<DOC>
[107th Congress House Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:82583.wais]
IMPROVING SECURITY AND FACILITATING COMMERCE AT THE NORTHERN BORDER
=======================================================================
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
__________
DECEMBER 10, 2001
__________
Serial No. 107-130
__________
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
82-583 WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
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
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
BOB BARR, Georgia DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
DAN MILLER, Florida ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
DOUG OSE, California DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
RON LEWIS, Kentucky JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia JIM TURNER, Texas
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
DAVE WELDON, Florida JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
CHRIS CANNON, Utah WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida DIANE E. WATSON, California
C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia ------
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
------ ------ (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 JANICE D. SCHAKOWKY, Illinois
DAVE WELDON, Florida
Ex Officio
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Christopher Donesa, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Nicholas P. Coleman, Professional Staff Member
Conn Carroll, Clerk
Julian A. Haywood, Minority Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on December 10, 2001................................ 1
Statement of:
Brown, Rear Admiral Erroll M., Commander, 13th Coast Guard
District, U.S. Coast Guard; Thomas W. Hardy, Director,
Field Operations Northwest Great Plains Customs Management
Center, U.S. Customs Service; Robert S. Coleman, Jr.,
Director, Seattle District, Immigration and Naturalization
Service; and Ronald H. Henley, Chief Patrol Agent, Blaine
Sector, U.S. Border Patrol, Immigration and Naturalization
Service.................................................... 10
Gardner, Georgia, senator, Washington State Senate; Pete
Kremen, Whatcom County executive; Jim Miller, executive
director, Whatcom Council of Governments; Pam Christianson,
president, Blaine Chamber of Commerce; Barry Clement,
president, National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 164;
and Jerry Emery, vice president, American Federation of
Government Employees, National INS Council, Local 40....... 87
Meredith, Val, member of Parliament, House of Commons; David
Anderson, president, Pacific Corridor Enterprise Council;
Terry Preshaw, member, Vancouver Board of Trade; and Gordon
Schaffer, president-elect, White Rock & South Surrey
Chamber of Commerce........................................ 54
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Anderson, David, president, Pacific Corridor Enterprise
Council, prepared statement of............................. 61
Brown, Rear Admiral Erroll M., Commander, 13th Coast Guard
District, U.S. Coast Guard, prepared statement of.......... 13
Christianson, Pam, president, Blaine Chamber of Commerce,
prepared statement of...................................... 117
Clement, Barry, president, National Treasury Employees Union,
Chapter 164, prepared statement of......................... 123
Coleman, Robert S., Jr., Director, Seattle District,
Immigration and Naturalization Service, prepared statement
of......................................................... 29
Emery, Jerry, vice president, American Federation of
Government Employees, National INS Council, Local 40,
prepared statement of...................................... 129
Gardner, Georgia, senator, Washington State Senate, prepared
statement of............................................... 90
Hardy, Thomas W., Director, Field Operations Northwest Great
Plains Customs Management Center, U.S. Customs Service,
prepared statement of...................................... 21
Henley, Ronald H., Chief Patrol Agent, Blaine Sector, U.S.
Border Patrol--Immigration and Naturalization Service,
prepared statement of...................................... 38
Kremen, Pete, Whatcom County executive, prepared statement of 102
Meredith, Val, member of Parliament, House of Commons,
prepared statement of...................................... 56
Miller, Jim, executive director, Whatcom Council of
Governments, prepared statement of......................... 107
Preshaw, Terry, member, Vancouver Board of Trade, prepared
statement of............................................... 75
Schaffer, Gordon, president-elect, White Rock & South Surrey
Chamber of Commerce, prepared statement of................. 78
Souder, Hon. Mark E., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Indiana, prepared statement of.................... 4
IMPROVING SECURITY AND FACILITATING COMMERCE AT THE NORTHERN BORDER
----------
MONDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2001
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and
Human Resources,
Committee on Government Reform,
Blaine, WA.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:30 p.m., at
the Senior Center, 763 G Street, Blaine, WA, Hon. Mark E.
Souder, (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Souder and Larsen.
Staff present: Christopher Donesa, staff director and chief counsel;
Nicholas P. Coleman, professional staff member; and Conn Carroll,
clerk.
Mr. Souder. Good afternoon and thank you for coming. Today
our subcommittee will explore the status of the Blaine, WA
border crossing. Even before the terrorist attacks on September
11, 2001, this subcommittee was considering ways to improve
both the security of our Nation's borders and the efficient
flow of international commerce, travel and tourism. Continuing
problems with illegal immigration and the smuggling of drugs
and other contraband over the Southern and Northern borders,
and the threat of terrorism, have prompted calls to hire more
Federal law enforcement officers and to expand the physical and
technological infrastructure needed to allow those officers to
work effectively.
The attacks of September 11th have only heightened our
sense of urgency in dealing with the terrorist threat as well
as the problems of narcotic interdiction and illegal
immigration. At the same time, long delays at border crossings
and a sharp reduction in commercial and commuter traffic
resulting from the increased security measures put in place
after September 11th have raised concerns about the effect of
these policies on trade, tourism and travel. Congressman Larsen
has been a leader in making sure that we are aware of this
balance as has both senators in Washington State.
Congress has been considering numerous proposals to deal
with these problems, and our subcommittee is open to exploring
all of them. However, finding and implementing solutions is
more difficult than simply identifying problems. For example,
the House of Representatives and the Senate recently passed
anti-terrorist legislation that, among other measures,
authorizes the tripling of the number of Border Patrol agents,
INS inspectors, and Customs inspectors along the Northern
border. It is unclear, however, how quickly any of these
agencies can meet these requirements; moreover, it is unclear
what the impact of the new emphasis on anti-terrorism will be
on personnel decisions at each of these agencies. In the rush
to protect our Nation's borders from terrorists, we must not
hamper our ability to protect the citizens from other dangers.
This hearing is part of a series of field hearings which
this subcommittee is holding at border crossings and ports of
entry throughout the United States. At each location, this
subcommittee is assessing the problems facing the Federal
agencies, local lawmakers, and community and business leaders
with respect to border policy. We will focus on what new
resources are needed for the Federal Government most
effectively to administer the border crossing, as well as what
new policies could be pursued to ease the burdens being placed
on commerce, travel and tourism. We will also explore how the
new emphasis on preventing terrorism may affect the ability of
these agencies to carry out their other vital missions.
Last week, for example, we held a hearing with the head of
INS, the head of Customs, the head of DEA, the head of the
Coast Guard, as well as representatives from the FBI to look at
how diverse anti-terrorism and what that means for other
missions and to what degree they are complimentary.
These issues are all very important and extremely urgent,
and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about
ways to address them. We have invited representatives of the
agencies primarily responsible for protecting our borders in
this region, namely the U.S. Customs Service, the Immigration
and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Border Patrol, and the
U.S. Coast Guard, to testify here today. The subcommittee is
vitally interested in ensuring the effective functioning of
these agencies, and we will continue to work with them and
their employees to ensure the continued security and effective
administration of our Nation's borders.
We welcome Rear Admiral Erroll M. Brown, Commander of the
13th Coast Guard District; Mr. Thomas W. Hardy, Director of
Field Operations of the Northwest Great Plains Customs
Management Center; Mr. Robert S. Coleman, Jr., Director of INS'
Seattle District; and Mr. Ronald Henley, Chief Patrol Agent of
the Border Patrol's Blaine Sector. We also welcome Mr. Barry
Clement, a Customs Inspector and president of Chapter 164 of
the National Treasury Employees Union; and Mr. Jerry Emery, an
INS Inspector and vice president of Local 40 of the American
Federation of Government Employees, National INS Council.
Border policy, of course, affects not simply the United
States, but also Canada. As such, it is of vital importance
that we seek the input of our neighbors to the north in
evaluating changes at the border. We are very pleased to
welcome Ms. Val Meredith, member of the Canadian House of
Commons, who represents the area of British Columbia just north
of this area. We are very glad that Ms. Meredith could join us
today. She is accompanied by several representatives of the
local Canadian business community; Mr. David Andersson,
president of the Pacific Corridor Enterprise Council; Ms. Terry
Preshaw, a member of the Vancouver Board of Trade; and Mr.
Gordon Schaffer, president-elect of the White Rock & South
Surrey Chamber of Commerce.
In fact, as I pointed out at a number of other hearings,
the regional outgrowth of this came from U.S./Canada
parliamentary group who have been talking about these issues
for the last number of years where I co-chaired transborder
subgroup.
When examining border polices, we must of course also seek
the input of representatives of the local community whose
livelihood is directly affected by changes at the border. We
therefore welcome State Senator Georgia Gardner; Mr. Pete
Kremen, the Whatcom County executive; Mr. Jim Miller, executive
director of the Whatcom----
Mr. Miller. Whatcom.
Mr. Souder [continuing]. Council of Governments, sounds
like a Dot Com--and Ms. Pam Christianson, president of the
Blaine Chamber of Commerce. We thank everyone for taking the
time this afternoon to join us for this important discussion. I
would now like to recognize Congressman Larsen.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Mark Souder follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.003
Mr. Larsen. I want to thank Chairman Souder and the
Committee on Government Reform's subcommittee for having the
hearing here in Blaine this afternoon. I also want to thank
you, Chairman Souder, for cosponsoring bipartisan pipeline
safety legislation. I think Congress--as you might know in
Bellingham here in Whatcom County, an explosion occurred years
back where three young men were killed and really raised a
profile of the pipeline safety. We want to thank you in front
of the community.
The common border we share with Canada has unique
geographic, economic, and political characteristics, which
create unique pressures and problems for our border
communities, which call for unique solutions. The events of
September 11th have changed each of our lives, our jobs, and
our priorities in many different ways--especially for those
from border communities. These events have also drawn attention
to the problem of having insufficient resources along our
border--a problem which our community is already painfully
aware. The lack of resources along the border has had a
detrimental affect on our economic security and our quality of
life.
Prior to September 11th, over 500,000 people and $1.3
billion in trade crossed the U.S/Canada border daily.
Even with temporary INS staff at the 128 Ports of Entry
along our common border, long lines have plagued both travelers
and international commerce. Border communities are losing jobs
and their economies are suffering.
A commitment to strengthening our Nation's security needs
to include a commitment to strengthening our economy. Not long
ago, I met with over 50 business owners and community leaders
from Point Roberts and Blaine. The message was clear. Decreases
across border traffic crippled business.
Long lines have also damaged the quality of life for
members of our border communities. One father wrote to me
saying he could no longer attend his son's football games. By
the time he leaves work and crosses the border, the game is
nearly ended. Our kids our spending hours each day on busses
waiting in lines to cross the border to get to school when they
should be learning or participating in school activities.
It is my hope that this hearing today will help produce
some solutions to the problem. United States and Canada have
already begun to address these problems together, but we have a
lot of work in front of us. United States must first get its
own house in order. As you know, there are currently only 440
Border Patrol agents assigned to our Northern border compared
to 8,000 at the Southern border. Similar discrepancies remain
for INS inspectors and Customs officials. We cannot expect
Customs and INS to do more for less, especially as increased
trade, traffic and terrorist threats compete for our limited
resources. I am therefore, encouraged by recent acts taken by
administration and Congress to increase staffing. For instance,
last week I wrote both INS and Customs and requested specific
level of new INS and Customs staffing for the five ports of
entry here in Whatcom County. In order for these ports of entry
to be both safe and efficient, I asked for additional 70 full-
time INS, as well as 70 Customs personnel.
While we desperately need an increase in staffing, that is
just the beginning. We have to find a way to get a dedicated
commuter lane up and running as soon as possible.
Give us NEXUS now. The former dedicated commuter lane
called PACE was closed September 11th. The PACE program was
started in the early 1990's to allow U.S. citizens to complete
a minimal background check and pay a $25 fee and then move
freely across the border. It was a very successful program with
over 160,000 participants. The PACE program has been
instrumental in fostering the growth of our cross-border
economy.
In October I requested help in finding a way to get PACE
running again with increased security until a new upgraded
dedicated commuter lane program such as NEXUS can be
implemented. I want to reiterate that request today.
To do all we need to do requires international cooperation.
U.S. and Canada are each other's No. 1 trading partners.
Likewise, we ought to build on our mutual history of
cooperation to continue to be not only one another's No. 1
trading partner, but partners in security as well.
One great example of a productive partnership between our
two countries is in the area of law enforcement. Here along the
Washington-B.C. border, U.S. and Canadian law enforcement
agencies have joined together since 1997 in a program called
the Integrated Border Enforcement Team [IBET]. We need to
continue these cooperative efforts and build new ones while the
U.S. works simultaneously to coordinate better cooperation
among U.S. agencies.
Central to the cooperative efforts, I think, is lean toward
what is called a perimeter strategy. This will require better
border management and information sharing between our two
countries. Since September 11th we have been making strides in
these areas.
In order to move toward a perimeter strategy, though, we
will have to stop focusing just on point of entry, but work to
focus on point of origin, perimeter clearance. When combined
with potential joint U.S. and Canadian inspections and
undercover operations at overseas ports of origin, perimeter
clearance provides a one-two punch to keep inadmissible aliens
and illicit cargo from leaving on a plane or ship to North
America.
In closing let me say this, the overriding message that I
would like you to take away from today's hearing is that common
border security must be assured without hampering commerce and
travel between the United States and Canada. It is essential
that we all, constantly, vigilantly be encouraging the good
traffic, and discouraging the bad traffic. Staffing, applied
technology, and a cooperation. In the words of President John
F. Kennedy talking to the Canadian Parliament in 1961,
``Geography has made us neighbors, history has made us friends,
economics has made us partners, and necessity has made us
allies.'' Never has the focus on the border been more
necessary.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent as well to enter my
full written comments into the record.
Mr. Souder. We have a sizable audience here today. Let me
add a couple additional comments to my opening statement to put
today's hearing in context. We are going to be doing several
different things as you heard us outline. We are looking at
both the national and the regional problems. Clearly what to
you may seem a local issue is of great concern to people in
Indiana where we have become a major recipient of ``BC Bud''
and drugs that are crossing this border. When we were at
northeast we have seen Quebec Gold and precursor chemicals and
ecstasy which has also come across from Vancouver come into the
entire nation from the border. These are no longer just
regional issues.
And trade issue is not really just a regional issue either.
The Ambassador Bridge in Detroit carries more trade than all of
the U.S/Japan trade together in the United States. So in each
of our locations, the trade that is coming across these major
border crossings between the major north and south cities is
not only impacting the border cities but impacting the
innerlands and other parts of the United States as well.
So in the context of what we are dealing with, I hope you
understand that when we are dealing with national issues we
also understand that your local concerns on trade are shared
elsewhere in the United States. And our concerns about
terrorism in other parts of the country are also shared about
targets in the Pacific Northwest, whether it be potentially the
targets in Seattle or San Francisco or even immediate areas of
targets.
Also we are not focusing just on Canada. Although I was up
in Ottawa just last week at another congressional delegation, I
had been up there a few weeks before and our chairmen are
trying to work out legislation that is compatible among each
other and it's easiest to work with Canada. We have also been
working both in narcotics and other areas, with other nations
as well.
All of a sudden the fight against terrorism in the United
States has become a universal international question regardless
of whether you are a Republican or Democrat. We have, in
addition to fighting a war, when, in fact, as a conservative
Republican, I was one, and our current President was one that
said we are not going to get into nation building. Now we are
in the mix of each party in the Nation building, and every
American, basically 90 percent, are supporting the efforts of
doing this. It is a different world.
And I did not--a month ago meeting with the exiled King of
Afghanistan in Rome, we have met with Holland about the
organization laws where their laws are making it difficult for
us to track ecstasy. In Spain with their extradition laws as it
relates to our ability to get Al Qaida members; with Germany
with laws regarding trying to be able to track the
organization, because if they can hide out in one country and
move around we can't ever find them, whether it is narcotics or
whether it is illegal terrorists. So it has become a much more
network world where we have to look at how our international
trade and our international criminal laws interact.
And that is really what we are trying to do systematically
with the Northern border crossing and Southern border crossing
which our subcommittee has chosen to concentrate on.
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 to the hearing record, then any answer to written
questions provided by the witnesses also be put in the record.
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Second, ask unanimous consent that all exhibits, documents,
and other materials referred to by Members of the witnesses may
be included in the hearing record and all Members be permitted
to revise and extend their remarks. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
It is a longstanding congressional protocol that government
witnesses representing the administration testify first, so our
first panel consists of those witnesses. So will the witnesses
on the first panel please rise and raise your right hand while
I administer the oath.
Just for the record, this is an oversight committee so we
have to swear in all of our witnesses. This committee was
probably most noted over the last 6 years for having done the
China Investigation, the Travelgate Investigation, the Waco,
and all of those, and we have always historically sworn in
witnesses. I hope we won't have anything like that today.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Souder. Let the record show each of the witnesses have
answered in the affirmative. Each of the witnesses will now be
recognized for opening statements. You can either summarize
your testimony, no longer than 5 minutes or roughly take 5
minutes, particularly since we have a large number of witnesses
today. You may each insert your full statements and anything
else into the record you would like to do so. It is my
privilege to recognize Admiral Brown. You are recognized for
your opening statement for the Coast Guard.
STATEMENTS OF REAR ADMIRAL ERROLL M. BROWN, COMMANDER, 13TH
COAST GUARD DISTRICT, U.S. COAST GUARD; THOMAS W. HARDY,
DIRECTOR, FIELD OPERATIONS NORTHWEST GREAT PLAINS CUSTOMS
MANAGEMENT CENTER, U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE; ROBERT S. COLEMAN,
JR., DIRECTOR, SEATTLE DISTRICT, IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION
SERVICE; AND RONALD H. HENLEY, CHIEF PATROL AGENT, BLAINE
SECTOR, U.S. BORDER PATROL--IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION
SERVICE
Rear Admiral Brown. Good afternoon Mr. Chairman, I am Rear
Admiral Erroll Brown, Commander of the 13 Coast Guard District
headquartered in Seattle, WA. On behalf of the Commandant,
Admiral Jim Loy, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you
today about the challenges we face in the Pacific Northwest
with respect to our role in law enforcement and homeland
security particularly along the international border. Thank you
also for recognizing the Coast Guard's key role in border
security.
The waterways of the Pacific Northwest are critically
important gateways to the global economy, yet they are among
the most vulnerable. Washington and Canada share approximately
150 nautical miles of maritime border accessible to anyone with
a water craft ranging from a jet ski to a commercial ship. In
addition, the coastlines of Washington and Oregon represent an
even larger international border between our Nation and the
high seas. Over 2.5 million containers move through the
combined ports of Seattle-Tacoma each year making it the second
largest container cargo complex in the United States. Annually,
over 15 billion gallons of oil move through the Strait of Juan
de Fuca. Over 600,000 recreational boaters and a quarter of a
million registered recreational boats enjoy the waters in and
around Washington State. The Washington State Ferry system
transports over 25 million passengers and 11 million vehicles
on about 150,000 transits a year, and is the largest ferry
system in the United States. Our growing cruise industry with
over 230,000 passengers last year is forecast to triple in
volume over the next few years. In addition, the Puget Sound is
home to the third largest concentration of U.S. Naval Forces in
the country. Protecting our maritime transportation system and
critical infrastructure from terrorist activities has become
one of our highest priorities.
And much of this law enforcement activity takes place
within our international maritime borders where illegal
activity continues to escalate. Within 3 miles from the
Canadian border, smugglers can quickly cross into one of the
172 San Juan Islands. The marijuana industry in British
Columbia is estimated at over $7 billion annually; marijuana
goes south, cocaine goes north.
Containerized shipment pose significant smuggling potential
with the threat of drugs from Southeast Asia and South America.
Marine containers offers traffickers a nearly unhindered,
unmonitored mode for smuggling large quantities of drugs or any
other illicit commodity. Applying law enforcement efforts
result in inspection of less than 2 percent of containers being
inspected when entering U.S. ports.
Since September 11th our Nation has emphasized security
increases along the land border. Smugglers will naturally turn
to areas where there is less law enforcement presence--east
toward more inhospitable terrain, and west onto the water.
While we have established close relationships with our
Canadian counterparts, and other U.S. law enforcement agencies
across many areas of operation, challenges along the border
remain significant. We operate a Cooperative Vessel Traffic
Service with Canada. This system provides continuous
communications with, and radar tracking of all commercial
maritime traffic entering our waters. We are an active member
of the international cooperative Integrated Maritime
Enforcement Team [IMET], an organization of law enforcement
agencies that conduct joint operations along the border. With
combined resources and effort of the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S.
Customs Service, U.S. Border Patrol, the Royal Canadian Mounted
Police, and local sheriff's department, Congress has been
making narcotic and other contraband seizure. The introduction
of a high-speed 27-foot utility boat to the northernmost Coast
Guard station, State of Washington finally gives us the ability
to keep pace with fast smuggling vessels. That most recent bust
of 100 pounds of marijuana occurred just last week, December
4th. However, drug trafficking in the region has not been
significantly impacted, even with additional assets moved to
the border. With only a handful of law enforcement assets,
thinly spread over a very large area, the maritime border
remains porous.
We are continuing to be balancing our mission requirement
current resources. Homeland security and search and rescue are
now our top priority.
We continue to adjust our resources to meet mission demands
and attain a sustainable operational balance. The greatest
challenges in the Pacific Northwest are geography, and the high
consequence of a successful terrorist attack on high-value
assets and limited resources.
In conclusion, the U.S. Coast Guard is an integral
component of our Nation's homeland security efforts and the
lead agency for maritime homeland security. We will make the
best use of our resources to meet the demand for safety and
security. We will maintain the viability and integrity of the
maritime transportation system by working with other public,
private, domestic, and international partners so that people
and goods move safely while maintaining border integrity. Thank
you for the opportunity to share our challenges that the Coast
Guard in the Pacific Northwest faces today. And I appreciate,
specifically, Congressman Larsen for recognizing some of the
stellar work the Coast Guard does in protection of the border,
U.S. Customs and Border Patrol. I would like to have the award
that he presented to the men and women of Station Bellingham
entered into the record.
[The prepared statement of Rear Admiral Brown follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.008
Mr. Souder. Thank you.
Mr. Hardy.
Mr. Hardy. Good afternoon. By way of introduction, my name
is Tom Hardy, Field Operations Director for an area covering
Point Roberts to Grand Portage, MN, so I have the flat part of
the border that we talk about.
Chairman Souder, Congressman Larsen, thank you for your
invitation to testify and for providing me the chance to appear
before you today. I would like to discuss the efforts of the
U.S. Customs Service to address the terrorism threat and the
challenges that exist along the U.S--Canadian border, commonly
referred to as the Northern border.
As one of the agencies that guard our nations, Customs has
taken a lead role in efforts to deny entry to potential
terrorists and the implements of terrorism into the United
States from Canada. The Customs Service enforces 400 laws and
regulations for more than 40 Federal agencies. Naturally, the
ports of entry on the Northern border are a major focus of our
efforts.
Trade and travel between the United States and Canada has
increased dramatically since the implementation of the North
American Free Trade Agreement in 1994. The immense flow of
trade and travel between the United States and Canada requires
that our two nations continue to work together to enhance the
protection of our vital interests at this critical time. Our
security and anti-terrorism efforts must be balanced against
the need to assure the smooth flow of legitimate trade and
travel.
Addressing the terrorist threat, security vulnerabilities,
narcotics, agriculture product, and currency smuggling requires
a coordinated, multi-agency and multi-national approach. The
Customs Service continues to buildupon established cooperative
relationships with the Immigration & Naturalization Service,
the Border Patrol, the USDA, especially APHIS, the Coast Guard
and Canadian authorities. Using a collaborative approach, all
the agencies are employing targeting and risk management
techniques to select people, vehicles, vessels, aircraft, and
cargo for increased inspection. Canadian and U.S. agencies
comprise the Integrated Border Enforcement Team in Blaine, one
of two such teams located on the Northern border.
The service port of Blaine consists of 13 land border ports
within Washington State, plus the seaports of Anacortes,
Bellingham, and Friday Harbor. The service port stretches from
Point Roberts on the west, through the major port of Blaine on
the Interstate 5 corridor, over the Cascade Mountains to the
smaller ports in Eastern Washington. The Western Washington
ports of Blaine, Lynden, and Sumas are a vital link between the
metropolitan area of Vancouver, B.C., and the Seattle-Tacoma
metropolitan area. During the last fiscal year over 5.8 million
vehicles and nearly 800,000 trucks entered the United States
through the Service Port of Blaine. Over $11 billion of
commercial goods entered through the service port of Blaine
last year alone.
In addition, the Service Port of Blaine continues to be a
hotbed of narcotic smuggling, agriculture products, and
currency smuggling. Nearly 3 tons of high quality ``B.C. Bud''
marijuana, 242 pounds of cocaine, and approximately $5.5
million in currency were seized in this area during fiscal year
2001. Stepped up enforcement efforts at Blaine area ports of
entry have pushed narcotic smugglers westward into the marine
environment, and eastward toward the Cascade Mountains and
beyond into Eastern Washington and Western Montana. In response
to the growing narcotics threat, Customs has established a
Customs Intelligence Collection and Analysis Team [ICAT] in
Blaine.
The Customs Service was addressing security along our
frontier with Canada well before the attacks of September 11th.
The arrest of an Algerian terrorist, Ahmed Ressam, during the
millennium by U.S. Customs inspectors at Port Angeles, WA, is
just one example of our ongoing efforts to prevent terrorism.
That arrest also set into motion a range of measures to bolster
security along our northern flank.
In response to the terrorist attacks of September 11th, the
U.S. Customs Service immediately implemented a level one alert
for all personnel. This is our highest state of alert, calling
for sustained, intensive anti-terrorist operations. We remain
at level one alert today.
This requires us to staff all ports of entry all hours of
the day, 7 days a week with two officers. Here in Blaine at the
Peace Arch, we have discontinued the PACE lanes in response to
it.
In order to meet the demands of maintaining this highest
state of alert, nearly 100 additional Customs inspectors from
throughout the United States have been temporarily detailed to
Northern border posts. These officers are being deployed to
ensure that this minimum staffing requirement applies even to
our most remote locations. The National Guard will deploy
additional personnel along the Northern border to further
enhance security at the ports of entry.
We have also received pledges of support from Canadian
Customs and Royal Canadian Mounted Police in preventing
terrorists and the implements of terrorism from transiting our
country.
I need to move on, for the record, just need to explain the
challenges we have ahead. From an overall perspective, the vast
volume of trade and traffic on our Northern border has put
immense pressure on our ability to enforce the Nation's laws
while facilitating international trade, even before September
11th. After September 11th, our challenge rose to a new level.
Although we have taken many steps to address these challenges,
such as the planned improvements to our facilities and the
temporary detailing of additional inspectors to Northern border
posts, we still face many challenges.
The Customs Service and the administration are working to
address these challenges. We are developing threat assessments
and a longer-term perimeter strategy to secure our homeland
defense. In considering such a long-term plan, several core
questions will need to be addressed. How can we best ``harden''
low-volume, high-risk ports of entry that pose a significant
threat to overall border security? How can we best develop and
deploy non-intrusive technology to detect the implements of
terrorism? How can we best recruit, train, and house the
additional Customs officers destined for Northern border
security enhancement? And finally, how can we best enhance our
industry partnership programs to enable the trade,
transportation and business communities to assist in the
overall security strategy envisioned by Customs?
Those questions are on our national plate for resolution.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Larsen for this
opportunity to testify.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hardy follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.014
Mr. Souder. Mr. Coleman.
Mr. Coleman. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Larsen, thank you.
Robert S. Coleman, INS Seattle. Thank you for inviting me here
today to address you on behalf of the U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service.
The shared border between the United States and Canada is
invested with an openness that is worth protecting. This is
especially true in the Seattle District area. To preserve the
current level of openness, INS uses both officers and support
personnel to enforce immigration laws and facilitate trade and
commerce, which is estimated to exceed $1 billion a day. The
relationship that we have with Canada and our level of
cooperation with its various agencies is essential to
maintaining normal border operations. In addition, it takes
people on the ground, in the booths, and in supporting offices,
to keep legitimate traffic and commerce moving, while
interdicting those who do not have a right to enter our
country, and those who would do us harm.
I know that you are now familiar with the various INS
authorities and our inspection processes from your previous
field hearings. Today I will focus on the Seattle District.
The Seattle District in Seattle, we have two sub-offices in
Yakima and Spokane. We are a full service district office that
operates from all five of our operational programs: management,
examinations, inspections, investigations, and detention and
removal. All the branches have a specialized role in enforcing
the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The Seattle District encompasses the entire State of
Washington, 10 northern counties in Idaho and pre-
inspectionsites in Canada; 70,000 square miles and
geographically represents the largest district in the Nation.
The District incorporates 500 miles of northern land border and
2,400 miles of saltwater coastline. We operate out of 29
physical locations. The District staffs two pre-inspection
stations in British Columbia, two international airports in
Washington State, five sea ports of entry located along Puget
Sound, and 14 land border ports of entry located in the States
of Washington and Idaho. Immigration inspectors at Seattle
District ports of entry examine approximately 30 million
entrants a year, roughly equivalent to the entire population of
Canada.
The Seattle District may be unique from other districts you
have visited in that we have a large seaport operation. A
recent highlight of our work within the seaport includes the
significant level of work done by our inspectors to accommodate
the 56 cruise ship sailings this past season. The Port of
Seattle has already scheduled 78 cruise ship sailings for next
season and the post September 11th redeployment of cruise ships
from the European market may increase that number. The success
of the Seaport unit is also a result of the excellent
relationship we have with the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S.
Customs Service, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
The long history of shared intelligence between the INS and
Canadian officials has facilitated the interception of
smuggling organizations transporting migrants to the United
States via Canada. A recent example of this is Operation Cape
May, and other human trafficking investigations involving
shipping containers in the area between 1998 and 2001. In Cape
May, we discovered a container with 18 males, 18 to 30 years of
age, from the Fujian province in the People's Republic of
China. Four aliens died as a result of the vessel conditions.
Three of the human traffickers involved have pled guilty and
five other persons involved have pled to Transportation of
Illegal Aliens or Conspiracy to Transport. The standard
sentences for these crimes range from 30 to 88 months, 78
months, excuse me.
The Seattle District Detention and Removal Unit detains
anywhere from 160 to 200 aliens nightly in a Service owned/
contract managed facility. In addition, the District has
contracts with other State and local detention facilities. In
total, the Seattle District detains an average of 400-500
aliens nightly. The District also covers 100 percent of the
Washington State Correctional System to find and remove
criminal aliens. During fiscal year 2001, the District
successfully removed 6,300 aliens, including 3,779 criminal
aliens. I am hopeful that the current INS plans for a new
contractor owned and managed detention facility will be
fulfilled. Our current building was built in 1930. And we keep
both law enforcement and benefits operations in that old
building now.
Since the terrorists attacks on September 11, 2001, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service has operated under a
threat level one of the U.S. Customs Service. This is the
highest level of security. In response, the District also
established a 24 hour command element staffed by Senior
District leadership. Operations at alert level one entail more
intense inspections, closer security of individuals,
documentations and vehicles.
Following the September 11th attacks, the District
temporarily moved inspectional resources--during the winter
hiatus--from some low volume ports to the high volume ports.
These inspectors will have to go back when the cruise season
and the summer season pick up again. In addition, Western
Region detailed several officers to our district along with 21
Border Patrol Agents to assist.
As a result of the heightened threat level, all alternative
inspection procedures, including PACE have been suspended. We
hope that NEXUS will be its replacement, and I am working hard
with our headquarters, and I welcome congressional leadership
to help ensure that NEXUS be realized soon. But I would like to
say it is the implementation of NEXUS that will be the trick
and the hard part. And I hope we get the right amount of
resources to help us maintain that support office.
We also cooperate with other agencies. I am a member of the
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, executive committee, and
INS works with all of the agencies on drug smuggling, human
trafficking. And I would like to say we also have great
relationships with the private sector.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Coleman follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.021
Mr. Souder. Mr. Henley.
Mr. Henley. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Larsen, my name is Ron
Henley. I am the Chief Patrol Agent of the Blaine Sector of the
U.S. Border Patrol. Thank you for the opportunity to testify
before you today.
The U.S. Border Patrol is the first line of defense against
persons attempting to illegally enter the United States between
our ports of entry. The Border Patrol's primary mission is to
prevent the illegal entry of aliens into the United States and
to apprehend those persons found in the United States in
violation of the immigration laws. Historically, the Border
Patrol also serves as the primary interdicting force for drug
smuggling between ports. We accomplish our mission through an
aggressive forward deployment of Border Patrol Agents to the
immediate border; the innovative use of technology; and a close
working relationship with Federal, State, local, and Canadian
enforcement agencies. I report to INS Headquarters through the
Western Regional Office in Laguna Niguel, CA.
Geographically the Blaine Sector encompasses the States of
Alaska, Oregon, and Western Washington. The Sector's main focus
of enforcement is the 120 miles of border stretching from
Blaine, WA, to the Pacific Crest Trail of the Cascade Mountain
Range, where the majority of the illegal smuggling activity
occurs. The topography of this portion of the Sector is mainly
rolling hills, mountains, forest land, and farmland. Interstate
5 is the major interstate highway that offers rapid transit
between the major urban communities of Vancouver, British
Colombia; Seattle, WA; and further south to Portland, OR and
Los Angeles, CA. The Blaine Sector is also responsible for 150
miles of water boundary that separates the United States and
Canada. Within these waters just south of Canada are the San
Juan Islands, which number close to 200 small to medium-sized
islands.
There are five Border Patrol stations within Blaine
Sector's area of operations, four located in western Washington
and one in Oregon. Our staff includes one aircraft pilot and an
intelligence officer. In addition to having uniformed agents,
we have an Anti-Smuggling Unit and several Detention
Enforcement Officers.
Since September 11th, the Border Patrol has been on the
highest state of alert. All available resources have been
deployed to the immediate border, performing line watch duties
24 hours a day, 7 days a week. To accomplish this task agents
have been working 12-hour shifts.
We have found that to continue to accomplish our mission,
by far the best strategy to leverage our resources along this
portion of the Northern border is to liaison and share real
time intelligence with other law enforcement entities. This
includes working hand in hand with all Federal, State and local
law enforcement agencies, as well as developing an extremely
close working relationship with the RCMP. Together we have
developed a unique border management posture called the
Integrated Border Enforcement Team. The border itself ties all
agencies together for the common goal of making it secure.
Agencies not only share intelligence but also perform joint
operations acting on real-time intelligence gathered.
Since fiscal year 1996, the Blaine Sector has apprehended
approximately 14,500 removable aliens. During fiscal year 2001,
the Sector apprehended 2,056 undocumented aliens. Of those
apprehensions, approximately 13 percent were Canadian citizens.
The Sector apprehends aliens from many different nations every
year that utilize Canada as a transit country to gain entry
into the United States.
Over the past 5 years, Blaine Sector has experienced a
large increase in narcotic seizures along the border. The
primary drug has been the high quality ``BC Bud'' marijuana
which is grown in British Columbia. We have reports of ``BC
Bud'' marijuana going for as high as $8,000 a pound in Los
Angeles. Since September 11th we have seen an increase in the
sizes of marijuana loads encountered. In November alone, we
apprehended three loads weighing a total of 825 pounds as
smugglers attempted to bring them across the border.
Border Patrol Agents assigned to the Blaine Sector are all
experienced agents who have transferred from assignments along
the Southern border. Agents use a variety of tools in the
performance of their duties, including patrol cars, four-wheel-
drive trucks, snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, boats and
airplanes. Technology, such as night vision cameras and
sensors, is also employed by agents in remote areas of the
border to detect and interdict illegal border crossers. Our
agents also use the art of tracking or ``sign cutting'' in
remote areas.
The Blaine Sector makes effective use of electronic sensors
as a force multiplier. The Sector has strategically placed
seismic, magnetic, and infrared sensors in areas where Border
Patrol Agents have detected or suspect illegal activity.
A video camera monitoring system is also currently being
installed along the border in our Sector. When completed, this
camera system will provide 32 camera sites that will enable us
to monitor designated areas along the border and will greatly
enhance our capabilities day and night.
The Blaine Sector's Anti-Smuggling Unit works closely with
Border Patrol line units in establishing a united effort toward
effective border control. This unit has established an
aggressive approach to the prosecution of alien smugglers.
Mr. Chairman, the agents of the U.S. Border Patrol and
support staff are proud to be serving their country. I look
forward to working with Congress and our partner agencies, such
as the Customs Service, the Coast Guard, and the Agriculture
Department to further enhance our capabilities in the
accomplishment of our mission. Thank you for this opportunity
to talk to you today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Henley follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.028
Mr. Souder. Thank you for your testimony. It is rather
stunning to see the mileage that you each have to cover in your
different zones, all the way to Grand Portage, and I think
Alaska as well.
Let me ask some beginning questions but also say up front
we will probably send you a fair number of written questions.
One of the things we are trying to do at the hearing is to have
a common base of questions that we ask at the different
hearings that we prepare it for a report cross hearing. But I
also want to make sure I get some particular questions in
relation to the uniqueness of each hearing.
First Mr. Hardy, I have some questions. One of the things
we have seen on the Southern border, and I was curious when we
were going along the border this morning, and I saw a train go
through. What are we doing with trains in this zone?
Mr. Hardy. We have five rail crossings in Washington State
territory, and we are developing--we work with most of the rail
companies, both Canadian and Burlington Northern, to develop
manifesting system to better tell us ahead of time what cargo
is coming across. Traditionally, and especially on the smaller
rails, its agricultural products.
However, as you move further across toward Chicago the
markets there, Canadians are always taking some of the market
containers from overseas. And we are having some difficulty
getting that process automated in terms of getting additional
information from--of the cargo that is inside the containers.
And we are working with proactively, but under this time period
we have had to do a few more searches on the border where we
have very few facilities, and then we also direct some searches
in the hubs like Chicago.
Mr. Souder. One of the concerns that I have, there is a $7
billion trade going on in ``BC Bud'', not to mention illegal
immigrants. That's clearly one area that we are going to have
to look at. And would encourage you to come to Congress with
suggestions how to do that without negatively affecting
Congress and commerce. I know busses, for example, have to
disembark. Amtrak and other transit need to look at how we can
do that in expedited fashion, yet be able to watch for
terrorists. Also have to watch for box cars. I just saw lots of
box cars going through like a port, a different type.
Also had a couple of other questions for you. In eastern
Washington we understand, I guess Oroville may be a similar
type of a situation, is that is there a--what was the name of
the other----
Mr. Hardy. The joint facility?
Mr. Souder. Yes.
Mr. Hardy. We have--have partial construction, we have a
joint facility in Oroville, Osoyoos is the Canadian counterpart
for it. A similar joint facility is also in Sweetgrass, MT.
These are both test ports under the accord Canadian share
border, U.S. shared border. Testing a little larger market, we
were successful doing joint facilities, and we have one in
Danville, WA. And that actually is a one lane each way
noncommercial port. This one we are introducing a concept of
trucking to the joint facility.
And it is definitely a more complex process, especially in
terms of laying out the port so that the people can work
together on various projects because the traffic flows, trucks
going north, trucks going south, and needing some convenient
place at the border side is problematic. We are working on it.
Mr. Souder. Are the facilities on the U.S. side or some on
the Canadian side?
Mr. Hardy. The way it is going to be laid out is that over
the border is shared facilities overhead and the traffic lines
for passengers flow underneath the shared part of the facility.
So up above will be conference rooms, work out rooms,
supervisory offices non-enforcement type offices. Still
remaining keeping our sovereignty and Canadian sovereignty in
terms of searches.
Mr. Souder. Both sides will have a search that won't be
shared?
Mr. Hardy. Right.
Mr. Souder. One other question on the--what we have seen in
the Caribbean and South America are the use of--Customs uses
both marine resources but particular air helicopters and so on.
Do you see additional need for that? We squeeze the main border
crossing, are we going to see more pressure on the Cascades,
Glacier Park and others as we move to the East?
Mr. Hardy. We have seen that trend exactly as probably the
growth of the IBET itself. The purpose of the IBET was because
we were searching so hard inside the port we were actually
figuring we are forcing people to go outside of the port to
bring narcotics in, but for the IBET. One of the concepts was
to force them back into the port, which we were. So we do see
that, yes. Infrastructure both Customs and other agencies need
that kind of technology and additional capability such as you
mentioned to help us between the ports of entry.
Mr. Souder. Thank you. Mr. Larsen.
Mr. Larsen. It may not come as surprise to the members of
community will be to Mr. Coleman about the PACE program. And
you alluded to it. I wanted to give you an opportunity too, Mr.
Coleman, to give a little more detail about implementation of
NEXUS, the timing of it, the resources that we need here in
Blaine to make that happen, as well as the enrollment of the
timing and what kind of help you need in enrollment. So
enrollment, and then staffing of the booth, if you will, and
time lines for both.
Mr. Coleman. Yes, sir. Just recently Tom Campbell from our
headquarters visited the District and came up and visited the
port. I believe that INS wants to implement NEXUS as fast as
possible. In terms of equipment, just getting the site up and
running for both ports, Pacific Highway and Blaine, I still
think that is about 90 days just to have everything installed.
I cautioned Mr. Campbell that the real trick was going to be
enrolling the 100,000 plus current enrollees in PACE now so
that we had as smooth as possible transition from PACE to
NEXUS. It is not enough to have the equipment up and running.
And it is really not enough to have someone in the booth. I
believe we need an office that the public can come to for their
enrollment and maintenance of that program needs. That is going
to be the hard part. Historically, the inspectional process
that INS runs likes to see things happen in the primary booth
or in secondary. I believe that the time has come to make sure
there is a support office that can support a business practice
such as NEXUS.
Mr. Larsen. On the 90th day, when would that clock start
running?
Mr. Coleman. I think that clock has started.
Mr. Larsen. Enrolling 150,000 plus people requires what
kind of staffing?
Mr. Coleman. It takes a minimum of one officer to oversee
the office, but I believe the model that INS should use is the
model used for application support center where the public goes
to now for its photographs and for--associated with the
benefits applications, and those offices normally run with four
or five people including an immigration officer who oversees
the program and process.
Mr. Souder. Is there an estimate what it might cost one
individual--to participate in?
Mr. Coleman. I am not prepared to talk about costs. The
private sector and public would like to see the cost lower, but
I know there is an application to have the cost associated to
the cost of the program, so I am not prepared to talk about
that.
Mr. Larsen. What kind of--(inaudible) in order to fulfill
the missions you were doing before September 11th and fully
fulfill the missions that you now have after September 11th?
Rear Admiral Brown. We are still working through what the
Commandant has defined as the new normalcy; that is post
September 11th. When the event occurred, we immediately
responded to vulnerabilities that I highlighted in my
statements including Navy ports and passenger vessels and other
maritime traffic using resources we had at that time. We also
brought aboard additional reserves. We had responsive
auxiliaries. And what we find ourselves now in a position of
pulling back from that a little bit, reaching for a more
sustainable level of operation. We are continuing to look at a
maritime security (MARSEC) model that standardizes our
vulnerability assessment throughout all of our ports and gives
us a risk basis for making resource allocations. So short
answer to your question is, we are still making our assessment
of what that new normalcy is. It does have us keeping search
and rescue and maritime security on top priority and as
available attending to the other mission responsibilities that
we still have.
Mr. Larsen. Let me restate that a little bit. What I heard
you say is that bringing in auxiliaries and bringing in
reserve, but you are now looking at perhaps giving some of
those folks a break and then taking a look at the risks that
are associated with any numbers of facilities here in the water
in Puget Sound and trying to determine what more permanent
numbers you might need?
Rear Admiral Brown. Yes, that's correct. We, during
September 11th and immediately following, were at our max
personnel tempo and off tempo and those are things that we
definitely are pulling back on to achieve a more sustainable
level.
Mr. Souder. Mr. Henley, are you currently staffed with all
of the vacancies or are they all filled?
Mr. Henley. No, sir. Lack about 2 of my 52.
Mr. Souder. And have you seen any as you look, air marshals
and others, have you seen any movement away from the Border
Patrol to other law enforcement agencies?
Mr. Henley. No, sir, not in my sector.
Mr. Souder. Do you fear that coming?
Mr. Henley. No, sir.
Mr. Souder. I think a number of people mentioned to me this
morning one difference this large military component that is in
Washington State many recruits, we understand from our hearings
in Washington, come from retired military or local and State
law enforcement. Is there a general feeling that is given a
different pool to this region than others?
Mr. Henley. All of the agents that come up to the Northern
border from the Southern border a lot of tenure to start with.
Most of them have 10 plus years in before they have a chance to
be up here. So that drives a lot of them.
Mr. Souder. Kind of a waiting list?
Mr. Henley. Yes, sir.
Mr. Souder. And you have worked for years in the Southern
border. You expect then if we hire more here, we are likely
to--(background noise; inaudible)--Southern border further?
Mr. Henley. Yes, sir.
Mr. Souder. I am not sure exactly who I started with, Mr.
Coleman. At the pre-clearance places that you have in Vancouver
as well as other parts of Canada, one question, every time we
talk about whether we are going to put any facilities on
Canadian land is whether our agencies can be armed. Are they
allowed to carry firearms in those?
Mr. Coleman. No, sir. There is no firearms in Canada. There
is a lot of work that goes into how many--how we negotiate with
Canada regarding authorities and protection. There is no
firearms. There is no personal protection devices either. And
at some locations, there is no companion Canadian law
enforcement to back us up.
Mr. Souder. So if we move to more of these things, we need
some kind of waiver order before our law enforcement is going
to be willing to move. For example, we talked about putting
truck ports on the Canadian side of the border, the Windsor
Bridge or Buffalo Erie Bridge, but I was just double checking.
To your knowledge has there ever been any waiver like that this
morning?
Mr. Henley. We have limited authority to go through Canada
to Point Roberts, but no enforcement authority in between. So
we do have authority to transport firearms with permits into
Point Roberts, but that's pretty limited.
Mr. Souder. For example, if you are enforcing the law over
in Point Roberts and were coming back, somebody--one of the
drug dealers, for example, could sandbag you?
Mr. Henley. Could be.
Mr. Souder. That in the marine area, which could, this
could either be Coast Guard question to a degree. One of the
unique reasons we came here, we have similar problems in Great
Lakes, to less degree in Lake Champlain. If a boater heads from
the Canadian side to the U.S. side, what mechanisms do we know
that they don't have a terrorist or drugs on board? Do they
have to register? Is it the same when they come in at other
border crossings? If they don't go to a border crossing, do we
have methods of monitoring? How does that work?
Mr. Hardy. Perhaps I should start with that. We have border
ports of entry at Friday Harbor out in the Islands that people
are required to report to. And also, you know, lesser
extensive, some of the mainland ports. However, we also have a
small reporting system which registers very much like a PACE or
like a--it is a preregistration system, which we try to vent
those people that are involved in that, and there is a user fee
requirement for some sizing of boats that we ask user fees.
Mr. Souder. You do check the people that are registered
against, like if they were crossing another port of entry? In
other words, if you have a license to come in at Friday Harbor,
would you be checked to see if you had given money to Al Qaida?
Mr. Hardy. I don't know how sophisticated this is myself at
the working level. What I do know, it is a pre-approved system,
generally, so you apply and get authorization to call in. So we
would check, generally, but specifically each crossing is not
necessarily--they don't go through a personal check at each
crossing.
Mr. Souder. Admiral Brown, when you work within a narcotic
or immigration question are you working on a tip that you have?
Rear Admiral Brown. Yes. You heard many of the panels talk
about intelligence. Clearly for us that is the most significant
element. We talked about the expansive area, the thin presence
and without clear intelligence, you are searching for a needle
in the haystack. We made a lot of progress. You heard about
IBET and IMET is the maritime equivalent of that. And we
progressed significantly.
Mr. Souder. What would any of you do to strengthen IMET?
Mr. Coleman. I would like to have some resources assigned
to it right now. Everything we do is associated with looking at
cruise ships or small plane traffic that is coming in. And we
have to check all of the freighters coming in. We only look at
containers when we think there is somebody on it, in a
container. But there are not any resources for us to really
look at. A small boat program, and then we occasionally support
IMET. But that is one occasional thing. We have law enforcement
inspectors in the seaports, but they are stretched very, very
thin.
Mr. Souder. Anybody else on that? Quite frankly, it is a
tad silly for the U.S. Congress to spend billions of dollars on
borders if they are going to move to another place and we don't
have a way to address it. We have to be thinking--doesn't mean
we have to do it the first year. And it is just logical way to
address a different thing. And as you look at that,
particularly in the Puget Sound, 200 Islands and so much water,
it is clearly vulnerability we don't have at some of the other
places in the water. North Dakota presents a different problem.
Mr. Hardy. Chairman, I am privy to information.
Commissioner met with the Canadian counterpart, and they have
discussed different methods, for example, checking out of
Canada before you leave and checking back into the United
States. I don't, you know, some of this gets to the legitimate
boating public it sounds scary, but there are some novel things
we are trying to work on in that area so it is being discussed,
I think. If you could have a written reply from us for the
record.
Mr. Souder. My understanding, Admiral Brown, you are saying
your resources are fairly stretched at this point. You said
your first focus is the anti-terrorism; second, search and
rescue, homeland security and search and rescue. You didn't
mention drugs and certainly didn't mention immigration or
fishery which is a huge issue. How far out do you go? Do you
have Alaska region in this zone?
Rear Admiral Brown. No, we don't have Alaska. We go out 200
miles from our coast. We have--17th District has Alaska.
Mr. Souder. Are your resources--are you projected to take a
reduction next year?
Rear Admiral Brown. Based on last figure we saw, we are not
marked for a reduction.
If I could answer two of your questions. One, you asked
about--if I could go back to first question, what else could be
done? I would quickly talk about two areas that have been
addressed, but highlight them. One is enhanced internal
cooperation and coordination among the agencies. We are already
working on a joint revision of Memorandum of Understanding
[MOU], focusing on enhanced border maritime domain where this
element of knowing what is out there, inspection and
investigation coordination and prevention response planning and
operation of coordination. So coordinating the Federal elements
and agencies already in the business. Because we talked about,
as you know, as you raise one, you just have the bad guys to go
to the others. So if we are going to raise the land border, we
need to raise the maritime border equally, so that is
coordination.
The other side is cooperation with Canadian and multiple
partnerships. In terms of North Star and others we can submit
for the record. So it is coordinating together and also
cooperation with our Canadian partner.
And your other question about our effort and the other
areas. We have, as our top priority, maritime security and
search and rescue. We are known for our search and rescue. And
our stations are placed for search and rescue. As we begin to
look at our responsibility for maritime security, we find that
we need to probably perhaps make some adjustment in those. We
do continue to pursue and have returned to our law enforcement,
which is predominantly drugs, migrant, and fish.
We have some assets from the Navy. We have gotten increased
cooperation from our industry partners. And that has provided
us some relief and some return. So we are, again, to attend to
those other law enforcement areas.
Mr. Souder. Well, is all your staff full? Are all your
current allotted slots full?
Rear Admiral Brown. To the best of my knowledge, but we'll
make sure to clarify that for the record.
Mr. Souder. Do you have problems in your office?
Rear Admiral Brown. Not here in the Seattle area but Coast
Guard wide we are challenging our recruiting in the other
military services are.
Mr. Souder. And Mr. Henley, I wanted to ask you a couple of
more questions. Where do you feel your area of the greatest
need is right now?
Mr. Henley. Right now it is the land border between United
States and Canada, about 120 miles worth.
Mr. Souder. And you have a projected increase of personnel?
Mr. Henley. I have submitted staffing, but it is not been
cleared yet.
Mr. Souder. How much would you say that is?
Mr. Henley. That basically triples our resources.
Mr. Larsen. Mr. Henley, question about IBET. Just brought
it up. There, I think, General Ashcroft and equivalent in
Canada looking at expanding, using that model nationwide. Can
you provide me with one or two or maybe three lessons about
what we leaned here that can apply, that should apply across
the border?
Mr. Henley. I think that the IBET concept is a wonderful
tool because the way I look at it I have basically expanded our
IBET portion of it to all of my agents, so all of my resources
are available to IBET. IBET concept simply is that two or more
agencies working together for a common goal, which is secure
the border. So it is a very basic concept. It is not
necessarily an individual--I guess before September 11th it was
probably an idea that you have a team that kind of augmented
resources on both sides of the border. It is--I have proven
pretty clearly that if I triple my resources and I put them up
on the border, then the IBETs are going to have to go further
out east or out the water because we are certainly going to be
forcing that illegal entrance and commodity to the port of
entry and elsewhere, because it is just a proven fact that once
the deck is stacked, they will go to the path of least
resistance.
So I think that working with Canada is a wonderful working
relationship, having been on the Southern border for most of my
career. And we don't have that same luxury with Mexican
Government that we do with Canadian Government. So there is a
common goal here of border security. And I think we can expand
IBET into more real live intelligence driven type information
that would direct--help us direct our agents on the ground in a
better fashion.
Mr. Larsen. I want to followup on the questions about Air
Marshals, and maybe Mr. Coleman help out as well because I have
heard that there is actually, essentially, lack of a better
term, salary ceiling; that there is opportunity for more
advancement in the Air Marshal Program that we are developing
as opposed to staying in INS or perhaps even Customs, Mr.
Hardy. And I wanted to use that as preface to ask a question.
Perhaps in Border Patrol in your sector it is not a problem,
but is it a problem? Are we losing INS Border Patrol or Customs
agents to the Air Marshal Program? And, if so, what should we
do about it?
Mr. Coleman. I will try to take that first. I believe work
force issues, pay issues is, grade issues are paramount to the
effectiveness of the employees. Our inspectors work very, very
hard. And they see other agencies around them. They see other
officers around them. And they see the work that they do. And I
believe that the proper kind of grade, proper kind of pay, will
match the commitment that they're giving and that they're
putting up.
And those work force issues cause problems. Cause morale
problems over time and cause people to be disgruntled. So
whether looking at Air Marshals or perhaps go to another agency
or something, there is room for work to be done and some
important leadership to be brought to bear to support those
officers, particularly the inspectors in our ports.
Mr. Henley. Our general level up here, we are just--we were
able to show headquarters how the levels work up here from
intelligence and other things that agents have to do is step
above the normal Southern border which is GS-9 journey level.
Up here able to get, not only here but in Spokane up to a GS-
11. That is still two pay grades behind any other agency.
Again, these folks volunteered to come up here from the
Southern border, so it is kind of a plumb, actually, to come to
the Northern border from the Southern border. So, I really
don't have a problem with agents putting in for air marshal or
anything else. Most of them are--I'm probably one of the
youngest guys there, and I am not too young myself. They don't
have a vision to move on to something bigger and better, but
the pay standard is lower than other agencies.
Mr. Hardy. We have had 5 out of 100 apply, that we know of,
for the sky marshal job, a couple of interviews. We haven't had
any direct losses. We think it is a--law enforcement jobs are
attractive to different people for different reasons. Sometimes
it is just getting out of the territory you were in and
sometimes it is getting into something very interesting. But on
the whole I think it is just another opportunity. And we just
have to do a better job recruiting to backfill.
I do think the pay issues are definitely there, and I think
right now we have our Customs agents that are assigned to the
air marshal program. I would think because of the
familiarization with the program, they may stand to loose more
than the inspectors.
Mr. Souder. General problems in the Coast Guard as well, is
that correct?
Rear Admiral Brown. Yes. One of our biggest challenges is
being outside of DOD is the way the NDAA is appropriated.
Normally what happens is we get, unfortunately, out of cycle
with those allocations. And our budget sometimes is, at least
preliminary, built when they come through with the NDAA
adjustment. We think it is very important to have parity with
DOD and so for us, that continues to be a challenge that we
face.
Mr. Souder. One of the big challenges, people say put more
people on the border. We start to rob Peter to pay Paul unless
we are training people because we don't want people to take
early retirement from the military either, and if we drain
State and local law enforcement, then that means property taxes
affected, and pay higher salary. It is not an easy question to
try to address.
Thank you all very much for your answers. I want to take
this opportunity to ask Mr. Hardy a couple of questions. I may
not be able to get asked depending on whether we go to some
other parts of Eastern border. That is, do you have any similar
problems on Lake of the Woods as far as water traffic to Puget
Sound?
Mr. Hardy. Yes. Water and snowmobile in the winter time.
Similar type of difficulty. Access is easy but control is
difficult.
Mr. Souder. Do you know, and I should--one rule of thumb,
don't ask a question if you don't know the answer. But I
suspect that--I know the ``BC Bud'' is coming into Indiana, has
moved east--west east in Canada. Do you sense any of that was
coming down though Minnesota at this point, or do you think it
is going further east and then down?
Mr. Hardy. Well, I believe it is coming----
Mr. Souder. North Dakota has had some.
Mr. Hardy. The furthest east I have heard is North Dakota
and in significant quantities. It does not mean--I mean, the
highways just keep moving east, and then they drop down. But,
yeah, we know ``BC Bud,'' once again, in the United States it
spreads out because of its THC content.
Mr. Souder. Does the money tend to come up? In other words,
here the marijuana is going down. Money is coming back to buy
cocaine and heroin. When the drugs move west east and come
down, do you see the money coming back across North Dakota,
Minnesota or is the money coming back here?
Mr. Hardy. We have seen our interdiction of cash coming up
through here to pay for the marijuana, but also a barter system
where cocaine is exchanged for the marijuana. Cocaine market
being in Vancouver B.C., and marijuana coming south.
Mr. Souder. And some case is pressure on Cascade National
Park. Have you seen that at Glacier Waters and at all at
boundary waters?
Mr. Hardy. Those two particular locations are normally
between the ports interdiction. I don't have any first hand
knowledge, but our ports of entry, again, have smaller seizures
but nothing in the extent that Blaine is experiencing.
Mr. Souder. So Border Patrol would have that, but you have
not gone that far yet. Do you have--are there in New York State
we have a case where there is an Indian Reservation goes across
both sides. Do you have any case on that at Grand Portage or
west east?
Mr. Hardy. Yes. Grand Portage has an Indian reservation,
Sudatse, International Peace Arch which is also located next to
the Indian reservation. Also various in Montana, various
reservations do extend toward the border. We haven't
experienced the extent of difficulties that New York has had,
but we recently had a very large seizure--amphetamines through
Grand Portage which was typical of trying every path to bring
that. That is a bulk commodity. It has to come by truck. And it
did come by truck in cargo through Grand Portage.
Mr. Souder. Thank you. But we are--the main border
crossings, but I was not sure on some of those. Anything else?
Thank you very much. I appreciate your participation. We'll
have additional questions.
Will the second panel please come forward.
Second panel. Let the record show that they responded in
the affirmative. We need to have order in the room to carry on
the hearing. We need----
Ms. Meredith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Souder. Will everyone please be quiet. We are trying to
conduct a hearing. If you can go outside. That is probably not
the wisest thing to do, but somewhere outside. We can't get the
transcript if there is not silence. She can't hear.
STATEMENTS OF VAL MEREDITH, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF
COMMONS; DAVID ANDERSON, PRESIDENT, PACIFIC CORRIDOR ENTERPRISE
COUNCIL; TERRY PRESHAW, MEMBER, VANCOUVER BOARD OF TRADE; AND
GORDON SCHAFFER, PRESIDENT-ELECT, WHITE ROCK & SOUTH SURREY
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Ms. Meredith. Thank you. Mr. Chairman and Congressman
Larsen, it is a pleasure for me to be testifying before your
subcommittee today, although I must admit I am usually on the
other side of the table. I also welcome you to this part of the
continent. I hope you enjoy your stay, albeit a bit wet.
This area contains two of the busiest border crossings west
of Windsor, Detroit; the passenger vehicle crossing at the
Peace Arch, and combined commercial and passenger vehicle
crossing 1 mile to the east. I don't imagine that there are
many border crossings anywhere in the world that have a more
beautiful setting than the Peace Arch crossing. In the middle
of the conjoined states and Central Park is the Peace Arch
itself, which stands as a symbol of our cross border
friendship. There are two mottos on the Peace Arch, one
stating, ``Children of a Common Mother;'' and the other
stating, ``Brethren dwelling together in unity.'' This is how
many people in this area on both sides of the border have
thought about each other as family. Quite different you might
notice than the east coast and the eastern States.
Mr. Chairman, I understand you have had the opportunity to
tour other parts of this border region and seen in many places
the border is no more than a ditch. In an isolated world, that
ditch would be sufficient to maintain the required level of
security between our two countries. But today we live in a very
globalized environment, and as events of September 11th showed,
threats can come from anywhere. However, a fortified Canada/
U.S. border will not increase security on this continent. Yes,
security has to be increased, but not at the risk of
jeopardizing the $400 billion U.S. in two-way trade that
crossed our border last year.
Other witnesses with me will go into the details of
economic importance of our border, but I would like to remind
the subcommittee that $20 billion U.S. in American industrial
output is exported to Canada each and every month. In the past
our relatively open border has been viewed as forest by some
individuals on both sides of the border. Illegal drug
importation has been a two-way street. I believe you would find
that Canada Customs drug bust at the border often exceed the
number of seizures by their American counterparts.
Citizens on both sides of the border have expressed concern
about the deplorable people smuggling industry, which has also
been a two-way street.
In addition, many Canadians are concerned about the flow of
illicit firearms that are smuggled into Canada. Criminal
offenses in both countries--used properly the border is very
effective law enforcement tool.
However all the issues seem minor in light of the event of
September 11th. There is great cooperation locally with
integrated border enforcement, and I am glad to see that the
agreement with Attorney General Ashcroft signed with our
Solicitor General will give additional resources to these
teams.
However, I am suggesting that we go beyond the piece meal
approach of these agreements and develop a fully integrated
border management agency. One way to describe this agency is as
a civilian version of NORAD, a bi-national agency to protect
our borders. As described in my written submission, which you
have been provided with, this agency would provide both nations
with a significantly increased security, not just physical
barriers that jeopardize our bilateral trade, but through
shared intelligence. Our immigration, Customs, and law
enforcement, intelligence agencies on both sides of the border
would have knowledge about the movement of everyone entering
Canada and the United States. Key to this proposal is a
separation of pre-clear, low risk travelers who voluntarily
undergo pre-screening from individuals who show up at our
borders as unknown entities. Using interactive biometric cards,
this would allow real time delivery of intelligence among the
various agencies.
By giving these low risk individuals expedited entry into
our countries, our security forces can concentrate their
efforts on high risk or unknown individuals. By extending
coverage to low risk goods carried by pre-cleared companies,
such a system should actually improve the movement of goods
than was the case prior to September 11th. Mr. Chairman, this
plan is a culmination of over 5 years of work on border traffic
that I have been involved in.
In May 2000, I offered this report on trade corridors for
Canada and U.S. parliamentary groups, and I have also provided
copies of that for your committee to consider. My current
proposal is just another extension of this report, but there
appears to be greater inclination from members on both sides of
our border to address these problems. While the events of
September 11th are unparalleled tragedy, let us create
something good out of this disaster. Thank you for allowing me
this opportunity to present my written report and my verbal
report.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Meredith follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.031
Mr. Souder. Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank
you for your participation and working with the U. S. Congress
and the House of Commons and our Senate because I think that is
an important long term way to keep continuing to work together
and appreciate your participation today.
Mr. Andersson.
Mr. Andersson. Thank you Chairman Souder, Mr. Larsen. And
it is a pleasure and honor to be able to address you today. We
are the Pacific Corridor Enterprise Council [PACE]. We were
great supporters of the Peace Arch Crossing experiment when it
first came into being. Unfortunately, it was a low tech
experiment and as our border inspectors found, it deserved from
time to time the nickname, the ``paraphernalia'' contraband
express lane. We can't defend it any more. It is time to move
on. We adopt and are enthusiastic about Mr. Larsen's comment.
We need NEXUS and we need NEXUS now. We have conducted some
research into what it would take to have NEXUS here. We
listened with great interest to Mr. Coleman's comments. Meg
Olson, a local from Blaine here in accessed information
request, found some interesting numbers. It would take $172,000
to implement DCL installation factors, and five inspectors cost
about $20,000 a month. And we would be happy to share those
with Mr. Coleman, although presumably he has a copy.
But whatever we can do to move the agenda forward by
enthusiastically supporting those who share--embrace the
concept that when you drain the stream of legitimate business
travelers, who are among the commerce of our two nations, then
you allow our inspectors at the border to concentrate on the
problems. And that is a concept that I believe you will find
support for within the inspection agencies. With our biometrics
that are available today we can do it. We can do it quickly,
and I bet you we can do it in less than 90 days if we really
put our mind to it.
On the Canadian side of the border, I spoke extensively
with Canadian Customs Revenue Agency, which runs CanPass lanes.
They have 66,365 individual enrollees. When you add their
dependents, that comes nigh on the 140,000, 150,000 people who
are willing to step up and enroll very quickly.
We endorse the legislation that the Senate has proposed
introduced by Senators Kennedy, Brownback, Kyl, and Feinstein.
That is bill S. 1749. Specifically we endorse and support the
concept that dedicated commuter lanes should be made available
to the business traveler free of charge. We submit that there
are some great opportunities to move the program forward if you
did that. And the dividends from having people quicker under
the general stream and on to the dedicated commuter lane will
yield dividends far in excess of the fees you would collect,
the user fees.
We endorse the concept of what you can do away from the
border you should, stated many times over by Demetre
Papademetrio the Canadian delegate for international peace and
restated several times by people on both sides of the border.
We have electronically included in our submission a copy of
``Rethinking our Border,'' which is prepared by the Coalition
for the Secure and Trade-Efficient Borders, a coalition of now,
53 and growing business organizations north of the line.
And finally in closing, we are proud members of the
Americans for Better Borders. Our organization is a cross
border organization of business people. Half of us are
American, half of us are Canadian and we join 59 border
organizations who are greatly in favor of continuing our
billion dollar a day in business. Thank you for the opportunity
to address you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Andersson follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.043
Mr. Souder. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Ms. Preshaw.
Ms. Preshaw. And thank you Chairman Souder and Congressman
Larsen for inviting me to participate in this forum. I am
representing the Vancouver Board of Trade. The Board of Trade,
of course, is comprised of hundreds of Canadian businesses with
strong economic ties to the United States either in terms of
trade and/or actually conducting business in the United States
through their other subsidiary company. Invest in the United
States and create jobs for Americans. And in this Northwest
corridor they are particularly critical to our economic well
being. These companies may not survive, and certainly won't be
investing in creating those U.S. jobs if the current sorry
state of the border is not properly remedied.
And let me say it one more time, NEXUS now. We need that
dedicated commuter lane for business persons as soon as
possible, and I agree with Mr. Andersson. I think we can get
this done in less than 90 days if we really put our mind to it.
Business travel must become a border priority. If it does not,
again, our communities, our border community in the United
States as well as Canada will suffer tremendously as they
already have.
One of the things that would be helpful is that perhaps we
could look at having more NAFTA officers available once we get
other things straightened out. We used to have dedicated NAFTA
officers at all of our ports of entry.
For various reasons, they are being allowed to disappear
through attrition. Currently any officer is allowed to
adjudicate NAFTA applications, assuming you know NAFTA
applications are business oriented applications and very
important way of Canadian business travelers getting to the
United States to conduct their important business. If we could
have more NAFTA officers, then we may be able to help
streamline business traffic, and, you know, get these people in
status so they can go to the United States and conduct that
business.
I would like to move over to NEXUS. An idea we had was that
to ensure that NEXUS is not abused by potential terrorists and
such, we might want to consider in the future a system where
there are random biometric measurements that could be requested
at the site, wherever they measure the biometric information.
For example, the card could have four different biometric
measurements on it; voice scan, iris scan, palm scan, or
specific fingerprint scan. But the person entering the United
States would not actually know which biometric measurement was
going to be asked for at the port of entry. That way, a
terrorist could not, for example, you know, chop off somebody's
hand, steal their card and try to get it that way. I think the
random nature could effectively circumvent evil-doer's ability
to plan around this program and we need to think about these
things, because believe me, they are thinking ahead too.
The other idea we had for, well, ultimately helping
business travel, but this could help everyone is perhaps you
should consider streaming entry, that is using designated lanes
for U.S. citizens, Canadian citizens or Canadian permanent
residents, foreign visitors. I don't know if this is, how
workable this would be, but perhaps someone could look at it.
Finally, we are thinking that machine readable passports,
making that the required entry and exit document for all
seeking entry, could solve many problems in terms of the
traveling of all visitors to the United States.
Oh, and my last point, you really need to raise those
salary levels of INS officers so that the INS can retain the
competent people that they already have on staff and hopefully
attract some more.
Thank you very much. I appreciate the opportunity to
address you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Preshaw follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.045
Mr. Souder. Thank you.
And I hope your testimony is not quite as gruesome, Mr.
Shaffer, about cutting off hands.
Mr. Shaffer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Larsen.
Traditionally the job of all Chambers of Commerce is to
increase business in the area. Since September 11th the
businesses in South Surrey and White Rock restaurants, stores,
and lodging is down approximately 35 to 40 percent. The
contributing factor for this is not only the recession
presently on both sides of the border, but also the lengthy
delays at both the Peace Arch and truck border crossings.
It is true that security is paramount, which is good, but
in order to provide an efficient flow to our citizens and
commerce through the border certain remedies need to be
addressed.
And I would simply suggest the first: A new reinstated pre-
clearance and dedicated commuter lane to replace CanPass and
PACE, currently known as NEXUS. This program could be
implemented in 90 days.
Second, it is apparent that Customs control on the American
side of the border is under staffed, with only two of six lanes
normally open at all times. On the side going north, normally
five lanes are open at all times. This means going north 10 or
15 minute wait. Coming south, up to 2 or 3 hours.
Third, the resulting consequence of this is less Americans
are coming to Canada to shop, despite the fact that the U.S.
dollar is worth over $1.50 in Canadian dollars.
Fourth, of all of the residents of Blaine, WA, that I have
talked to, they tell me they love the exchange rate, but they
don't come across the border to shop and dine because it is not
worth the wait at the borders.
Fifth, Canadian business shipping merchandise to the United
States via trucking has been losing profits due to the long
delays at the border. I have talked to some local people in
White Rock and South Surrey. All of their profits are being
lost in paying the drivers time while they wait at the border
for clearance. They say it is about four times what it was
previous to September 11th.
And sixth, on both sides of the border we must work
together to secure orderly fashion that our citizens and
commerce can travel across the border to achieve our goals with
security and without delays.
And I would say in closing, I thank you for being here
today, and I do have a unique outlook on this because I can see
it from both sides of the border, because I am both American
citizen and Canadian citizen. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Schaffer follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.046
Mr. Souder. Thank you for your testimony.
First let me ask for the record--I know I talked with Val
about this. Would each of you support an implementation of the
NEXUS system if someone, particularly if someone abused that
there would be a stiffer penalty? And in, other words, in
effect, if we are saying you have a special right. If you
violate that right, you have twice the penalty you normally
have for violations? Is each witness saying yes? Anybody has
reservation about that?
Ms. Meredith. If I can respond to that, Mr. Chair. I would
suggest that in order to expedite the NEXUS program or a
program similar using biometric and interactive card there
would have to be serious penalty for somebody who was
fraudulently using that system. And certainly somebody abusing
an expedited lane for commercial purposes, I would suggest that
they remedy--discipline would have to also not only driver but
the trucking organization and potentially the business, the
corporation who hired the trucking outfit. I think it would
have to be something very severe, so responsibility of
selecting who is trucking and what kind of clearance the driver
has would be shared not only with the driver but with the
businesses as well.
Mr. Souder. How do business representative feel about that?
Mr. Andersson. We agree wholeheartedly. In fact, there has
been, I think there was a lifetime ban on abuse prior to
September 11th. One additional feature that we learned from our
local dedicated commuter lane guru in the INS, Ron Hayes, with
the new technology the INS, if they are going to be
administrating agency, can turn on and off cars, if they learn
about an abuse of the system afterward. I think it is
additional security feature.
Mr. Souder. One of the problems we have is in the--
Champlain was the biggest drug bust in that border's history.
Somebody using accelerated pass. Trucking company claimed that
they did not know that the driver was doing it. He freelanced,
so would you take that trucking company's privileges away?
Mr. Shaffer. It would be on a case by case basis.
Mr. Souder. How? Obviously every company is going to say
the individual was freelancing. Does this mean the company
would have to have access to the clearance information?
Ms. Meredith. I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, if I may, that
our legal systems do allow people to appeal decisions that are
made. And if there was evidence, strong evidence, to show that
the trucking company and driver, and truck company and perhaps
the manufacturer whoever was, had no idea. But I do think there
has to be a connection between--the onus should be on the
person hiring the trucking company to make sure that they're
using persons of high.
Ms. Preshaw. But remember that when we are talking about
the border what we take for granted in terms of due process
does not necessarily apply. And perhaps there could be a
safeguard built into the system to protect it in the border.
Perhaps that is what should be done. Or maybe there should be
like a three strikes you are out rule.
Mr. Andersson. Add a little bit. There is not currently a
pacing for trucks. Also we do support one, so in terms of what
we are contemplating, NEXUS now is just business traveler, so
they would be individually liable for their own cars in any
event.
Mr. Souder. Right. But I understand that and San Diego and
other places we have experimented with flexibility for Congress
and moving it if you were a regular person. Some--in Detroit,
there are some that go back and forth 17 times in a day. And
trying to figure out how to address that system and yet still
hold somebody accountable and somebody has been in business. It
is not an easy thing to work out. Fine to say, we are going to
hold somebody accountable. At the same time you don't control
your employees. On the other hand, don't even ask the question,
you are not held accountable because then you have deniability.
Three strikes you are out may work to some degree for some
things. Certainly does not work if one of the three strikes was
a terrorist that came and blew up the World Trade Towers. It is
a difficult question. It is because we all agree with the
concept, making the concept work.
A second problem on the--and I believe that is one that is
fixable, but the business community needs to understand that
there is an element of risk with this, and that if it is, if
there is an abuse and we grant it, we accelerate the process
and bring NEXUS into more, at least the major interstate
crossing. If there is one anywhere in that border, the whole
system is going to fall apart and retribution aspect, if it was
a major breakdown it is going to be huge, in that our political
pressure in the United States right now is zero tolerance,
which is, impossible to achieve, and yet that is the political
standard.
Attorney General, reason he keeps saying it is a risk this
weekend, Rick says it is a high risk, is one failure and
they're out. Because American people are being relatively
tolerant. OK. You couldn't catch them September 11th, but they
are not going to tolerate a second round; and, therefore, the
political pressure on all of us is so high. It is why this
stuff is moving very slowly.
Leads me to the second point. The other problem with NEXUS
system is not with the Canadian side of the border. It is our
intelligence systems are not interconnected in that what we
know, for example, of those 19, to degree, and I assume that
the one or two that moved across the United States, in fact, it
looks like they may have moved back and forth four or five
times and the others may be in the process. We were not
tracking it so we don't know. That has caused a different
attitude in the Congress as to how fast we are going to do the
NEXUS because we are not confident that our intelligence
systems right now are sophisticated enough to catch it as
opposed to the actual agent at the border watching. And so,
that is partly--it is not just a function of cost, which is a
function or a function of, can we implement it in a sense of
would it work on almost all cases?
But in a zero tolerance case, looking at whether our
intelligence systems are ready and have all of the information,
the Canadian border person, the Border Patrol is based in
Burlington, VT. That is a long way from here in trying to
figure out how to get that information in a system. Anyone want
to comment on that?
Mr. Andersson. Mr. Chairman, there are two dedicated
commuter lines that remain in operation after September 11th.
One is (inaudible) at our airports, use of biometrics. The
other is Century in San Diego that you mentioned. Both of them
are virtually identical to the NEXUS program. So, we say there
may be precedent. In any event, it would be inconsistent to
leave those two running and not allow us to have NEXUS.
Ms. Meredith. Mr. Chairman, if you would allow me to refer
to my written submission, if you read the written submission,
you will find that it goes into greater detail of how a system
could be used. I agree with you 100 percent that part of the
problem is that the intelligence is not shared in real time. It
is not shared here between Canadian agencies nor is it in the
United States. What we need to do is figure out a way of
getting that intelligence into a central data base that is not
sharing the reasons why, but the names of persons of concern
and the names of persons who are pre-cleared so they have real
time delivery with biometric readers. So that somebody comes in
L.A. airport, the whole continent knows whether or not that
person is being pre-cleared or person of interest.
I think that our concept of a civilian NATO would function,
bi-national agency with all the various intelligence and
policing agencies represented in that agency could deliver
intelligence throughout the continent in real time. And having
that at our disposal would certainly support a program like
NEXUS. Not saying NEXUS is perfect.
My concern is whatever system we use, has to be used across
the continent and has to be used in the perimeter of the
continent so it is one system. Problem we have now is every
agency has its own system. They don't talk to each other. The
delay in talking to each other in the process is set in place.
Just allow individuals to come into our continent and
disappear. We have got to make sure that does not happen. I
think the proposal I put before you in the written submission
that I think is worth developing. And certainly seen support
when I was in Washington last week and bringing it before the
Department of Transportation, FAA and other agencies. Certainly
the interest is there.
I think if we put our resources, combine our resources, and
come up with a good product is much better than everybody going
off and support different products that still don't talk to
each other.
Ms. Preshaw. I want to add, the Vancouver business
community fully supports the perimeter clearance concept that
Val has just discussed.
Mr. Larsen. I want to ask the same question twice. I want
you to put your Canadian citizen hat on. Has to do with
language that perhaps we use in the United States about
harmonization or compatibility of policies. My point of view,
the fact is that we are dealing with a new kind of enemy that
does not recognize traditional definition of sovereignty. The
terrorists who attacked the United States don't necessarily
identify themselves with any one country but with a thought.
And so, if we are dealing with that new kind of threat, does
not recognize traditional definition of sovereignty, how much,
from a Canada citizen perspective, how much sovereignty, I
suppose, are you willing to consider relaxing to help deal with
that threat? And I ask that question because it is the same
question, someone asking ourselves in the United States, how
much privacy rights do we give up, civil liberties? Where is
the envelope end on that? Can you help me understand that?
Ms. Preshaw. Well, certainly is a slippery slope, but
nevertheless, I--the feedback that I am hearing from my
Canadian friends and business acquaintances as such is
notwithstanding some of the comments that have been made by, I
believe, Christian, and Emily, couple of weeks ago, most are
feeling that we are now North America. And we still retain
here, well, up there in Canada, certain concepts and freedoms
that are different from those of the United States, and there
is no reason why we can't retain those up there.
But, security is a pressing concern, and I believe that
both countries are willing to make some sacrifices in terms of
perceived sovereignty issues and in terms of some personal
liberties that we have all taken for granted. I believe most do
envision that sacrifice will be demanded and will be gladly
given. You will hear some kicking and screaming, but in the end
I think that people will feel well served if we can ensure
continental security.
Mr. Larsen. Val, ask the same question of you.
Ms. Meredith. Yeah. I think the concept of sovereignty is a
perception problem. What Canadians perhaps don't understand is
that every state, including Canada, has the right to ask every
individual who comes to our country questions. Any number of
questions. Most of them, if not all of them, very personal
questions. That is the right of the country when somebody wants
to come into it.
For Canadian travelers, having just gone through a little
study from the airline industry perspective, 94 percent of
Canadians are already pre-cleared, pre-screened in our airports
before they enter the United States. So U.S. authorities
already have some fairly personal information about us before
we even get on the airplane.
Now, there is some concern about more invasive information
that will be asked to be shared. And I think that in the
proposal that I made, it is voluntary. If somebody wants to sit
in a 5-hour line up, that is their choice. If they choose not
to, they are voluntarily giving up that information to whoever
is asking, whether Canadian or American authority.
I think as far as a nation is concerned, if the information
is not necessarily being shared, if the integrity of the RMCP
information is still held in Canada, but the names of the
people that they might have of interest are in the central data
bank, and the same with the CIA, if the integrity of their
information is maintained in their nation, then it is not a
question of challenging sovereignty. I think there is a way to
get around it. I think that we have done it before. I use NORAD
as a great example. I think the sovereignty issue is perhaps
misnomer, that it is concept as opposed to reality.
And I agree that Canadians see themselves on a continental
basis. I think Americans now almost see themselves on
continental basis. And I think there is a greater willingness
now than there was pre-September 11th to deal with that--that
wider perspective that we are family, that we are neighbors, we
are allies, and it is time we started working together in a
very real sense. The threat against your security is a threat
against our security, and I think we realize that.
Mr. Andersson. I see the light is red. Let me just add, in
1999 Canada passed pre-clearance act which cedes' sovereignty
over certain space in our airport, our pre-clearance area. It
does not go to the extent to permit gun carry, but it allows
almost all other law enforcement activity to be carried out in
those places.
And in addition, following Attorney General Ashcroft's
visit to Canada recently, there may be some movement afoot to
share CCRA data bases, and it would be very easy to. I mean,
you have just seen yourself, the whole 110 debate, if you
logged into the Canadians returning to Canada, check in with
Customs on data base, and it is very simple to do. CPICK, the
Canadian police checks, have been shared with INS and the
Customs authority in the United States for years already. So
most Canadians, if they don't know it, it won't hurt them. And
you won't offend their sensibility.
Mr. Larsen. For Mr. Shaffer. Do you see a difference in the
hit the smaller businesses are taking versus larger?
Mr. Shaffer. Absolutely. We have been talking to a lot of
businesses in the area in the last few weeks, and it is the mom
and pop business being hurt the most. I find that the much
larger enterprises are actually doing a little better than last
year at this time. But the small businesses, and not only the
small ones, but what we were talking about this morning in our
chamber meeting, something came up that was really, I didn't
realize was happening is that the high end restaurants are
suffering very much, but the fast food restaurants are booming
so there is something saying there. The people are saving their
money and just waiting day by day to see what is going to
happen next.
Mr. Souder. Why would the larger businesses be up?
Mr. Shaffer. I think the larger businesses are businesses
where people need those things, not boutique where you go to
buy something you just think you might want, but the larger
businesses, and of course right now people are buying hard
items. And automobiles are up because of the low rate for
financing. A lot of companies are offering zero financing.
Homes are selling 50 percent from a year ago because the
mortgage rates are the lowest in 20 years.
Mr. Andersson. I want to note a comment. When I met with
business owners up at Point Roberts, the market place business
was down 50 percent. Gas stations down 50 percent. Restaurant
business 50 percent. It was very consistent, and maybe they
meant beforehand and said, use the 50 percent number, but by
the same token, I don't think they did. It is clearly
comparing--when they compared September 1 to September 10, 2001
to 2000; and then September 12 to the date or day before the
meeting 2001 to 2000, and clearly showing the direct impact of
the line up at the border.
Mr. Souder. So----
Mr. Shaffer. Everybody's waiting to see what is going to
happen, and that is why all of us are--that we get a NEXUS
program as soon as possible that is efficient but secure.
Mr. Souder. Is 35, 40 or 50 percent right around the
border? Has it gone down in Vancouver as well? Is it
proportionally less impacted at the border?
Ms. Preshaw. No. It is very bad in Vancouver, what has
happened. Even though the Canadian dollar is so low, and let me
tell you, there are some major bargains to be had. It is--
nobody is coming. Nobody comes up. One time I came up, because
I come up every other week, usually on Wednesday, I got to the
Canadian border. There was no one there. And I had three Custom
guys all to myself. One was chatting with me; other looking
inside my car; and the third one, poor man, had to look in my
trunk, and, you know, that was it. I was the only one. So I
went up there, and I did my Canadian patriotic duty by buying
lots of goods and bringing them back to the United States.
Merchants are so glad to see anyone, but especially an American
because we are virtually a nonexistent species up there now.
And it is because the border is perceived as being a barrier,
and not so much coming into Canada but trying to get out that
is the problem.
Mr. Souder. You have any number, what this might be
elsewhere?
Ms. Preshaw. Well, typically, Whistler would be the next
destination beyond Vancouver, and my understanding is
definitely the numbers are down at Whistler also.
Mr. Souder. Mr. Andersson, do you represent manufacturers
as well?
Mr. Andersson. Yes, sir, we do.
Mr. Souder. And you heard about how the trucking companies
are being impacted. Have you seen any manufacturing drop off?
And can you tell has that drop off--let me ask the question
several parts and you sort out which way you want to answer it.
That we clearly had a softening of the economy about a year ago
in the United States, so we were already having a trend line
that was building. September 11th seems to have--simplest thing
is to look at our stock market. Bottom fell out. Now it is
almost back to where it was pre-September 11th, but still soft
and certain part of that. Is it a similar pattern in the
manufacture and retail? What are you kind of seeing as the
impact? Probably trying to sort out what is the economy and
what is the border.
Mr. Andersson. The Coalition for Secure and Trade Efficient
Border is Secretary is the Canadian Manufacturer of Exporter's
Association, who have compiled statistics which I could try to
give you back, but I think if you wanted to send that question
to us we could provide you with very real particulars.
Mr. Souder. Also we may stay in touch with that to get a
moving target to try to separate the questions. Intuitively you
feel that the border is having a big impact and we all knew
that. It is hard to quantify that as we are hearing different
numbers at different border crossings across the country.
Ms. Meredith. My understanding, Mr. Chairman, when I was
talking to some Customs people, the flow itself, the number of
persons going using the border crossing has gone down since
September 11th. The numbers are down, I understand, 20, 25, 30
percent, so we are not dealing with the volume that 4 hour line
up. We are not dealing with volume we used to have. It is a
reduced volume.
Mr. Souder. I want to do something a little different for
just briefly. Mr. Hardy, could you come back up? I am not going
to put you under these questions. You may have to come back,
but if you could come up, I want to ask you a question or two
on the--if you could also on the numbers of what Customs has
seen on the trade.
Ms. Faron. Thank you----
Mr. Souder. And I need to swear you in so I can put it in
the record.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Larsen. Could you spell your name for the record.
Ms. Faron. F-A-R-O-N. We just got our figures from fiscal
year 2001, and the truck numbers are down maybe 100,000 from
fiscal year 2000, cars are down about 200,000 from last year.
Mr. Souder. What was it.
Ms. Faron. It was 3.3 million in 2000, cars. And it is 3.2
million so 500,000 down in fiscal year 2001 for cars in Blaine.
That is just Blaine we are talking about, the two crossings in
Blaine. And trucks in 2001 about 520,000 and last year it was
about 490,000.
Mr. Souder. Did most of that drop seem to be in the last
month?
Ms. Faron. I know for cars, they were down almost 40 in the
last 2 months and the numbers of crossing compared to last
year.
Mr. Souder. But you don't know trucks for sure. Could you
get that?
Ms. Faron. Yes.
Mr. Souder. And Mr. Shaffer had said that sometimes going
north five lanes were open and going south sometimes only two.
Is that personnel problem or is it a----
Ms. Faron. It would normally be personnel. I think we have
usually had more than two lanes open, but it is a matter of
staffing. When we have staff available. We open as many lanes
we can with the staff we have.
Mr. Souder. Do you have a request in for more staff to open
more lanes? The reason I am asking the question is for all of
the talk about 90 days, we are not going to get FBI and the CIA
to talk to each other in 90 days--[laughter]; (unintelligible)
it is not, in addition to getting the machinery and all of that
kind of stuff up, we have to figure out other types of ways to
short term deal with it. Do you have a request in to get
additional help so more lanes can open on the weekends?
Ms. Faron. We just got nine additional bodies. Half of them
are at school, so they won't be here until February. And when
the new appropriation, State of Washington is getting 30
additional bodies. I don't know how that will shake out for
Port of Blaine, but we will be getting more.
Mr. Souder. Do you see the Guard being able to relieve any
of those functions to be able to open up lanes by not having a
Custom Inspector?
Ms. Faron. I can see them helping at the ports that are
normally closed. They could help secure staffing then, and that
would free up inspectors to do other things.
Mr. Larsen. Just a comment on the National Guard. Some--
support moving the National Guard up here, but as a supplement
and not a replacement for what we need here in terms of full-
time staffing. Even the National Guard is going to be tested in
terms of their ability to devote their time and resources as
well.
Mr. Souder. The function--in reality, what we are trying to
do is figure out multiple tiers here. One is a longer term,
which is more technology plus some plusing up of staff. To the
degree we can do joint things, that will be great. That is
where we are clearly headed between the two Parliaments and
Congress, and the Commission. And when I was in Ottawa meeting
with Solicitor General, Judiciary Committee and chairs trying
to look at that and there is general agreement to try to do
these kind of things.
We also short term problem. Short term it's, we are moving
people in different ways. The Guard is really a combination
until you can get permanent agents and/or equipment, they're
not a long term solution. And we are wearing the Guard out all
over. And also, quite frankly, while it gives some semblance of
psychological security to some people and hopefully
intimidates, it is not particularly comfortable at an airport,
necessarily, to have people wondering around with automated
rifles and machine guns or whatever either. It is not--yet at
the same time a lot of what we are battling right now is
psychological in these trade questions. Some of it is real in
the sense of back up. And some of it is, I am worried there is
going to be a line. I am worried that my airplane is not going
to be safe. So we are trying to deal both with the
psychological problem and the real problem. And to the degree
we can figure out how to address the real problem, we are
clearly not going to back off short term even a year, if ever,
on the security clearance, so we have to figure out a way to
address the other.
Ms. Preshaw. Psychologically, it would certainly make
everyone feel a lot better to have every single booth manned at
those high travel times. I have never seen that.
Ms. Meredith. I would like to take this opportunity, Mr.
Chairman and Congressman Larsen, to thank you for having a
Canadian delegation appear before you. I think it is very
important that we keep the dialog going between Canada and the
United States. And thank you for very much for the opportunity.
Mr. Shaffer. I would thank you gentleman also.
Mr. Souder. Thank you. Our nations are so incredibly
interconnected and getting more so. We will always maintain our
independence and all have our own little things that we are not
about to give up our sovereignty about. But our trade
interconnection is huge, and it's not just business trade. It
is having do with the 1,400 nurses that come across from
Windsor to Detroit. And all of a sudden they were being held up
and the hospitals were not able to treat people. Tourism. One
of the things I joke about in our Parliamentarian session are
that our Florida Congressman probably have bigger, more
Canadians in their districts then the write-ins in Canada that
we have become so interconnected. So I appreciate you
participating.
If the third panel will come forward: Honorable Georgia
Gardner, Mr. Pete Kremen, Mr. Jim Miller, Ms. Pam Christianson,
Mr. Barry Clement, and Mr. Jerry Emery. Remain standing.
Mr. Souder. Senator Gardner, have you lead off.
STATEMENTS OF GEORGIA GARDNER, SENATOR, WASHINGTON STATE
SENATE; PETE KREMEN, WHATCOM COUNTY EXECUTIVE; JIM MILLER,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WHATCOM COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS; PAM
CHRISTIANSON, PRESIDENT, BLAINE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; BARRY
CLEMENT, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION, CHAPTER
164; AND JERRY EMERY, VICE PRESIDENT, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, NATIONAL INS COUNCIL, LOCAL 40
Senator Gardner. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to
speak to you today and present materials regarding border
issues. I am happy to have you in my community, and it is my
home town. For the record, I am Georgia Gardner. I am the State
senator for the 42nd District, which is about two thirds of
Whatcom County, and I have five different international border
crossings in my district.
I am a resident in Blaine, and I have also owned a business
in Blaine, and I am a Certified Public Accountant in the United
States and chartered accountant in Canada, so I deal primarily
with cross border individuals and businesses. So I have been an
observer as well as a neighbor of this border for many, many
years.
Prior to my 5 year service in the State legislature, I
served 8 years on the Blaine City Council.
I have been very involved personally professionally,
politically with the problems involved in being located on an
international boundary. Our border communities are small towns
just across the line from a huge population of the lower
mainland of British Columbia, and I think this is mostly true
of the Canadian, U.S. border clear across the country. In many
ways British Colombians are partners in our economy, our best
customers, and a great source of employers and employees.
Because jobs are limited in our small communities we have
significant number of our residents who regularly work in
British Columbia. We also have a large of number of B.C.
residents that work in our business here.
St. Joseph Hospital in Bellingham, which is one of our
largest employers in the county, is a 253 bed level 2 trauma
center with 1,800 employees, 100 of whom live in British
Columbia. And these workers range from physicians to nurses to
housekeepers, technicians. And St. Joseph is dependent upon
their ability to cross the border to get to work. Lives
literally depend on them. I am attaching a letter from the
hospital which more completely explains their concerns. Their
story is much the same as other employers here in Whatcom
County. Businesses depends on their employees' ability to get
to work, and the individuals need to get home at night to spend
time with their families.
We also depend on British Columbia customers as you heard
from many of us here today. We have traditionally enjoyed a
large number of our Canadian neighbors visiting to shop, eat in
our restaurants, to buy gas and groceries. They stay in our
resorts. They catch our trains and planes, and many own
vacation property in our community. It is been a great
partnership. They have the population, and we have the goods
and services.
With the difficulties at the border, traffic south just is
not moving. We have experienced a 60 percent or greater drop in
retail businesses, and our restaurants and resorts are empty. I
believe you stayed at the Inn at Semiahmoo. That has been a
huge source of tax revenue for the city of Blaine, and we
greatly miss their high occupancy rate. One of our businesses
here in Blaine, International Cafe and Motel, has had to reduce
its work force by two-thirds. That is a serious loss to a small
community. This, unfortunately, is the norm. We are going to
begin to lose businesses and jobs very quickly unless we can do
something to increase the flow of traffic across the border.
We also have a lot of our products to take into Canada to
sell. In fact, most of the Washington exports to Canada are to
British Columbia. Again, we need to get them across the border
to make a sale. Again, I am attaching a background sheet from
the Washington State Commission on Trade and Economic
Development. It gives more detail and statistics on trade and
tourism between Washington and British Columbia.
I am very concerned about the four mainland border
crossings in Whatcom County (Peace Arch Crossing, Pacific
Highway Truck Crossing here in Blaine, the Lynden-Aldergrove
Crossing and the Sumas Crossing). But I want to say a special
word about Point Roberts. I think historically when the folks
back east decided to make the boundary between Canada and the
United States the 49th parallel, they didn't look at the map to
see that little peninsula that has that tip that dips below the
line.
Point Roberts is a 5 square mile piece of the United
States, that is for all intents and purposes at this point
completely cutoff from us. There are about 1,300 permanent
residents. They are part of the Blaine School District. And the
grades four through high school must come to Blaine. The
problems at the border not only impact the school busses which
must cross twice in each direction, but they also impact the
ability of the students to participate in extra-curricular
activities and parents' ability to volunteer at the school. Our
greatest concern is for students who are sick or injured and
the parents can't get to them to take them home or to authorize
medical attention.
We need help at the borders and we need it as quickly as
possible. First, we hope that we can keep the full complement
of personnel now assigned. We need the National Guard troops to
assist, but we don't want to lose any of our existing
inspectors. We need to open additional inspection lanes.
We need to reinstitute the dedicated commuter lane that you
heard so much about this morning. And I would ask that the
first priority in reinstating this is to give Point Roberts'
residents and persons employed in Washington, while resident in
British Columbia, first priority for getting clearance. Second
priority should be for the visitors and commercial travelers. I
know these folks are willing to go through whatever screening
is necessary to have their free passage restored, and I hope we
can move forward quickly with that.
Finally, I do want to mention that our small county has
exceptional criminal justice expenses because we have to
prosecute the cases at the border. Whatcom County has been hit
especially hard with the recession. We simply do not have the
ability to cope with the budget that is attributed to the
border. I have attached a statement from Whatcom County
Prosecuting Attorney David McEachran which will give you
astonishing figures. We are looking at approximately $2.3
million of our criminal budget that is directly attributed to
the border.
We appreciate the additional security at the international
boundary, and we support it. No one knows as well as we do the
problems of living on the border. And we want to cooperate in
any way we can--as we have in the past. We are used to being
additional ears and eyes for the Border Patrol and other
authorities. We understand crossing the line will never be what
it was once. We very much appreciate the work you are doing and
we appreciate the fact you have come to our community to talk
with us. And I would be happy to answer any questions you might
have.
[The prepared statement of Senator Gardner follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.056
Mr. Souder. Thank you very much for your testimony, and we
will insert it into record, all your additional comments. I am
convinced listening to westerners fight over water when in the
Midwest we are always flooded, that the original goal of the
29th was California was going to build a canal and drain that
portion and then it would have been connected.
Mr. Kremen.
Mr. Kremen. Correct. Thank you, Chairman Souder and Mr.
Larsen. I want to thank for the opportunity not only to address
you today, but the fact that you are both here as Senator
Gardner, just a couple of seconds ago, the fact that you are
here and it is obvious to me and I am sure everyone else in
this room that this is not what some might say would be a dog
and pony show. You are actually here. You are sincere and
genuine in hearing what our comments and suggestions are, and
it is apparent that you, Mr. Souder, that in your travels in
other border areas of the country have really been listening,
and I am very impressed.
I really don't have any prepared oral remarks because I, at
the urging of President Bush, took a 2-week trip on an airplane
and arrived literally hours ago. My first 2 week vacation in 26
years. And I have an executive assistant who is extremely
sensitive and compassionate and never called me to let me know
that this was on my first day back. But let me have a feeble
attempt at giving some oral testimony for your information and,
hopefully, to benefit not only this community but the county as
a whole.
The recent terrorist attack severely crippled not only the
border area, but a lot of the country, but particularly this
county. And I say that because this county is relatively small.
When you compare it with the other two large ports of entry on
the northern border, Detroit and Buffalo, we are extremely
small. We have a population in Whatcom County of about 172,000,
and we have up to 26 million crossings a year. Currently I
think we are at about 15 million. That is an awful lot of
traffic for a community the size of Whatcom County. So we have
been inordinately affected by the events of September 11th, and
when you add the local economy and the national economy to our
overall economic climate, it is extremely weak, and that is at
best.
We have, because of the, in spite of the fact that we
produce about a third of the power consumed by the city of
Seattle in Whatcom County, we had two of our largest employers
shut down. One permanently, Georgia Pacific, 420 employees
there. That is our sixth largest employer. Our second largest
employer is still in idle mode. They are not producing
aluminum. It is Alcoa. That is over 1,000 employees. Second
largest employer in the county. When you add that all together,
we need some help.
Border staffing is essential, and it needs to happen
quickly. I appreciate the efforts of the good Congressman from
Everett who represents the Second Congressional District. He is
doing just a splendid job, especially when you consider this is
your first term. And I am very grateful for everything you have
been able to do, including the Pipeline Safety bill.
And Congressman Souder, I also want to thank you. This has
meant a lot to this community.
But we need help, border staffing quickly. And you have
heard about NEXUS, the dedicated commuter lane. That has to
happen, and as quickly as possible. And one thing I want to
bring to your attention, is that I do not believe, contrary to
INS, that this is a premium service, and therefore, we need to
charge for it. I think the charge would be counterproductive,
especially if the charge were anything less--or more than
minimal. The purpose of getting this done is to move commuters,
screen, background check, across that border with ease and in a
timely matter; and dedicate the resources for security where
you need them. And so I submit to you that this is not a
premium service. This is a service to help this country enhance
and improve our security. And I hope you can look at this issue
with those remarks when you are facing the deliberation hour.
I also would like you to consider that perimeter clearance
is something that I believe ultimately long-term is something
we should be doing. The mayor of White Rock, British Columbia,
on the other side of the border, Hardy Staub, is also chair of
the Greater Vancouver Regional District, has been working with
me and others to encourage Canadian officials in Ottawa to see
the value of perimeter clearance as well as adopting the joint
NEXUS system. So this is a bi-national reference.
And I also want to commend you again for taking the time
and really listening to what we have to say, and I just want to
encourage you to use your wisdom, your courage, your resources
to the best of your ability so this community, as well as the
rest of the country, come out the better for all of the
adversity.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kremen follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.058
Mr. Souder. Thank you.
Mr. Miller.
Mr. Miller. Thank you Mr. Chair, Congressman Larsen. My
name is Jim Miller, and I am the executive director of the
Whatcom Council of Governments, a regional planning
organization as well as the federally designated Metropolitan
Planning Organization for this region. I would like to thank
you for your invitation to testify before you today. Today I
would like to discuss the importance of secure, cross-border
transportation for this bi-national region.
The United States and Canada are each other's largest
trading partner. This relationship holds true for most U.S.
States as well--37 States have Canada as their primary trading
partner. That is a show stopper. I noticed on your committee
list here, I believe about 17 States that are represented--over
twice that many States have Canada as their largest trading
partner. So while my comments today focus on the border's
relevance to this community, the way our shared border is
realized and managed by both Federal Governments is of national
as well regional significance.
Whatcom County and Lower British Columbia are joined by a
set of border crossings often referred to as the Cascade
Gateway. This area has prospered from a long history of social
and economic ties. Families, jobs, shopping, and recreation
cross the border. As a result, Blaine is the third busiest auto
crossing on the Northern border and the fourth busiest
commercial crossing.
Border-related responses to the September 11th terrorist
attacks aimed at critical security concerns, are, as currently
staffed and supported, impairing the trans-border activities
that characterize the region's people and businesses. Key
aspects of the post-September 11th border include: Level-one
alert status--meaning longer and more detailed inspections with
two inspectors in each lane. There is no time line for
returning to a lower alert level. Two, the region's pre-
approved traveler programs, PACE and CANPASS, have been shut
down. Before September 11th, approximately one-third of
Interstate 5 border traffic crossed by way of these expedited
dedicated commuter lanes.
Our enrollment compared to a combination of all of the
other DCL's in the country, and then you add all that up and
maybe multiply by two you still have more enrollees out here.
It has been tremendously successful.
These changes to inspections policy by both countries and
the resulting border wait-time (2-3 hours during peak travel
periods), have resulted in steep declines in regional, cross-
border travel. October 2001 automobile crossings here in Blaine
have been cut in half, actually down 46 percent compared to
October 2000.
Why do people in this region cross the border? A study
completed by the Whatcom Council of Governments last year
answers this question. About one-half of trips are made for
recreation, about a third for shopping, and almost one quarter
of trips are for work. All of these trips represent financial
and social transactions that Whatcom County is built on. Since
September 11th, half of the trips are not being made.
One institution hit hard by new border policies is our
regional hospital. Senator Gardner touched on it also. St.
Joseph's Hospital in Bellingham employs a large number of
nurses and other professionals who commute from Canada. With
Level-one status and the shut down of PACE and CANPASS--which
most cross-border commuters used to avoid backups--the hospital
has scrambled to deal with new border transportation challenges
and maintain patient care. And, the medium-term likelihood is
that, without a return shorter trip-times, the travel costs of
cross-border commuting will eliminate a labor market that
employers in our community depend on.
Our heightened focus on land border security will not be
sustainable if it trades on our social and economic
relationships.
In the near term, the Whatcom County-Lower Mainland B.C.
region desperately needs the following: One, enough Federal
inspection agency staff to open all of the inspection booths
that are currently built here--both for passenger and
commercial traffic. Two, the reinstatement of a pre-approved
travel program. Three, continued development and installation
of pre-arrival clearance systems for cross-border trucks. Four,
infrastructure to support secure, pre-arrival processing and
clearance for both trade and travelers.
Meeting these needs depends on coordinated support from
multiple sources.
Efficient levels of staffing for ports of entry will
require increased funding. Unified port management would also
improve staffing efficiency.
Pre-approval of goods and people, a vital component of a
secured-mobility future, will depend most on interagency and
international enforcement integration.
And funding for border infrastructure and operations should
be increased in next year's USDOT border program. The upcoming
reauthorization of TEA-21 should also include increased funding
for borders.
The ultimate, near-term goal should be secured mobility
through dramatically improved integration. The United States
and Canada need to establish standards on continental security,
harmonize and integrate intelligence and enforcement, and
consequently diminish dependence on our shared border. In the
United States, the border and border agencies are currently the
focus of several reform proposals. During this window of
opportunity, I urge Congress to pursue policies that recognize
land-border ports of entry as distinct environments, enhance
agency functions that are interdependent, and unify functions
that currently overlap.
In conclusion, I am encouraged by several developments over
the last few weeks, such as: The recently signed Joint
Statement of Cooperation on Border Security and Regional
Migration Issues--I did sign this last Monday.
And also the Senate Defense Appropriations bill which
includes significant funding for INS, Customs, and Northern
border facilities and technology.
These developments, while prompted by tragedy, provide an
unprecedented opportunity to improve our nations' security by
being strategic and cooperating more. If we allow our U.S.-
Canada border to grow as a barrier rather than managed its
maturation as a critical part of a broader strategy, we will
trade our sustenance for our security.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to express these
perspectives for this region. I am happy to take any questions
you might have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Miller follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.062
Mr. Souder. Thank you very much.
Ms. Christianson.
Ms. Christianson. Chairman Souder, Congressman Larsen, and
in Blaine we can't thank you enough because you have come so
far, and I honestly didn't think this was a formal thing when I
agreed to do this. I thought it was just another hearing. It is
not.
Mr. Souder. If you make a false statement under oath, it is
not more than 5 years.
Ms. Christianson. Well, it is not my fault. Mail said that
I had to turn it into our street address and post office sent
it back, so it is not my fault.
In recent history Whatcom County, and particularly our city
of Blaine, WA, have been hit by some hard times. In the last 2
or 3 years we have witnessed the decline of the Canadian dollar
and the impact it has had on our small community. In the last
year we have seen two major manufacturers and employers--
Georgia Pacific and Alcoa Intalco Works--close their facilities
due to rising costs of doing business in our county. And now in
the last 3 months we have experienced the aftermath of the
September 11th attack.
With the attack of our country came increased border
security which literally brought our small town to a
standstill. We are a community that relies a great deal upon
business from our Canadian neighbors. Since the 11th, Blaine
businesses report their sales being down almost 75 percent. One
business had to lay off 13 of their employees. Restaurants and
gas stations are probably the hardest hit but every business in
town is feeling the effect.
Out city has one of the most beautiful marinas in the area
and approximately 65 percent of the slips are rented by
Canadian tenants. After the 11th, several boat owners have
moved their boats because they were unable to get across the
border to check on them. Now we are into winter, and they don't
come down as often. It is not as big an issue. When spring hits
they want to come down and use their boats, they won't have
access.
A large number of our Canadian residents own weekend/
vacation homes in Blaine and Birch Bay. These property owners
are already dealing with the decline in their dollar and now
difficulties in crossing the border to get to their homes. This
seems to be the last straw and people are stating that ``It's
just not worth it anymore,'' and they are putting their homes
up for sale.
As Georgia was saying, our school district is affected. The
children of Point Roberts have to go to four times a day. Two
coming and two going. Now the school busses have priority, so
that is not--but the kids who are old enough to drive their own
cars don't get that priority.
As we all heard, we want PACE open.
Mr. Anderson, of Mr. Larsen's office, spoke at our Chamber
last week and explaining that if they reopened it, it would
heighten security. If a third of the people are going through,
you are not going to speed anything up, and so we understand
that.
Another area of concern is the truck crossing. It is not
just truck crossing coming from Canada to the United States. In
Blaine they back all the way down around down the freeway, so
you have truckers that are not willing to go to Point Roberts.
In our business we accept deliveries for the lumber yard in
Point Roberts, and then they send a truck down or they have
somebody come and get it. The other day we ordered some fence
panels for them. It took him 2\1/2\ hours to deliver our fence
panels. I believe UPS does not go to Point Roberts. So they're
really suffering.
Again, it is not just us. It is White Rock. People are not
going up there. They have wonderful restaurants but nobody is
going. Nobody wants to wait. While things are definitely slower
in our community, this letter is not about doom and gloom. Our
local Chamber has launched a program to encourage residents to
shop locally first and support the businesses in town. While
these efforts are making a small difference, it is nothing
compared to the difference more staff at our borders could
make.
Every person in our community and neighboring communities
across the border realizes the importance of keeping our
borders secure. Now more than ever we know that the price of
freedom is eternal vigilance. We would ask you to understand
that in order for our communities to survive it is imperative
that people are able to move freely between the United States
and Canada without worrying about line-ups and excessive
delays.
While our community is surviving at the moment--we would
like for it to be thriving. We need your help in this matter.
Please send more staff to help our Border Patrol and Customs
Agents.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Christianson follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.065
Mr. Souder. Thank you very much.
Mr. Clement. You are vice president of----
Mr. Clement. The National Treasury Employees Union. Local
Chapter 164.
Mr. Souder. So you represent Customs.
Mr. Clement. Customs. Chairman Souder, Representative
Larsen, thank you for the opportunity to provide this
testimony. I am one of the many U.S. Customs employees who
serve as the first line of defense on the border between the
United States and Canada.
I am the president of the National Treasury Employees
Union, Chapter 164. I represent over 200 uniformed and non-
uniformed employees of the U.S. Customs Service. My chapter
covers 14 ports of entry, 13 of those are in the State of
Washington. It stretches as far north as Vancouver, British
Columbia--Vancouver Pre-clearance--as far south as the San Juan
Islands and reaches as far east as Metaline Falls. Each of
these locations specialize in a task essential to the Customs
mission. Those tasks range from the clearance of passengers on
planes, ferries--automobile and pedestrian--ferries, Amtrak,
automobiles, boats, small boats, and pedestrians at land
borders to the clearance of commercial merchandise at our
commercial truck facilities, rail stations, seaports, and air
cargo facilities.
To assist us with the threat assessment at the Northern
border, Customs has installed an auditing system called COMPEX
which takes a random sample of traveling conveyances. Our data
tells us that in the Northwest, we have the richest environment
for noncompliance in the country. Noncompliance is a term that
identifies violations of customs or other agency law.
In light of the recent world and domestic events, Customs
must tighten security at ports of entry. It is not acceptable
to allow automobiles, trucks, and pedestrians through and
around our checkpoints without inspection. This happens on a
routine basis.
There are many solutions to preventing these problems, some
are costly, and others are as simple as installing a metal gate
to close a traffic lane as opposed to a single orange traffic
cone. Surveillance cameras and plate readers, license plate
readers that is, could be installed in locations where physical
identifiers such as license plate numbers, the make, model,
color, and possibly the identity of the occupants can be
readily researched for intelligence and pursuit purposes. This
would provide Border Patrol and other assisting agencies with a
specific target to challenge those attempting to circumvent
inspection and avoid detection. Without these tools we are
limited and the security of the United States remains at risk.
Illegal entry into the United States is quite simple. We
have miles of wooded areas between ports. These locations
conceal the movements of traffickers and terrorists alike. Our
only defense is the small number of Border Patrol Agents and
Customs Agents that are understaffed and overwhelmed with their
huge area of responsibility. This is not to mention the wide-
open waterways of the Puget Sound and Pacific Ocean. At the
area Port of Blaine, we have a telephone reporting system where
a traveler on a small watercraft can call and report their
arrival to the United States up to 1 hour before they leave
their residence. Those same systems are in place for small
aircraft and hikers on international trails between the United
States and Canada. The problem with these systems is that we
have no control over when the report of arrival is made. Many
report after they have reached their destination and returned
to their home nearby. Even if we had the ability to send
someone to their location to inspect them and their conveyance
upon notification, the off loading of contraband or subjects of
interest may have already occurred. Most of the smugglers
encountered by Agents during enforcement operations don't even
bother to call because the chances of getting caught are
minimal. Recently the Bellingham Herald, a local newspaper,
wrote an article identifying this same topic. I believe the
name of the article was ``The Simplicity of Entering the U.S.
Unlawfully.''
Commercial cargo at Blaine travels through a new $14
million facility. At this facility, a commercial truck with a
container full of foreign goods can have its cargo cleared and
entered into the United States in less than a minute. That same
conveyance can be selected for inspection and required to back
up to the loading dock or told to pull ahead to the mobile x-
ray vehicle. After referral, the inspector has no capabilities
to monitor the movement of the shipment because the layout of
the facility is not conducive for continuous monitoring once it
leaves the primary booth and the inspector's line of sight.
This creates a huge security and safety issue. If a vehicle had
a dangerous shipment that could cause harm to America, it could
feasibly keep on going and not be detected until minutes later.
Sometimes the cargo is legitimate, but it may contain
contraband placed in the shipment by the driver or someone
loading it. This is not only a problem at Blaine. Other
facilities have less technology and worse security. It is
important to note that truckers communicate with each other,
and they know which port to go to minimize the likelihood of
delay.
Rail cargo is a different topic. I would like to mention
that we have less control of those shipments. At the area port
of Blaine, we have no inspection facility for clearing the five
cargo trains averaging 70 plus cars, or the Amtrak train from
Vancouver to Bellingham.
Customs is not faring well on the legislative
appropriations front. The information I am hearing from the
media suggests that Customs is far from the focus of Congress.
This is unpleasant news in that Customs has taken the lead on
the Northern border in staffing major and remote ports of entry
24/7. Customs has staffed their cargo facilities to ensure that
the billion-dollar commerce between Canada and Customs
continues to flow at pre-September 11th levels. At the area of
Blaine, this demand has forced staffing on the midnight shift
to double. This translates to 10 Customs Inspectors staffing
three locations and an 11th being reassigned to work both rail
and cargo, while Immigration's staffing on the same shifts has
only increased by 1. These additional assignments create even
heavier demands on an already heavy work week.
Customs employees in Chapter 164 are a motivated group with
a can-do attitude. They have embraced every new technology that
has been rolled out by Customs. They have mastered that
technology and become experts in use in a very short time. They
work long hours under less than ideal conditions. Inspectors
work most holidays, and yet some inspectors volunteer to work
16 hours on holidays so that others can be home with their
families. Throughout our chapter, inspectors routinely work two
to three double shifts a week. I know of two inspectors who put
off cancer treatments in the days after the events of September
11th, just so that they could do their part. Yet still after
many long hours in the rain, wind, cold, and sacrifices, they
remain professional in the face of adversity.
I would like to thank you for the opportunity to submit
testimony on behalf of all of the members of the National
Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 164.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Clement follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.069
Mr. Souder. Thank you for your testimony.
I want to make sure that both you and Mr. Emery take back
to your fellow members how thankful both Mr. Larsen and I and
all Members of Congress so your thoughts in Washington can be
expressed. Our thanks as you work over time, work long hours,
give up going in for cancer treatment. You are going above and
beyond the call of duty and we appreciate that. I think that
with Mr. Boehner on board, Mr. Ziegler clearly has been on the
hill before and working it hard. Mr. Boehner, you are seeing
more attention paid to these areas and you will. And some of
the questions will bring some of this out. I want to make sure
you take back to your members that, in fact, you are
appreciated and you realize that we are only as safe in our
country as the skill of your employees at detecting and
catching those people like over at Port Angeles or others.
Finding drug loads, focusing on the terrorist at the range.
I would like to point out, we are all paranoid about
threats. We have had five people die. 17,000 people last
recorded have died. Narcotic attacks in the United States. We
are under that. We are at a point trying to stop that.
Mr. Emery. My name is Jerry Emery and I am the vice
president of Local 40, the American Federation of Government
Employees.
Mr. Chairman and other honorable members of the
subcommittee, thank you for allowing me this opportunity to
testify before you about my knowledge of the Northern border
immigration inspections process. I have proudly served the
Immigration Services 20 years, 7 years in the deportation
branch and 13 years as an inspector on both the Southern and
Northern borders.
I am here today as a representative of all concerned
employees and as their advocate. These employees are dedicated
men and women who protect our borders and perform the task of
enforcing the laws of the land while providing service to the
traveling public. They serve as the first representative of the
United States a traveler encounters upon arrival at our ports
of entry, with the responsibility of preventing drug and alien
smugglers, terrorists, and other inadmissible persons from
entering this country.
Unfortunately, immigration inspectors are regularly
frustrated in their efforts to perform their duties in a
consistent manner. Their efforts to enforce the letter and
spirit of the law, perform adequate inspections, or conduct
system checks and interviews necessary to intercept and exclude
criminal aliens, are hampered by an organizational interest in
facilitation. This is demoralizing to the inspection staff and
severely lowered the recruitment and retention rates. In
addition, the fact that there is disparate pay and benefits
between them, the Border Patrol, and other Federal agencies,
inspectors are not afforded law enforcement status or
eligibility to retire after 20 years of service.
I want to thank Mr. Coleman and Mr. Hayes for the support
on this issue.
Currently, the more than 3,000 miles along the Northern
land border of the United States is protected by a few
understaffed ports of entry like the Peace Arch in Blaine, WA.
The Peace Arch is an eight lane port of entry, my duty station,
is manned by a cadre of highly trained and motivated
individuals who take seriously the trust placed in them by the
American public. The Port operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week, 365 days a year, and is to date staffed with just 24
inspectors who must perform both primary and secondary
inspections, expedited removal, and adjudicate visa packages
and immigration benefits services. As land border inspectors,
they also perform Customs and Agricultural inspections as part
of their primary duties. They intercept and arrest criminal
applicants, possible terrorists, and other violators of the law
all the while providing the best service possible without
complaining or failing in their duty to protect our borders.
This lack of manpower coupled with the higher security
levels in light of the threat of future terrorist actions, has
resulted in the traveling public being forced to wait many
hours to enter the United States. This problem is not unique to
one port of entry or the Northern land border. Airports and
land border ports of entry throughout the country are
chronically short-staffed and under funded.
The issue of increasing border security that we all face
here today is extremely complex and no one person or group can
provide the solution. I believe that a concerted and co-joined
effort by the newly appointed Commissioner of Immigration and
Naturalization Service and his staff, the Attorney General, the
heads of other Federal agencies, lawmakers, and the public, a
solution can be found. I do maintain that any realistic
solution should involve meeting the appropriate staffing
levels.
The employees of the INS applaud the new commissioner and
your fellow Members of Congress for focusing on our issue. They
remain dedicated to their commitment to the safety of those who
place their trust in them and ask for your assistance and
support in their effort to consistently enforce the immigration
laws of this country.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Emery follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.073
Mr. Souder. Thank you very much for you testimony. And this
is the final panel because you can see we have--both sides of
the argument in the same panel how to reconcile, and the
questions are going to be interesting in trying to work this
through. Members of the Congress, for those who have to work in
Washington--7 minutes on any subject is a miracle. And to be
able to be here a whole day and hear actual debate internally,
being able to have Customs and feel the question when another
voice is raised, we don't even get that because we are too
distracted with all sorts of voting and bells going off. This
has been tremendously helpful for us to concentrate and we
appreciate that. We were hoping in the Appropriations bill to
try to work with the Civil Service Committee and Appropriation
to get this problem fixed on the law enforcement status, but it
is a little more complicated in relationship to trying to work
with the different agencies.
But we are trying to address it. Mr. Ziegler brought it up
twice at our subcommittee hearing. He clearly wants to address
it the sense of Border Patrol. We are very aware of it because
particularly this is kind of a new angle here today about not
having job preference as much here. We already had a huge
question, 60 Minutes or somebody did it. Not very pretty story,
but we had problems so we know we have to address that
question. How and when, we can't assure that right now, but
there is a high degree of awareness.
Before September 11th--we call them cardinals, but chairman
Rogers and Chairman Wolfe called a meeting of those interested
in border issues. Normally--I think we had 30 or 40 members
show up. And one of the things that Mr. Ziegler said, talking
about tripling Border Patrol, he said, we lost five agents.
What do you mean, you lost five agents? You are supposed to be
adding. And there is a general awareness across the board about
the challenge we have right now as we look at airport security,
sky marshals, more people in the military potentially in the
long term here, guards getting exhausted as we use them for
everything. And we have to figure out how to pay for this.
Of course, being from Indiana, Ms. Daniels is a friend of
mine, and just spoke at a big Republican dinner in Indiana. And
everybody cheered when they said, cut the budget. Then
afterward they come up to me and said, not our roads, our
Security Trust Fund, by the way we need more tax relief, by the
way we need more this and that. And that is our dilemma.
Senator Gardner knows it is a constant pressure we are trying
to work through in time past, but we are more conscious of
this, and we are going to try to address it.
Let me ask a generic question first. Because in listening
to the last panel and this panel actually, you all agree that
the smaller businesses in the United States are being hurt more
than the bigger business?
Mr. Kremen. I think that is--that is just the way the
economy is any more. I mean, it is pretty tough for ma and pa
to make it anymore because everybody is gobbling up everybody
else. But that is generic. Here we are all feeling the effects.
Not only the economy but the ramifications from September 11th.
It is across the border. I don't know about British Columbia,
but here it is across the border.
Mr. Souder. Let me ask a--driving up last night from Seatac
Airport, if anybody doubts that the world has changed since
September 11th, I had half my district at lunch today talking
about a knife being pulled at Seatac Airport. Before that it
would not have been a national story. It's a whole different
world right now. In Bellingham and some of the other areas
there are large business areas, malls, number of things, and
further south some of the cities that some of the reason we are
seeing that the traffic--in other words, the traffic may not be
down 70 percent as a whole, but is part of that because the
traffic that was going to Seattle is still going to Seattle or
moving some of the bigger cities and smaller cities have been
affected?
Senator Gardner. I think if you look at the pattern, well,
first let me start, Mr. Chairman, by saying, you would make
your life a whole lot easier the next time you come to visit
Blaine, if you will fly into the Bellingham Airport. It is much
more pleasant. We see a pattern of the shoppers, if you will,
people who want to go to the theater, want to go shopping, want
to go to the restaurant, where they start coming down and they
will go all the way down to the first Nordstrom store, which is
in the north end of Seattle. So within that area you will see a
lot of people coming. Obviously, they peel off along the way.
We get a lot of gas and grocery store people here in
Blaine. We get a lot of people in our restaurants. Bellis Fair
Mall, which is the big shopping mall in Bellingham, has a
tremendous amount of Canadian shoppers there. But we still see
people going south. One of the reasons, unfortunately, that we
can sort of measure the impact in our local businesses, is that
the economic down turn hit us a lot earlier than it did a lot
of other places. Fully a year before the September 11th act, we
had already seen the real restriction in our economy because of
the two major layoffs. And what we have seen here in the
Whatcom County area is really apart from the economic
situation. It is more a part of the border, so when we say 50
or 60 percent, that really is a reflection of the loss of the
Canadian shoppers.
Mr. Souder. Is part of that addition--good job of
separating. I am trying to figure out some of this geographic.
You are thinking, I am going to spend a Saturday and go down to
Portland. The additional delay at the border may not be as
significant if I am going across for lunch or I am going to gas
up. In other words, are they seeing 70 percent drops further
down?
Senator Gardner. Yes. As for the Canadian shoppers, I would
expect, yes, they are. Because the person that is going to come
across just for gas or for groceries is just simply not going
to come. But the person who might want to drive down to the
first Nordstrom store, you are looking at 2 hours in the car
just for driving time to the border. If you add travel time on
the other side of the border and the border wait, there is no
time to shop, so they don't bother. I think it is pretty well
across the border.
The only time that I think people will brave it is if they
are coming for a longer period of time. If they are planning to
spend a weekend or if they are catching a plane to go fly down
to Mexico or to Alaska or something, then they are going to
come across, but pretty much we are not seeing people if they
have an opportunity, no.
Mr. Kremen. I get the idea you have the impression that
people primarily go to buy a couple of toys or a meal or see a
movie. I mean, just the statistics that were given to us
earlier today about the truck traffic. The decrease in the
truck traffic is monumental. And I think that is kind of
indicative of the whole situation across the whole set. It is
not just what you would think would be someone just going to
have dinner or a day trip. People in British Columbia that were
doing a lot of business in the States and using this community
kind of a satellite base, have either quit doing that or are
contemplating quitting doing that because of the hassle, time,
and as you well know, time is money, and it doesn't pencil out.
It is a pretty severe situation here. More than you would think
on the surface.
Mr. Souder. I am trying to sort out a little bit out--what
is the difference between small and large and also the fact
border change over longer periods since September 11th is not
as great as you're right on the border here.
Mr. Miller. Let me see if I can take a--roughly 70 percent
of the passenger vehicles that cross the border go through
Whatcom County, and I suspect----
Mr. Souder. What percent?
Mr. Miller. Seventy percent. Now they are on their way
primarily to Seattle. Now those numbers are based on surveys.
But I suspect it has been across. And I agree with Senator
Gardner, that more than likely, and I think I can check for you
on that and check sources.
As far as large versus small, I would suggest that in this
area because we are primarily, we have a few big concerns,
Georgia Pacific, the university, and Intalco; but most of our
business here, as across the United States, is made up of
smaller businesses. But I suspect that because 37 States have
Canada as their largest trading partner, that sooner or later
this is going to hit all elements of the economy. And I think
the dependence, the inner dependence between Canada and the
United States, I don't think is really realized. I know that 85
percent of the Canadian international trade with the United
States. But it goes both ways. So I suspect that it would be
cross sector.
Mr. Kremen. Keep in mind that the population in all of
Canada, about 28 million people, 90 percent of those
inhabitants live within 100 miles of the border. So they are
naturally going to be affected somewhat.
Mr. Larsen. Just a few facts. Washington State unemployment
rate, 6.6 percent. That was the last number that came out,
which apparently is the highest in the country. Last week it
announced that the country unemployment rate was 5.7 and might
go to 7 percent. We are already at 6.6, and we are likely to go
higher. Boeing hasn't yet laid people off. Those people's first
round is this Friday. We are just getting hit a little bit
harder in Washington State.
With regards to Whatcom County, sort of been hit by the
perfect storm. You know, last year it was the energy crisis
that knocked, helped knock GP off the map, Georgia Pacific. And
then, of course, Intalco. And then you had the decline of the
economy generally. Then September 11th. All of that contributed
to the perfect storm of unemployment, if you will, and
therefore hitting the small businesses, large businesses, all
the way around. So my initial comments, I started out by saying
you are unique geographically in Whatcom County. I think a good
argument made about that.
I want to ask a few questions, if I may. First off, echo
the comments Chairman Souder about the support for the people
in the front line. I had a chance to meet with Mr. Ziegler as
well. He is very committed to doing what he can to support INS
employees, those on the front line. I haven't had a chance to
talk to Mr. Bonner yet. He hasn't scheduled things so we were
not able to meet, but I do plan to followup with that. There is
support for people on the front line as a recognition that on
the front line, when you are working 16 hour days, that is not
something that anyone considers the norm. And I want to try to
do something about that. Mr. Coleman, I want to ask you
questions about that, about 16 hour days and your sacrifice.
What kind of role do your members have in deciding what hours
to work or not work? Sixteen hour day is a long day. Is it
strictly volunteer?
Mr. Clement. We have a volunteer system in Blaine where you
pick the days you want to work and, hopefully, the scheduler
can accommodate that. So say I take--this week I am taking
Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday as a 16 hour day. Some people
choose to work the 6th day as overtime. That is basically how
it goes at our port. I don't know how it goes at Oroville.
Hopefully it is the same.
Mr. Larsen. Was that in place before the 11th?
Mr. Clement. Yes.
Mr. Larsen. Is your regular week a 48 hour week?
Mr. Clement. No. Our regular week is 40 hour week. We kind
of promise to volunteer for a double during that time. Right
now we are up to two. We are putting two on top of that.
Mr. Larsen. I have written a letter asking for 70
additional Customs Patrol. That is the number--Do you think
that is a good number?
Mr. Clement. I think that is a solid number. That is the
Research Allocation Model? I have a lot of faith in that. It
took 1 percent of our Customs--Customs' budget to come up with
those numbers when we went through that audit.
Mr. Larsen. We might as well use it.
Mr. Clement. It was hard to take at the time, peel off 1
percent. We had a lot of argument about that.
Mr. Larsen. Jim, you mentioned the term secured mobility.
And we talked about that before. And we will be reauthorizing
T-21 in about a year and a half or so. Talking about
reauthorization, we have started talking about it and jump to
that for a minute. What do you see differently in terms of
mobility and transportation of infrastructure to address
security generally?
Mr. Miller. Well, generally I think that we have to improve
our technology, whether it is NEXUS. I know we have some
regional initiatives up here as far as bonded cargo, pre-
clearance, and I think that has to be broadened. I think as far
as reauthorization goes, you have a brand new program that in
that the Border Section 11.18, 11.19 both are funded from one
pot of money. Initially started through the process. When it
came out of Federal highways there was a firewall between those
two. I believe the total on an annual basis is about $144
million, take down it is a net of about $120 million. So both
borders around the country. I would suggest that the firewall
be reinstored and that there be adequate funding for
infrastructure that goes along with some of this technology. I
mean, you have to have both. For example, you can't have
technology pre-clearance without a lane separating pre-clear
and non-preclear.
And then getting to question as to specifics in our area.
We have through our IMPC up here at the border, all of the
agencies, Federal, State, provincial, local governments and the
private sector to identify and solve problems. And it has been
tremendously successful. And I think that the infrastructure at
the commercial crossings, for example, 543 has been identified
as a top priority for the IMPC, for 3 or 4 years now. That
really--get that fund in the next year or two. I think we could
make this a model because it has technology. Soon as we get the
staff. That is the first thing. But it has technology. It has
the proper separation. It has security. It has been out there
for a number of years. It is ready to go. We have $15 million
of about a $25 million project. That money sits waiting for
additional funds necessary, and that will do it for us.
Mr. Larsen. Just to highlight the letter that Senator
Gardner has attached. I had a chance to meet with the
prosecuting attorney about this issue of funding and for the
cases that they prosecuted and U.S. Attorney's Office could
prosecute. I just want to highlight that as a, just another
example of the problems that we are having in Whatcom County
because of this compilation of events here. It is tough
enough--as a former county elected official, it is tough enough
to be at the bottom of this chain and being asked to do a lot
of things. Problem--and Mr. Kremen outlined another example.
Just another example of these mandates that the county elective
have attempted to fulfill and Whatcom County is ever tougher.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Larsen, I would like to comment on that.
Mr. Souder. This is where the geographic and demographic is
unique in our area. We are the third busiest border crossing
between United States and Canada, yet the fourth busiest
commercial crossing. Yet when you look at the level of activity
you have here as opposed to Buffalo, Detroit, even on the
southern border of the major crossings--San Diego, the
infrastructure is usually the other way around. We have large
U.S. cities that are on the border, and more able, I think, to
absorb some of the criminal justice issues. Here we have a
reverse. Here we have a huge population north of us and small
infrastructure here to take care of the tremendous trade and
movement across the border. And it does make us a little bit
more difficult situation than you see at the other major border
crossings. It is tough.
Mr. Kremen. We also have a larger percentage than almost
any other community of individuals who are denied access in
Canada and they wind up, people with mental disabilities,
mental problems, so it is a real strain on our human services
department and our health department. And you add that with the
collection of criminal elements because of the border town,
etc., it really does exacerbate the normal problems that your
ordinary community has to deal with. And again, to underscore
the difference between our community and say, Buffalo and
Detroit, we just don't have the financial wherewithal or the
ability to generate the kinds of local revenue to deal with
these problems. I think we need some special focus and
attention. And I am not looking for a handout, but I do think
that there needs to be some reasonable deliberation on, well,
maybe I will take.
Mr. Souder. I think maybe one of you can give us something
to put in the record at this point that tells us why this is a
wonderful place to live.
Ms. Christianson. We have 1,300 people in Point Roberts. We
have 3,500 in Blaine. We have about 7,000 in Lynden and 1,000
in Sumas. And it is so important to have you here and listen to
our concerns because it is a wonderful place to live.
Mr. Souder. Before we close, there was something you said
that I didn't understand with regard to the border crossing. In
your second page you said you were talking about new commercial
facility. And you said the inspector has no capabilities to
monitor movement and shipment.
Mr. Emery. Excuse me, sir. That's me.
Mr. Souder. Sorry. Can you explain what you mean by no
capability to monitor? You mean once they go through they can
run for it?
Mr. Emery. Yes. Basically the primary lanes are facing
straight north. And the truck has to take a 90 degree turn.
Goes around the corner and you lose visual contact with it. And
the loading dock is around on the west and set behind the
building, so you can't see if your referral went into the
loading dock or not. A lot of commercial carriers and stuff so
you have some in-house formal way of making sure that goes, but
when you get busy, you can't make sure if they are all parking
where they are supposed to park.
Mr. Souder. Do you know of any cases where they just keep
going?
Mr. Emery. Yeah. They just keep going around the building
and head on down the freeway. Once they get within a minute, a
mile away from the border; 3 minutes will be off the freeway.
Mr. Souder. But you don't know of any cases at this point?
What would you do to fix it?
Mr. Clement. We call Border Patrol. Oh, what we do to fix
it? Just technology, monitoring system, camera. It was a design
flaw that we identified before the building went up.
Mr. Souder. Mr. Emery, the question I had for you were two.
One was where you made a written testimony was a little
stronger as you went through. You felt that your office put in
pressure between trying to expedite traffic and do your
clearance. Does that build on weekends?
Mr. Emery. Yes, it does. From Friday through Sunday it
does.
Mr. Souder. As a practical matter, do different agents
decide which things they are going to check? Do you do more
profiling, or what do you do?
Mr. Clement. Each inspector has its own way of dealing with
the amount of people that come in and out. We don't normally do
a profiling kind of thing. It is--each officer has their
experience, and he uses that experience, and as we lose
officers we lose that experience. When we lose that experience,
people fall through the cracks.
Mr. Souder. You know, people think of profiling as a bad
thing but I came across legalized marijuana and----
Mr. Emery. I don't know how to answer that.
Mr. Souder. Do you find if you work a double shift,
regardless of how hard you are focused, it is harder to
concentrate?
Mr. Emery. Yes, sir. The nature of our work makes us more
focused. The more focused you are and the more you work the
more tired you get. Yes.
Mr. Souder. The importance of us for retention and also not
having people exhausted--I will get into particulars. You don't
realize how close call it is. It is something you notice a
little bit different on a flap. You think, I am going to go
after that truck. Somebody is a little more nervous with a
question, or you saw something weird in the back seat, and you
want to check it. It is astounding how alert somebody has to be
and experienced you have to be to catch them.
Mr. Emery. That is true, sir. The longer you work at this
job, the better at that you get. And if we can't retain those
officers, especially up here we--our officers that are more
experienced seek better pay grades, different agencies, they
are going to go there. And giving our officers law enforcement
coverage and grade structure, we are going to keep those
officers up here.
Mr. Clement. One thing on the retention. I just looked
through the personnel here in Blaine. 18.9 percent of the
inspectors at the end of 2002 will be eligible for retirement.
Mr. Souder. Is the scuttlebutt both of you are hearing is
that people are likely to take that?
Mr. Clement. The stress is wearing on people. I am hearing
people say they are going to call it quits. They don't want to
right now. They are vested.
Mr. Souder. Thank you all for your testimony. It has been
helpful for us to learn nuances and Ms. Campbell personalized a
number of things. Mr. Kremen, I believe, in his testimony said,
a great line: The richest environment for noncompliance in the
countries combined with businesses being devastated because you
can't move across the border, and that is our dilemma in a nut
shell. So we will do our best to address it, and it has been
very helpful.
Mr. Larsen. I just want to say thank you to the chairman
for coming to Blaine, for recognizing that things like this are
not just taking place east of the Mississippi but we have up
here, help illuminate solutions. I am not a member of the
committee, so I want to also thank you for the opportunity to
participate in today's hearing, and I look forward to working
with you.
Mr. Souder. Thank you. One of our biggest challenges--an
illustration somebody coming all the way from southern Montreal
coming across the ferry, New York Trade bombing, going the
other direction. As you see movement back and forth across
Canada, back and forth across the United States, and you see
the cells moving in from Germany and Spain and connected in
Rome and the Netherlands and Canada and the United States, all
of a sudden we are awful small. And all of a sudden you feel
very vulnerable as Americans.
It is very similar to narcotics. And yet, you can't just
say, stop. You are so interconnected at this point. It isn't
just here it is interconnected. It is about 37 States. And many
times, quite bluntly, one of the greatest strengths in Canada,
and one of their irritations is that because we speak for the
most part English, it's a little bit different in Quebec, that
because we are very similar that we don't necessarily realize
when there are Canadian owned businesses or Canadian exchanges
as much as we are aware of other nations' investments and their
connectivness. And we are learning that. This is one of the
most valuable experiences if we do this right. I think we are
all hearing this is likely somewhere in the next 6 months,
whether it is Anthrax, whether it is another attack on
Americans abroad, or whether it is something we heard like in
Montreal, that this is likely to keep us more on edge. The
uncertainly of all of this really makes it difficult to figure
out what I learned, and at is No. 1 thing that business can
look for is predictability. That is the No. 1 thing that we
don't have right now.
Thank you very much for coming. And at this the hearing
stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:55 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2583.082
-