to deal with anything as destructive and costly as meth. It
is destroying communities morally, spiritually, and
financially, and it is my belief that it has not yet peaked.
Usage will continue to grow and availability of the drug will
reach epic proportions.
We need your help in coming to terms with something that is
turning rural America into a toxic waste ground, destroying
lives, filling our jails, and using up all of our limited
resources.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Sheriff Harp follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.139
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.140
Mr. Souder. Thank you all for your testimony. It is a very
good mix and moving mix and challenging mix of testimony for
us.
Sheriff Dukes, there was one thing that you had said that
was extremely troubling to me. You said that the one person
that you had arrested said he had 400 clients. Do you have any
idea what percentage were students? Did he give you any clue?
Half? Because, to put it in context--what?--east Noble has
maybe 1,200 in the high school; central Noble, 250, and west
Noble, 600?
Sheriff Dukes. Right.
Mr. Souder. Something like that? So that would be an
extremely high percentage from just one dealer, unless he was
into the junior highs, too, but you're still in a pretty high
number of penetration.
Given the fact that we have been very aggressive in Noble
County, also, in prevention programs and treatment programs,
aggressive with this, could you elaborate a little bit more? Do
you think we're not catching in the other counties as much? You
alluded to the changes occurring in Noble County, and they are
dramatic. For those who aren't familiar, you use a 10 percent
Hispanic population, which is a jump probably close to five
times since the last census, and in Ligonier on the western
side of the county, I know when I go to the parade there, less
than 50 percent can speak English, of maybe 20,000 to 30,000
people at the parade. It is a dramatic changing community, most
of whom are in no way involved with any of these problems, but
it has led to extra challenges. Could you elaborate a little
bit? Because it would seem to be a county where we have model
prevention and treatment programs.
Sheriff Dukes. In that case right there, the person he was
in business with was from Goshen, and it included a lot of
Elkhart, Goshen, all the way to Kendallville, all the way to
East Noble kids. He, this kid, had a big, fancy car, the gold;
he had it all, and he attracted people. When I say he had 400
clients, that's exactly what he told us, around 400 clients,
and most of them high school kids. It always amazed me how, at
$100 a gram or $125 a gram--you know, I didn't have that kind
of money and still don't. My wife doesn't let me have that
much. Where do they get it, you know? But that is exactly what
was going on there, and he never got caught, flying on those
airplanes, using his own name. He just used different airports.
But it's all local.
Mr. Souder. Several of you made references to trying to
improve prevention programs as well as treatment programs.
Could you address--Sheriff McCroskey, I think you had some
fairly pointed comments about that. What would you suggest we
do to make them more effective?
Sheriff McCroskey. I wish I could tell you. I wish I had
any answer. I can really only speak to my little world. One of
the problems that I see, I've coached little league baseball
and soccer for many years and watched these kids grow up now,
and it hurts me terribly to tell you that some of those kids
have told me they'll be dead by the time they're 25 and they
don't see any reason not to use this. At best, I guess, can
call it a loss of hope.
Another phenomenon in our county, in our community, largely
because of changing timber policies, we no longer have the
mills and the jobs that were paying high dollars. Well-meaning
people have come and said, ``Well, let's put some training
dollars in here and make them computer programmers or other
things,'' but these are folks whose family name is on a road
someplace, who have hauled logs, cut trees, and have somehow
been maligned by others who don't live there and think we've
cut all the trees down or done something horrible. They have
lost hope. They are losing their houses, and they go to the
bars. Usually it starts with alcohol, and they drink and they
end up trying meth.
The message that gets lost somewhere is that meth--and I've
been around this a long time, and I didn't see heroin and stuff
in our county until just recently probably, but I started in
southern California and I saw a lot of it there. The difference
between then and now, in my opinion, is that started in the
mainstream stuff and scared people and they backed away from
it. Today it's going into the mainstream and, for whatever
reason, either because of its highly addictive nature, the loss
of hope, the failing families, the strain of just trying to eke
out a living in places that are depressed anyway, and it's
affordable, they're using it. Once they're addicted, it's too
late.
So how do you connect with kids and say, ``Look, it's not
marijuana. If you try it, it may be the last thing you do.
There's a good chance you're going to be addicted. It's not
something that you may walk away from in a little while''?
People that live in my jail for up to 3 years--I wish they
didn't, but they do, and they'll tell you when they leave, the
day they leave, that they'll go out and find meth just as soon
as they can. They're not in there for meth. They're in there
for driving violations or something, but they're going to go
find meth. They know it hurts them. They know it's bad. They
don't care, and I don't know how you connect with 10-year-olds
and keep them from starting.
Mr. Souder. Thank you.
Chief Serrano. Excuse me.
Mr. Souder. Sure.
Chief Serrano. If I could address on the question of
education, we've been fortunate. We've had some very, very
creative officers. Bob Johnson, one of my lead narcotics
officers, is very creative in his thought processes. One of the
things we did was we went into our freshman class at our high
schools and we spent a 4-hour period with these freshman. We
went over the pathology of it. We went over what it does to
your career opportunities. One of the most effective things, I
think, was we took several pictures, before and after pictures,
where you start off with a really vibrant, sharp-looking young
man or young woman, and by the time they're 30 they look like
they're 50.
The things that these other gentlemen have described are
absolutely true. Teeth are gone. Complexions are shot, deep
boils, scarred, just a mess.
With that, we then did a post-survey of the students and
asked them about four questions. One of them was, ``Has this
training changed your thought processes?'' Almost every one of
them said to some degree or another that it had changed their
thought processes. In fact, we had a couple that were really,
really sad where the kids were saying, ``You know, my parents
use meth and I know I need to now become involved with you guys
because I see what it's going to do to my family.''
So that is something that we have found effective. The
psychologists that we work with tell us that the freshman year
is as late as you can get in on that type of intervention. If
you wait until they're seniors, you've waited too long. But it
does seem to be at least one effective tool that we can use to
help educate our youth.
Mr. Souder. I want to add a brief comment before I go to
Congressman Gilman, and it actually happened at East Noble High
School. I was meeting with seniors, most of the senior class,
and raised the question because I believe in drug testing, and
immediately was jumped by a number of the class leaders as this
being a violation of civil liberties to propose such a thing.
One of the students then held up his hand and said, if he
hadn't been caught in a drug test, he said he was spiraling
downhill and that was the only thing that saved him, was a drug
test as part of an athletic team at East Noble. Then another
class leader jumped in and said, ``Yes, but it's a violation of
civil rights,'' blah, blah, blah. And a couple of other
students jumped in who said that they favored drug testing and
had used drugs.
The principal and the superintendent, who were in the room,
then instituted a drug-testing program because they said every
kid who had spoken up in favor of drug testing had either had a
problem or had been suspecting of a problem, and every student
who had spoken against drug testing had never been suspected of
a problem, which was it turned on its reverse. It was almost as
though they were begging for help.
Now the Indiana court has kicked out the drug testing. Ball
State in Indiana has done a survey showing that the schools, of
which a number are in my district, that have put in drug
testing, now since the drug testing has been pulled, we've seen
a dramatic rise again in the drug usage in Indiana schools in a
multiple way. Part of my frustration is that, in addition to
the education, having a check, it's both find opportunities so
they don't lose hope, but they also have some accountability,
and we need to look at creative ways to do that. The court
needs to be helpful rather than obstructionist.
Sheriff McCroskey. Mr. Souder, may I comment on that for
just a second?
Mr. Souder. Yes.
Sheriff McCroskey. One of the comments earlier was about
the odor. Many of the chemicals are common chemicals, acetones
and things like that. So that the odors are not necessarily
going to get you very far, depending on the environment that
you find them in. Of course, if you found them in the tank of a
car, that may very well be.
The other anomaly, speaking of your students, that I find
really disturbing is that it used to be that you could classify
kids. Go to a group and the group would be--in our area they
were called the stoners, the drinkers, and the athletes
essentially. That would be what they would call themselves. And
they didn't blend very well and you wouldn't find the athletes
involved in these other things. What we're finding today is
that our athletes, our best, our brightest are getting involved
in methamphetamine. Again, for the life of me, when you talk to
them and wonder why--you know, I want a little more information
from this man about the Citrus Heights thing. Some of that we
already do, but some of the experts tell me that scare tactics
don't work. On the other hand, part of my heart says that it
might. I don't know, but it is frightening.
Mr. Souder. Congressman Gilman?
Mr. Gilman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank
our panelists for being here today. You've described some
pretty poignant pictures of what we have out there in the
battlefield. Sheriff from Indiana, Doug Dukes, you mentioned
you have only two drug agents out there now, DEA agents?
Sheriff Dukes. Correct, they're in Ft. Wayne. They're in
the city of Ft. Wayne and they're overwhelmed.
Mr. Gilman. Sounds like we need a lot more help out there.
Sheriff Dukes. You sure do.
Mr. Gilman. And we'll make a recommendation to that effect.
Sheriff Dukes. Thank you.
Mr. Gilman. Have you seen--and I address this to all of the
panelists--have you seen a change in the demographics of the
problem in your area over the years? Has it spread? Is it more
concentrated around the cities? Can you tell us a little bit
about what you are finding? And I address that to all of the
panelists.
Sheriff Harp. Again, the thing that I noticed when I
started working narcotics was I had the perception that the
larger dealers were in the cities and that they weren't direct
pipelines into the small counties. One of the things that just
amazed me, was the fact that we've got major, major dealers set
up in rural county America. Our county is only 43,000. So that
part of it was really frightening to me.
It got to be in a sense kind of comical. When we leave the
office--I was based out of Ft. Wayne, attached to a task force,
but if we turned right, we went to the innercity and we bought
crack cocaine. If we turned left, we went to Noble County and
we bought crank, we bought meth.
Mr. Gilman. Where is most of the meth coming from in your
area?
Sheriff Harp. A lot of it is mom-and-pop operations now.
Five years ago, it probably wasn't to that extent, but today
there's a lot of mom-and-pop operations that are cooking up an
ounce to a pound, somewhere in there, because they're heavy
users as well as dealers. Then we've still got a pipeline, I
think, that comes from the Southwest and comes direct to the
county.
Mr. Gilman. So what portion of it is mom-and-pop
operations?
Sheriff Harp. That would be kind of hard for me to say. In
I think the majority of the cases that we've seen the last 2
years, it has probably been small operations that had been
cooking their own. That doesn't mean that the big operations
aren't there, because they still are.
Mr. Gilman. Other panelists want to comment on that? Yes,
Chief?
Chief Serrano. There is a change in the demographics that I
find kind of frightening, because I hadn't heard some of the
numbers here from folks in the central and eastern portion of
the country. Methamphetamine costs about a quarter of what it
does for the rest of these folks in California. It is extremely
cheap. That is one of the things that makes it the drug of
choice out there. You can get enough to stay high for a day for
about $20. It's not $120 a gram; it's about $20 a gram in
California.
Mr. Gilman. Any other comment by the panelists? Yes?
Sheriff McCroskey. Sir, I would just add that most of ours
also is mom-and-pop. However, we just did, and we've done two,
international cases in our county, and the last one was a huge
case. DEA came in and spent several months involved with our
task force on it, but that's relatively rare. I'm afraid that
may be a pattern that is coming.
Mr. Gilman. Mr. Brooks.
Mr. Brooks. Yes, I would say in California, which is the
State that is completely flooded by methamphetamine, it crosses
all boundaries. There is no demographical lines that would
delineate who might use meth or who might not. We're finding it
among professionals. We're finding it among the blue collar
community. We're finding it among all race and genders. But the
really scary thing that's been mentioned is in California it's
cheap. It's so cheap that it's become a very popular drug,
along with ecstacy, at rave parties and in nightclubs. More
frightening now, as a parent, we're seeing it into the junior
high school and even upper grade elementary school levels,
available for purchase at $5 and $10 for usable quantities.
Mr. Gilman. Mr. Brooks, is any of it coming in from
overseas, other countries?
Mr. Brooks. We have seen a recent phenomenon of
methamphetamine tablets coming from Southeast Asia into the
Oakland and LA airmail facilities, but that has not been that
common. As was testified to, California is probably producing
83 percent of the total amount of the methamphetamine sweeping
the Nation. Not to take away from the mom-and-pop user labs
that have been a problem in all States, the big superlabs or
factory labs in California is what drives the meth trade.
Mr. Gilman. One last question, Mr. Chairman. I know my time
is up. Have any of you received any significant help from the
Federal agencies?
Sheriff McCroskey. Sir, we have a drug task force that's
partially funded, but constantly the funding for it is under
attack. I guess there's other things that are needed. So we
struggle with that.
The other area, though, that we're desperately in need of
is in cleanup help and lab response help, and I would suggest
that you use established organizations that may be in
existence, if they're not. We have some rural counties that do
not have any of those things, but our Washington State Patrol
Lab Response Team runs itself completely ragged trying to keep
up, and we lose cases. There's labs that we don't even include
in the numbers because we lose them.
Mr. Gilman. Any other comments?
Mr. Brooks. If I could----
Mr. Gilman. Go ahead, Mr. Brooks.
Mr. Brooks. What we receive in the way of Federal help, we
have an excellent working relationship with DEA, but
California, the Department of Justice has run since 1996 our
California Meth Strategy Program. It's been funded out of the
Congress since 1998. That gave us 84 additional agents and 59
additional technical specialists to add to what was already a
very robust program that we ran. It makes up a small portion of
the $160 million that California law enforcement spends each
year on meth enforcement, but it gave us those extra personnel
so that we could concentrate on the big, large-production,
organized-crime families that are operating these meth labs, so
that we weren't just reactive like firefighters, but that we
could be proactive in long-term strategies to work on rogue
chemical companies and cross-state and interstate distribution
organizations producing in California but shipping hundreds and
thousands of pounds of methamphetamine across the Nation.
Mr. Gilman. Thank you. Any other comments? Yes, sir?
Chief Serrano. Yes. We've been very fortunate where we're
at in that Congressman Ose has been a tremendous support in
helping us with Federal assistance. We currently have a program
that I talked about today. We want to expand it to its full
fruition so that we can prove it out, so that we can get it
beyond the ad hoc enforcement, education, and community nexus
that we're currently doing. The program that I have referenced
cleared appropriations yesterday. So we're very hopeful that
we'll be able to see that become a reality and will be able to
further prove out the things that we have going here, but we're
very, very hopeful for that.
Mr. Gilman. Well, we commend Congressman Ose, who does a
great job at fighting this battle, wherever it may be.
And the other two gentlemen, sheriffs?
Sheriff Harp. One of the problems that we have, with the
task force I was assigned to, since I've left that, the numbers
have been cut in half, not by our department because we only
had one representative there, but the Allen County Sheriff's
Department, who was the primary sponsor of the task force,
through some reassignments and some shortages elsewhere, had to
pull half the task force and put them back into uniformed
positions. So that is really going to hurt us in our area
because we've lost the use of so many personnel that we're
earmarked just for narcotics.
Mr. Gilman. Sheriff Dukes.
Sheriff Dukes. Yes, sir. Our two DEA agents work well with
us. It's just that we don't see them too often because they are
so overwhelmed. However, when they came--we never had them
until about 3 years ago or 2 years ago--since they came, our
big cases now go to Federal court. It has made a difference.
Mr. Gilman. Well, it's good to hear that.
Mr. Chairman, with your consent, I'd like to submit my full
opening statement for the record.
Mr. Souder. Thank you.
Mr. Gilman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Souder. Mr. Ose.
Mr. Ose. Mr. Chairman, what is the time----
Mr. Souder. We have 10 minutes and 21 seconds left in the
vote on a motion to go to conference on the supplemental.
Mr. Ose. Are we going to have a second round?
Mr. Souder. Yes, because we're not going to be able to get
Congressman Baird in before, and I have some more questions,
too.
Mr. Ose. OK, thank you, Mr. Chairman. A couple of
questions, if I might.
Chief Serrano, I want to explore these drug recognition
experts, and I want to come back to the DEA agent numbers
because I share an issue with Sheriff Dukes and Deputy Sheriff
Harp here. On the drug recognition experts, if you could
elaborate a little bit more on what that program is? Why is it
important to the entire program, and then could you share with
us some of the experiences that law enforcement personnel who
come out of that program have had when they go back to their
home departments?
Chief Serrano. Yes, thank you, Congressman. The drug
recognition expert program is a 2-week training period, and
they go through everything from symptomology to what the drug
is, how it works. They receive this training at certain
training sites. They are very, very limited. Once they've had
the 2-weeks of course study, then they have to go out into the
field and prove that they've absorbed what they've learned.
Citrus Heights is a DRE test site, which means that we
bring officers in from all the northern California region to be
able to go out and make arrests and show that they truly
understand what they've learned.
What DRE does for the officer is officers who are well-
versed in this can be driving down the street, look in the car
next to them and tell by symptomology some good indications:
sweatiness, clammy, the tweaker movement, as you might refer to
it. They can identify these things.
To be certified, they have to get 12--they have to be able
to do the work on 12 individuals who are arrested for
methamphetamine. These sweeps that we do in our city that
usually involve between about 12 and 15 officers, the most
people we have arrested in about a 10-hour shift is 25, and
that's simply going out and looking for them.
What it does for an agency is it gives them the ability to
identify it. A classic example is there's a little community
just east of us called Rocklin, about 8 miles out of our
community in Placer County. One officer got DRE trained. The
following month he arrested 20 people in his community, and his
comment, because he's come back and helped on some of the
sweeps, was, ``These are the same people I've been stopping in
the 5-years I've been with the agency. I just didn't know what
to look for.'' And that's the real key to DRE: It gives you
something to look for. The officers are now trained. They know
what to look for. They know how to identify it and they can
take affirmative action based on that.
Mr. Ose. Mr. Chairman, the reason I asked that question is
I did a ride-along with a member of the department in Citrus
Heights, and it was uncanny to be just driving down the street,
and the deputy would just be kind of going like this, right
there, and would pull that car over, and, bam, he'd find
something related to the drug issue. It was uncanny.
So for the others who are here who might wish to access
this program or those who might read this testimony, I would
commend this program to them.
Chief Serrano. Congressman Ose, we've trained Mounties and
we'd be glad to invite anyone else who would like to come.
Mr. Ose. All right.
Sheriff McCroskey. Sir, just let me comment on that. It's
also in Washington. However, the biggest setback to a rural,
small agency such as myself is the 2-weeks' training and the
costs associated with that. We do send a person occasionally,
but----
Mr. Ose. What is the cost? Two weeks of salary and covering
the shifts and whatever the cost to house them.
Mr. Brooks, you talked in your testimony about 670-odd
children being CPS-eligible or necessarily turned over to CPS.
Can you just expand for us the connection that you're seeing
between methamphetamine use and its impact on families, the
disintegration that takes place in those families and the
impact on the kids from those families?
Mr. Brooks. Yes. Methamphetamine is an extremely
devastating drug in that, as described before, people that are
addicted to methamphetamine become so consumed that they're
unable to provide the care and love that they need for their
children. Additionally, it's a drug that is sexual drug and a
drug that causes aggression and violence. So in many studies
throughout California 80 to 85 percent of the child abuse cases
have been related to persons, caregivers or parents or others,
that were under the influence of meth.
One example is the fire in Riverside County, CA, when a
meth lab exploded in a mobile home and a mother raced to save
the meth chemicals and save her own life while letting her own
three children burn to death.
Another example was in Arizona when a New Mexico man under
the influence of methamphetamine driving down the street heard
voices that he related later he thought were from God that
caused him to cut the head of his small son off while his other
older son tried to stop him. The violence associated with meth
and the violence that I can relate to you may sound
sensationalized, but this is something that I see and deal with
every single day of my life.
More importantly, when we talk about these children and
these meth labs, more than 700 in 1999 eligible for treatment
by the child protective services and really that number is much
higher because there are some meth lab teams that have not been
trained to take care of those kids yet. These are kids who test
positive for meth, heavy metals and the other toxins that are
involved in meth labs.
Let me just relate a real quick story. I just did a meth
lab where I went out with the men and women that work for me
down in rural San Benito County, 2 hours south of San Jose. We
hit a meth lab, a large Mexican national factory lab, almost
300 pounds of finished product, five armed suspects running
that lab, and when we hit the lab in what was the largest
hydrochloric acid cloud that I have ever seen in all the labs
that I've hit, an extremely toxic environment, we found a woman
with her three children and she was pregnant, 8 months pregnant
with her fourth child. We had been on surveillance on that lab
for 3 days. We had never seen her come or go, which meant that
her and her children were in that lab, in that environment, an
environment of carcinogens, respiratory toxins, and contact
poisons, for the whole weekend that we watched the lab. That's
but one story of hundreds, maybe thousands, that occur across
the Nation.
Mr. Ose. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Souder. Thank you. The subcommittee now stands in
recess, and we'll come back to this panel when we get back.
[Recess.]
Mr. Souder. The subcommittee will come to order.
Mr. Baird.
Mr. Baird. Again, thank you, Mr. Chair, for holding this
hearing and for your leadership on this issue, and thanks to
the witnesses for their outstanding testimony, and not only for
your testimony, but for your service. You folks and your
officers go in every day to places that are terribly, terribly
dangerous.
I shared with the chairman on the way to the vote when I
use to do crisis mental health and our pagers would go off. In
these days most folks who were doing crank in those days were
largely biker-type folks. When your pager would go off and
they'd say, ``There's somebody here in the ER on meth,'' you
just would shake your head and say, ``Gosh, why did I get call
duty today?''
But I want to ask a couple of questions regarding the
exposure of your officers to the toxic chemicals. Oftentimes
you don't know there's a meth lab when you're going to bust a
place. What experiences have you had? One of our city
councilwoman's son is a police officer whose had some severe
health effects following a meth lab bust. I'd be interested in
your comments and your experiences. I'll open this to whomever
wants to offer it. John, do you want to start? Sheriff
McCroskey.
Sheriff McCroskey. Sure. Thank you, Congressman Baird. It's
funny you should ask that. We have officers exposed less
frequently now because they're a lot more cognizant of it, but
it wasn't uncommon to send one to the ER routinely after an
exposure. One of my deputies, a woman, which they do tell me
biologically are more vulnerable than men in some ways, stopped
a car, went to a house because a guy forgot his license, and
said, ``Hey, I'll take you up there and get the license for
you.'' And she followed him up there. They walked in the door,
and as they walked in the door he goes, ``Oh, gosh, I forgot
about my meth lab cooking here.'' So she was instantly
contaminated. It's routine--it's very common or most common in
domestics or in serving of warrants: routine, common police
practices, things we do all the time. So it's very common, and
a byproduct of that is increased insurance rates to local
agencies through the risk pool and others.
Mr. Brooks. In California we run a statewide clandestine
lab enforcement program out of our nine field divisions. We're
required to have cradle-to-grave reporting for all of those
agents in which we do baseline medical testing annually. So we
can track the accumulation of heavy metals and other chemicals
in their system and we report our exposures. Last year in
California 22 law enforcement officers went to the hospital
from injuries from exposure that occurred at labs, but many
hundreds of officers were exposed.
There's an interesting graphic in this book that I think
could be put up on the screen that kind of shows how toxic
these lab sites are. It's just amazing to me that we don't get
more and more officers hurt because--you may not be able to see
that too well, but it's in your packet. You can see the
thousands of gallons of toxic chemicals, and we're talking
about carcinogens, contact poisons, respiratory toxins.
At one point in the heating process in making
methamphetamine using the red phosphorous pseudoephedrine
method, if you overheat, it creates phosphine gas, a very
deadly gas that, when breathed just several times, can cause
pulmonary edema and almost instant death. All of our agents
have to carry toxiray phosphine gas detectors, and that's when
we know we're going into the meth lab. So the real hazard, of
course, is when officers working in uniformed patrol for local
police departments or sheriffs' offices may stumble into these
environments without the protective equipment that we normally
wear, without that training and that medical monitoring.
Chief Serrano. In my agency what we do is, if we get into a
lab environment, as soon as it's stabilized, we get out and we
bring in the task force. We are very fortunate; we're there in
California where there's a lot of emphasis way far down the
track. Being at the capital, we have all these resources
immediately available, and we just hold it down. We're more
concerned about protecting our officers at that point and
stabilizing the situation and immediately handling it.
There have been times where we have gone in and seen it and
it was so dramatic that we have had to evacuate portions of
neighborhoods in order to keep them safe.
Sheriff Dukes. The DEA training is excellent in what to do.
We do the same, stay back as soon as they find it. Very
sobering, the class is very sobering, as you see three
policemen and I believe a county coroner going into a house,
all eventually died of cancer. A body that was outside that was
so contaminated that when they turned it over, the officer got
contaminated. The DEA has an excellent training program. We, as
a department, have the State police identifying team come in
and show us what to be careful of every year.
Mr. Baird. We intend at some level within the
Methamphetamine Caucus here to try to initiate some studies,
possibly through CDC or NIH, to assess this. If you gentlemen
or your offices have data pertaining to exposures and
illnesses, we would much appreciate that, if you have the
opportunity. That may be helpful. Address it to my office,
attention Lizzie Ivry, who is on my staff. Lizzie's over here.
Sheriff McCroskey. Congressman Baird, along those lines,
I'd ask that you consider the fire departments at the same
time, especially volunteer fire districts who they're just
folks that help out, but the impacts can be significant to
their districts as well.
Mr. Baird. At some point, John, we intend to do precisely
that. Thank you. Again, thank you. My time's up. Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
Mr. Souder. We're going to go a second round. I had a
question. In Indiana and nationally we have had a case that is
going to impact the identification of marijuana growing and
being able to identify it from helicopters based on the heat
sensitivity and other visual imaging. Is that also going to
affect meth labs?
Sheriff Harp. Probably not to the extent that it will with
the marijuana grows. Unfortunately, we just got the thermal
imaging. We just sent the guy to training in Arizona and he
just got back with the unit, and then I think a week later is
when the court kind of nixed us on that.
The other thing that we've also stumbled into specifically
in Indiana with our interdiction program, where we do the rouse
and put signs up, and then we're on a side road and that's
actually the interdiction point. I know in Indiana they've
nixed the sobriety check points and they've also created
problems for us doing those kind of interdictions. So we've
come to a standstill until we get some kind of further opinion
from the prosecutor in our county anyway as far as what we can
do with the interdictions. So those are two things that's
really hurt us recently within the last just couple 3 months as
far as what we can do for proactive drug enforcement.
Chief Serrano. Our experience is that a lot of what we find
with the labs and the major suppliers is through the arrest or
the interconnects with the lower-level person purchasing. To
give you an idea, we had a situation a few weeks ago where an
officer was very proactive, stopped a gentleman. He didn't have
his license on him. In order to work off not getting a ticket
for not having his license, he went and did a drug buy. A lot
of times you can have someone for a low-order-type situation
that you work with in order to get more information. You
develop informants, and it's usually through--at least our
experience in a community of about 89,000 people, that's the
most effective, is working informants.
Sheriff McCroskey. In my rural county our idea of thermal
imaging is standing next to the wood stove and going, ``Man,
that's hot.'' [Laughter.]
So that's not going to hurt us too bad yet, but what does
hurt us, we recently had a case that could not be charged
because of a court decision where an officer went to a door to
serve a civil paper, saw methamphetamined people, they
screamed, ``Cops, police,'' ran like crazy, and through the
house. He pursued. They were ultimately all arrested. We not
only found meth; we found a meth lab. The meth lab
spontaneously combusted shortly thereafter, while it was being
watched, waiting for the lab team. That whole case could not be
tried because in this particular case the prosecutor felt that
the courts had so restricted our ability to enter that house
under exigent circumstances that we were not able to pursue
that. That was my neighbor; the meth lab was.
Mr. Souder. Mr. Brooks, could you comment on the large-
scale labs in California, how that might differ in these kinds
of questions as far as (a) how you identify them, and then a
second question that Chief Serrano may want to address as well,
and that is: How does the child abuse law in California
regarding meth labs work at this point? It came up in the
hearing we had in California. You referred to the increasing
number of arrests in the area of child abuse related to these
type of violations, but I've wondered if you could put that in
specific context as we look at that possibly spreading around
the country.
Mr. Brooks. Certainly. To the first portion of your
question, many of our large meth labs we find through
cooperating police informers or, even more often now, by trying
to target who we know are rogue chemical distributors and then
following the trail of those chemicals, very large amounts of
chemicals, both ephedrine or freon or red phosphorous or acids.
Those are very labor-intensive cases. They require around-the-
clock surveillance teams with aircraft support because these
people are very cagey and very aware of surveillance, but
sometimes then, after days, weeks, maybe even months of
following those persons, we're able to then put them down at
what we know to be a large superlab or factory lab. After
waiting sufficient time for a search warrant, we're able to
enter and process that lab, which, by the way, may take 30, 40,
or 50 hours of crime scene processing, these very large labs.
The issue of the thermal imaging, we use that as
collaborative evidence only. It probably doesn't affect us too
much, but what will out of that same court decision is the
limit of our ability to use trackers that we place in suspects'
vehicles, especially in barrels of chemicals that are traded
through cooperating witnesses, and we use those trackers to
follow the chemicals to the labs. Now there are more
restrictions on that, but I'm sure we'll work around that.
As to the child abuse/child neglect issues, California has
been very successful in the institution of the drug-endangered
children's program, where we work very closely with child
protective services, the courts, and the district attorney's
office, and other public health care professionals to look at
the danger the children are in in homes where meth is present,
where firearms are present and, more importantly, in these
homes and in environments where children are present when drugs
are being cooked, when they're exposed to the drugs. We have a
protocol on how to collect evidence specifics for those child
abuse/child neglect prosecutions, and we work closely with the
DA's office, with the county prosecutors to prosecute. And
that's something that they don't do very well at the Federal
level yet. Federal prosecutions might be something the Congress
would look at.
Chief Serrano. On a more local level, in all candor, the
major concern we have in those situations is the welfare of the
child, the endangerment of the child. If we can take that child
out of that environment and get them into the processes of the
State, at least if there wasn't a case open on the family
before, there is now and a child protective worker will be
checking on the family and monitoring. A lot of times that's
probably about the best help that we have for that child.
They're in extremely dire straits in the environment where the
parents are either cooking or heavy users of methamphetamine.
Getting that child out of that cycle is probably the most
beneficial thing that you can do.
Mr. Souder. And you've invoked that in your county a number
of times?
Chief Serrano. Yes. Yes, we will take the child out of the
home. Obviously, it always depends--if the parent is a moderate
to minor user and we're arresting the custodial parent, a lot
of times we'll spend time with the parent to try to find an
aunt, an uncle, a grandparent that can take the child. In these
serious cases, as being indicated, that's where you want to
take the child and you want to put them into a protective
environment and at least get the processes started with the
State and the local government, so that will be monitored.
Mr. Brooks. Mr. Chairman, if I might, the biggest problem
is the children in these meth labs, they're truly guinea pigs.
There are no long-term studies both for our police officers,
firefighters, EMS personnel, or these children, these innocent
victims, on what the long-term effects are of prolonged
exposure to heavy metals and carcinogens. We know anecdotally a
number of horror stories of cancers and tumors and other
illnesses, kidney and liver failures caused by these meth lab
chemicals, but we're still in those early stages, only 10 or 20
years of studies. So these children growing up, exposed in
these heavy environments, chemical environments like I
described in Hollister, CA, we really don't know what's going
to happen to those children when they're adults.
Sheriff McCroskey. Sir, I'd just like to add that--and keep
in mind that my perspective is completely rural--we don't have
enough CPS, child protective services. We do not have enough
foster homes. If we started doing--we have to really evaluate
in where they're placed; they're very limited. I mean, we do
all the things, take them out, start the case, do those kinds
of things, but the limitations, based upon what's available in
our community in terms of housing those children, is severely
limited. So very often they end up right back where they came
from.
In your packet of information that I provided was a case
out of our county where a 16-year-old--I think he's a 16-year-
old, but a young boy--was used as a guinea pig, got to test out
the meth his folks produced. I'd like to say that that stuff
doesn't happen, but I'll bet it happens more than we know.
Mr. Souder. Thank you. Congressman Ose.
Mr. Ose. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chief Serrano, I want to go back to the drug recognition
expert program that you've got doing. How much of that program
are you able to implement with local funding and resources?
Chief Serrano. We are very fortunate in--just about
exclusively the DRE program is something we've absorbed
locally--we're fortunate in that the training happens at the
California Highway Patrol Academy, which is right near our
community. So it's a day-commuter on the officers. What we have
to absorb, then, is the time for them to be in the class and
the moderate tuition. I think it's only $200 to $300 for the 2-
week training, very inexpensive. But we can't absorb the loss
of the officers. That's the biggest thing that we absorb, is we
have to watch that.
We are the training site, the certificationsite, where they
actually go to do their training. So when our officers go to
the school and they come back to do their training, they're
doing it right there in our own back yard. They're doing it
within our community.
At this point we have managed to absorb that. It is
sometimes difficult. It means, instead of--because we don't
have a big pot of money that we can pay to backfill and stuff,
we send maybe--we have 85 sworn and we maybe send two or three
people to a class instead of five or six, like we might like
to, but we're able to do it.
Mr. Ose. Let me diverge for a minute. Of your 85 sworn, how
many of them are in the police force as a result of the COPS
program successes we've had?
Chief Serrano. That's a very good question, Congressman.
When we started up 4 years ago, 32 of our officer positions
were COPS positions--allowed us to start the police force,
allowed us to have it staffed as it should have been. This past
year, with Congressman Ose's help, we were authorized an
additional six officers through the COPS program that are now
providing our traffic safety and our motor unit.
Mr. Ose. I bring that up, Mr. Chairman, because when we
established the city, there were two or three driving issues,
one of which was the adequacy of law enforcement. It's
interesting to me, on almost a daily basis, to see the
interconnection between what we do here at the Federal level
and the success that local government enjoys in addressing
local concerns, at least as they relate to, say, Citrus
Heights. And I'm sure they exist in your communities also.
Chief Serrano. Mr. Ose.
Mr. Ose. Yes?
Chief Serrano. I might say that, from my perspective, the
COPS program has probably been one of the most beneficial
Federal programs for law enforcement to my experience.
Mr. Ose. I appreciate the ability to diverge there a little
bit.
Chief Serrano, you also talked--excuse me--I talked in my
more complete statement about the problems we have with meth
and other drugs on our school campuses. We haven't touched on
that very extensively here this morning. You did a survey on
one of the campuses with the kids. It's anonymous, so there
wasn't any consequence. But the kids talked about being able to
acquire weed, ecstacy, crank, and coke, and all that. One even,
more than one went so far as to say, ``Oh, yeah, we've got a
crank dealer in our neighborhood,'' kind of like your mom-and-
pop AM/PM or something.
What has been your experience as to the impact of meth in
the schools that are in the city of Citrus Heights? And for
that extent, the others might want to chime in.
Chief Serrano. The main drugs that we see in our high
schools, thank goodness, are primarily marijuana, but we do
have a small percentage of the drug users--in the survey we did
I would say that I know that at least 50 percent of the kids
said, ``Hey, I have used some kind of drug.'' I would say it's
a very small portion of the students that use methamphetamine.
We're lucky in the sense that we do take the resources we
have put into drug enforcement and not only worked the arrest
aspects, but we've really worked diligently to try to really
implement the educational and community involvement aspects.
We're also fortunate in that we have a school officer assigned
to each high school, and that becomes a really viable contact
within that school. What it allows us to do is, as kids get
more confident in the officer, all of a sudden they're coming
up and, ``Hey, Officer Henry, I'm kind of bugged 'cause
Johnny's not acting right, and I know that Johnny's parents
do'' blah, blah, blah. It really is a good resource to have
that officer in the school.
But, yes, as far as methamphetamine in our high schools, at
the high school level it has not become a major problem that we
are aware of.
Sheriff Harp. We're probably in that same line. Marijuana
is the drug of choice in the high school. We have seen a
resurgence of LSD somewhat into the younger crowds, high school
and early twenties, late teens. Primarily our meth problem has
been with probably the 21 to 40-year-old crowd.
Mr. Ose. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Brooks. I was going to say, we're seeing in the San
Francisco Bay Area an increasing amount of local law
enforcement reporting teen meth use. The thing that's really
dangerous about this, NIDA and NIH studies, and those coming
out of Columbia University are showing that meth robs the brain
of serotonin and dopamine permanently. There is permanent brain
altering, maybe brain damage, if you will.
The other thing is it puts these kids on the highway with
an altered state of awareness, depth perception, and speed. We
just had, in 1998, a fine young fellow, Scott Greeley, who was
a California Highway Patrol officer, killed when he was on a
traffic stop on the side of the road, run into by a meth drug
driver who wasn't even aware of his own surroundings.
So I think the risk of children being permanently damaged
and the risk of children being on that road with not very much
driving experience and then being under the influence of meth
puts all of us and our families in danger.
Sheriff McCroskey. I won't repeat what they said, but the
ancillary problems are also, if you talk to teachers, the kids
that are coming to school, they're not learning. They're having
all kinds of behavioral problems. They normally say, ``Oh,
that's Johnny; their folks do meth; their folks do meth; their
folks do meth.'' And the rest of the kids are suffering, too.
Mr. Ose. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Souder. Thank you. Congressman Baird.
Mr. Baird. One of the things that I have seen as far as lab
precursor material has been this huge abundance of
pseudoephedrine. We had a bust in Lewis County recently where
they found 40,000 bottles of Sudafed. The guys were clever.
Instead of dealing with the child-proof lids, they had rigged
jigs up to chop the bottoms of the Sudafed bottles off, so they
didn't even have to waste the time with child-proof lids and
cotton, etc. They were very resourceful. But they found bags
and bags and bags.
One of the pseudoephedrine bottles I brought to my office
here, and it said it was distributed by a company called
Wildcat Wholesalers. Now it sure did not seem to me to be a
reputable drug distribution organization.
Do you feel like--it seems to me that there are some
Federal laws and some State laws regarding distribution and
tracking precursors, but it seems that if a company, be it a
mom-and-pop grocery store or whatever, is selling these kinds
of quantities, we must have some better tracking method than we
do now. What is your experience with that, and what do you
think we need to do?
Sheriff Dukes. If I could, it's exactly the way you're
talking. In our community the kids steal a lot of it from the
little convenience stores and occasionally get caught stealing
it. Of course, they have a cold or allergy; they're never
making meth, of course. However, there is no tracking. To my
knowledge, there is no tracking. I don't know if you can
purchase it over the Internet or not, but I wouldn't be a bit
surprised.
However, if I may get back to something you said earlier--
and it's so important. It affects the kids. When you talk about
education now, we all know that, but the correctional officer
who the policeman comes in and throws in the guy that's high
and stinks, he's affected. The ambulance or the EMS people who
go to the scene, they had their first class in meth just about
6 months ago in our county. They didn't even know what it was.
The emergency room doctors, the emergency room nurses that take
care of these people--this is a chain reaction. I think John
said the firemen, the volunteer firemen--we're all little and
they've never seen this stuff, and they go into these homes and
they go right in them.
Mr. Baird. Sheriff, if I could interject----
Sheriff Dukes. Sure.
Mr. Baird. I think you raise a critical point. One of my
concerns, if you were to look at funding levels for drug
interdiction from this body, from the Congress, we spend so
much more money on cocaine and heroin and the other so-called
hard drugs. Yet, as you all know, ask any sheriff, ``Would you
rather bust a coke, a crack house, or a meth house?'' You don't
have to have HAZMAT teams to bust a crack house. You don't have
to have fire suppression to bust a crack house. You're not
exposed to toxic waste in a crack house. The social costs, I
believe, of methamphetamine far outweigh--not that the other
drugs are good, by any means, but we're spending billions of
dollars in Plan Columbia and all these other plans. Yet, right
here at home we have these tremendously diverse impacts, hugely
costly, especially for you rural communities that are relying
on volunteer firefighters, don't have HAZMAT teams, don't have
bunny suits, all that stuff. It seems to me maybe our
priorities are crooked here--not crooked, but they're in the
wrong direction.
Sheriff McCroskey. I think you're right, Congressman. I
think they changed. That's all that's happened is there's been
a change. Sometimes we don't react to change very well.
One of the byproducts of our attention to meth at home was
we missed--I was sitting in the emergency room. I'm an amateur
carver, and I mostly carve my finger. So I was in the emergency
room getting sewn up, and while the doctor was sewing me up, he
was telling me that day two people, two prominent local adult
people had come in requesting help for heroin addiction. I
said, ``My gosh, is that a problem?'' And he said, ``Oh,
yeah.''
Then the next thing I knew we have kids off the football
team going to treatment, kids off the basketball team going to
treatment. So while we've been buried down here in looking at
meth, and because it is so bad and so long term--we've just got
to be cognizant of the things that are going around in addition
to that.
Mr. Baird. John, just before my time's out, have you also
seen this problem--or others--with this ready availability of
mass quantities of Sudafed or any other precursors? Do you feel
we need to do more to track that availability?
Sheriff McCroskey. Yes. In fact, if there's one thing that
would really help, I think that particular thing, the
controlling of that particular substance, would make a huge
difference. Two stores, two local stores, small, convenience
stores had been selling, and the DEA came down and just did one
again a few weeks ago, but they were the primary source. At one
time our county was--we were being told through informants that
the folks in Pierce County, which I think is the No. 1 county
in Washington volumewise for methamphetamine labs, were coming
to Lewis County to buy their stuff because we live kind of in a
simple world. We didn't know what a rave was until one came and
now we have ecstacy. We didn't have that before. Kids were
suddenly educated. So we've done some work educating our
businesses, too.
Mr. Souder. I want to thank this panel for a number of
things. Sheriff Dukes, if you could add, just for the record, I
think that you were the sheriff who told me that actually some
of the meth cookers in Noble County had actually purchased one
of the pharmacies?
Sheriff Dukes. Well, what the informant has told us, they
now own the pharmacies; they now own the fertilizer places for
the anhydrous. This is very recent information. This is a
motorcycle gang out of Indianapolis who's implicated our area
and said, ``You'll never catch us because now we're
businessmen.'' That's what was told to us.
Mr. Souder. Which is a frightening trend as far as us
tracking, if it's a logical growth of a distribution network,
is to get control of the next thing.
I also wanted to just comment that our interrelationship
with the Mexicans and Colombians is inevitable if 80 percent is
being distributed by Mexican and California-related sources,
who predominantly distribute Columbian cocaine and heroin,
which finances the distribution networks. The things are
inextricably intertwined.
And a last comment to Mr. Brooks: I want to thank you, not
only all of you on the front lines, but in your association,
the narcotics association, for helping connect all the people
across the country who are working together in battling
narcotics in an informational way, in an information and
advocacy way to help battle these things. So I thank each of
you for coming today.
Did you want to add something, Sheriff?
Sheriff McCroskey. Well, something that was not talked
about today--and I'd add here it's not apparently a widespread
concern, but it is locally a trend we've seen, and that is--and
I know it's a topic of Congress: identity theft. Our
methamphetamine, our small, mom-and-pop operations are
financing themselves through the theft of mail, the replication
of ID stuff, the credit cards. It is interwoven, at least in
our area. I know that some of the folks that we have captured
doing that have traveled all the way the Mexican and Canadian
border. So it will affect others as well.
Mr. Souder. Thank you very much.
If Susan could come forward for our third panel, she's
going to talk about the treatment issues. If you'll remain
standing, I'll administer the oath to you as well.
[Witness sworn.]
Mr. Souder. Let the record show the witness has answered in
the affirmative.
I thank you for coming and being patient as we've moved
through this. We're trying to make sure in each hearing as part
of the record we include treatment as part of our anti-
narcotics effort because we cannot tackle this problem without
the treatment component. So we look forward to hearing your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF SUSAN ROOK, PUBLIC AFFAIRS DIRECTOR, STEP ONE
Ms. Rook. Thank you. Thank you for your commitment to
treatment as part of the solution, and thank you for the
opportunity to speak with you today.
As a recovery advocate, my commitment is to break the
silence of addiction and show the success of recovery. I'm
grateful to testify as part of the solution. For years I was
part of the problem. It's particularly nice to be in a room
with police officers and not have to worry about getting
busted.
I am an addict, an alcoholic, and I've been in recovery for
over 5 years. When someone is in active addiction, we're very
visible as part of the problem. You've heard that today.
Mr. Chairman, you talked about the emerging threat. I'm
here to tell you, it's the same problem; it's just a new drug.
And you're going to keep having hearings like this again and
again and again.
Nearly two decades of scientific research makes it
increasingly clear that addiction erodes a person's ability to
control behavior. Therefore, if you ever hope to correct the
behavior that causes all of the social problems, you must
address the fundamental issue, and that is addiction.
Sheriff McCroskey pointed out that addiction treatment
failures are very high. Treatment failures for addiction of
methamphetamines are very high. That's true. I would like to
suggest that we have a gap in our social system. We have
prevention, we have treatment, and we have criminal justice.
There is a spot in there from early use and experimentation
that is not addressed, that does not fall into prevention
because you're not preventing use. It doesn't qualify for
treatment because you're not addicted.
I'll use my case as an example. Consider, first, the issue
of voluntary choice and when that choice is made, the age of
that choice. Certainly, people choose to use drugs. Very seldom
are they forced to. I chose to use drugs. I was 13 years old.
Within 2 years I was drinking and getting high every day:
marijuana, PCP, alcohol, hash, speed, LSD, methamphetamines. My
parents caught me and tried to control my actions by taking me
out of school, home schooling me, no television, no radio, no
phone calls to friends, keeping very close watch on me.
External controls produced forced abstinence. Forced abstinence
is not treatment. Use will begin the cycle again.
I started college at 16. By 18 I was living the double life
of many successful addicts: active on the George Mason
University debate team, student government, school paper. I got
good grades, a B+ average, and I was addicted to speed. I had
to take two hits of 12-hour time-released speed, prescription
speed, just to get out of bed. When I didn't have the money for
that, I switched to bootleg speed, meth.
A guy I was living with got so disgusted with my behavior
and what was happening, he locked me into a room and wouldn't
let me out until I detoxed. That experience scared me so
badly--I was just about to start shooting up--that experience
scared me so badly, I stayed away from speed. Forced abstinence
or the unavailability of the drug is not treatment. Without
treatment, and more particularly the tools to stay in recovery,
it is only a matter of time before use and the cycle begins
again.
My first reporting jobs were covering the police beat. I
couldn't use illegal drugs and cover the cops. So I stayed away
from the hard drugs. I kept drinking, kept smoking marijuana.
Eventually, I did, of course, go back to using illegal drugs
and my particular drugs of choice: the speed-up drugs, speed
and cocaine. My life looked great on the outside, moving to CNN
at age 25, moving up in the ranks until getting my own show,
``CNN's Talk Back Live.'' My disease also progressed.
At 35 I overdosed. CNN paid for in-patient addiction
treatment when my insurance ran out. The support of CNN
management was critical. I was told in treatment that I was not
a bad person, but that I had a really bad disease and there was
hope; recovery was available.
You don't see people in recovery much because we now have
the option of being invisible. I talked to the sheriff before
the hearing, and he said, ``Treatment doesn't work for you
people.'' I'm here to tell you it does, but you don't see
people who are in recovery because we pass normal. We no longer
go to emergency rooms. We no longer go to prisons. We no longer
have meth labs. We no longer destroy families. We do pretty
much normal things, like getting us stuck in traffic and mowing
our lawns. You don't see us because we no longer stand out and
have the option of hiding.
People who do not have experience with addiction don't know
that doing these simple, adult, responsible things actually
represents growth, an enormous amount of work on our part. My
story is visible, and I chose to come forward and speak out
about this, but there are millions of people just like me out
there. Some are fortunate enough to be given the opportunity to
receive treatment and enter into recovery.
As we talk about the continuum from first use until
addiction, I started at 13. I was not given treatment.
Currently, 16 percent of adolescents across the Nation--16
percent--who need treatment get treatment. In North Carolina,
where I work at a local nonprofit, that number is less than 5
percent. If you want to do anything about the long-term drug
problem in the United States, pass parity for teenagers, so
they can get the separation from the drugs and alcohol long
enough to even begin to hear the conversation that recovery is
possible and hope is available.
I talk to so many teenagers. Perhaps the sheriff is right
and the adults are just frustrating and the brains are fried.
Maybe just write them off. I'm grateful somebody didn't write
me off.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Rook follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.141
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.142
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.143
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.144
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.145
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.146
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.147
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.148
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.149
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.150
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.151
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.152
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.153
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.154
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.155
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.156
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.157
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.158
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.159
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.160
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.161
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.162
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.163
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.164
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.165
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.166
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.167
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.168
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.169
Mr. Souder. Well, thank you very much for coming forward
and raising a number of these points. I've got a series of
questions that kind of popped into my head right at the
beginning.
First, on the question of parity for teenagers, Congressman
Ramstad had a bill here in the House on health care parity. Are
you suggesting, since we haven't been able to move that bill,
that we might be able to move it better if we just targeted the
teenagers separately from adults?
Ms. Rook. Well, for example, I think there's a lot of
stigma involved in addiction because it is a voluntary choice,
but I think how the public conversation is looking at it, you
look at someone who's an adult, a 20, 30, 40-year-old, and you
say, ``You have a choice about this.'' Well, once the disease
has progressed to that, no, you actually don't have a choice.
Looking at it in terms of children somehow shifts the
conversation, so people are more willing to help a teenager
than they're willing to help a 30-year-old. Case in point: The
attorney general in the State of Minnesota, Mike Hatch, just
filed suit against Blue Cross/Blue Shield charging that the
insurance company--filed a lawsuit against Blue Cross charging
that the insurance company was denying coverage to children.
They settled the case out of court. Blue Cross/Blue Shield
agreed to pay the State of Minnesota $8.2 million because the
State picks up the tab when the insurance company doesn't in
terms of social cost and some treatment cost. They agreed to
put a three-panel review board on. I mean, basically, the
insurance company settled the lawsuit. So I think that is an
indication that perhaps not going for full parity--that's been
before Congress time and time again, on the House side, on the
Senate side.
In North Carolina we have parity legislation every year.
People look at it, they laugh, and everybody goes home.
Everybody knows it's not going to pass. I think the same thing
is happening on the national level, but for the first time a
legal challenge was made in Minnesota, and the insurance
company settled.
Mr. Souder. A second question that came to mind: Early on
in your testimony, you stated that we have this kind of void.
You're past being prevented, but before you've been arrested,
although you could, in effect, become arrested in that stage,
but assuming you haven't been arrested, and you're not in
treatment--how would you target that group or even identify
that group?
Ms. Rook. Well, several things: First of all, we could
actually enforce the drinking laws in this country. Nobody
wakes up at 13 or 14 and says, ``Gosh, I've never had a
cigarette or a drink of alcohol or any marijuana, but I think
I'm going to go out and smoke some meth.'' That doesn't happen.
Initial use is always cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana. It is
more easily available.
So, in addition to enforcing what is an obvious problem
now, we can enforce the laws that are already on the books.
There's a huge Governors' wives initiative campaign--Governors'
spouses, sorry--initiative against under-age drinking. That
will help.
Just simply publicizing and talking about recovery as a
possibility instead of--you know, I think that people get
overloaded with all of the bad news about addiction. Yes, we
know it's awful, but give people something to go toward instead
of something to fight against. That's what actually happens in
recovery.
The sheriff talked about locking people up for 3 years and
then they get released from jail and they go out and they use
again. Do you want to know why? You just took away the drug. If
you don't replace that, there is a sense of ease and comfort
that happens when you take drugs that happens immediately. If
you don't give skills training, a spiritual path, whatever
works for that particular addict, if that hole that the
addiction fills is not filled with something else, then the
addiction will continue. Every child who is using drugs has
that hole. Fill it with something else. Mentoring programs--I'm
not sure what Congress can do in that sense, but you can
certainly allocate more money for prevention and education and
addiction treatment for teenagers.
Now all of the prevention programs in the world are fine
but, here's where they get shortcircuited. Kids go to school.
My agency, we work with 6,000 kids in the public school system
in Forsyth County, NC, 6,000 kids. So, great, they're hearing
that drugs are bad, there's more effective ways to make
decisions, how to negotiate about drug use. Then we send them
home to their parents or their family, where their mom's an
alcoholic or their dad is a drug addict. They can't get
treatment. The insurance company says, ``Yes, we'll give you 2
or 3 days detox,'' and then they send you back.
There's a disconnect. All of this stuff needs to work
together, and I think one of the key things is rhetorically
talk about solutions. None of these DEA guys, none of these
cops talked about any successes that they've seen, anybody who
has gotten off of methamphetamines. We in the recovery
community are powerful--powerful--allies for them, double team
as they go in and talk to kids.
You know, I double team with teenagers when I go talk to
kids. I'm 40 years old. Granted, I didn't think I'd live this
long, but I'm 40 years old. They're not going to listen to me.
I don't care what my drug use was. I double team with the
teenager in recovery, and I can say, ``This person is telling
you what happened at 15 or 16. Now they're no longer using. Let
me tell you what happened to me, as mine happened for 20 more
years.''
Now the drugs that are available nowadays, it's ratcheting
up the problem and it's ratcheting up the damage. So I think
one of the key focuses has to be on that early period from
experimentation to the beginning of addiction, and that is
quick. I agree with the law enforcement experts: By high school
it's too late.
Mr. Souder. It appears that you describe some of what Step
One is. Could you describe it a little further, what you do and
what your organization does?
Ms. Rook. Yes. Step One is a nonprofit. We do prevention,
intervention, and treatment. We're the Statue of Liberty for
Forsyth County, NC. We're the place that people go to when they
don't have any money. We're a United Way agency. We cut and
paste together funding streams and grants. We go out and beg
people for money. We're pretty typical of the arena of
treatment. We do adolescent treatment, adult treatment. We have
a Spanish component. We have onsite daycare. We just are
starting one of the few elderly substance abuse programs in the
United States.
It is unconscionable that this country is willing to trust
its No. 1 public health and public safety issue to the sole
provision of nonprofit agencies that have to worry about how
we're going to pay our light bills. If you get colon cancer,
would you put up with your doctor looking at you and saying,
``Go to a self-help group, pray, and there's a nonprofit down
the street; go talk to them''? No, you wouldn't think of doing
that, and yet, we do this with our No. 1 public health problem
and, as you've heard here today, our No. 1 public safety
problem.
Step One is great: treatment, intervention, prevention. Can
we do it all? No, and we're the one that's doing it for Forsyth
County. We have to turn people away. It's crazy.
Mr. Souder. When you said a little bit ago that you felt,
once you got past high school, it wasn't possible. Obviously,
your case turned around past high school, but you feel you get
diminishing returns? Is that in effect--in other words, the
earlier you reach somebody, the more likely your success in
treatment is? The later, it's harder?
Ms. Rook. Absolutely. NIDA and the brain scientists have 20
years of very good research, and Dr. Lechner of NIDA could
probably explain this way better than I could. I can tell you
from my experience, and I've looked at the brain science and
know a little bit about it. There is a period from use to
addiction. In that continuum there's a period called heavy use
and continuous use. At some point--and the scientists actually
have not been able to pinpoint where that point is, where the
switch in your brain flips to full-blown addiction--catch
people before that and before the repetitive pattern of heavy
and continuous use, and then you are not fighting a brain that
has been scrambled by methamphetamines or drugs that actually
makes treatment and negotiating the details of treatment more
difficult. You have more help from the body because the body is
not so physically damaged, however long that damage is.
Mr. Souder. Part of what I am sure the sheriffs were
reacting to was a pattern that we see in many places that I,
for example, have met very few drug dealers who haven't been
through--or heavy users who haven't been through multiple
treatment programs. Why do you think--I don't want to say, why
is it so hard? We know why it's hard. What is it--and I know
there are several key variables, but I would like you to put it
on the record. What are the reasons some of the treatment
programs aren't working? Because there's no question that to
say that they don't work at all is unfair, because we all meet
people who have completely changed their lives. Drug courts,
which are a promising approach, probably have about a 50
percent immediate rate that drops off a little farther long
term. We're still getting long term--but that's pretty good for
people who have already been arrested and who are there.
Furthermore, one of the things that is missed in treatment
is that, even if the person, they say, well, they failed, they
got arrested again, the intensity of use and the frequency of
arrest is often less. But it's hard to argue with the fact that
most people who commit drug crimes, the high percentage of
those have gone to treatment.
So could you describe some of the problems, some of the
types of treatment? You said abstinence isn't enough because
there hasn't been a change of heart, a change of attitude about
it--obviously, short term. What would be some of the variables
that you see in effective treatment versus less effective
treatment?
Ms. Rook. Two points about that: First, the definition of
treatment is not uniform. Two or 3 days detox in a local
hospital psych ward is not treatment. Treatment is a psycho-
educational, behavioral, and medical continuum of care. Studies
have shown that the longer you stay in treatment, the better
the outcomes. But, due to insurance restrictions, people are
discharged at now less than a week, if they are lucky enough to
go. Very few people have in-patient treatment available to
them. That in-patient treatment makes all the difference in the
world. CNN paid for the last 3 weeks of my in-patient
treatment. I am convinced that, had I been discharged at 5
days, I would have relapsed.
So what we have is we've set up a rhetorical conversation
saying, treatment doesn't work. Well, we're not treating
people, first of all. If you go into the hospital for
hypertension and the doctor puts you on a particular blood
pressure medication, and you have to go back into the hospital
several years--let's use Cheney for an example. My goodness, if
his doctor had looked at him and said, ``Gosh, you've still got
heart problems. The treatment isn't working. Well, we're just
going to write you off''--a perfect example. Why do we use a
different standard when we're talking about treatment of
addiction?
Treatment rates of addiction are actually higher because of
the behavioral component. There is a behavioral component to
addiction. Treatment effectiveness and outcomes are actually at
or above other diseases that have the behavioral component. For
example, hypertension: food, diet, exercise contribute to the
course of the illness. Diabetes, asthma, all of those require
patient participation for effective treatment, and yet, we look
at addiction and say, ``Well, if you don't get it the first
time, you must be resistant.'' No. Each time the person goes to
treatment there is a higher percentage that time it will
succeed.
Mr. Souder. Well, as you have been hearing, we have another
vote on. I appreciate your comments, your patience with us
today, and it is important that any record we have of any drug
subject we're trying, as much as possible, to work the
treatment component in, so those who go through the hearing
records and use this as a resource on meth--let me ask you one
additional question. Have you dealt with, or are you familiar
with, efforts to treat meth, in particular, and how meth
treatment differs from other treatment? Has it been more
difficult? Have you seen success stories related to that as
well?
Ms. Rook. We are not seeing in North Carolina meth showing
up at treatment centers yet. In 1999, the State Bureau of
Investigations busted a half dozen labs. In 2000, it was a
dozen. In the first 6 months of this year, it was 13. So we
will begin to see the results of these meth labs.
I can tell you of my personal experience. There's a young
man that I know that used to manufacture, distribute, and use
meth who's now in school and sober. It does work. For
everybody? No. But what are your options? What you're doing now
isn't working.
Mr. Souder. Well, I thank you. I think that one strong
point you made--and it is, quite frankly, true in every area of
this, and I am kind of a holistic approach person. To say this
for the record: that what we're doing now in all areas is both
working and not working. In treatment, there are reasons and
cases working and not working. In Plan Columbia, there are
things that are working and that are not working. In the border
control, there are things that are working and not working. I
happen to believe that we are never going to change completely,
which I believe from my personal faith is a matter of sin, but
you can control and manage and limit the number of people who
get involved in different things by giving alternatives and
working with them.
We tried to improve the prevention programs in the recent
drug-free schools thing. We are working with reauthorization of
the community efforts in anti-drugs. We are trying to support
the treatment efforts. We are trying to work on
methamphetamine. Through a holistic effort, I think we can
continue to have a higher percentage of success stories, but,
ultimately, we are never going to eliminate poverty in America.
We are never going to eliminate parents who ignore their kids.
We are never going to eliminate self-esteem problems that kids
have in America or a range of problems. But we can try to
manage it and make it better and give more people an
opportunity to escape.
So thank you for your efforts with Step One, your
willingness to go public, your willingness to make sure that
our record today has the treatment component to it, as well as
your patience this morning.
Ms. Rook. Thank you, sir, and I just want to add that that
holistic approach, that will work. It will work. And you, I
really appreciate. This is one of the first times--I mean, this
signals a national ``sea change'' in the conversation, that
treatment and recovery and the success of recovery is part of
this conversation. Thank you.
Mr. Souder. Thank you very much. And with that, our hearing
stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:04 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[The prepared statement of Hon. Bob Barr follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.170
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 80843.171
-