Find a Security Clearance Job!

Homeland Security

 Page 1       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
72–301 PS








MAY 3 AND MAY 15, 2001

Serial No. 29

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

 Page 2       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
Available via the World Wide Web:

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet:  Phone: (202) 512–1800  Fax: (202) 512–2250
Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois
GEORGE W. GEKAS, Pennsylvania
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina
BOB BARR, Georgia
LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
MARK GREEN, Wisconsin
 Page 3       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
DARRELL E. ISSA, California
MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania

JOHN CONYERS, Jr., Michigan
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts
HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina
ZOE LOFGREN, California
MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts
ADAM B. SCHIFF, California

TODD R. SCHULTZ, Chief of Staff
PHILIP G. KIKO, General Counsel
JULIAN EPSTEIN, Minority Chief Counsel and Staff Director
 Page 4       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

Subcommittee on Crime
LAMAR SMITH, Texas, Chairman
MARK GREEN, Wisconsin
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina
BOB BARR, Georgia
  Vice Chair

MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts

GLENN R. SCHMITT, Chief Counsel
BOBBY VASSAR, Minority Counsel


 Page 5       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
May 3, 2001

May 15, 2001


May 3, 2001

    The Honorable Lamar Smith, a Representative in Congress From the State of Texas, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Crime

    The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress From the State of Texas

May 15, 2001

    The Honorable Lamar Smith, a Representative in Congress From the State of Texas, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Crime

    The Honorable Robert C. Scott, a Representative in Congress From the State of Virginia, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Crime

 Page 6       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

May 3, 2001

Mr. Thomas J. Pickard, Deputy Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement

Mr. Donnie R. Marshall, Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement

Ms. Kathleen Hawk Sawyer, Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement

Mr. Louie T. McKinney, Acting Director, United States Marshals Service
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement

May 15, 2001

Mr. Michael Horowitz, Chief of Staff, Criminal Division
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement
 Page 7       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

Mr. Mary Lou Leary, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement

Mr. Ralph J. Justus, Acting Director, Community Oriented Policing Services
Oral Testimony
Prepared Statement


May 15, 2001

    The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress From the State of Texas


Material Submitted For The Record

May 3, 2001

    Response to questions From the Drug Enforcement Administration

    Response to questions From the United States Marshals Service
 Page 8       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Response to questions From the Federal Bureau of Investigations

    Response to questions From the Federal Bureau of Prisons

May 15, 2001

    Response to questions From the Office of Justice Programs (OJP)

    Response to questions From the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS)

    Response to questions From the Criminal Division


  U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs—

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP): Safe From the Start, Taking Action on Children Exposed to Violence

National Institute of Justice, National Evaluation of Weed & Seed, Cross-Site Analysis, Research Report

National Institute of Justice, Research in Brief
 Page 9       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  



House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Crime,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:36 a.m., pursuant to notice, in Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.

    Mr. SMITH. The Subcommittee on Crime will come to order. We welcome all, witnesses and others as well.

    As you all know, we had an unexpected vote occur a few minutes ago, which is why we're getting off to a little bit of a late start this morning, but it was unavoidable. I am going to have an opening statement in a minute, after which I will recognize Sheila Jackson Lee, who is substituting for the usual Ranking Member, Bobby Scott, today, although we're going to at least start off with Bobby Scott in attendance.

    Let me read my statement, and then, Sheila, I'll recognize you or Bobby, whoever is going to lead the opening statement.
 Page 10       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Today, the Subcommittee on Crime holds the first of two hearings on the reauthorization of the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice was last reauthorized by Congress in 1980. Since that time, there has been no complete examination of the authorities under which the department operates.

    Chairman Sensenbrenner has stated his intention to introduce legislation to reauthorize the department this year. To prepare for the consideration of that legislation, he has asked all the Subcommittees to hold hearings on the activities of the DOJ components over which they have oversight jurisdiction, with particular emphasis on the Administration's proposed budget request for those components. The Subcommittee on Crime is charged with oversight of the seven the DOJ components, four of which are before us today.

    Today's hearing focuses on the criminal law enforcement agencies of the Justice Department. They are the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Drug Enforcement Agency, United States Marshal Service, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The remaining three criminal law components of the Justice Department will be the subject of a hearing before the Subcommittee on May 15.

    The FBI is the nation's premier law enforcement agency. Its 27,000 employees, including over 11,000 special agents, work in 56 field offices, approximately 400 satellite offices, and 39 foreign liaison offices. The FBI has the broadest mission of any other law enforcement agency, ranging from violent crime to white collar fraud to domestic terrorism and espionage.

 Page 11       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    The Drug Enforcement Administration is the world's preeminent drug law enforcement agency. Created in 1973, it is one of the newest Federal agencies and is responsible for enforcing the provisions of the control substances and chemical diversion trafficking laws and regulations of the United States. It employs over 8,000 people in 22 domestic field divisions in the 77 international offices in 56 countries.

    The U.S. Marshal Service is the nation's oldest Federal law enforcement agency. Since 1789, U.S. Marshals have served in a variety of law enforcement activities. Today, the almost 4,000 employees of the service perform a variety of missions, including fugitive apprehension, court security, prisoner transportation and custody, witness protection, and asset seizure.

    The 34,000 employees of the Federal Bureau of Prisons are charged with the custody of over 150,000 Federal prisoners in controlled environments of prisons and community-based facilities. Over 126,000 of these prisoners are incarcerated in the 98 institutions that the BOP presently operates.

    The 73,000 employees of these four agencies are ably led by a talented group of officials. I am pleased that four of them are here with us today. We look forward to hearing from each of you about the challenges you face and the ways in which Congress can help you accomplish your goals.

    At this point, I'll recognize the gentlelady from Houston, Ms. Jackson Lee, for her opening statement. And before I do that, Mr. Scott, I was just going to say for the benefit of those in the audience—do you want to explain why you need to move on in a short period of time?
 Page 12       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We're in a markup in education, and I'll be going back and forth. So I've asked the gentlelady from Texas to serve as Ranking Member today, and she has graciously consented.

    Mr. SMITH. Very good. Thank you.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. And I'd be happy to yield to the gentleman to submit—if he wishes to now offer his statement in the record, that would be fine.

    Thank you very much. I'm delighted to assist because there's important work going on in both Committees.

    Good morning, and let me thank the witnesses for their able representation, the very able agencies who we are very much in support of and particularly the American people. It is interesting the great responsibility that the Department of Justice has for the very concept of justice, and people do look to the department for the justice that they so rightly deserve.

    So this morning, Mr. Smith, Chairman Smith, I thank you and the Ranking Member for holding this oversight hearing on the reauthorization of the Department of Justice. It is certainly my view that the Department of Justice should be properly funded to provide essential protection for the American people. It must have our full support to do the job. The Members of this Committee have begun to reach consensus or should begin to reach consensus on funding priorities, and there can be little question that many of us share common goals and aspirations.
 Page 13       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Additionally, I would say that it is important to have this opportunity to reauthorize the Department of Justice. It gives us the appropriate opportunity to review its work and to look for ways that it can improve its work. With respect to the efforts of prevention, rehabilitation, and alternatives to incarceration, I believe in the Year 2001, it's appropriate to address those questions, even with a department that heavily focuses on law enforcement.

    With respect to drug enforcement, we need to continue to look for innovative and effective programs that treat addiction, abuse, as opposed to merely incarcerating offenders, but yet we must also provide the training and support systems that help engage our men and women who are on the front line.

    We also need to do more to hire and diversify our Department of Justice as relates to minorities and women. For example, a recent OPM study found that while African Americans generally exceeded their relevant civilian labor force representation in 16 Federal executive departments, less than 16 percent of those employed by the Department of Justice were African American. The Department of Justice consisted of 37.7 percent women. That number was over 9 percent underrepresentative of what it should have been based on hiring practices regarding women in the civilian work force.

    I also believe that it is important that the Department of Justice take on very difficult challenges, and one of them, of course, that the Congress has been grappling with and States have been grappling with include the whole concept of racial profiling. It is well known that there is representation, that the DOJ is undergoing a study. I would only suggest that this is an important enough crisis that we move with all due and deliberate speed, and if there is the opportunity to provide insight and instruction in the reauthorization, then I think, Mr. Chairman, we should be engaged in that process, because this is an effort that should be looked upon by both the executive as well as the legislative.
 Page 14       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    I am particularly interested—today, we have the law enforcement agencies. I'm particularly interested in hearing reports as it relates to the Federal Bureau of Prisons. We just had a hearing on prison industries that I think generated a lot of controversy, and so we'll be asking those questions.

    I know that Mr. Marshall is engaged in a collaborative effort to protect this country as it relates to—I say drug infestation, but as you well know, I am heavily committed to rehabilitation and treatment, but I'm also committed to the right kind of equipment, and I will be concerned about the unfortunate circumstances that generated—though you may suggest that you were not particularly engaged in that effort, but I certainly want to know the tragedy that occurred with respect to the missionary plane and the fact that we need to be more astute in the work that we're doing.

    So, Mr. Chairman, let me say that each and every one of the representatives here, we will look forward to hearing their testimony, but also I hope that they will appreciate our inquiries and inquisitiveness from the perspective of trying to improve the work of the Department of Justice for all America.

    I yield back the balance of my time.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Jackson Lee. Before I introduce the witnesses, I'd like to thank two other individuals for their presence here.

    Mr. CONYERS. Just a moment, sir.
 Page 15       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. SMITH. Yes. Actually, I was just getting ready to recognize the gentleman from Michigan, but I do so a little bit prematurely, and the gentleman from Michigan is recognized.

    Mr. CONYERS. I didn't want to let this opportunity go by, Mr. Chairman. So I appreciate you recognizing me.

    Mr. SMITH. The gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers, is the Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, and he's recognized for an opening statement or other remarks.

    Mr. CONYERS. Thank you very much.

    We welcome the witnesses, and I hardly know where to begin. We're dealing with two departments of government that are presenting increasing difficulties that have been going on during the course of my career in the Congress. Let me start with the drug policies that come out of the DEA. The problem is that we're dealing with policies that have been unsuccessful, to put it generously. The cost benefit of drug interdiction is completely out of touch with reality. Prevention treatment is not even on the books.

    The RAN Corporation has found that $34 million invested in treatment would reduce cocaine use as much as an expenditure of $336 million for interdiction or $246 million for enforcement.

 Page 16       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    The racism involved in the justice process is pretty well known. Blacks are more likely to be arrested, more likely to be charged, more likely to be convicted, more likely to get longer sentences, more likely to end up on death row. If anybody cares to comment about that, I'd be happy to entertain it during question period.

    Now, the prisons, where are we on the prisons? I think we're approaching two million people in prisons. Many of them, one-third, are for marijuana arrests, mere possession. There's much overcrowding. We've got a disgraceful situation. Thanks to the body in which I serve, we've now started privatizing prisons, and we use it as a basis for industry spurts for small towns around the nation.

    We're trying—we have—any kind of correction or bringing prisoners around is hardly in existence. The conditions are terrible for prisoners and sometimes for corrections officials as well. We've got a disgraceful situation in our Federal prisons, and so as the authorizing committee, we've got a lot of explaining, discussion, and meeting to do beyond this small brief meeting that we'll be holding here. I think the prisons are in a disgraceful state of condition, and they've been that way. This isn't something new.

    The FBI is in pretty bad shape, I also might add. I think some of the gentlelady from Texas—in all of these things, the question of how minorities are being treated as Federal employees in these systems is in serious question and will be revisited and analyzed to a great extent.

    So if you get the idea that I'm unhappy with the work of every agency here, save the U.S. Marshals, you're absolutely correct, and I'd love to discuss matters further with you.
 Page 17       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Conyers.

    I also appreciate the attendance of two other Members who are here, Mr. Chabot of Ohio and Mr. Hutchison of Arkansas, and are there any statements that you all wish to make?

    [Mr. Chabot and Mr. Hutchison gesture in the negative.]

    Mr. SMITH. If not, we'll proceed, and I'll introduce the witnesses.

    Mr. Thomas Pickard is the deputy director of the FBI, a position he has held for the last 2 years. Prior to his current assignment, Mr. Pickard served as assistant director for the FBI's criminal investigative division. He began his career as a special agent in 1975 in the FBI's New York field office. In his 25 years of service, Mr. Pickard has worked on such cases as the trial of the New York Trade Center's bombers and the TWA Flight 800 investigation. Mr. Pickard received his bachelor's degree from St. Francis College and a master's degree from St. John's University.

    Mr. Donnie Marshall is the administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration. Mr. Marshal began his career in law enforcement in 1969 as a special agent with the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous drugs, a predecessor agency of the DEA. Mr. Marshal has served in a number of positions with the DEA, including resident agent in charge of Austin, Texas, county attache in Brazil, chief of domestic operations, and chief of operations. Mr. Marshal received his bachelor of science degree from Stephen F. Austin State University.
 Page 18       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Kathleen Hawk Sawyer has served a director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons for over 8 years. She is a career public administrator in BOP and only the sixth director since it was established in 1830. She has held numerous positions within the BOP, including serving as warden of the Federal Correctional Institution in Butner, North Carolina and as the bureau's chief of staff training, being responsible for the bureau's three training centers. She received her bachelors degree in psychology from Wheeling Jesuit College in Wheeling, West Virginia and her master's degree and doctorate of education degree in counseling and rehabilitation from West Virginia University.

    Mr. Louie McKinney was appointed as the acting director of the United States Marshal Service by President Bush in February. Prior to his appointment, he served as acting deputy director and special assistant to director of the Marshal Service. Mr. McKinney began his career with the Marshal Service in 1968. During 26 years with the Marshal Service, Mr. McKinney served as the chief inspector for INTERPOL, as well as United States Marshal for the U.S. Virgin Islands. Mr. McKinney holds a degree in police administration from the University of Maryland.

    Now, we welcome all of you, and I just have to add that I've had the privilege of meeting with you all personally, most recently with Mr. McKinney yesterday, as a matter of fact; prior to that, a couple of weeks ago, with Dr. Sawyer when I had a wonderful—when Bobby Scott and I had a wonderful tour of five prison facilities in Pennsylvania. Mr. Marshal, we've talked before, and Mr. Pickard as well.

    It's nice to know you all personally. It's nice to have you all here. The chief counsel, Glenn Schmitt to my right, reminds me that we are doing something unusual today, and that is giving you all 10 minutes to testify. All I can say is it will be appreciated if you decide not to use the full 10 minutes, just because of our late start and because of the fact that we, unfortunately, expect perhaps some procedural votes on the House floor during the course of the day, though we don't know when they're going to occur.
 Page 19       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    In any case, we welcome all of you, look forward to your expert testimony, and I'm sure you look forward to our questions after that.

    Mr. Pickard, we'll begin with you.


    Mr. PICKARD. Thank you, Chairman.

    Chairman Smith, Congressman Scott, Congresswoman Jackson Lee, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the FBI's budget and authorization issues. The processes of authorization and oversight are vital, and we appreciate the efforts you and your staffs are making to examine our authorities and resource needs.

    As all of you know, Louie Freeh announced Tuesday that he was stepping down as director of the FBI. It was a day all of us in the FBI knew would come eventually, but regret it has arrived. He enjoys enormous respect and admiration in the ranks, both for his vision and leadership and equally for his ethical expectations and integrity. No greater example can be set than he provided the right example for all of us to follow regardless the strength of the storms.

    Externally, Director Freeh was known for much, things like greatly expanding our capabilities against terrorism, redesigning our crisis response capabilities, making us effective against international crime in a global arena, substantially enhancing our cyber crime fighting capabilities, and helping to reduce the level of violent crime against our citizens. Internally, it is other things not often public recognized. He put in place core values to guide all of us, including mandatory ethical training. He greatly expanded our employee assistance programs to help those in crisis.
 Page 20       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    He meets every new agent and contacts every family of those who have died. He speaks at the funerals of all those who are killed in the line of duty and personally comforts their families. He talks to every police chief who loses an officer in the line of duty and offers our assistance. He calls agents who are injured in the line of duty and ensures they're getting the best of available care. He has met with the families of those lost in terrorist cases in the incident in Kobar and the bombing of the Cole. He promises their deaths will not be forgotten and reminds us all of us every day that other things in our lives are very important and should not be unattended.

    His devotion to his family extends to his FBI family. Louis Freeh is our director, and we are very, very proud of him and the vision he has brought to the FBI.

    As for our budget, as many of you know, the FBI focuses its investigative resources and submits its budget requests consistent with our long-term strategic plan. The plan, implemented 3 years ago by Director Freeh after consultation with Congress, requires that we prioritize our efforts based upon a tiered approach, calculated on factors such as potential harm to the national security, economic harm, public integrity, and other issues: Briefly, Tier I, those matters affecting national and economic security such as foreign counter intelligence, terrorism, cyber terrorism; Tier II, those crimes that affect the public safety or undermine the integrity of American society, such as organized crime, public corruption, civil rights, and international crime; and Tier III, those crimes that affect individuals and property where there is a substantial benefit in adding the Federal resources.

    Guiding the implementation of our national priorities are the FBI's core values I mentioned that were put in place by Director Freeh. Briefly, they are a rigorous obedience to the Constitution, respect for the dignity of all those we protect, compassion and fairness in all we do, and uncompromising personal and institutional integrity.
 Page 21       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    With the above backdrop, the FBI's fiscal 2002 budget request is for a total of $3,500,000 [sic] and 24,938 permanent positions, which includes 10,420 FBI agents. Included are 106 million for adjustments to base and 170 million in program increases. The program increases would provide 279 new positions, including 76 agents, and fund four critical initiatives in counterintelligence, counterterrorism, cyber crime, and infrastructure, all consistent with our strategic plan. This funding includes money to address preparation for the upcoming winter Olympics in Salt Lake and our Trilogy information infrastructure.

    In addition to direct funding, the FBI requests 2,826 anticipated reimbursable work years in programs such as health care fraud, organized crime, drug enforcement, and other programs. Our statement submitted for the record contains detailed descriptions for our strategic plan and these initiatives.

    For the sake of brevity, our accomplishments for this past year will be left with the statement in the record, but I would like to briefly touch on two very current and very critical issues, the Hanssen case and CI-21 or counterintelligence in the 21st Century. While the Hanssen case represents extraordinary investigative work that he has alleged to have spied without detection for a number of years, very simply, our internal security policies and practices are not adequate. We are approaching that possibility as rapidly and aggressively as we can, believing that while all risk can never be eliminated, we can and should do more to reduce the risk.

    Director Freeh and Attorney General Ashcroft asked Judge Webster to review our internal security from top to bottom and identify anything and everything that needs to be improved or implemented. He is doing so with an able staff. They have complete and unfettered access and cooperation of the FBI, and I understand they are making substantial progress.
 Page 22       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    In the interim and in coordination with Judge Webster, Director Freeh has taken other actions to address the urgent vulnerabilities. Director Freeh has instituted broadened polygraph policy, enhanced information security auditing, enhanced background reinvestigations, placed an internal security expert from the CIA in charge of our security program, and has changed the reporting lines so this individual reports directly to myself and the director. He has also appointed a task force headed by Assistance Director Bob Dies to identify those security policies that are lacking. I fully expect many additional changes to be forthcoming from that task force, from Judge Webster's commission, and also from the inspector general.

    The second issue is CI-21. While counterintelligence is not normally before this Committee, I mention CI-21 because counterintelligence is a significant part of the FBI's mission and represents a dramatic change in the Government's approach to counterintelligence. Borne out of the FBI's own self-evaluation, CI-21 represents the best opportunity ever for a government-wide coordinated approach to counterintelligence consistent with the national strategy designed to protect the nation's most valuable national security investigation, whether it is privately held or held by the Government. We appreciate those efforts, and CI-21 is a joint effort by DOD, CIA, the Department of Justice, and the FBI to produce in a formal way a common strategy and coordinated taskings.

    The FBI's 11,000 agents are deployed in 56 field offices, as you said, Mr. Chairman, and 400 smaller independent resident offices, 44 legal attaches around the world, and are at our training academy located at Quantico. At any given time, we have nearly 100,000 investigative matters pending. During Fiscal Year 2000, the FBI investigations led to over 21,000 convictions and a host of other recoveries and fines.
 Page 23       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    What has become one of the most important aspects of our operation is our international component. With a little over 100 agents in 44 countries, we have made a significant difference as evidenced by the U.S.S. Cole bombing and also by the recent release of three Americans who were held hostage in Kenya.

    The Subcommittee has received extensive briefings about the FBI's ongoing project to rebuild our obsolete information infrastructure. We call this Project Trilogy. As you know, Director Freeh brought in Bob Dies, a 30-year veteran of the IBM Corporation to lead this effort, which Congress has approved and begun funding.

    Your staff has asked about our previous exception from title V for hiring and retention. More than any other time in history, we have a need for highly-trained computer scientists, engineers, and forensic experts. A short pilot project of this program demonstrated its utility, producing results we would overwise not obtain. As the FBI is becoming increasingly more proactive, increasingly more technical, we must have the skills and abilities to deal with this.

    Many of you have asked about the National Instant Criminal Background System or NICS. Last year, total NICS inquiries were 4,489,000. There were over 3,000,000 immediate proceeds and nearly 72,000 denials in that year, and the NICS system is now achieving a 99.7 percent availability. NICS relies on other systems, and as a result, sometimes has an availability of only 96.3 percent.

    Finally, let me mention the Boston informant situation, so important to some of you. The conduct alleged is deplorable and reprehensible and deserving of the strongest possible condemnation. While I cannot comment on the pending criminal matter, Director Freeh and the attorney general established a task force of prosecutors and investigators to review the allegations going back to the mid-1960's. One former agent has been indicted, along with two alleged organized crime figures. Much more needs to be done, including investigation of the circumstances involving the murder of Teddy Deegan. We are fully committed to uncovering every detail and bringing every—and bringing before prosecution every facet of that investigation, just as we did in the Birmingham civil rights bombing. We cannot permit acts that happened 30 years ago to go on when justice must be ultimately served.
 Page 24       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    In the interim, the department has issued new guidelines for us on informant oversight, and we look forward to your questions.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Pickard follows:]


    Good morning, Chairman Smith, Congressman Scott and other members of the Subcommittee. I am pleased to appear this morning as the Subcommittee considers the reauthorization for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

    The work of the FBI, whether it is catching criminals, drug traffickers, terrorists, and spies; providing training, investigative assistance, and forensic and identification services to our law enforcement partners; or developing new crime-fighting technologies and techniques, is made possible by the strong support of this Subcommittee. On behalf of the employees of the FBI, I thank you for your support.


    I would like to begin by highlighting for the Subcommittee several of the challenges facing the FBI, and then update you on the implementation of the FBI Strategic Plan that we adopted in 1998 to prepare the FBI for the 21st Century. This plan and its vision of the FBI is especially important given the challenges and changes facing the FBI. I would then like to give you with an overview of our Fiscal Year 2002 budget request and conclude with a discussion of our evolving internal security strategies.
 Page 25       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Increasingly, the crime problems and national security threats facing the FBI are transcending the traditional investigative programs under which the FBI operates. For example, the Southwest Border and East Caribbean crime strategies are based upon a coordinated attack against drug trafficking (organized crime/drugs program), violent crimes and gangs (violent crimes program), and public corruption (white-collar crime program). Emerging criminal enterprises from Eastern Europe and Eurasia tend to be involved not only in ''traditional'' organized crime activities, such as extortion, loan sharking, and street crime, but also complex money laundering, tax evasion schemes, medical fraud, and other ''white-collar'' offenses and international trafficking in prostitution.

    We are also facing a growing internationalization of crime. Increasingly, cases being worked by FBI Agents on the streets of America are developing leads that take us to foreign lands for resolution. Recent events, such as the abductions and brutal murders of Americans in Uganda and Colombia, required the FBI to exercise its statutory extraterritorial jurisdiction and deploy investigative teams overseas. Organized criminal enterprises are often involved in related illegal activities on several continents. Communications networks and the Internet allow criminals in foreign countries to commit theft and fraud or to distribute child pornography in the United States without leaving their homelands.

    To respond to these types of emerging crime problems and national security issues more quickly, the FBI must focus its efforts and resources along broader investigative strategies.

    Another challenge facing the FBI is the changing demographics of our workforce. Since September 1993, when Director Freeh took the FBI's helm, we have hired and trained approximately 4,800 new Special Agents. Agents hired since September 1993 represent about 41 percent of the agents on board today. While I am immensely proud of our agent workforce, I am also aware that it is a young workforce in terms of experience. Similarly, we have hired nearly 7,800 new support employees since September 1993 representing nearly 36 percent of our current support employees.
 Page 26       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Keeping current with the fast pace of technology and more complex crime problems and issues requires a more technically trained and competent workforce. This applies not only in terms of our investigators, but also with respect to the scientists, engineers, analysts, and other support staff who help our agents do their jobs. We are also recognizing that technically trained specialists are becoming an increasingly important part of our investigative teams.

    Emerging technologies present both a challenge and an opportunity for the FBI to develop new methods and capabilities for preventing and investigating crime and protecting the national security. Criminals, terrorists, and foreign intelligence agents, mirroring legitimate businesses and society in general, have embraced information technology and recognize the potential of new efficiencies and capabilities in developing and maintaining criminal enterprises and other illegal activities. Traditional crimes, especially financial and commercial crimes, are now being committed in a digital world. Paper trails are now electronic trails. Records which were once written and stored in a safe are now written to electronic media and encrypted. At the same time, the same efficiencies and capabilities being exploited by criminals and others to commit crimes can also be used to improve the effectiveness of the FBI and law enforcement in fighting those very same illegal activities. We must be able to upgrade existing investigative techniques and technologies and to take advantage of emerging technologies to develop new capabilities to keep abreast of changing criminal problems and national security issues.

    Ensuring an infrastructure to support the operational, information technology, administrative, safety, and security requirements of the FBI also presents challenges. The FBI employs over 27,000 employees, located in 56 major field offices, approximately 400 smaller resident agencies, four information technology centers, a fingerprint identification and criminal justice information complex, a training academy, an engineering research facility, and FBI Headquarters. We also operate Legal Attache Offices in 44 foreign countries on the continents of Africa, Asia, Europe, North and South America, and Australia. Tying these offices together are large, complex radio communications and telecommunications networks. In addition, we also operate and maintain a nationwide criminal justice, forensic, and investigative information systems and services, such as the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System, the National Crime Information Center, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), Law Enforcement On-line, the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program, and the Combined DNA Identification System, that are relied upon by federal, state and local law enforcement and criminal justice agencies.
 Page 27       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  


    Three years ago, we issued the FBI Strategic Plan, 1998-2003. This plan represented the culmination of work performed over a year's time by a strategic planning task force. This group conducted strategy sessions with every FBI investigative program, both criminal and national security, and met with FBI Special Agents in Charge and other field office representatives. In doing so, the task force not only identified the strategic direction and national priorities for the FBI, but it also performed a self-assessment of the FBI's capacity to achieve these goals. This self-assessment identified deficiencies and performance gaps that must be improved or completely eliminated if we are to be successful in dealing with emerging crime problems and more challenging threats and issues related to protecting the national security. Some of these deficiencies and performance gaps are being corrected by reengineering processes and implementing policy decisions, while others may require funding and resources to mitigate.

    Guiding the implementation of our national priorities is a statement of core values for performing the mission of the FBI, which Director Freeh personally wrote. Briefly, the core values established for FBI employees can be summarized as follows:

 rigorous obedience to the Constitution;

 respect for the dignity of all those we protect;


 Page 28       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
 fairness; and

 uncompromising personal and institutional integrity.

    To accomplish the mission of the FBI, we must follow these core values. The public expects the FBI to do its utmost to protect people and their rights. Director Freeh emphasizes to FBI employees that observance of these core values is our guarantee of excellence and propriety in meeting the Bureau's national security and criminal investigative responsibilities.

    The FBI Strategic Plan, 1998-2003, identified three major functional areas that define the FBI's strategic priorities. These three national priorities are: national and economic security; criminal enterprises and public integrity; and individuals and property. Within these three functional areas the FBI identified nine strategic goals emphasizing the FBI's need to position itself to prevent crimes and counterintelligence activities, rather than just reacting to such acts after they occur, as follows:

    National and Economic Security. Our highest national priority is the investigation of foreign intelligence, terrorist, and criminal activities that directly threaten the national or economic security of the United States. We have established four strategic goals for this area:

 Identify, prevent, and defeat intelligence operations conducted by any foreign power within the United States, or against certain U.S. interests abroad, that constitute a threat to U.S. national security;
 Page 29       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

 Prevent, disrupt, and defeat terrorist operations before they occur;

 Create an effective and ongoing deterrent to prevent criminal conspiracies from defrauding major U.S. industries and the U.S. Government; and

 Deter the unlawful exploitation of emerging technologies by foreign powers, terrorists, and criminal elements.

Table 1

    Criminal Enterprises and Public Integrity. Our second national priority is crimes that affect the public safety or which undermine the integrity of American society. These investigations are often targeted at criminal organizations, such as the La Cosa Nostra, cartels and drug trafficking organizations, Asian criminal enterprises, and Russian organized crime groups that exploit social, economic, or political circumstances. Another focus within this area is public corruption and civil rights. For this area, we have established four strategic objectives:

 Identify, disrupt, and dismantle existing and emerging organized criminal enterprises whose activities affect the United States;

 Identify, disrupt, and dismantle targeted international and national drug-trafficking organizations;

 Reduce public corruption at all levels of government with special emphasis on law enforcement operations; and
 Page 30       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

 Deter civil rights violations through aggressive investigative and proactive measures.

Table 2

    Individuals and Property. Our third national priority is crimes that affect individuals and property. Within this area, we will develop investigative strategies that reflect the public's expectation that the FBI will respond to and investigate serious criminal acts that affect the community and bring those responsible to justice. Our strategic goal for this area is:

 Reduce the impact of the most significant crimes that affect individuals and property.

Table 3

    Overall, during FY 2000, FBI investigations led or contributed to the indictment of 19,134 individuals, the conviction of 21,420 individuals, and the arrest of 36,387 persons on federal, state, local, or international charges. Additionally, FBI investigative efforts led or contributed to $946,811,505 in fines being levied, $1,012,851,257 in recoveries of stolen property, and $3,259,384,477 in court-ordered restitutions.

    To achieve the strategic objectives that we have identified, the FBI has developed five operational support strategies that are designed to build enhanced investigative capabilities and effectiveness. These operational support categories are: intelligence, information technology, applied science and engineering, management, and assistance to state, local, and international law enforcement partners.

Table 4

    For the FY 2002 budget, FBI program managers continued to use the FBI Strategic Plan, 1998-2003, and the five operational support strategies as guides for developing their resource requirements. Through an integrated strategic planning and budget framework, the FBI has significantly sharpened its focus for allocating resources based upon national priorities and strategic objectives that concentrate on the most significant crime problems and threats to the Nation.
 Page 31       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  


    For FY 2002, the FBI is requesting a total of $3,507,109,000 and 24,938 permanent positions (10,420 agents) and 24,490 workyears for its Salaries and Expenses ($3,505,859,000) and Construction ($1,250,000) appropriations. For FBI Salaries and Expenses, this amount represents a net increase of $277,377,000 from the current year and consists of $106,569,000 for adjustments to base and $170,808,000 for program increases. The adjustments to base include such items as the proposed 3.6 percent pay raise for FY 2002, higher federal employee health insurance costs, additional General Services Administration (GSA) rent costs, and annualization of prior year increases and pay raises provided by Congress. Program increases proposed for FY 2002 would provide 279 new positions, including 76 new agents, and $170,808,000 for four budget initiatives: Counterintelligence; Counterterrorism; Cybercrime; and Infrastructure.

    In addition to direct funded resources, the FY 2002 budget request assumes a total of 2,826 reimbursable workyears, including 1,041 agents. Under the auspices of the Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement (ICDE) program, the FBI would be reimbursed for a total of 912 workyears, including 547 agents, and $115,436,000 for FBI drug and gang-related task force investigations and operations. Pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, the FBI will receive $101,000,000 in FY 2002 to fund 793 workyears, including 455 agents, for health care fraud enforcement. For user fee programs of the Criminal Justice Services program, a total of 692 workyears are planned, based on estimated fees. The remaining reimbursable workyears are used to facilitate a variety of other activities, including victim/witness assistance, name checks for other federal agencies, facility and maintenance support to other agencies sharing FBI facilities, pre-employment background investigations, and detail assignment to other agencies.
 Page 32       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    At this point, I would like to describe in more detail the four budget initiatives proposed for FY 2002.


    Despite the fall of the Iron Curtain and the emergence of democracy in many of the countries formerly under the rule of communism, the threat posed to U.S. national, military, and economic security from foreign countries remains significant. Investigations in this area have become more complex as foreign intelligence services have expanded their focus from traditional military-related targets to new areas, including technology, intellectual property, economic espionage, and proliferation. The FBI continues to work closely with the intelligence community to identify and reduce the presence of hostile intelligence services in the U.S.

    To keep pace with the changing counterintelligence threat to the U.S., the FBI is proposing a counterintelligence initiative that would provide an additional $31,277,000 and 182 positions (62 agents) in four areas of this mission-critical responsibility:

 enhancing field investigative activities focused on identifying, preventing, and defeating intelligence operations conducted by any foreign power within the U.S. or against U.S. interests abroad that pose a threat to U.S. national security;

 improving national-level program management and coordination of field investigative activities;

 Page 33       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
 developing and acquiring technology to support FBI counterintelligence activities; and

 improving security countermeasures to ensure the reliability of FBI personnel and contractors and security of information and facilities. I will be discussing this at length later in my testimony.


    The United States continues to face a serious, credible threat from terrorists both abroad and at home. The number of groups and individuals capable of carrying out a terrorist act has increased over the past several years. Of continuing concern to the FBI are groups and individuals for which political or religious beliefs constitute sufficient motivation for carrying out a devastating terrorist act.

    To deal effectively with domestic and international terrorism, the FBI must concentrate on both prevention and response. The FBI's counterterrorism strategy is focused upon five inter-related elements to build and maintain an operational capacity for identifying, preventing, deterring, and investigating terrorist activities.

    First, the FBI must have the capacity to respond to acts of terrorism committed in the U.S. and abroad when those acts are directed against the U.S. government or its interests. Second, the FBI must have the capacity to receive, react to, and disseminate counterterrorism information. Third, the FBI must develop its internal capacities to support proactive counterterrorism programs and initiatives. Fourth, the FBI must have the capacity to establish and maintain sound and productive relationships with other domestic and foreign law enforcement and intelligence counterparts. Fifth, the FBI must have the capacity to use all of the necessary assets and capabilities of the FBI and other U.S. government agencies to support and initiate complex investigations and operations against domestic and international terrorists and terrorist organizations. For FY 2002, the FBI is requesting increases totaling $32,059,000 and 42 positions (8 agents) to improve and enhance existing counterterrorism capabilities and operations.
 Page 34       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    2002 Winter Olympics Preparation. The 2002 Winter Olympic Games have been designated a National Special Security Event. Consistent with FBI lead-agency responsibilities for intelligence collection and crisis management as contained in PDD-39 and PDD-62, the FBI is working closely with the United States Secret Service and other federal, state, and local law enforcement and consequence management agencies to plan for security and public safety issues for the 2002 Winter Olympic Games that will be hosted by Salt Lake City, Utah.

    For FY 2002, the FBI requests increases totaling $12,302,000 for 2002 Winter Olympic Games deployment. The funding requested will cover travel, per diem, vehicle lease, utilities, telecommunications, and FBI overtime costs for the planned deployment of over 800 FBI personnel for the event period. The Salt Lake City games will be conducted at 20 official Olympic venues spread over a 6,000 square mile area. Olympic competition will take place simultaneously at 10 venues in 3 major cities and 6 remote mountain resort areas.

    Recurring Security Services. The FBI is committed to implementing the security standards contained in the June 1995 Department of Justice report entitled, ''Vulnerability Assessment of Federal Facilities.'' FBI facilities are often the target of potential terrorist threats. Safeguarding agency employees and physical security must be a priority. For FY 2002, the FBI requests an increase of $2,020,000 to acquire contract guard services for 6 stand-alone field office facilities where GSA does not provide such service ($1,600,000), replace an outdated closed-circuit television (CCTV) security system at FBI Headquarters ($320,000), and replace three guard booths at FBI Headquarters to facilitate new visitor identification procedures ($100,000).

 Page 35       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Incident Response Readiness. Consistent with the provisions of PDD-62, the FBI initiated a long-term program in FY 2000 to develop law enforcement capabilities for the technical resolution of a weapons of mass destruction incident involving chemical, biological, or radiological threats or devices. Initial funding for this effort was provided through an interagency agreement with the Department of Defense. For FY 2002, the FBI requests 42 positions (8 agents) and $17,737,000 to support ongoing efforts in the areas of threat assessment, diagnostics, and device render safe equipment.


    In recent years, technological advances have fundamentally changed the way of life in this country. Computers and networks allow millions of individuals to access, on a daily basis, a broad range of information services, databases, commerce, and communications capabilities that were previously unavailable. A combination of reduced cost for computer technology and increased storage capacity allows the accumulation, storage, and management of large amounts of information by individuals on personal computers and peripheral devices.

    Many FBI investigations, especially those involving organized crime, drug trafficking, crimes against children, white-collar crime, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism, are encountering the use of computer technology to facilitate illegal activities. As a result, the FBI must develop the investigative and forensic capacities and capabilities to deal with the use of computer technology by criminals and others to commit crimes or undermine national security. For FY 2002, the FBI is requesting an increase of 33 positions (6 agents) and $28,144,000 for providing specialized technical assistance to field investigators and for developing investigative tools for law enforcement to counter the use of digital technology by criminals, terrorists, and others.
 Page 36       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Technical Support to Field Offices. Criminals and other subjects of FBI investigations are employing advanced, complex physical and electronic security technology to protect their operations from competing criminal groups and to thwart law enforcement from executing lawful searches of premises and conducting court-approved interceptions of communications. The ability of the FBI to overcome such defensive measures is often critical to the success of high profile investigations and operations and the collection of evidence. The FBI's Laboratory Division provides technical support to FBI field offices, as well as the Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Customs Service, and other federal, state, and local law enforcement encountering such problems. To be able to continue providing this assistance, the FBI is requesting an increase of 10 positions (4 agents) and $1,358,000.

    Network Data Interception. In the Omnibus Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended, Congress provided the FBI with the basic legal authority to conduct the interception of oral, wire, or electronic communications in criminal investigations. The statutory authority to intercept communications in national security cases was provided by Congress in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The use of court-authorized intercepts is the investigative tool of last resort, and allowed only after all other logical investigative avenues are exhausted. Often, the evidence collected through the use of court-authorized intercepts of communications is critical to the prosecution of criminal enterprise leadership who are otherwise able to insulate themselves through the use of intermediaries from direct ties to criminal acts and illegal activities. The increasing use of the Internet and world-wide web by criminals, terrorists, and intelligence agents to commit illegal acts and carry out conspiracies against U.S. national security has presented the FBI and law enforcement with new challenges in conducting court-approved interceptions of communications and obtaining evidence and intelligence.
 Page 37       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Increasingly, affidavits for the interception of communications are including e-mails, file transfers, and Internet Relay Chat messages, within the scope of court orders. Emerging new digital technologies, such as Internet telephony, digital subscription lines, cable Internet, wireless Internet, and satellite communications, are likely to be exploited by criminals and others in their continuing efforts to thwart law enforcement detection. Law enforcement requires the development of capabilities and techniques for conducting court-approved interceptions of communications in existing and emerging digital environments.

    For FY 2002, the FBI requests an increase of 7 positions (2 agents) and $7,664,000 to develop and procure network digital interception technologies; to provide on-site assistance to field offices, pursuant to court-approved orders; and to provide training to FBI technically trained agents.

    Counterencryption. The widespread use of digitally-based technologies and the expansion of computer networks incorporating privacy features and capabilities through the use of cryptography presents a significant challenge to the continued ability of law enforcement to use existing electronic surveillance authorities. The FBI is already encountering strong encryption in criminal and national security investigations. In 1999, 53 new investigations encountered encryption. The need for a law enforcement cryptanalytic capability is well documented in several studies, including the National Research Council's 1996 report entitled, ''Cryptography's Role in Securing the Information Society.'' The report recommends high priority be given to the development of technical capabilities, such as signal analysis and decryption, to assist law enforcement in coping with technological challenges.

 Page 38       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    The Administration supports the enhancement of a centralized law enforcement capability within the FBI for engineering, processing, and decrypting lawfully intercepted digital communications and electronically stored information. For FY 2002, the FBI requests an increase of $7,000,000 to further develop an initial operating capability that will allow law enforcement to obtain plain text and meet the public safety challenges posed by the criminal use of encryption. With this funding, the FBI intends to work with existing national laboratories and other government agencies to ensure all existing resources are used in executing processing functions. This approach will prevent duplication of effort.

    Additionally, the FBI plans to acquire necessary computer hardware, software tools, technical expertise, and services to develop capacities in four counterencryption program areas: (1) analytical engineering; (2) signal analysis research; (3) counterencryption deployment; and (4) industry-assisted technology transfer. The FBI also requests an increase of 13 positions and $1,202,000 for the collection and examination of evidence (devices and communications) which include encrypted materials and other electronic analysis forensic and technical examinations.

    Electronic Surveillance Data Management System. With funding appropriated by Congress in FY 2001, the FBI is acquiring and installing new digital collection systems to update existing analog equipment currently being used in FBI field offices. For FY 2002, the FBI requests an increase of 3 positions and $10,920,000 for the Casa de Web project which would serve as a distributed database that provides agents and analysts with access to minimized (not unprocessed) recordings of audio, data, and reports generated by digital collection systems. The Casa de Web system will consist of two separate databases, one for criminal law enforcement data and one for foreign counterintelligence data. This separation ensures compliance with Executive Order 12333 that prohibits the commingling of such materials. Firewalls and security protocols will prevent data from being accessed by unauthorized users and prevent external access of the system. The Casa de Web project is being coordinated with Trilogy, the FBI's information technology upgrade program.
 Page 39       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Casa de Web will allow authorized agents, analysts, and translators to share and analyze minimized data on an inter and intra office basis. Analytical tools planned for Casa de Web, such as key word speaker identification, and speech recognition, will improve information and intelligence sharing capabilities and permit FBI Agents and analysts to view, listen, and act on collected minimized electronic surveillance information on a more timely basis.


    To be successful, the FBI must have the capacity for collecting, storing, managing, analyzing, and disseminating case and intelligence information on a timely basis to its own investigative personnel, as well as other federal, State, and local law enforcement and the intelligence community. Existing systems and capacities must be upgraded to meet increased investigative demands. New technologies also present opportunities for making for effective and timely use of case information and intelligence currently being collected. On a daily basis, the FBI depends on its core infrastructure to ensure its agents and support staff can perform their jobs. A strong, solid infrastructure is necessary for providing everyday tools and services, such as replacement and safe automobiles for responding to and conducting investigations and equipment and supplies for conducting forensic examinations of evidence.

    Trilogy. Trilogy is the FBI's three-year information technology infrastructure upgrade initiative. Trilogy consists of three key components: User Applications, a collection of user-specific software applications and tools to enhance the ability of agents and support employees to organize, access, and analyze information; Information Presentation, replacement computer hardware and office automation software within each office to link employees at their desks with counterparts throughout the FBI; and Network, upgrades to acquire high-speed local and wide area networks and telecommunication circuits to deliver information between users and locations securely and quickly.
 Page 40       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Congress provided the approval to proceed with the first year of the Trilogy implementation plan in FY 2001 and authorized the expenditure of $100,700,000 in appropriated and unobligated prior year funds. Since receiving approval to proceed with this project, the FBI acquired the services of Mitretek Systems to provide management and techncial assistance to the FBI Trilogy Program Office and the services of GSA's Federal Systems Integration and Management Center (FEDSIM) to act as the acquisition agent for the project. The FBI also selected the GSA Millenia contract as the acquisition vehicle for the project. In January 2001, the FBI, through FEDSIM, issued two task order requests (TORs) to the Millenia contractors. One TOR addresses the User Applications component of Trilogy, while the second TOR addresses the Information Presentation and Network components. In April 2001, after separately reviewing vendor proposals for both TORs, the FBI selected vendors. Contractor work is expected to commence by June 2001.

    Second year implementation costs of the Trilogy project are estimated at $142,390,000. To help meet this requirement, the FBI plans to allocate $38,230,000 of existing base funding and apply $36,500,000 of unobligated prior year funds toward Trilogy in FY 2002. To complete second year funding requirements, an enhancement of $67,660,000 is required. Second year activities of the Trilogy project will focus on implementing multi-case analytical tools, intranet upgrades, and multi-media electronic case files; continuing office automation upgrades in field offices; and continuing upgrades to local and wide-area networks and telecommunications circuits. The third year of implementation will complete the office automation upgrades in field offices and at Headquarters, provide for additional wide-area network circuits, and permit additional improvements to FBI case databases.

 Page 41       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Telecommunications Services. An enhancement of $6,500,000 is requested to begin the replacement and upgrade of telecommunications equipment used to provide connectivity between FBI legal attache offices and the Department of State's (DOS) worldwide network and to provide telecommunications support for FBI participation in High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) multi-agency investigations and meet special case needs. The DOS Diplomatic Telecommunications Service (DTS) is upgrading its telecommunications network over the next five years. This upgrade will require the FBI to replace its legacy equipment with new equipment compatible with the DTS network.

    Motor Vehicle Program. An increase of $4,007,000 is requested for the FBI motor vehicle program, including $2,557,000 to replace an additional 110 vehicles with mileage exceeding 80,000 miles, $450,000 for automotive diagnostic tools, and $1,000,000 to upgrade the Vehicle Management System to enhance fleet management and maintenance.

    FBI Laboratory Activation. Occupancy of the new FBI Laboratory facility at Quantico, Virginia, is scheduled to begin in Summer 2002. Activation of the facility will require an increase of 22 buildings and facilities management employees and $1,161,000 to properly operate and maintain the new building.

    Additionally, the FY 2002 budget proposes that $40,000,000 from the Department of Justice Working Capital Fund be used to meet costs associated with the activation of the new facility. These costs include the following:

 $3,868,750 for the transfer of 125 Laboratory Division employees;

 Page 42       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
 $15,000,000 for general and specialized equipment;

 $4,695,812 for office furniture and shelving;

 $600,000 for information technology equipment, such as network routers, hubs, and multiple access units;

 $908,438 for moving services;

 $792,000 for part-year FY 2002 operations and maintenance costs, such as utilities; maintenance supplies; environmental testing, trash removal, and other miscellaneous services; and housekeeping, landscaping, and other building maintenance; and

 $14,135,000 for decommissioning and renovation/ alteration of existing Laboratory Division space in the J. Edgar Hoover Building being vacated. This amount includes $3,000,000 for abatement and clean-up activities and disposal of hazardous materials/waste and $11,135,000 for renovations and alterations of approximately 131,000 square feet of space.


    Mr. Chairman, I would like to highlight several requests for funding included within other Department of Justice programs that are considered important to FBI initiatives and programs.

    State and Local Bomb Technician Equipment. Within the funding proposed for the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), $10,000,000 is included to continue an FBI Laboratory-managed program of training and equipping approximately 386 accredited State and local bomb squads located in communities throughout the United States. Congress appropriated $5,000,000 for this program in FY 2000 and $10,000,000 in FY 2000. In FY 1999, the Department of Justice provided $25,000,000 from the Working Capital Fund to initiate this effort.
 Page 43       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Continuation of funding for this program will ensure State and local bomb squads are properly trained and equipped to deal traditional improvised and explosive devices, as well as the initial response to devices that may be used by terrorists or others to release chemical or biological agents. Through this program, the FBI has provided State and local bomb squads with weapons of mass destruction (WMD) protective search suits, real-time x-ray devices, multi-gas monitoring systems, portable radiation detectors, and computers to access the Chemical and Biological Organisms-Law Enforcement database. This initiative compliments the State and local bomb technician training and accreditation program that the FBI Laboratory provides at the Hazardous Devices School, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama.

    Grants for DNA Convicted Offender and Crime Scene Backlog Reduction. Also, requested under Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program is $35,000,000 for grants to reduce the backlog of DNA profiles for entry into the FBI's national Combined DNA Information System (CODIS) database ($15,000,000), and to reduce the backlog of crime scene evidence awaiting DNA testing ($20,000,000). These proposals are related to several on-going FBI Laboratory initiatives for improving State and local crime-fighting and forensic capabilities.

    White-Collar Crime. The OJP, Justice Assistance appropriation proposes $9,230,000 for the operations of the National White-Collar Crime Center (NW3C). The FBI has entered into a partnership with the NW3C to staff the Internet Fraud Complaint Center (IFCC), which opened in May 2000. The IFCC serves as a focal point for receiving and analyzing complaints from citizens and private industry victimized by Internet fraud and as a resource to federal, State, and local law enforcement and regulatory agencies.

 Page 44       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. Chairman, the FY 2002 budget request includes several general provisions proposed by the FBI, including: danger pay, foreign cooperative agreements, railroad police training, and warranty reimbursement authorities. Director Freeh and I encourage the Subcommittee to include these general provisions as part of the FY 2002 Justice Appropriations Act.

    Danger Pay. Section 108 would extend to the FBI the same authority that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) currently enjoys for authorizing danger pay for personnel assigned to high risk overseas locations. For the FBI, this is both a pay equity issue for FBI Agents assigned to DEA Country Offices and a recognition of the increased threat facing FBI personnel performing extraterritorial investigations in foreign locations due to our counterterrorism responsibilities. At times, FBI personnel are deployed to overseas locations where, due to the nature of our work, they face a threat or hostile environment that does not always extend to all members of the United States diplomatic team in a particular country. This authority would allow the FBI to address those situations. This authority has been requested by the Administration in each of the past three budgets.

    Foreign Cooperative Agreements. Section 109 would allow the FBI to credit to its appropriation funding that is received from friendly foreign governments for that country's share of joint, cooperative projects with the FBI. This authority would facilitate projects with friendly foreign governments, especially in support of our national security mission. The authority was first proposed by the Administration last year, was adopted by the House, but did not make its way into the final Conference bill.
 Page 45       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Railroad Police Training. Section 110 would allow the FBI to establish and collect a fee to pay for the costs of railroad police officers participating in FBI law enforcement training programs authorized by P.L. 106–110, and to credit those fees to its Salaries and Expenses appropriation to cover the costs of providing such training. P.L. 106–110 authorized railroad police officers to attend FBI training programs, but directed that no federal funds be used to provide such training. Railroad police officers are willing to pay for such training; however, the law does not provide an authority for the FBI to collect and retain the fees to pay for the training. This provision provides the requisite authority.

    Reimbursement for In-house Warranty Work. Section 111 would allow the Attorney General to seek and retain reimbursement from vendors for warranty repairs and maintenance performed in-house by Department of Justice employees when it is not possible for the vendor to perform such services. For example, FBI motor vehicles are equipped with radios that use government encryption devices. As a result, these vehicles cannot be left unattended at vendor repair facilities for servicing. FBI mechanics currently perform warranty work that normally would be provided at no cost by the vendor. Many vendors are willing to reimburse or credit the FBI for the cost of the warranty work provided in-house. This provision would provide the authority needed to enter into such agreements when there is a law enforcement, security, or mission-related reason that precludes vendor servicing and permits the crediting of payments received to the appropriate appropriation.


    Mr. Chairman, I would like to close my statement with an accounting of the FBI's evolving internal security strategies.
 Page 46       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    In the wake of the arrest of Special Agent Robert Philip Hanssen on espionage charges, Director Freeh asked Judge William H. Webster to conduct a thorough review of the FBI's internal security functions and procedures and to recommend improvements. As a former FBI Director, CIA Director, and Director of Central Intelligence, Judge Webster is, of course, uniquely qualified to undertake this review. Judge Webster has assembled an impressive team of highly credentialed individuals to assist him in conducting this review. Those members are: Clifford L. Alexander, Jr., Griffin B. Bell, William S. Cohen, Robert B. Fiske, Jr., Thomas S. Foley, and Carla A. Hills. Director Freeh is committed to providing Judge Webster and his team complete and timely access to FBI records, personnel, and resources to complete this task.

    I understand that Judge Webster has also established a team of investigative attorneys to assist in this review. Those attorneys are currently conducting interviews and reviewing documents in order to formulate recommendations to improve FBI security policies and procedures. We welcome their recommendations and are committed to implementing them as expeditiously as possible.

    In the meantime, Director Freeh has created an internal FBI Task Force made up of eight Assistant Directors to identify and implement interim changes to the FBI's security programs that are sufficiently urgent that we should not await the outcome of either Judge Webster's review or that of the Department of Justice Inspector General. To date, the FBI Task Force has implemented the following changes:

    Enhanced Computer Audit Procedures: The FBI's most sensitive information is contained in electronic case files in the Automated Case System. Access is determined both by one's assignment and restrictions placed when the case is opened or data entered.
 Page 47       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Director Freeh has instructed our personnel to implement regular reviews on our most sensitive cases—reviews that can highlight all individuals who have looked at the case files—so that the case agents and their supervisors can be responsible for assuring these cases are being accessed by only those with a need to know.

    The FBI's Electronic Case File (ECF) Document Access Report (DAR) shows accesses to all documents in a particular case file for a specific period of time. The DAR shows the user who conducted the captured activity, the date and time, and the actions taken, i.e., list serials, view text, print, or download.

    Case Agents will review the DARs every 90 days and, with their supervisors, will be responsible for resolving unexplained accesses. As part of the resolution process, the Agent and his supervisor may decide that more frequent monitoring of a specific case is warranted to determine whether accesses were anomalous and accidental or repeated and unauthorized.

    This procedure should act as a strong deterrent as well as identify unusual entries into sensitive files. It will not stymie the flow of information necessary for effective counterintelligence. If this monitoring system had been in place, Hanssen would have known that every time he accessed a case or program as a result of ''surfing,'' his entry would have been identified to the case Agent and questioned. And even though Hanssen did not conduct an unusual number of searches against FBI records, the fact that he was conducting these searches at all would have been immediately apparent and raised suspicions.

 Page 48       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Expanded Polygraph Program: Currently, the FBI conducts polygraphs of all new employees prior to them beginning their service. In addition, individuals with access to certain sensitive programs or cases are polygraphed and, of course, the polygraph is used during serious internal inquiries to resolve unexplained anomalies and ambiguities.

    As an interim measure, we have identified for periodic polygraph examination those individuals who, by the nature of their assignment, have broad access to the FBI's most sensitive information. This includes any level of employee in any field who has access to our most sensitive information, such as data base administrators. These polygraph examinations are currently underway. In addition, we are conducting polygraph examinations of those employees leaving for and returning from permanent foreign assignments.

    Judge Webster will closely examine the entire polygraph issue to include random polygraphs and inclusion of the polygraph as part of the five-year reinvestigation every employee now undergoes.

    As there are elsewhere in the Intelligence Community, there will be unexplainable false positives and, as we saw in the Ames case, false negatives. On balance, however, Director Freeh and I believe the potential for damage to be done by traitors outweighs these concerns. Accordingly, Director Freeh implemented this interim step with the full expectation that Judge Webster will examine this issue in its entirety and make further recommendations.

    Reassignment of Security Countermeasures Section: The FBI Task Force recently recommended, and Director Freeh agreed, to temporarily establish the Security Countermeasures Section of the National Security Division as a separate entity run by a senior level executive from outside the FBI who will report directly to me. That status will remain as we pursue the necessary authority to effectuate this change.
 Page 49       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    This initial elevation of having Security Countermeasures report to me is intended to help implement the substantial policy and procedural changes under development by the AD Task Force and that will precipitate from the review by Judge Webster and the Inspector General.


    Mr. Chairman, Director Freeh and I are especially proud of the work being performed everyday by the employees of the FBI. Their ability to do that work—the work asked of us by the Congress through the laws it passes, by the President through executive orders, and by our federal, state, local, and international law enforcement partners—is a reflection of the strong fiscal support given to the FBI by this Subcommittee.

    The budget proposed for the FBI for FY 2002 addresses the critical resource needs identified through our Strategic Planning process. These important investments will allow the FBI to meet the investigative and technological challenges we face as the FBI enters the 21st Century. These investments will also enable us to develop the core competencies that will allow us to be successful in investigating crimes, protecting national security, developing and sharing technical and forensic expertise, and working better with our federal, state, local, and international partners. I believe that the national priorities and objectives we have put forth reflect the expectations for the FBI that are held by the American people, as well as the Congress.

    Congress, and this Subcommittee in particular, has been extremely generous in its support of the FBI over the past several years. Our successes in the field, whether they be preventing pedophiles from luring children over the Internet, to bringing terrorists from foreign lands back to the U.S. to stand trial for their actions, to protecting our Nation's critical infrastructure from cyber attacks, to fostering greater cooperation with foreign law enforcement through our Legal Attache Offices, were made possible because of your support for the FBI. As we look forward to FY 2002, I am hopeful that we can continue to depend upon your support.
 Page 50       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Again, I thank you for this opportunity to appear before the Subcommittee.

    Mr. SMITH. Okay. Thank you. Did I mispronounce your name? Is it Mr. Pickard?

    Mr. PICKARD. You can call me anything.

    Mr. SMITH. It just dawned on me. I think it is Mr. Pickard.

    Mr. PICKARD. It's Pickard, somewhat like the TV show.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Pickard, for your testimony.

    Mr. Marshall.


    Mr. MARSHALL. Chairman Smith, good morning, Ranking Member Jackson Lee, and other Members of the Committee. It is indeed a pleasure to be here this morning as you hold these hearings, and thanks for having me.

    Before I begin my testimony, I want to thank the entire Subcommittee. I really believe that without your support on both sides of the aisle, DEA could not continue to effectively and safely meet the growing challenges that are posed by today's what I consider to be very ruthless and predatory criminal drug trafficking organizations.
 Page 51       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    As members of the world's premier drug enforcement agent sill, DEA personnel are really international crime fighters, and those employees every day courageously confront and neutralize the world's most sophisticated international drug trafficking organizations. Whether we're working in South America or Asia or communities all across America, DEA is present at the cutting edge of law enforcement, and we're continuously adapting to the ever-changing dynamics of the criminal organizations and enterprises that we confront.

    And I believe that DEA's efforts have had a major impact against global drug trafficking. As examples, I want to mention the demise of the Medellin and Cali cartels, and that demise is due in very large part to DEA's aggressive investigations and programs of international cooperation. By destroying those international syndicates, the cocaine threat in the U.S. appears to be leveling off somewhat, and other—the Columbian cartels are looking to Europe and other countries around the world to create their new markets. Likewise, the neutralization of the Southeast Asia-based drug insurgence groups, such as the Shang United Army, has all but eliminated the availability of Southeast Asian heroin in the United States.

    Mexican-based methamphetamine traffickers, who during the early and mid-1990's flooded the U.S. market with the product of their methamphetamine superlabs, have also been hurt by our intensive law enforcements and chemical control efforts, and those efforts have resulted in price increases and purity decreases in methamphetamine and lower methamphetamine emergency room incidents.

    That good news, however, I think is tempered by the challenges that lie ahead of us, continued challenges. We see that the Columbian-based traffickers are always ready to exploit their infrastructure, and they have very quickly capitalized on the voids that were created by our successes in Southeast Asian, and we see that Columbian groups now dominate the U.S. heroin market, and further, by relinquishing a part of that you domestic cocaine distribution network to Mexico-based operators, the Columbian traffickers have really further insulated themselves from U.S. law enforcement intervention, and in the process they have empowered those Mexico-based organizations to the extent that the Mexico-based organizations are now the premier poly-drug traffickers threatening our nation.
 Page 52       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Now, DEA has grown and developed tremendously over the years from a small start. We now have about 9,000 dedicated, courageous, and talented men and women, and we are committed to improving the quality of lives of citizens of the United States. Under my administrator's vision for DEA, we are committed to intelligence-based operations, and we place a premium on maintaining the public trust and confidence, ethical practices, integrity, training, technology, and last, the success of each and every individual employee of DEA.

    We now have a 5-year strategy that's—that I have here, and we've discussed it with your staff. It's derived from the administrator's vision, and it directs our skills and resources on our core competency, which is the disruption and dismantling of major drug trafficking organizations wherever they operate in the world. That overall strategy focuses on DEA's efforts on international, national and regional, and local impact targets with the ultimate goal always being to destroy the major drug trafficking organizations by investigating, indicting, and imprisoning their leaders.

    DEA now maintains 78 offices in 57 countries. These offices support DEA domestic investigations through foreign liaison, training of host country officials, bilateral investigations, and intelligence gathering. Domestically, as you said, Mr. Chairman, we operate 21 fields divisions in addition to our special operations division at DEA headquarters, and we have offices in almost 350 U.S. cities in every State.

    Some of our significant successes include Operation Mountain Express where we successfully target the methamphetamine precursor chemical providers; Operation Impunity II, which resulted in the seizure of over 5,000 kilograms of cocaine and arrested 141 of the top leaders of that organization; Operation White Horse, which we recently completed with the Columbia authorities and State and local authorities here in the United States was responsible for immobilizing an organization that was sending large quantities of heroine from Columbia to the northeastern United States.
 Page 53       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Now, I have long said that the fight against drugs cannot be won through law enforcement alone, and I very deeply believe that. I believe in what I refer to as a holistic approach that includes a very strong element of law enforcement, but also includes treatment, education, and prevention. It's important, I think, that each one of those elements be strongly supported, and none of those elements should be implemented at the expense of others.

    Now, in light of DEA's view of the threat posed by international drug trafficking in our country and in the world today, I want to outline for you some of the things that are in our 2002 budget request. For our salaries and expenses appropriation, the DEA is requesting a total of one and a half billion dollars, 7654 positions. That's an increase of about $120 million and 134 positions over our currently-enacted 2001 levels.

    We're seeking those increases in three initiatives. The first is for our special operations division and communications intercept initiative. We're seeking 15.1 million and 62 positions under that initiative, which is very critical to us because it will allow us to enhance staffing levels in key investigative units within the special operations division, and that will include support for drug enforcement investigations against the major organizations associated with the southwest border, Latin America, Caribbean, and Europe, and Asian. Now, that special operations division that's dealt with in this initiative has actually proven to be our very most effective tool against these criminal organizations.

    Secondly, is our Firebird initiative. We've requested an increase of $30 million in three positions for the global Firebird network. That is our primary office automation infrastructure. It also serves as the communication backbone for our MERLIN intelligence network, and it's a platform for a lot of other mission-critical data bases and operational systems.
 Page 54       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Now, finally, we're requesting $13.1 million and 69 positions, including 46 chemists, in our laboratory operations initiative, and this will allow us to meet mission-critical requirements within that laboratory support services program. Our chemists are very dedicated and talented people, and they provide a variety of essential services, including drug and evidence analysis, on-site assistance, very often essential for officer safety in clandestine laboratory seizures, and crime scene investigations. They provide vital courtroom testimony to support our prosecution efforts.

    Now, collectively, I believe that the three initiatives that we've presented will really enable us to be more effective and go about meeting more effectively the mission requirements of our special agent work force, and it will also allows us to better support the prosecution of the command and control of drug offenders that are in charge of the major global drug trafficking organizations.

    Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared remarks, and I'll be happy to take questions at the appropriate time. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Marshall follows:]


    Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am happy to appear before you today as you hold hearings on reauthorizing the Department of Justice. It has been more than 20 years since the Congress passed a new authorization bill for the Department, so I would like to review with you today some of the major DEA programs and initiatives that the Congress should be aware of as it considers crafting a new authorization.
 Page 55       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Before my testimony today, I would like to take this time to express my sincere gratitude for your ongoing support. Without your support, DEA could not continue to safely and effectively meet the growing challenges posed by increasingly sophisticated and dangerous international drug trafficking organizations operating throughout the global community. Your efforts work to send a message to these traffickers that their assault on the citizens of this nation will not be taken lightly, and that we will continue to fight to ensure that our streets remain safe for generations to come.

    The mission of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is to enforce the Controlled Substances laws and regulations of the United States and to bring to the criminal and civil justice system of the U.S., or any other competent jurisdiction, those organizations involved in the growing, manufacturing and/or distribution of controlled substances destined for illicit traffic in the United States. The DEA also recommends and supports non-enforcement programs aimed at reducing the availability of illicit controlled substances on both domestic and international markets. To accomplish this mission, DEA works with international, federal, and state and local law enforcement partners to target and immobilize the organizations of major drug traffickers operating at all levels of the drug trade.

    I have long said this fight can not be won through law enforcement alone. There must be a ''holistic'' approach to a global problem. DEA has in place a five-year strategic plan, which addresses the problems posed by illicit drug availability and abuse and provides for a comprehensive balanced approach. There is no doubt that interdiction and enforcement, coupled with education, prevention and treatment, are the essential elements for reducing the supply and demand of illicit drugs in this country.
 Page 56       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    DEA, in its capacity as the world's leading drug enforcement agency and the only single-mission federal agency dedicated to drug law enforcement, has developed the unique ability to direct resources and manpower to identify, target, investigate and dismantle drug organizations headquartered overseas and within the United States. DEA's strategy to successfully accomplish these goals is straightforward, requiring that the agency's resources and manpower be focused on all three levels of the drug trade: the international, national/regional, and local levels. Each of these categories represents a critical aspect of the drug continuum, which affects communities across the nation.

    The 9,000 dedicated men and women of the DEA are committed to improving the quality of life of the citizens of the United States. The agency directs and supports investigations against the highest levels of the international drug trade, their surrogates operating within the United States and those traffickers whose violence and criminal activities threaten towns and cities across the country. These investigations are intelligence-driven and frequently involve the cooperative efforts of numerous other law enforcement organizations.

    DEA's strategy to reduce drug trafficking at all levels of operation is flexible and reflects the constantly changing nature of the drug trade. In concert with the Department of Justice, our sister law enforcement agencies, and the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), DEA has crafted an innovative and effective program to keep pace with developments and shifts in the drug trafficking spectrum and bring both national and international drug traffickers to justice.

    DEA targets, investigates, and dismantles the most powerful drug syndicates operating around the world which are responsible for supplying drugs to American communities. The most significant drug syndicates operating today are far more powerful and violent than any of the other organized criminal groups that we have experienced in the history of American law enforcement. Unlike traditional organized crime, these new criminals operate on a global scale with transnational networks to conduct illicit enterprises simultaneously in many different countries. DEA has grown in sophistication and effectiveness to meet the challenge posed by international drug trafficking in the new century.
 Page 57       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  


    The main challenge DEA faced during the late 1980's was posed by the major drug traffickers from Medellin, Colombia. These drug lords were investigated, arrested and prosecuted by the Colombian National Police (CNP), the DEA, and U.S. Federal prosecutors, beginning with the landmark return of Carlos Lehder to face drug charges in the United States, and ending with the death of Pablo Escobar at the hands of the CNP. During this same time frame, narcotics investigations by the DEA and other Federal, state and local entities created a choke point in South Florida and the Caribbean, through which most of the illicit drugs arriving in our country were being transported. These enforcement strategies led to the demise of the Medellin Cartel.

    As the Medellin traffickers disintegrated, the Cali traffickers quietly coalesced and assumed power equal to that of their predecessors. Due to law enforcement's response to the trafficking in the Caribbean, the Cali traffickers would later form an alliance with Mexican trafficking groups in order to stage and transport drugs across the Southwest Border. The drug traffickers from Cali were far more sophisticated than the Medellin group and eventually became deeply involved in all aspects of the cocaine trade, including production, transportation, wholesale distribution and money laundering. Whereas the Medellin traffickers seemed to revel in the terror and violence that became their trademark—and ultimately contributed to their downfall—the Cali traffickers attempted to avoid indiscriminate violence and sought to build their image as legitimate businessmen. The Cali leaders—the Rodriguez-Orejuela brothers, Jose Santacruz Londono, and Helmer ''Pacho'' Herrera-Buitrago—amassed fortunes and ran their multi-billion dollar cocaine businesses from high-rises and ranches in Colombia. Miguel Rodriguez-Orejuela and his associates comprised what was, until then, the most powerful international organized crime group in history.
 Page 58       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    During 1995 and 1996, intense law enforcement pressure was focused on the Cali leadership by the brave men and women of the Colombian National Police. As a result, all of the top trafficking leaders from Cali were either in jail or killed. During that time frame, U.S. law enforcement agencies were effectively attacking Colombian cells operating within the United States. With the Cali leaders imprisonment in Colombia and the successful attacks by law enforcement on their U.S. cells, traffickers from Mexico took on greater prominence. A growing alliance between the Colombian traffickers and the organizations from Mexico worked to benefit both sides.

    Traffickers from Mexico had long been involved in smuggling marijuana, heroin, and cocaine across the U.S.-Mexico border, using entrenched distribution routes to deliver drugs throughout the United States. The Mexico-based organizations' emergence as major methamphetamine producers and traffickers also contributed to making them a major force in international drug trafficking. The Mexican traffickers, who were previously paid in cash by the Colombian traffickers for their services, began to routinely receive up to one-half of a shipment of cocaine as their payment. This led to Mexican traffickers having access to multi-ton quantities of cocaine and allowed them to expand their markets and influence in the United States, thereby making them formidable cocaine traffickers in their own right.

    The U.S./Mexico border is now the primary point of entry for cocaine shipments being smuggled into the United States. According to a recent assessment, more than half of the cocaine smuggled into the United States crosses the Southwest Border. Today, traffickers operating from Colombia continue to control wholesale level cocaine distribution throughout the heavily populated northeastern United States and along the eastern seaboard in cities such as Boston, Miami, Newark, New York City, and Philadelphia. Traffickers operating from Mexico, however, control wholesale cocaine distribution throughout the western and Midwestern United States. The distribution of multi-ton quantities of cocaine once dominated by the Colombia-based drug groups is now controlled by Mexico-based trafficking groups in cities such as Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Diego, San Francisco, and Seattle.
 Page 59       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Members of international crime groups today pose a much greater threat than did their Medellin and Cali predecessors. They have at their disposal the most sophisticated communications technology as well as faxes, the Internet, and other communications equipment. Additionally, they have in their arsenal radar-equipped aircraft, weapons and an army of workers who oversee the drug business from its raw beginnings in South American jungles to the urban areas and core city locations within the United States. All of this modern technology and these vast resources enable the leaders of international criminal groups to build organizations which, together with their surrogates operating within the United States, reach into the heartland of America. The leaders of these crime groups work through their organizations to carry out the work of transporting drugs into the United States, and franchise others to distribute drugs, thereby allowing them to remain beyond the reach of American justice. Those involved in drug trafficking often generate such tremendous profits that they are able to corrupt law enforcement, military and political officials in order to create and retain a safe haven for themselves.

    Successes against the Medellin and Cali drug lords accelerated the decentralization of the international cocaine trade. In this new century, we are seeing ''second generation'' traffickers emerge on the scene as major players in the Colombian cocaine trade. They tend to be less willing to directly challenge government authority and are much more sophisticated in their methods of operation. They employ extensive utilization of wireless communication devices, which they change with great frequency. Other emerging characteristics are the use of computerized communications, elaborate concealment of clandestine cargo, and avoidance of becoming directly involved in retail distribution or even direct distribution to the U.S. market. The successful identification, investigation, and prosecution of these violators have become an even greater challenge to law enforcement both in the United States and Colombia.
 Page 60       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  


    We can and should continue to identify and build cases against the leaders of the new criminal groups from Colombia. These criminals have already moved to make our task more difficult by withdrawing from positions of vulnerability and maintaining a much lower profile than their predecessors did. Just as there is a new generation of international drug traffickers operating in the world today, we have built what is in many ways a new DEA, far more sophisticated than that which was created in the 1970s.

    As an organization, DEA has grown and changed tremendously over the years. From 1,446 agents and 1,422 support personnel in 1973, we have grown to 3,772 agents and 4,340 support staff at the end of 2000. From our first budget of $74 million in 1973, which increased to $256 million in 1983, DEA's budget authority has grown to $1.44 billion for the current year.

    Domestically, we now operate through 21 Field Divisions, in addition to the Special Operations Division at DEA Headquarters, with offices in every State. Also within the United States, we work through the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) program. This program was initiated in 1982 to combine federal, state, and local law enforcement efforts into a comprehensive attack against organized crime and drug traffickers. DEA remains today as the leading initiator of OCDETF cases.

    Our State & Local Task Force program carries out one of the DEA's priority initiatives-addressing the problem of drug-related violent crime with our state and local counterparts. These are currently 1,134 Special Agent positions dedicated to this enforcement effort working alongside 1,868 State or local police officers in 203 Task Forces. Of this number, 45 task forces are funded through the HIDTA program.
 Page 61       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) program was authorized by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 and is administered by the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Its mission is to reduce drug trafficking throughout the country by coordinating federal, state, and local law enforcement efforts.

    To ensure that criminals do not benefit financially from their illegal acts, federal law provides that profits from drug-related crimes. Asset forfeiture is an effective weapon because it removes the profit from such illegal activities. Asset forfeiture can also financially disable drug-trafficking organizations. Property is seized by the DEA only when it is determined to be a tool for, or the proceeds of, illegal activities such as drug trafficking, organized crime, or money laundering. The DEA has also launched major operations specifically targeting the money-laundering capabilities of major trafficking organizations.

    Most of the drugs in the illicit traffic are products of illicit processing or synthesis. Until recently, there were virtually no legal impediments to obtaining the chemicals necessary to manufacture drugs of abuse, no records required to be maintained for inspection, and no penalties for negligence or willful diversion. The Chemical Diversion and Trafficking Act of 1988 extended the concept of commodity control to those chemicals most often used for the manufacture and synthesis of drugs of abuse. With the support of the State Department, the DEA pursued the same goal for incorporation into the U.N. Convention Against Illicit Drug Traffic of 1988 (the Vienna Convention). On these legal bases, DEA has established controls over a list of critical chemicals commonly diverted for the production of the major drugs of abuse.

 Page 62       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Finally, Mobile Enforcement Teams (METs) were conceived in 1995 in response to the overwhelming problem of drug-related violent crime in towns and cities across the nation. MET teams assist local law enforcement officers in identifying major drug traffickers and organizations that commit homicide and other violent crimes, collecting, analyzing, and sharing intelligence, arresting drug traffickers and assisting in the arrests of violent offenders and gangs, seizing assets, and assisting prosecutors. METs have completed 294 deployments so far, with 18 more currently under way. There are 262 DEA Special Agents assigned to the MET Program nationwide, comprising 24 teams.

    Overseas, the DEA now maintains 78 offices in 57 countries. These offices support DEA domestic investigations through foreign liaison, training of host country officials, bilateral investigations, and intelligence gathering. Through the International Visitor Program, DEA provides foreign officials and U.S. diplomats with briefs on drug trafficking trends and national and international counter narcotics activities.

    DEA is also in the forefront of the forensic science industry. DEA's eight Regional laboratories make up the largest accredited federal lab system in the United States. They provide the best available forensic drug analysis to the law enforcement community. These Labs each serve a region of the country. The Northeast Laboratory is located in New York City, the North Central Laboratory in Chicago, the Southeast Laboratory in Miami, the South Central Laboratory in Dallas, the Southwest Laboratory in National City (CA), the Western Laboratory in San Francisco, and the Mid-Atlantic Lab in Washington, DC. In addition, the Special Testing Laboratory is in the Washington, D.C. suburbs.

    The DEA's Computer Forensics Program (CFP) is the application of computer technology and specialized seizure and evidence handling techniques to retrieve information from computer systems for investigative or intelligence purposes. Like many other business people, drug traffickers rely on computers and electronic pocket organizers to store information. Modern law enforcement routinely encounters and seizes home computers, laptops, computer networks, pocket organizers, and magnetic media in every conceivable size and format. These items, when seized, are forwarded to the CFP for duplication and extraction of information in such a way as to preserve the integrity of the evidence in a court-admissible manner. The Computer Forensics Program was established in October 1994, and has processed hundreds of computer items and pieces of electronic equipment each year since then. Over the last five years, the number of cases and computer seizures have increased by approximately 30 percent each year.
 Page 63       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Electronic surveillance is critical to our success in combating the drug problem in the United States. In fact, the vast majority of court authorized electronic surveillance actions are directly tied to enforcement of the controlled substances laws and regulations of the United States. Without this essential tool, we in drug law enforcement would be unable to prevent, investigate, and solve many of the crimes associated with the growing, manufacture, or distribution of illegal drugs. In order to meet the challenges presented by these sophisticated drug trafficking organizations, it is necessary for us to attack the command and control mechanisms of these organizations. Our center for targeting command and control is the Special Operations Division (SOD), a combined DEA, U.S. Customs, FBI, IRS/Criminal Investigations, and DOJ/Criminal Division effort that supports ongoing investigations by producing detailed and comprehensive analyses of data revealing the activities and organizational structures of major drug trafficking and drug-related money laundering organizations and identifying relationships among traffickers and their related enterprises.

    Today's international drug trafficking organizations are the wealthiest, most powerful, and most ruthless organized crime entities we have ever faced. We know from our investigations that they utilize their virtually unlimited wealth to purchase the most sophisticated electronic equipment available on the market to facilitate their illegal activities. The Special Operations Division has enabled us to build cases against the leaders of these powerful organizations by targeting their command and control communications with multi-jurisdictional criminal investigations based on state-of-the-art, court approved Title III electronic interceptions. We rely on the information and evidence gathered from these Title III interceptions of their communications to build a picture of the organizations, identify the individual members, and obtain evidence enabling us to make arrests and take apart whole sections of the criminal organizations at a time. The capability provided by SOD is at the core of our ability to make cases against the leadership and U.S.-based infrastructure of these powerful organizations that control the drug trade in our hemisphere.
 Page 64       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Using the law enforcement tools available to today's DEA, as outlined above, in the past several years we have participated in a number of very significant investigations. These actions demonstrate not only the new sophistication of drug trafficking organizations at the beginning of the Twenty-First Century, but also the significance of the law enforcement response.

    We continue to carry out cutting-edge, sophisticated investigations like Operation Millennium, which successfully targeted major traffickers who had previously operated without fear of capture or prosecution in the United States, believing that only their low-level operatives were at risk. These operations underscore the importance of cooperation among international drug law enforcement agencies. Such operations benefit from the closest possible cooperation between the DEA and our foreign counterparts. These investigations will continue to lead to the dismantling of major portions of the most significant drug trafficking organizations operating today. Allow me to review just a few of DEA's recent successes.

    Operation Millennium, brought to a successful conclusion in 1999, effectively demonstrated that even the highest level traffickers based in foreign countries could not manage drug operations inside the United States with impunity. Operation Millennium was made possible by direct support from the governments of Colombia and Mexico. Operation Millennium effectively targeted major cocaine suppliers who had been responsible for shipping vast quantities of cocaine from Colombia through Mexico into the United States. Operation Millennium specifically targeted drug kingpin Alejandro Bernal-Madrigal, who, by his own admission, had been smuggling 30 tons, or 500 million dosage units, of cocaine into the United States every month.

 Page 65       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Operation Mountain Express was a joint operation between DEA's Special Operations Division and the Office of Diversion Control. Mountain Express targeted traffickers of the methamphetamine precursor, pseudoephedrine. Existing regulations make it possible for California-based Mexican criminal organizations to purchase multi-ton quantities of pseudoephedrine for use in methamphetamine production. Since January 2000, SOD coordinated a number of multi-jurisdictional investigations targeting pseudoephedrine traffickers, many of whom were of Middle Eastern origin, using 11 wiretaps during the course of the investigations.

    Operation Tar Pit was a DEA led multi-jurisdictional investigation targeting a Mexican heroin transportation and trafficking organization based in Tepic, Nayarit, Mexico. Primarily, this organization imported multi-kilogram quantities of black tar heroin from Mexico into the United States. During the course of the operation, more than 30 Federal Title III investigations were conducted. In June 2000, a nationwide takedown occurred against Operation Tar Pit targets, which included the principal Mexican command and control members in Mexico, U.S. based cell heads, workers for each cell, couriers, and customers.

    In November 2000, the DEA, FBI, U.S. Customs Service, and Federal prosecutors culminated an 18-month investigation targeting a multi-ethnic, transnational MDMA (Ecstasy) and cocaine distribution organization, following-up on enforcement action by Dutch police in the Netherlands. The investigation, known as Operation RED TIDE, was a textbook example of the new multi-agency, multi-national law enforcement cooperation needed to thwart organized crime in the 21st Century. As a result of this cooperative effort, Customs agents seized 1,096 pounds (2.1 million tablets) of MDMA, the largest single seizure of the drug in history. The head of the organization, Tamer Adel Ibrahim fled the U.S. after the seizure, but was quickly traced to Mexico and then to Europe by the multi-agency team. Ibrahim, along with others, was arrested and the Dutch National Police seized 1.2 million tablets of MDMA.
 Page 66       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Operations like RED TIDE exemplify the unprecedented level of international law enforcement cooperation in effect today. The investigation targeting a transnational MDMA and cocaine trafficking syndicate was a cooperative effort by the U.S. law enforcement agencies, as well as the Dutch National Police/Regional Team South, Mexico's Fiscalia Especializad Para La Atencion De Delitos (FEADS), the Israeli National Police, the German Federal Police (Bundes Kriminal Amt), the Cologne Germany Police Department, the Duissburg Germany Police Department, the Italian National Police and the French National Police.

    This investigation is extremely important because MDMA (Ecstasy) is a new threat with the potential to cause great damage, especially to America's youth. Operation Red Tide has ensured that a large volume of Ecstasy that would have made it into the hands of our youth never hit the streets, and sent a strong message to the traffickers that the DEA is leading a truly global response to the drug threat.

    Last December, the DEA, together with U.S. Customs and the FBI, completed Operation Impunity II, resulting in 141 arrests and the seizure of 5,266 kilograms of cocaine, 9,325 pounds of marijuana, and approximately $9,663,265 in U.S. currency and assets. Impunity II follows earlier successes dating back to 1996 in Operation Limelight and Operation Impunity I and was the result of the outstanding coordination between federal, state, and local law enforcement officials and prosecutors across the country.

    Operation Impunity II was a multi-agency law enforcement effort that targeted a wide-ranging conspiracy to smuggle thousands of pounds of cocaine and marijuana from Mexico, across the southwest border into Texas, for distribution throughout the United States. Impunity II targeted an organization that placed managers in the United States and retained the organizational command and control elements in Mexico. In addition to remnants from the Carrillo-Fuentes organization, agents learned that some members of the Mexican Gulf Cartel had also become associated with the organization, including Osiel Cardenas-Guillen, allegedly a former Gulf Cartel lieutenant. In addition to the domestic enforcement activity in this country, the United States Government presented provisional arrest warrants for extradition for eight Mexican nationals in Mexico and one Dominican national in the Dominican Republic.
 Page 67       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    In January of this year, Operation White Horse targeted a large scale heroin trafficking organization, directed by Wilson SALAZAR-Maldonado, which was responsible for sending multi-kilogram quantities of heroin from Colombia to the Northeastern United States via Aruba. The investigation was conducted jointly by the Colombian National Police, DEA Bogota, Curacao, Philadelphia and New York, and the Special Operations Division. This investigation resulted in 96 arrests, as well as the seizure of multi-kilograms quantities of heroin and cocaine, weapons and U.S. currency.

    DEA remains committed to its primary goal of targeting and arresting the most significant drug traffickers in the world today. Our successes range from participation in the historic destruction of the Cali and Medellin Cartels to the recent operations just mentioned. In the future as well, DEA will meet the ultimate test of bringing to justice the drug lords who control their vast empires of crime, which bring misery to so many nations. As we sustain a relentless assault against drug traffickers, we must insist that these drug lords be arrested, tried and convicted, and sentenced in their own countries to prison terms commensurate with their crimes, or, as appropriate, extradited to the United States to face justice in U.S. courts.


    The illegal drug market in the United States is one of the most profitable in the world. As such, it attracts the most ruthless, sophisticated, and aggressive drug traffickers. Drug law enforcement agencies face an enormous challenge in protecting the country's borders from drug traffickers who smuggle in cocaine, heroin, marijuana, and methamphetamine for distribution in U.S. neighborhoods as well as from domestic suppliers of these drugs.
 Page 68       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Diverse groups traffic and distribute illegal drugs. Criminal groups operating from South America smuggle cocaine and heroin into the United States via a variety of routes, including land routes through Mexico, maritime routes along Mexico's east and west coasts, sea routes through the Caribbean, and international air corridors. Furthermore, criminal groups operating from neighboring Mexico smuggle cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, amphetamine, and marijuana into the United States. These criminal groups have smuggled heroin and marijuana across the Southwest Border and distributed them throughout the United States since the 1970's. In addition to distributing cocaine and methamphetamine in the West and Midwest, these Mexico-based groups now are attempting to expand the distribution of those drugs into eastern U.S. markets.

    Besides these criminal groups based abroad, domestic organizations cultivate, produce, manufacture, or distribute illegal drugs such as marijuana, methamphetamine, PCP, and LSD. By growing high-potency sinsemilla, domestic marijuana growers provide a product that easily competes with other suppliers. As demand for methamphetamine grows, especially in the West and Midwest, so, too, does the number of illicit laboratories that supply methamphetamine to a growing number of addicts. Finally, a small number of chemists manufacture LSD that is subsequently distributed primarily to high school and college students throughout the United States.


    The primary U.S. drug threat is cocaine, particularly in its smokable form known as ''crack'' cocaine. The trafficking, distribution, and abuse of cocaine and crack cocaine over the past decade, along with increasing drug-related violence, seriously debilitate the quality of life in many cities and towns across the country. Most of this nations drug law enforcement assets are directed against cocaine traffickers.
 Page 69       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Crack, the inexpensive, smokable form of cocaine, continues to be distributed and used in most major cities. While cocaine use in the United States has declined over the past decade, the rate of use in recent years has stabilized at high levels. Crack cocaine usage, which drove these rates, has reached the saturation point in large urban areas throughout the country. Street gangs, such as the Crips and the Bloods, and groups of ethnic Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, and Jamaicans dominate the retail market for crack cocaine nationwide.


    Heroin is readily available in many U.S. cities as evidenced by the unprecedented level of average retail, or street-level, purity. The increased availability of high-purity heroin, which can effectively be snorted, has given rise to a new, younger user population. While avoiding the stigma and additional health hazards of needle use, this user group is ingesting larger quantities of the drug and, according to drug treatment specialists, progressing more quickly toward addiction.

South American Heroin

    The availability of South American (SA) heroin, produced in Colombia, has increased dramatically in the United States since 1993. South American heroin is available in the major metropolitan areas of the Northeast and along the East Coast. Investigations also indicate the spread of South American heroin to smaller U.S. cities as well. Within the United States, ethnic Dominican criminal groups have played a significant role in retail-level heroin distribution in northeastern markets for at least the past two decades. Currently, Dominican groups dominate retail heroin markets in northeastern cities such as New York, Boston, and Philadelphia.
 Page 70       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

Mexican Heroin

    Mexican heroin has been a threat to the United States for decades. It is produced, smuggled, and distributed by polydrug trafficking groups, many of which have been in operation for more than 20 years. Nearly all of the heroin produced in Mexico is destined for distribution in the United States. Organized crime groups operating from Mexico produce, smuggle, and distribute the black tar heroin sold in the western United States. Once the heroin reaches the United States, traffickers rely upon well-entrenched polydrug smuggling and distribution networks to deliver their product to the market, primarily in the metropolitan areas of the Midwestern, southwestern, and western United States with sizable Mexican immigrant populations.

Southeast Asian Heroin

    High-purity Southeast Asian (SEA) heroin dominated the market in the United States during the late 1980s and early 1990s. Over the past few years, however, all indicators point to a decrease in SEA heroin available domestically. Despite the recent decline in trafficking of SEA heroin, Chinese criminal groups based in Asia remain the most sophisticated heroin trafficking organizations in the world.

Southwest Asian Heroin

    While a large portion of Southwest Asian (SWA) heroin is consumed in Western Europe, Pakistan, and Iran, traffickers operating from Middle Eastern locales smuggle SWA heroin to ethnic enclaves in the United States. Criminal groups composed of ethnic Lebanese, Pakistanis, Turks, and Afghans are all involved in supplying the drug to U.S.-based groups for retail distribution. West African traffickers, who primarily smuggled SEA heroin to the United States in the 1990s, now also deal in SWA heroin.
 Page 71       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  


    Domestic methamphetamine production, trafficking, and abuse are concentrated in the western United States. Methamphetamine is also increasingly available in portions of the South. Clandestine laboratories in California and Mexico are the primary sources of supply for methamphetamine available in the United States.

    Over the last decade, the methamphetamine trafficking and abuse situation in the United States changed dramatically. In 1994, ethnic Mexican drug trafficking organizations operating ''super labs'' (labs capable of producing in excess of ten pounds of methamphetamine in one 24-hour production cycle) based in Mexico and California began to take control of the production and distribution of methamphetamine domestically. The entry of ethnic Mexican traffickers into the methamphetamine trade in the mid-1990s resulted in a significant increase in the supply of the drug.

    The primary points of entry into the United States for methamphetamine produced in Mexico have traditionally been California ports of entry, particularly San Ysidro. Although a great amount of methamphetamine still transits this area, ports-of-entry in south Texas are experiencing significant increases in smuggling activity.

    The vast majority of methamphetamine precursor chemicals diverted to clandestine laboratories in the United States are dosage-form pseudoephedrine or ephedrine drug products. They are usually purchased from U.S. manufacturers and distributors who sell case quantities of the tablets. The finished methamphetamine is then distributed throughout the U.S. through preexisting smuggling methods to the traffickers.
 Page 72       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  


    Marijuana is the most widely abused and readily available illicit drug in the United States with an estimated 11.5 million current users. At least one-third of the U.S. population has used marijuana sometime in their lives. The drug is considered a ''gateway'' to the world of illicit drug abuse . . .

    Marijuana smuggled into the United States, whether grown in Mexico or transshipped from other Latin American source areas, accounts for most of the marijuana available in the United States. Marijuana produced in Mexico remains the most widely available. Moreover, high-potency marijuana enters the U.S. drug market from Canada. The availability of marijuana from the Far East, primarily Thailand, generally is limited to the West Coast. U.S. drug law enforcement reporting also suggests increased availability of domestically grown marijuana.


    Commonly referred to as Ecstasy, XTC, Clarity or Essence, the chemical substance known as 3, 4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) is a synthetic psychoactive drug possessing stimulant and mild hallucinogenic properties. In the early 1990s, MDMA became increasingly popular among European youth. However, it is within the last five years that MDMA use in the United States has increased at an alarming rate.

    Although the vast majority of MDMA consumed domestically is produced in Europe, a limited number of MDMA laboratories operate in the United States. Law enforcement seized seven clandestine MDMA laboratories in the United States in 2000 compared to 19 seized in 1999. It should be noted that these labs were primarily capable of limited drug production. While ''recipes'' for the clandestine production of MDMA can be found on the Internet, acquiring the necessary precursor chemicals in the U.S. is difficult.
 Page 73       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    MDMA is manufactured clandestinely in Western Europe, particularly in the Netherlands and Belgium. Much of the MDMA is manufactured in the southeast section of the Netherlands near Maastricht. International MDMA traffickers based in the Netherlands and Belgium consistently use other European countries, such as France, England, Germany, and Spain as transshipment points for MDMA shipments destined for the United States. Russian, Israeli and European criminal organizations, the principal traffickers of MDMA worldwide, supply the United States with the drug.


    None of the major drug traffickers headquartered overseas could operate without the assistance of national and regional drug trafficking organizations which are responsible for trafficking huge quantities of drugs into U.S. communities. These organizations are comprised of a network of operatives who transport, store and distribute drugs and collect and repatriate drug proceeds throughout the United States and whose activities are directed by drug lords based in foreign countries. In many cases, national and regional drug trafficking organizations are comprised of numerous cells whose directors are responsible for specific tasks such as communications, financial matters and/or logistics. These cell heads are sent to the United States for a period of time to carry out the business mandates of the top drug lords and are given specific tasks to accomplish. The national and regional drug syndicates have infiltrated many states and communities, bringing with them the crime and violence once limited to major urban areas. A survey of recent DEA investigations revealed that over 400 investigations stemming from Operations Reciprocity and Limelight involved drug traffickers from foreign countries who had set up operations in various cities across the United States.
 Page 74       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Local violent drug trafficking organizations also operate across the United States and are responsible for eroding the quality of life in many American communities. Previously centered in major urban areas, violent drug trafficking groups are now part of the landscape in smaller cities and rural areas. Fueled in large part by methamphetamine production and trafficking, violent drug trafficking organizations are now affecting the crime rates in smaller cities such as Spokane, Washington and Cedar Rapids, Iowa. While these local, violent groups appear to be unrelated to the large international drug trafficking organizations headquartered overseas, it is important to note that all of the cocaine and heroin that is trafficked by these groups is produced overseas and transported to the United States for eventual distribution on the local level.


    The number one goal of the National Drug Strategy is to educate and enable America's youth to reject illegal drugs as well as alcohol and tobacco. DEA believes that there is a role for everyone to play in this goal, including law enforcement. Law enforcement may not take the lead in demand reduction efforts, but it has a unique perspective and wealth of experience to bring to the prevention arena. DEA special agents have seen first hand the terrible impact of drug abuse in communities, and speak with a compelling authority in explaining to citizens why this problem needs to be conquered. They also have great expertise in planning, organizing and implementing proactive efforts to deal with drug abuse.

    As an example of DEA's contribution to drug prevention, Demand Reduction Coordinators (DRC's) have been instrumental in working with media to place public service announcements from the Partnership for a Drug-Free America in support of the President's Youth Media Campaign. Demand Reduction Coordinators worked collaboratively with state and local authorities to produce an educational video (several thousand distributed to date) for adults and adolescents in the Midwest to educate them about the dangers of methamphetamine. In New York and Washington, D.C., Demand Reduction Coordinators developed an ad campaign geared to engaging youth that is being posted on busses, subway trains, and taxis. And the Demand Reduction Section has participated in satellite video conferences that were broadcast all over the United States.
 Page 75       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Additionally the Demand Reduction Section, the Bureau of Justice Assistance, and the National Crime Prevention Council have conducted seminars for teams of community leaders from cities and towns that received MET deployments. The objective is to educate community leaders to start programs that prevent the return of the drug trafficking and violent crime that plagued their neighborhoods. CPD hosted a group of national experts in drug and crime prevention to review the proposed curriculum for this training.

    The DEA web page is yet another way of reaching a large segment of the public with demand reduction information both for young people and their parents. But not everyone has access to computers, or is computer-literate. Therefore, DEA also reaches the public through publications and direct contact such as seminars, conferences and meetings with youth, parents, employers, employees, businesses, community and civic groups, teachers, coaches, clergy, prisoners, as well as law enforcement personnel.

    The driving force behind DEA's demand reduction program has always been the particular credibility that law enforcement, and especially federal law enforcement officers bring to the drug prevention arena. DEA agents possess a certain authority because of their background and job experiences, which play an important role in the overall drug demand reduction picture. This is why DEA's current demand reduction program has been so successful.

DEA's Strategic Plan

    In order to meet the enormous challenges posed by internationally-based narcotics traffickers and their surrogates within the United States, DEA has developed a five-year Strategic Plan which is a key part of our commitment to establish and maintain a clear focus on the outcome of our efforts. In its unique capacity as the world's leading drug enforcement agency, DEA carries out its legal mandate for enforcing provisions of the controlled substances and chemical diversion, trafficking laws and regulations, and serves as the single point of contact for the coordination of all international drug investigations.
 Page 76       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    To ensure mission success, DEA attacks all levels of drug trafficking using both traditional and innovative drug control approaches, focusing its enforcement operations on the full continuum of drug trafficking. This overall strategic approach is based on the recognition that the major drug traffickers, operating both internationally and domestically, have insulated themselves from the drug distribution networks but remain closely linked to the proceeds of their trade. Consequently, the identification and forfeiture of illicitly derived assets is a powerful tool in successfully destroying the economic base of the drug trafficking organization, as well as a means of proving a connection between violators and a criminal drug conspiracy at the time of prosecution.

    In view of this assessment, DEA's investigative efforts are directed against the major international drug trafficking organizations and their facilitators at every juncture in their operations—from the cultivation and production of drugs in foreign countries, to their passage through the transit zone, and eventual distribution on the streets of America's communities. DEA's Strategic Plan takes into account the current drug trafficking situation affecting the United States, and works to identify the characteristics and exploit the vulnerabilities of all three levels of the drug trade. By focusing directly on the agency's investigative priority targeting system, DEA responds to each of the following levels simultaneously:

    International Targets: DEA will eliminate the power and control of the major drug trafficking organizations and dismantle their infrastructure by disrupting and dismantling the operations of their supporting organizations that provide raw materials and chemicals, produce and transship illicit drugs, launder money worldwide, and halt the operations of their surrogates in the United States.
 Page 77       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    National/Regional Targets: DEA will continue an aggressive and balanced enforcement program with a multi-jurisdictional approach designed to help focus Federal and interagency resources on illegal drug traffickers, their organizations and key members who have control of an area within a region of the United States, and the drugs and assets involved in their activities.

    Local Initiatives: DEA will continue to assist States and localities in attacking the violence that plagues our cities, rural areas, and small towns to protect our citizens from the impact of drugs, and help restore a positive quality of life. DEA considers this an important part of its overall strategy to complement the state and local efforts with specialized programs that bring DEA's intelligence, expertise, and leadership into specific trouble spots throughout the nation.

    In each of the aforementioned forums, DEA seeks to identify, target, investigate, disrupt, and dismantle the international, national, state, and local drug trafficking organizations that are having the most significant impact on America. DEA's strategic goals reflect the agency's efforts to use its unique skills and limited resources in a manner designed to achieve maximum impact. This requires maintaining a clear focus on Deals core competency—the destruction and dismantlement of drug trafficking organizations. The implementation of DEA's strategic plan is carried out with the ''holistic'' approach, which I mentioned at the beginning of my statement. This approach addresses the problems posed by illicit drug availability and abuse and provides for a comprehensive approach of interdiction and enforcement, coupled with education, prevention and treatment.

 Page 78       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    For FY 2002, DEA is requesting a total of $1.6 billion, 8,314 positions, and 8,171 FTE, of which $1.5 billion, 7,654 positions and 7,515 FTE are funded by our Salaries and Expenses (S&E) Appropriation, and the remainder is funded by the Diversion Control Fee Account. For the S&E Appropriation, this represents an increase of $120.6 million and 134 positions over the FY 2001 enacted levels. The increase consists of $62.5 million needed to maintain our current level of operations and $58.2 million and 134 positions (including 13 Special Agents) for three program initiatives: a Special Operations Division (SOD) and Communications Intercept Initiative, a FIREBIRD initiative, and a Laboratory Operations Initiative. I will briefly discuss each in turn.

    First, DEA is seeking $15.1 million and 62 positions (including 13 Special Agents) under the Special Operations Division and Communications Intercept Initiative to provide critical enhancements to its SOD and Investigative Technology programs. SOD is a comprehensive enforcement operation designed specifically to coordinate multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional and multi-national Title III investigations against the command and control elements of major drug trafficking organizations operating domestically and abroad. These resources will be used to enhance staffing levels in key investigative units within the SOD, to include support for drug enforcement investigations associated with the Southwest Border, Latin America, the Caribbean, Europe, and Asia. This request also augments DEA's funding base for contract linguists, and enhances DEA's investigative technology programs through new resources for equipment, technical support personnel, and training.

    Second, under our FIREBIRD Initiative, DEA requests an enhancement of $30 million and 3 positions for the global FIREBIRD network. FIREBIRD is DEA's primary office automation infrastructure. It provides essential computer tools for agents and support staff, including E-mail, uniform word processing, and many other forms of office automation software. FIREBIRD also serves as the communications ''backbone'' for DEA's MERLIN intelligence network, and serves as the platform for numerous other mission critical databases and operational systems. DEA is requesting funding to complete deployment of the system, provide vital network security, and support technology renewal of the system. The technology renewal resources will allow DEA to replace outdated technology and adopt a reasonable replacement cycle for FIREBIRD equipment.
 Page 79       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Third and finally, DEA requests $13.1 million and 69 positions (including 46 chemists) pursuant to our Laboratory Operations Initiative to meet mission-critical requirements within our laboratory services program. DEA's forensic chemists provide a variety of essential services, including drug and evidence analysis, on-site assistance for clandestine laboratory seizures and crime scene investigations, and vital courtroom testimony to support prosecution efforts. Likewise, the recent success of DEA's Operation Breakthrough program in providing the US Government with new scientific data on coca cultivation and cocaine production in Colombia has demonstrated the crucial role played by DEA forensic chemists and intelligence analysts in supporting the critical intelligence needs of senior US policy makers and the counterdrug intelligence community. We must be able to enhance our capability to carry out this type of strategic analysis and reporting. The requested funds and staffing are needed to address a growing backlog of exhibits and establish a laboratory equipment base that will better support program operations. Collectively, these resources will enable DEA to more effectively meet the mission requirements of its Special Agent workforce and better support the prosecution of drug offenders through timely analysis of evidence.

    Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared remarks. I will be happy to take any questions you may have for me at this time.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Marshall.

    Dr. Hawk Sawyer.

 Page 80       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. I'm also pleased to be appear before you today, and let me just thank you again, Chairman Smith and other Members of the Committee, for your great support of the Bureau of Prisons.

    The Federal inmate population has increased more than six-fold in the last two decades from approximately 25,000 inmates in 41 institutions in 1980 to more than 150,000 in 98 institutions today. To address the population growth, the bureau's budget has grown from approximately $330 million and 10,000 staff in 1980 to more than $4 billion and about 34,000 staff today.

    The FY 2002 budget requests about $4.7 billion. 3.8 billion of that is for operations and 833 million is for capital budget. We estimate that rising utility costs could increase our expenses by nearly $40 million within this year, and we believe this could go even higher in future years. Also, nearly 70 percent of our operating budget is consumed by staffing expenses. Thus any unfunded pay raises and benefit increases which must be absorbed have a dramatic impact.

    The rapid growth of the inmate population has led to system-wide crowding of 32 percent above rate of capacity, with the most severe crowding at medium and high security institutions, which are 57 and 48 percent above capacity, and these institutions house our more intractable, more violent inmates. Three new facilities will be activated by the end of FY 2001, and we have an additional 26 new prisons under development. These will bring the total number of prisons to 127. The new institutions will provide approximately 33,000 new beds.

 Page 81       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Despite the dramatically increasing inmate population and crowding levels, the bureau has experienced significant reductions in assaults on both staff and inmates, homicides, suicides, escapes from secure institutions, and other serious misconduct over the past several years. Our effective management of the inmates in institutions is due to our dedicated loyal and hard working staff. Direct supervision of inmates, including good communication, has proven to be a critical element of successful prison management.

    The bureau employs an inmate classification system that minimizes the likelihood that vulnerable inmates will be housed with more sophisticated dangerous criminals. In recent years, the bureau has improved prison design and construction, made many physical plan improvements, and taken advantage of technological developments to further enhance our institutions' security.

    Inmates typically have greater health care needs than the average citizen, and through variation cost-cutting strategies, the bureau has maintained inmate health care costs below inflation levels over the past 5 years, despite the fact that national health care expenditures have increased an average of approximately 5 percent per year during this period. Unfortunately, in the coming years, the cost of inmate medical care is likely to increase due to increasing numbers of inmates of all ages who have inordinate health care needs and the steep increase in the cost and use of pharmaceuticals.

    All sentenced inmates in Federal prisons are required to work except the relatively small number who are medically unable to do so. Approximately 25 percent of the bureau's medically able sentenced inmates work in Federal prison industries, or FPI, and we consider that our most important correctional program. By statute, FPI's mission is to employ and provide work skills training to the greatest possible number of inmates combined within the Bureau of Prisons. Research has demonstrated that inmates who worked in prison industries or completed vocational programming were 24 percent less lightly to recidivate than those who did not and were 14 percent more likely to be employed following release from prison and earn higher wages than their nonparticipating peers. This research has also demonstrated that FPI programs provide even greater benefits to minorities who are at greater risk for recidivism.
 Page 82       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    By employing 25 percent of the bureau's work eligible inmates, FPI assists in the management of crowded prisons, contributing directly to the safety of staff and inmates. FPI does not receive appropriated funding for its operations and by statute must be economically self-sustaining. Operating only from sales revenues, FPI precludes the need for alternative inmate programs, lowering annual prison costs to taxpayers by hundreds of millions of dollars.

    In addition to work, all bureau institutions offer a variety of educational and vocational training programs through which inmates gain knowledge and skills that help them become gainfully employed upon release. These programs have been shown by research to reduce recidivism, and the bureau is committed to addressing the educational deficits of all of our inmates.

    The most intensive drug abuse treatment in the bureau is our residential drug treatment program. This treatment is designed for the approximately 34 percent of our inmate population that's been clinically diagnosed with a substance abuse or dependency disorder. The bureau continues to meet the statutory mandate of providing residential substance abuse treatment to all eligible inmates. Analysis of the bureau's residential drug program reveals that 3 years after release from custody, inmates who completed the bureau's drug abuse program were significantly less likely to be rearrested and to reuse drugs.

    The bureau places most of its inmates in community corrections centers or halfway houses prior to their release from custody in order to help them adjust to life in the community and find suitable employment and housing. Inmates in community correction centers are required to work and to pay a subsistence charge of 25 percent of their income to defray the costs of confinement.
 Page 83       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    And, recently, the bureau has given responsibility for carrying out Federal death sentences. Federal executions will be conducted at the execution facility at the United States Penitentiary at Terre Haute, Indiana, which is also the site of our special confinement unit or death row. Lethal injection is the method to be used in Federal executions. There are 21 individuals housed on the Federal death row. The last Federal execution was carried out in 1963. There are two executions scheduled for FY 2001. Timothy McVeigh has a scheduled execution date of May 16, and Juan Raul Garza has a scheduled execution date of June 19.

    I'm very proud of the Bureau of Prison staff and the job they do each and every day. Despite our record-setting population growth, evidenced by the net increase of 1800 new inmates in the bureau last month alone, our effective prison management is very evident. Such success cannot be expected to continue, though, with dramatic population increases and record-setting crowding without the resources we've requested to bring new capacity on line.

    The bureau's mission involves myriad program and policy issues, and today I've just touched on a few of the key ones, and I again would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. I'd be very happy to take any questions you might have.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Hawk Sawyer follows:]


    Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

 Page 84       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss the operations of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Let me begin by thanking you, Chairman Smith, Ranking Minority Member Scott, and other members of the Subcommittee for your strong support of the Bureau. I look forward to continuing our work with you and the members of the Subcommittee.

    The Bureau continues to effectively meet our mission to protect society by confining offenders in facilities that are safe, humane, cost-efficient, and appropriately secure, and that provide work and other self-improvement opportunities to assist offenders in becoming law-abiding citizens.


    The Federal inmate population has increased more than six-fold in the last two decades, from approximately 25,000 inmates and 41 institutions in 1980 to more than 150,000 inmates and 98 institutions today. (Of the 150,000 total, approximately 127,000 are in facilities operated by the Bureau of Prisons, and the remainder are in privately operated facilities and facilities managed by state and local governments). The growth stems from more Federal investigations, prosecutions, and convictions, and new legislation that dramatically altered sentencing in the Federal criminal justice system. The bulk of the growth since the mid-1980's resulted from increased sentences based on the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 (which established determinate sentencing, abolished parole, and reduced good time) and mandatory minimum sentences enacted in 1986, 1988, and 1990. The past three fiscal years are particularly telling: in FY 1998, the population increased by 10,027 inmates (representing an 8.9 percent increase); in FY 1999, the increase was 11,373 (9.3 percent); and during FY 2000, the population increased by 11,436 inmates (an 8.6 percent increase).
 Page 85       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    To address this population growth, the Bureau of Prisons' budget has grown from approximately $330 million in 1980 to more than $4.3 billion today. The Bureau's approved staffing levels have risen from just under 10,000 in 1980 to nearly 34,000 in FY 2001. Approximately $3.47 billion (81 percent) of the total budget is for daily operations (70 percent salaries and expenses), with the remainder for capital budget projects including construction, modernization and repairs, and for contract confinement and detention space.

    The FY 2002 budget request totals almost $4.7 billion; $3.8 billion for operations and $833 million for the capital budget. The operating budget will fund all existing facilities, including the five new facilities scheduled to be operational by the end of FY 2002 and nearly 20,000 more inmates we project will be in our custody. The budget request includes an increase of approximately $128 million to cover the costs of housing Federal inmates in contract facilities. The Bureau of Prisons relies on the private sector (and state and local governments) to house approximately 15 percent of Federal inmates in correctional facilities and in community corrections centers.

    One of our operating budget challenges this year and anticipated for next year is the cost of utilities across the country. We currently estimate that rising utility costs could increase our expenses by nearly $40 million this year above last year, and we believe this could go even higher in future years, depending on weather patterns and energy source costs. Additionally, nearly 70 percent of our operating budget is consumed by staffing expenses, thus any unfunded pay raises or benefit increases which must be absorbed have a dramatic impact. While the Bureau's primary mission is the incarceration of sentenced Federal inmates, the agency provides assistance to the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) by confining pretrial detainees and presentenced offenders. The Bureau currently confines approximately one-third of the USMS detainee population. The Bureau also assists the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) by confining approximately 3,000 INS detainees in Bureau institutions and contract facilities.
 Page 86       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    We expect the inmate population to continue to increase for the next several years due to ongoing Federal law enforcement initiatives, particularly with respect to immigration, drugs and weapons offenders. In addition, we will be housing all District of Columbia sentenced felons (approximately 8,000 inmates) by the end of 2001 (as required by the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997).

    In the late 1980's and early 1990's the female inmate population often grew at a faster rate than the male population, but that trend has stopped and women have consistently represented approximately 7 percent (or less) of the Federal inmate population. The Bureau's current projections indicate the total inmate population could reach as high as 200,000 by 2006.


    The Bureau confines inmates in institutions at four security levels (minimum, low, medium, and high) and has one maximum-security prison for the less than 1 percent of Bureau of Prisons inmates who require that level of security. The Bureau also operates detention centers that confine mostly pretrial detainees and presentenced offenders, and Federal medical centers that provide medical care to inmates who cannot be housed in general population facilities.

    The rapid growth of the inmate population has led to system-wide crowding of 32 percent above the rated capacity, with the most severe crowding at medium-security and high-security institutions, which are 57 and 48 percent above capacity, respectively. Prison crowding contributes to increased inmate idleness due to an increased demand on limited services and facilities. It can also lead to an increased potential for inmate violence and staff turnover. These concerns are heightened for the Bureau because the higher levels of crowding are at the higher-security institutions (where the more-intractable, more-violent inmates are confined). With the support of Congress, the Bureau is making every effort to ensure that sufficient staff are available in its facilities to provide adequate prisoner supervision and offset the deleterious effects of crowding on inmate management.
 Page 87       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    For many years, the Bureau has been developing new capacity to meet the demand of its increasing inmate population guided by the following principles: (1) fully utilize and expand existing Federal institutions wherever cost effective and feasible; (2) construct new Federal prisons, preferably on surplus or donated property; (3) utilize alternatives to traditional imprisonment, such as community corrections centers, for appropriate offenders; and (4) contract selectively with the private sector and State and local correctional agencies, with full consideration of costs and public safety. The Bureau has had success in contracting with the private sector for the confinement of minimum- and low-security inmates, but has concerns with the private sector's ability to manage medium- and high-security inmates. Over the years, the private sector has had significant problems with the incarceration and management of inmates who would be classified by the Bureau as medium- and high-security. Also, a cost analysis (using the A-76 methodology) of the privately managed Taft Correctional Institution indicated that for the first two years of operations it would have been less expensive to the taxpayer to have the Bureau of Prisons operate the facility. Three new facilities will be activated by the end of FY 2001: USP Atwater, CA; USP Coleman, FL (this activation is imminent); and FDC Honolulu, HI. The Bureau of Prisons has 26 new facilities under development; these will bring the total number of institutions to 127: 10 are high-security United States penitentiaries, 15 are medium-security Federal correctional institutions, and one is a secure female facility. Of these 26, 19 facilities are fully-funded by Congress, and the remainder have site development and planning monies appropriated. In total, the new institutions will provide an additional 33,000 beds.


    The Bureau protects public safety by ensuring that Federal offenders serve their sentences of imprisonment in institutions that are safe, humane, cost-efficient, and appropriately secure. The Bureau helps reduce future criminal activity by encouraging inmates to participate in a range of programs (described below) that are proven to help them adopt a crime-free lifestyle upon their return to the community. These programs are an essential component to effective inmate management, and they are as important to the security and good order of Federal prisons as fences, daily counts and cell searches.
 Page 88       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

Safety and Security

    Despite the increasing inmate population and crowding levels that have climbed from 22 percent over capacity in 1997 to 32 percent over capacity today, the Bureau has experienced significant reductions in assaults (on both staff and other inmates), homicides, suicides, escapes from secure institutions and other serious misconduct over the past several years. Only 2 staff have lost their lives in the line of duty.

    Our effective management of the inmates and institutions is attributable to our dedicated, loyal and hardworking staff. The Bureau's commitment to instill in all staff the agency's culture and philosophy has been challenged in recent years as we hire large numbers of new staff to keep pace with the Bureau's aggressive activation of new facilities to help manage the increasing inmate population. We have met this challenge through formal training (mostly provided at our staff training centers) and mentoring by experienced staff at all of our institutions.

    Bureau of Prisons wardens and other prison administrators employ the ''Management By Walking Around'' philosophy. Direct supervision of inmates, including good communication, has proven to be a critical element of successful prison management. Additionally, regardless of the specific discipline in which a staff member works, all employees are ''correctional workers first.'' This means that everyone from secretaries to correctional officers to wardens is responsible for the security and good order of the institution. All staff are expected to be vigilant and attentive to inmate accountability and security issues, to respond to emergencies, and to maintain a proficiency in custodial and security matters, as well as in their particular job specialty. Additionally, as part of the culture and philosophy of the Bureau of Prisons, all staff serve as positive role models for inmates, thereby further emphasizing the behavioral changes that are encouraged in many of the inmate programs. There are, of course, a very small proportion of staff who engage in misconduct, for which they are sanctioned in accordance with the law and regulations. All allegations of staff misconduct are fully investigated, and, where warranted, referred for prosecution.
 Page 89       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    The Bureau of Prisons employs a validated inmate classification system to designate inmates to correctional facilities that provide the appropriate level of security and supervision. This system minimizes the likelihood that vulnerable offenders will be housed with predators or that first time non-violent offenders will be housed with sophisticated and dangerous criminals. In recent years, the Bureau of Prisons has improved prison design and construction, made many physical plant improvements, and taken advantage of technological developments to further enhance institution security, including the use of closed-circuit video recording equipment to deter and detect illicit inmate activities.

    In order to detect, deter and control illegal drug use in Federal prisons, institution staff routinely search inmates and their property. Additionally, the Bureau regularly conducts urinalysis on random samples of inmates as well as members of disruptive groups, inmates who are suspected of using drugs, and inmates who have an institutional history of the possession, use, or distribution of drugs. Inmates are subject to disciplinary action if they test positive for a controlled substance or if they refuse to provide a urine sample. In fiscal year 2000, the random testing of inmates resulted in a positive test rate of 1.1 percent; the overall rate was 2.1 percent due to the inclusion of suspected inmates and inmates who have a history of drug use. Since the late 1990's, the Bureau has been employing ion spectometry drug detection systems at many Federal prisons, which has bolstered our existing efforts to control the introduction of drugs into Federal prisons through inmate visiting rooms.


Medical Care
 Page 90       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Inmates typically have greater health care needs than the average citizen. Many offenders have long-standing medical and dental concerns which either have been neglected in the past, or which have resulted from dysfunctional lifestyles involving drugs or alcohol abuse. As a result, many inmates may be as much as 10 years older physiologically than their chronological age—a fact that has clear implications for health care programming and costs.

    The Bureau has developed and implemented several major health services initiatives designed to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of the Bureau's medical care. These include an increased emphasis on managed care and infectious disease treatment programs.

    Despite the national trend of rising health care costs, through various cost containment and cost cutting strategies, the Bureau has maintained inmate health care costs below inflation levels over the past 5 years, despite the fact that national health care expenditures have increased an average of approximately 5 percent per year during this period. Unfortunately, in the coming years, the cost of inmate medical care is likely to increase. This increase is attributable primarily to continually increasing numbers of inmates of all ages who have inordinate health care needs, and steep increases in the use and cost of pharmaceuticals.

    Additional measures to control medical costs are underway. The Bureau is implementing telehealth capability at virtually every institution whereby a medical professional is able to diagnose and even treat patients from remote locations. The Bureau of Prisons is also restructuring staffing patterns and primary care provider teams, centralizing precertification for certain medical treatments, and implementing an inmate co-payment fee system that is expected to reduce unnecessary medical appointments.
 Page 91       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

Mental Health Treatment

    In addition to substantial medical needs, many inmates are in need of some form of mental health care. Psychologists at Bureau of Prisons facilities offer inmates a range of psychological services and programs which include: initial psychological assessment, crisis intervention, suicide prevention, counseling, individual psychotherapy, and group psychotherapy. Additionally, psychologists offer inmates a number of specialty treatment programs to assist them in gaining greater insight into their specific psychological disorder(s) and in developing the skills needed to successfully overcome their problem(s). Some of the programs are described below, and others include the Sex Offender Treatment Program; the Trauma Treatment Program for female offenders who have been victimized by physical/sexual abuse and/or domestic violence; and both in- and out-patient programs for mentally ill offenders.

Work Programs

    All sentenced inmates in Federal correctional institutions are required to work, except for the relatively small number who are medically unable to do so. Most inmates are assigned to institutional maintenance jobs such as a food service worker, orderly, plumber, painter, warehouse worker, or groundskeeper. Due to current levels of crowding, most work details are comprised of more inmates than necessary to accomplish the particular task. Staff must be continually creative to provide sufficient work opportunities. Approximately 25 percent of the Bureau's medically able, sentenced inmates work in Federal Prison Industries (FPI), the Bureau's most important correctional program.

 Page 92       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Federal Prison Industries (FPI). The statutorily defined mission of FPI is to employ and provide skills training to the greatest possible number of inmates confined within the Federal Bureau of Prisons. FPI directly contributes to public safety by providing inmates with skills necessary to successfully reintegrate into society after release from prison. Rigorous research conducted by the Bureau of Prisons Office of Research and Evaluation has demonstrated that inmates who worked in prison industries or completed vocational programming were 24 percent less likely to recidivate than those who did not, and were 14 percent more likely to be employed following release from prison than their non-participating peers. This study showed that inmates who returned to the community with the skills and training provided by working in FPI earned higher wages (and paid more in taxes), providing additional benefits to the community. Finally, the research has demonstrated that FPI programs provide even greater benefit to minorities, who are at greater risk for recidivism. FPI does not receive any appropriated funding for its operations, and by statute must be economically self-sustaining. Operating off sales revenue, rather than appropriated funds, FPI precludes the need for alternative inmate programs, lowering annual prison management costs to taxpayers by hundreds of millions of dollars. Not only does FPI not cost taxpayers any money, it returns substantial amounts of money to the community: 73 cents of every dollar in FPI revenue is spent on purchases of raw materials and supplies from the private sector (in Fiscal Year 2000, this equated to $410 million, 63 percent of which was directed to small, women- and minority-owned businesses) and 20 cents on each dollar is spent on staff salaries. The remainder (approximately 7 cents on each dollar) is paid to inmates, and even this money reaches the private sector: inmates are required to pay 50 percent of their FPI earnings to meet court-ordered obligations such as fines, restitution, and child support, and the money they spend in prison commissaries goes to vendors in the community. In Fiscal Year 2000, inmates working in FPI paid $2.5 million for victim restitution, fines, and child support.

 Page 93       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    In keeping with the statutory mandate to employ as many Federal inmates as possible, FPI has increased its operations, including the volume of sale and numbers of products, to keep pace with the increasing Federal inmate population. This growth has drawn increased attention to the program, and not all of it positive. Several industry trade associations and organized labor unions are actively opposed to FPI and any expansion of its operations. These groups suggest that FPI's impact on private industry and free labor is too great. They have, therefore, pursued legislatively, the elimination of FPI's ''mandatory source'' status for Federal procurement. The Bureau disagrees with this characterization of FPI's impact and strongly opposes the abolishment of FPI's mandatory source status without providing some type of alternative (such as providing FPI with the authority to offer its products to the commercial market) which would allow FPI to generate the business necessary to occupy its inmate workforce. FPI would also need ample time to transition to such new alternatives. With the Bureau inmate population projected to increase 33 percent by the year 2006, the greatest challenge facing FPI in the future will be its ability to continue to generate the requisite number of new inmate jobs, and thereby help prisoners prepare for a crime-free return to their community after release.

Education Programs

    All Bureau of Prisons institutions offer a variety of education programs and occupational and vocational training programs based on the vocational training needs of the inmates, general labor market conditions, and institution labor force needs. Through all of these programs, inmates gain knowledge and skills that help them become gainfully employed upon release and avoid new criminal conduct. These programs have been shown by Bureau research to significantly reduce recidivism, and the Bureau is committed to addressing the education deficits with which inmates begin their incarceration. At present, just over one-third of all inmates are enrolled in more or more educational classes.
 Page 94       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    The Bureau requires that, with few exceptions, inmates who do not have a verified 12th-grade education participate in the literacy program for a minimum of 240 hours or until they obtain the GED credential. Non-English speaking inmates are required to participate in an English as a Second Language program until they are proficient in oral and written English. Institutions also offer literacy classes and adult continuing education.

Substance Abuse Treatment

    In 1989, the Bureau designed a comprehensive substance abuse treatment strategy in an effort to change inmates' criminal and substance-abuse behaviors. In the drug abuse education component, inmates receive information about alcohol and drugs and the physical, social, and psychological impact of abusing these substances. Inmates who are identified as having a further need for treatment are encouraged to participate in non-residential or residential drug abuse treatment, depending on their individual treatment needs. Non-residential drug abuse treatment and counseling are available in every Bureau institution. Treatment includes individual and group therapy, as well as specialty seminars and self-improvement group counseling programs.

    The most intensive drug abuse treatment in the Bureau is the residential drug abuse treatment program which is provided in 47 Bureau institutions. This treatment is designed for the approximately 34 percent of offenders with a diagnosed substance abuse or dependency disorder. Inmates who participate in the residential program are housed together in a separate unit of the prison that is reserved for drug treatment. The residential program provides intensive treatment, 5 to 6 hours a day, 5 days a week for 9 months. The remainder of each day is spent in education, work skills training, and other inmate programs. Upon completion of a residential substance abuse treatment program, aftercare treatment services are provided in the general population and in community corrections centers to ensure an effective transition from the residential program to the community.
 Page 95       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    The Bureau continues to meet the statutory mandate of providing residential substance abuse treatment to all eligible offenders. Based on empirical research regarding the effectiveness of treatment programs, we treat inmates toward the end of their sentence. While we have waiting lists for the programs, primarily the result of the statutory opportunity for a sentence reduction, we are able to treat all eligible offenders prior to release.

    A rigorous analysis of the residential drug treatment program conducted by the Bureau's Office of Research and Evaluation revealed that three years after release from custody, inmates who completed the Bureau's Residential Drug Abuse Treatment Program were significantly less likely to be rearrested and to use drugs, when compared to similar offenders who did not participate in the residential treatment. These findings suggest that the Bureau of Prisons' residential drug abuse treatment programs make a significant difference in the lives of inmates following their release from custody and return to the community.

Other Treatment Programs—Changing Criminal Thinking

    Encouraged by the positive results of the residential substance abuse treatment program, the Bureau has implemented a number of new residential programs for special populations (including younger, high security, and intractable, quick-tempered inmates) who are responsible for much of the misconduct that occurs in Federal prisons. The cognitive restructuring approach used in the drug treatment programs was carried over as the foundation for programs to change the criminal thinking and behavior patterns of inmates. These programs focus on inmates' emotional and behavioral responses to difficult situations. While too early to assess value in terms of reducing recidivism, we have found that these programs significantly reduce inmates' involvement in institution misconduct. Previous studies have shown a strong relationship between institution misconduct and recidivism, so we are hopeful that the full evaluations of these programs will confirm their effect in reducing recidivism.
 Page 96       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

Programs for Female Inmates

    Recognizing that female offenders have different social, psychological, educational, family, and health care needs, the Bureau continues to design and implement special programs for female offenders. Several facilities operate intensive programs that focus on helping women who have histories of chronic sexual, emotional, or physical abuse by addressing their victimization and enabling positive change. The Bureau also operates the Mothers and Infants Together (MINT) program for minimum security inmates who are pregnant. These offenders are housed in a community corrections center during their last two months of pregnancy, and remain there for three months after giving birth, in order to bond with the child.

Religious Programs

    The Bureau of Prisons' religious programs are intended to provide inmates with opportunities to grow spiritually; to deepen their religious beliefs; to strengthen their religious convictions; and to reconcile with their God. Bureau institutions schedule services and meeting times for inmates of many religions and faiths. Religious programs are led or supervised by staff chaplains, contract spiritual leaders, and community volunteers of a variety of faiths. Chaplains provide and oversee inmate self-improvement forums such as scripture study and religious workshops and are available upon request to provide pastoral care, spiritual guidance, and counseling to inmates. Inmates may also request spiritual counseling from community representatives. Inmates are able to observe religious holy days and are able to wear and use religious items consistent with both their faith and with the security, safety, and good order of the institution. A religious alternative diet is available to those inmates whose religious beliefs include special diets.
 Page 97       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Faith Based Programs. The Bureau is developing a residential faith-based pre-release pilot program for male and female inmates of various security levels. We expect to implement the program with Fiscal Year 2002 funding, at four geographically different sites. The initiative—which will be voluntary and open to inmates of any faith—aims to reduce crime and recidivism by providing participants with moral and spiritual principles that can influence their future decisions. There is a growing body of empirical evidence that demonstrates the potency of the ''faith factor'' to change behavior. This model initiative has a strong mentoring component during the pre-release phase and post-prison aftercare component designed to offer moral guidance and a caring community to help ex-offenders reenter society with hope and responsibility.

Final Preparations for Release

    All of the Bureau's inmate programs are intended to prepare inmates for a successful return to the community. In fact, immediately upon their admission to Federal prison, offenders are told to begin ''planning'' for their eventual release and begin preparing to undertake a productive and successful lifestyle. The Bureau complements its array of programs with a specific Release Preparation Program in which inmates become involved near the end of their sentence. The program includes classes in resume writing, job seeking, and job retention skills. The program also includes presentations by officials from community-based organizations that help ex-inmates find employment and training opportunities after release from prison. Mock job fairs are also provided to instruct inmates in appropriate job interview techniques and to expose community recruiters to the skills available among the inmate population.

 Page 98       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
Community Corrections Centers

    The Bureau places most inmates in community corrections centers (halfway houses) prior to their release from custody in order to help them adjust to life in the community and find suitable post-release employment. The length of placement varies, up to 6 months, depending on the offenders' need to make arrangements to reintegrate into the community (such as establishing a residence and securing employment). Inmates in community corrections centers are required to work and to pay a subsistence charge of 25 percent of their income to defray the cost of confinement. Some Federal inmates are placed in home confinement for a brief period at the end of their prison terms. They serve this portion of their sentences at home under strict schedules, curfew requirements, telephonic monitoring, and sometimes electronic monitoring. After release from the halfway house or from the institution (for inmates not released through a halfway house), most inmates have a period of supervised release under the supervision of the U.S. Probation Office.


    Recently, the Bureau was given responsibility for carrying out Federal death sentences. The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 made the death penalty available as a possible punishment for certain drug-related offenses. The availability of capital punishment in federal criminal cases expanded significantly with enactment of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. No inmate has been executed under these provisions, but there are 21 individuals currently housed on the Bureau of Prisons' death row.

    Federal executions will be carried out at the Execution Facility at the United States Penitentiary, Terre Haute, Indiana, which is also the site of the high-security Special Confinement Unit (SCU or death row). Lethal injection is the method to be used in Federal executions. The United States Penitentiary at Terre Haute was selected based on its central location and the presence of an existing Federal penitentiary already on site. The last Federal execution was carried out in 1963. There are two executions scheduled for Fiscal Year 2001; Timothy McVeigh has a scheduled execution date of May 16, 2001 and Juan Raul Garza has a scheduled execution date of June 19, 2001.
 Page 99       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  


    I am very proud of the Bureau staff and the job they do each and every day. Despite our record-setting population growth, evidenced by the net increase of 1,800 new inmates in the Bureau last month alone, we see indications of our effective prison management. However, such successes cannot be expected to continue in the face of the dramatic population increases and record-setting crowding we project will occur in the next several years. Without the resources we have requested to bring additional capacity on line, our record of service may be in jeopardy.

    The Bureau of Prisons' mission involves myriad program and policy issues. Today I have touched on just a few key topics. I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Minority Member Scott, and Members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity to provide an update on the operations of the Bureau of Prisons. This concludes my prepared remarks, and I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Dr. Hawk Sawyer.

    And Mr. McKinney.


    Mr. MCKINNEY. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Scott, and Members of the Subcommittee. Let me begin by thanking you on behalf of the men and women of the United States Marshals Service for your strong support. We look forward to continuing our successful working relationship with the Subcommittee.
 Page 100       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    On February 9th, President Bush appointed me acting director. My career with the Marshals Service, however, began in 1968. During my career, I've worked alongside thousands of dedicated people and held a number of leadership positions. I have served as a chief deputy U.S. marshal, chief inspector at INTERPOL, chief of the enforcement division, and I was appointed as U.S. marshal twice. I also helped initiate what became the witness security program.

    Mr. Chairman, I'm honored to serve as acting director of the Federal Government's oldest law enforcement agency. As you know, the service must respond to a wide range of responsibilities. While we're part of the executive branch and report to the attorney general, our primary mission is to protect the Federal courts. We also confine, transport and produce prisoners for judicial proceedings. We apprehend violent fugitives. We execute court orders, including seizure, maintenance, and disposal of assets, and we return extradited criminals to the U.S.

    Today, I would like to discuss the President's Fiscal Year 2002 budget request, and I'd like to describe our workload trends. For the next fiscal year, we request 4,128 permanent positions and slightly more than $618 million for salaries and expense appropriations. In short, we are requesting 94 additional positions.

    Allow me to discuss some key areas where these new employees would work. First, the Marshals Service has 2,272 persons engaged in protecting and supporting the judiciary. Those positions amount to almost $303 million. For FY 2002, President Bush requests an increase of $9.4 million for these judicial security missions. This is the lion's share of our budget request. The potential for danger to the judiciary is ever present. Unless the judiciary is adequately protected, our nation would be deprived of a cherished right: justice.
 Page 101       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Another part of our work of which I am personally proud is our witness security program. It has been a true success story. Since 1971, over 16,000 witnesses and family members have entered the program. To date, no witness who has followed the rules has been harmed or killed.

    Second, we also request $6.6 million and nine additional positions for our construction appropriations. These resources are needed to help with the planning, design, and renovation of Marshals Service space and courthouses and Federal buildings.

    Third, is prisoner detention. In recent years, the biggest change in our daily workload involves a growing number of prisoners. We must keep pace with Federal prosecutions of terrorist, criminal aliens, drug offenders, and violent criminals. Since 1995, the Marshals Service prison population had grown by 67 percent. That 67 percent national increase in prisoners doesn't paint the entire picture.

    It's true that such numbers are climbing in all of our districts, but there is a regional impact as well. In our southwest border district, Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico, and California, the number of prisoners has skyrocketed by 178 percent. The cost of housing and caring for them is also climbing. $725 million are needed for the Federal prison detention appropriation. That's about $128 million increase over the last year.

    Finding new jails and bed space for court prisoners is difficult everywhere. We find bed space at the lowest cost to the Government, using State and local agreements and private contracts, but our budget reflecting a staggering fact. Next year, we will need the pay for 10.6 million jail days nationwide.
 Page 102       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Fourth, moving our prisoners is another challenge. Mr. Chairman, the best known part of the prison transportation program is the Justice Prison and Alien Transportation System or JPATS. This is the real life Con Air. Last year, JPATS carried 250,000 prisoners and detainees for the Marshals Service, BOP, and INS. We also transported prisoners for the Department of Defense, Department of State, and a growing number of local and State law enforcement agencies. The JPATS system involves more than just planes. It requires a scheduling component just like any commercial airline. Overall, the President is requesting an additional $3.5 million to handle the anticipated increase in the number of Marshals Service air transport movements.

    Finally, there is our fugitive apprehension. Next year we'll devote over $120 million to this effort. This will allow us to pursue 25,000 individuals wanted in Federal felony cases. It will fund much of our task force work and help us catch Federal, State, and local fugitives. It provides funding to catch and extradite international fugitives as well. Within our borders, we coordinate over 100 multi-agency task forces that join our deputies with State and local agencies.

    Last year, this committee authorized the Marshals Service to establish permanent fugitive task forces. Task forces are a very effective tool. Allow me to give you an example. During the search for the Texas Seven last winter, we worked jointly with State, local and Federal offices. That task investigated numerous leads across the region. A tip from a citizen in Colorado helped deputy marshals and local officers pinpoint the fugitives. Six of the Texas Seven were then arrested, and the Marshals Service transported them back to Texas.

    Catching bad guys is one of the things that we do best. Our fugitive hunters offer a proven return to the taxpayers. Here's the bottom line, Mr. Chairman: Since 1995, our tax forces have apprehended more than 58,000 Federal, State, and local fugitives. The U.S. Marshals Service's contribution to this nation is as old as the Constitution itself. We provide the safety for our judicial system. We protect judges, transport prisoners, and apprehend fugitives. The ultimate mission hasn't changed.
 Page 103       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    The U.S. Marshals guarantee that our citizens enjoy the same rights our founders promised in 1789. The first 13 marshals made a commitment to President Washington, one we still honor today, to provide a secure system where all Americans can pursue equal justice under the law.

    Thank you for having me to speak to you, and today I look forward to answering any of your questions.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. McKinney follows:]


    Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Scott, and Members of the Subcommittee. Let me begin by thanking you, on behalf of the men and women of the Marshals Service, for your strong support. We look forward to continuing our successful working relationship with the Subcommittee.

    On February 9th, President Bush appointed me Acting Director of the U.S. Marshals Service. However, my career with the Service began in 1968. I've worked alongside hundreds of dedicated people, and have held a number of leadership positions. These include two appointments as a U.S. Marshal, and Chief of the Enforcement Division, (the division now known as the Investigative Services Division) which is responsible for fugitive investigations and arrests. I also helped initiate what became the Witness Security Program. Obviously, Mr. Chairman, I am honored to serve as Acting Director of the Federal Government's oldest law enforcement agency.
 Page 104       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    As the members of this Subcommittee well know, the Service is truly unique. It is a reflection of the great federal experiment our founders launched in 1789. The Service began as a highly practical, but not strictly centralized, law enforcement organization. Over the past two hundred and twelve years, our mission has remained distinctly broader in scope than our companion federal law enforcement agencies.

    In addition, while we are part of the Executive Branch and report to the Attorney General, our primary mission is to protect and support the Judiciary. Consequently, we must respond to a diverse range of responsibilities. I personally have also participated in numerous special assignments and operations. These operations, like so many to which the Marshals Service responds, are precipitated by destructive events such as hurricanes or civil disturbances, or a rapid and unforeseen increase in the number of prisoner arrests, or prosecutions such as those now occurring along our Nation's southwest border. Whatever the mission, the men and women of the United States Marshals Service are prepared to meet the challenge.


    One thing about our mission is certain. The oldest and greatest challenge for the Marshals Service is to protect the federal courts and ensure the secure operation of America's judicial system. The Marshals Service must:

 Protect judges and all other participants in the federal judicial system;

 Provide security at federal court facilities and eliminate any safety deficiencies;
 Page 105       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

 Safely confine, transport, and produce prisoners for judicial proceedings by using appropriate and cost-effective means whenever possible;

 Apprehend violent fugitives as quickly as possible;

 Execute court orders, including the seizure, maintenance, and disposal of assets;

 Secure the return of extradited criminals to the United States;

 Ensure the long-term safety of protected government witnesses; and,

 Serve government and private civil process.


    Today, I would like to discuss both the President's fiscal year (FY) 2002 budget request for the Service as well as describe our workload trends. For FY 2002, we request 4,128 permanent positions, 3,993 full-time equivalents (FTE) and $619,818,000 in the Salaries and Expenses appropriation. This request represents an increase of 94 positions, 98 FTE, and $48,383,000 over the FY 2001 enacted level.


    In FY 2001, the Marshals Service will use 2,272 positions and $302,811,000 to protect and support the Judiciary. The protection of judges and courthouses is one of the least understood, but most important, functions of American government. If federal jurists cannot preside over cases and render verdicts free from fear and intimidation, then our citizens cannot expect the judicial system to function fairly and impartially. In short, without this protection, our Nation would be deprived of its most cherished and fundamental right—justice.
 Page 106       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    The Marshals Service maintains this judicial process integrity by: ensuring the safe conduct of judicial proceedings as well as the personal protection of federal judges and other members of the court family; conducting detailed security surveys of both public buildings and the private residences of federal judges; providing enhanced security at federal courthouses and federal buildings housing court operations; stopping the unlawful entry of dangerous persons, weapons or other harmful devices into judicial areas; preventing the disruption of judicial proceedings; and, maintaining the custody, protection, and safety of prisoners who are brought to court for any type of judicial proceeding.

    The Witness Security Program (WITSEC) has been a true success story for 30 years. It provides protection for government witnesses and their families whose lives may be endangered. These witnesses agree to provide critical testimony concerning organized criminal activity, terrorism, or other serious crimes in exchange for security and freedom from prosecution. This protection is provided 24 hours a day to all such witnesses while they are in a ''threat'' environment, including trials and other court appearances. Witness Security Inspectors administer all matters relating to new identities, relocation, and program services to the witnesses and their family members. The number of convictions (89 percent success rate in cases where protected witnesses provided testimony) has been achieved because Justice attorneys could utilize this program. Since 1971, 16,181 participants (7,108 primary witnesses and 9,073 family members) have entered the Witness Security Program. To date not one witness who has followed the established rules has been harmed or killed as a result of their testimony.

    The President requests an increase of 52 positions in FY 2002 (41 deputy marshals, 2 detention enforcement officers (DEOs), and 9 administrative personnel), 26 FTE, and $9,394,000 to secure and equip U.S. courthouses. The request reflects the new three-tier operational workforce and includes deputy marshals (GS-082) rather than criminal investigators (GS-1811). We believe that the workload associated with courtroom protection and prisoner security can and should be accomplished with deputies.
 Page 107       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  


    The Service oversees all new construction and renovation of Marshals Service-controlled space in our courthouses and federal buildings. This program develops policy and specifications for the engineering, construction, planning, designing, and acquisition of space, and most important—ensures the physical security of both personnel of the Marshals Service and the Federal Judiciary. This security includes detention cell-blocks, prisoner circulation corridors, courtroom holding cells, prisoner/attorney interview rooms, prisoner elevators, vehicle sallyports, and vehicle parking areas.

    The Marshals Service requests a total of 9 positions, 9 FTE, and $6,621,000 in the FY 2002 Construction Appropriation. This funding will facilitate the renovation of Marshals Service space. Of the $6,621,000 requested, $5,949,000 is to initiate six renovation projects in 2002 and $672,000 is for personnel compensation.


    The Marshals Service accomplished 516,854 prisoner productions and had in its custody an average daily prisoner population of 34,528 individuals during FY 2000. Since FY 1995, our prisoner population has increased 67 percent nationwide. The major force driving this increase is prisoner population growth along the Southwest Border (SWB), where the percentage has grown by an astonishing 178 percent.

    The Federal Prisoner Detention (FPD) appropriation provides funding for housing, subsistence, medical care, and medical guard services for all federal detainees in our custody. The Marshals Service requests a total of $724,682,000 for the FPD appropriation which includes a program increase of $48,787,000 to house and care for detainees. These funds will allow us to keep pace with the accelerated prosecutions of violent criminals, drug offenders, criminal aliens, and terrorists.
 Page 108       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    The Marshals Service depends on state and local governments and the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to house its detainees. We acquire detention bed space for federal detainees at the lowest cost to the government through IGAs, a program where a daily rate is paid to state and local governments, and the Cooperative Agreement Program (CAP) with state and local governments. With a CAP, capital investment funding is provided in exchange for a guarantee of a certain number of bed spaces. A daily rate is paid when these CAP bed spaces are used. The Marshals Service request supports 10.6 million IGA, CAP and contract jail days.

    Although CAP resources are included in the Office of Justice Programs appropriation, the Marshals Service manages and administers this program. In addition to enabling the state and local governments to renovate their facilities, the CAP program provides a boost to communities through both the initial capital investment and the payments that are made when we use those jail beds. The acquisition of jail bed space through the CAP program helps avoid the most expensive bed space acquisition option, the construction of federal jail facilities. In FY 2000, the Marshals Service awarded over $17 million in CAP funds to state and local facilities. In the State of Texas alone, we awarded $10.3 million in CAP funds over the past five years, and in Virginia the five-year total is over $8 million.


    Mr. Chairman, the most well-known component of our prisoner transportation program is the Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System (JPATS). Last year JPATS transported more than 250,000 pre-trial and sentenced prisoners and detainees in the custody of the Marshals Service, BOP, or INS. Approximately 60 percent of the movements are accomplished via air and the remainder are ground movements. Our aircraft also provide prisoner transportation for Department of Defense (DOD), Department of State, as well as a growing number of local and state law enforcement agencies. On any given day, the system's reservation and location components perform like booking and information operations at commercial air and bus lines.
 Page 109       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Although the Service manages JPATS, it is also a customer. As such, we are charged on a cost-per-seat basis payable to the JPATS Revolving Fund. Non-federal prisoners are handled on a reimbursable, space-available basis. When JPATS aircraft or ground transportation are unavailable or are not cost-effective, we use chartered or commercial aircraft, air ambulances, BOP buses, commercial buses, and trains. In FY 2001, JPATS received congressional funding of $13.5 million to purchase two small aircraft to cost effectively replace its aging Sabreliners in the fleet.

    We estimate moving 56,731 of our own prisoners via JPATS aircraft in FY 2002. For FY 2002, the President is requesting an additional $3,458,000 to assist us with these air movements.


    The Marshals Service houses an ever-growing detainee population nationwide, but with unique regional impact. Between 1995 and 2000, our average daily detainee population grew 67 percent (from 20,652 to 34,528). During the same period, the Southwest Border districts' (District of Arizona, District of New Mexico, Southern District of Texas, Western District of Texas, and Southern District of California) average daily population has collectively grown 178 percent (from 3,795 to 10,537 detainees). Most of the growth in the Southwest Border (SWB) districts is a result of increased INS enforcement.

    Law enforcement efforts along the SWB have significantly increased the number of apprehensions and arrests which, in turn, have generated an increased need for detention space for the Service. The number of prisoners processed has almost tripled in the Western District of Texas, where the average daily prisoner population is over 3,200 nearly 10 percent of our national total. It also has more than tripled in the District of Arizona to more than 2,100 average daily prisoners. A Deputy Marshal in a border district handles an average of 50 prisoners per day compared to a national average of 18. Successfully housing a detainee population of this magnitude, both nationwide and specifically in the Southwest Border districts, represents a constant challenge.
 Page 110       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  


    The Marshals Service has primary responsibility for apprehending federal, state and local fugitives from justice to include: prison escapees; bail jumpers; parole and probation violators. The Marshals Service also enforce warrants from agencies without arrest power, bench warrants issued by federal judges, and warrants referred by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). We project 915 FTE and $120,240,000 to fugitive apprehension in FY 2002. These positions address the nationwide inventory of over 25,000 active federal felony arrest warrants as well as state and local fugitive warrants. We are also responsible for the administration and execution of federal misdemeanor warrants and federal traffic warrants.

    In FY 2002, the President's budget requests a program increase of15 positions, 8 FTE and $1,002,000 for fugitive investigations in the District of Columbia, resulting from the increased warrant workload generated by the National Capital Revitalization Act of 1997.

    The Marshals Service coordinates multi-agency task forces by teaming up with other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies to concentrate apprehension efforts on violent fugitive felons and drug offenders. Let me give you an example of one of our success in this area. During the search for the seven violent Texas jail escapees last December and January, we worked jointly with federal agents and state and local officers to locate them. The Marshals Service investigated numerous leads both within and outside Texas. The Marshals Service Northern, Eastern, Southern, and Western Districts of Texas devoted all available resources to the investigation and conducted a lengthy and arduous surveillance. In addition to using traditional investigative techniques, we participated in command posts that received thousands of tips and reported sightings of the escapees nationwide and in Canada. All of these were reviewed, evaluated, and directed to the appropriate law enforcement agencies for investigation. A citizen's tip helped Deputy U.S. Marshals, along with local law enforcement, coordinate their efforts with a command post. The deputies conducted interviews, corroborated details, and helped establish surveillance on a mobile home park. Six of the ''Texas Seven'' were subsequently arrested and the Marshals Service returned the prisoners to Texas.
 Page 111       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    In 1993, as part of the Attorney General's Anti-Violent Crime initiative, we joined with Federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to create a number of permanent fugitive task forces. The Marshals Service currently sponsors 106 task forces nationally. Since FY 1995 our task forces have apprehended more than 58,000 federal, state and local fugitives. In December 2000, President Clinton signed the Presidential Threat Protection Act. A portion of this act included a provision authorizing the Marshals Service to establish permanent fugitive task forces.

    In addition to domestic fugitive investigations, our fugitive authority reaches beyond the boundaries of the United States to arrest fugitives who have fled the country. As an INTERPOL member, the Marshals Service works with foreign law enforcement officials and cooperates with DEA and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) officials in foreign locations to apprehend and extradite fugitives. In FY 2000, the Marshals Service performed 279 international extraditions and provided coordination and support for foreign law enforcement agencies in 65 instances where fugitives were extradited from the United States to another country. Furthermore, the Marshals Service recently assigned deputies to the U.S. embassies in Mexico City; Kingston, Jamaica; and Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.


    The Asset Forfeiture Program is one of DOJ's most potent weapons against organized crime, particularly when it targets large illegal drug enterprises. The success of the program relies on the close coordination between the FBI, DEA, INS, the U.S. Attorneys Office, and the Marshals Service. We have two primary roles relating to the asset forfeiture program: law enforcement and administrative. Deputy Marshals are responsible for executing court orders by physically seizing and securing assets. Administrative staff are responsible for ensuring that assets are properly managed and maintained while forfeiture action is pending. Once forfeited, the Marshals Service ensures that assets are disposed of in a timely and commercially sound manner. Without a sound property management program, seized assets would fall in disrepair, lose value and be more difficult for the Federal Government to dispose of in a timely manner. Currently, the program has 17,800 assets valued at $918 million. Nationwide, the Marshals Service and U.S. Attorneys have entered into cooperative agreements regarding pre-seizure planning to ensure the quality of the forfeiture cases. We provide pre-seizure planning and property services to the DEA, FBI, INS, U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the Food and Drug Administration. These federal agencies work with state, local and international law enforcement agencies to investigate seized asset cases.
 Page 112       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    At the conclusion of forfeiture cases, participating state and local agencies, as well as foreign governments, can apply for an equitable share of the proceeds. Equitable sharing not only assists in providing much needed resources to continue the fight against crime the participating state and local law enforcement agencies, but also fosters cooperation with them. The Marshals Service processed sharing requests worth approximately $169 million during FY 2000.


    The U.S. Marshals Service district for the Superior Court of the District of Columbia is unique in that the office performs all Marshals Service duties, and also functions like the local sheriff's office for our nation's capital. At Superior Court, we provide judicial security for 69 judges, 20 senior judges, 15 full-time magistrates, and 17 part-time magistrates. Court activity is conducted in 94 courtrooms and hearing rooms located in three separate buildings. We also serve process, apprehend fugitives and transport prisoners. The court operates 6 days a week, including holidays, and handles a wide variety of judicial cases.

    As you may know, one of the goals of the National Capital Revitalization Act of 1997 was to close the Lorton prison facility. The impending closure will have a significant impact on the Marshals Service Superior Court office. Because the Marshals Service will assume increased responsibility for both prisoners and warrants previously performed by the District of Columbia government, the President has requested an increase of 27 positions, 13 FTE, and $1,726,000 for the Marshals Service Superior Court district.

 Page 113       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. Chairman, as the United States Marshals enter their fourth century of service to our Nation, we can be proud of the men and women who serve faithfully and effectively preserving the security of our federal judicial system. Whether we are protecting judges, transporting prisoners or apprehending fugitives, foremost in our mission is ensuring that our citizens enjoy the rights guaranteed by the Founders the year the first U.S. Marshal was appointed—equal justice under the law.

    Thank you, for inviting me to speak before you today, and I look forward to answering your questions.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. McKinney. By the way, I've been watching too many TV programs. When you watch shows, it's called witness protection program, but there's no such thing as witness security program. Is that correct?

    Mr. MCKINNEY. That's correct, sir. There's no witness protection program.

    Mr. SMITH. Once again, the media is wrong, but no side comments on that.

    But anyway, Mr. Pickard, I'd like to start to address my questions to you, and if you would give me brief responses so I can try to get to several witnesses with my questions. The first, you anticipated, and it had to do with the Robert Hanssen, case and I appreciate everything that the FBI is doing to make sure that kind of the situation never develops again. However, my question is this: Is there really any good reason why the FBI over the last 20 years has not given random lie detector tests to agents in sensitive positions?
 Page 114       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. PICKARD. Mr. Chairman, we have given random polygraph tests to certain people assigned to certain positions within FBI headquarters. I myself took two random polygraph test while I was assigned to——

    Mr. SMITH. How did Robert Hanssen get through 20 years without a lie detector test?

    Mr. PICKARD. Mr. Chairman, we don't polygraph every employee. We polygraph the employees that are assigned to specifically sensitive investigations such as internal security or espionage matters.

    Mr. SMITH. Okay.

    Mr. PICKARD. He was not assigned to one of those areas, and as a result, he was not polygraphed.

    Mr. SMITH. Okay. But in retrospect, anyone who is in such a sensitive position where you could lose agents as a result of leaked information should be polygraphed occasionally, I presume.

    Mr. PICKARD. That's correct, and that's the new policy we have now, that 100 percent of the national security division employees will be polygraphed. We are now completing the polygraph of all our senior executives, myself included.

 Page 115       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Mr. SMITH. Right. I understand.

    Mr. PICKARD. And also, we're looking at other areas of employees who need to be polygraphed, such as our data base administrators.

    Mr. SMITH. I understand. The FBI has also taken a recent new initiative to investigate child pornography. What specifically is the FBI doing in that area?

    Mr. PICKARD. In that area, we have an initiative called the Innocent Images Task Forces that we've been developing around the country, and we have agents and local police officers working to find people who are going on the internet dealing in child pornography and also trying to lure children across State lines for illicit purposes.

    Mr. SMITH. And then, lastly, as I recall, about one-third of the cocaine coming into the United States is now coming from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. What initiatives is the FBI taking to stop that one-third of the cocaine coming through those two areas?

    Mr. PICKARD. We're working closely with the DEA and the Customs Service to address that. We've added additional agents to our office in San Juan, Puerto Rico, specifically to address the numbers we have down there. I don't have the exact number of agents we've added, but it's been substantial, and we've had a commitment down there to that.

    Mr. SMITH. What are the circumstances that have allowed individuals to be able to ship that quantity of cocaine just from those two areas? What is there about Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands that allows that situation to occur?
 Page 116       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. PICKARD. Mr. Chairman, I believe part of that is the geography of that situation there where you're so close to so many other islands. That is for many drug dealers a first port of entry. They can bring it in there. Once it's in there, it's almost within the continental United States as far as getting it to other areas.

    Mr. SMITH. I mean where does the cocaine go next after—from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands?

    Mr. PICKARD. It travels up to New York, also to Florida, but those are the two may main routes. I think Mr. Marshall could probably address that better than I could.

    Mr. SMITH. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Pickard.

    Mr. Marshall, not only would you address that last question, but would you also address the question that comes from a hearing we had about a month ago where we discovered that 62 percent of all drugs seized in the United States are now seized along the southwest border. So could you tell us what the DEA is doing to counter that as well as the cocaine coming from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands?

    Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, I'll be happy to try that, and you're right; and 60 or more percent of the drugs in the aggregate and particularly cocaine comes through Mexico. We have a southwest border strategy that we work very aggressively in concert with the FBI, Customs, Immigration, Border Patrol, and many, many State and local agencies. We also have a presence in Mexico itself, we work alongside the Mexican authorities there to try to dismantle the major drug trafficking organizations that are operating in and through Mexico and by extension with their cells inside the United States.
 Page 117       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    With regard to the Caribbean, we have a similar strategy, but it's tailored toward the diverse geography of the Caribbean. We work with many host country nations there. We've established intelligence information sharing networks with many of those countries. We have worked cooperative investigations down there, and we really believe that we have a comprehensive strategy to attack the drug organizations in both areas, frankly.

    Mr. SMITH. Would you dare to guess how much you're going to reduce the flow over the next several years?

    Mr. MARSHALL. Well, I think that it's hard to put numbers on that, Mr. Chairman, but I will say this: There are several positive things that have developed over the last number of years. First of all, drug abuse in this country is half what it was at the peak of the drug epidemic in '79 and '80 and on into the early eighties. We're also seeing the drug trafficking organizations respond to pressures from U.S. and other law enforcement. We see that the Colombians are giving part of their U.S. markets over to the Mexico-based traffickers. We see that the Columbia cocaine cartels are focusing on creating new markets, not in the United States, rather in Europe and the former Soviet Union and other parts of the world.

    When you see those kinds of fundamental changes in the way the drug trafficking organizations go about doing their business, I think you can recognize that we've had some success with law enforcement.

    Mr. SMITH. Mr. Marshall, you've answered my question, and my time is up, and I want to sneak one more question into Dr. Hawk Sawyer real quickly, and that is that there are a number of privately-owned prisons that are either—privately-run prisons, I should say, that are either not being used at all or are not being used to their full capacity. I'm just curious. Why is that?
 Page 118       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Well, I can really only speak to Bureau of Prisons' use of the private facilities, and we are the second largest user of private prisons in the country, but we've made the decision based upon the experience we've had with private corrections that the safest population to place in private prisons are minimum and low security inmates. Private sector prisons have had some very serious difficulty that's been occurring in the last few years handling medium and high security inmates. So we reserve private prisons only to house for us low level criminal alien cases.

    Mr. SMITH. So you don't have enough minimum security prisoners?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. We have enough capacity to house up to a certain number of minimum and low security inmates, and anything above that—we have not built a new low security institution for the last several years.

    Mr. SMITH. Okay.

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. We've diverted those into private corrections.

    Mr. SMITH. Okay. Thank you very much.

    The gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers, is recognized for his questions.

    Mr. CONYERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

 Page 119       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Mr. Pickard, what is your budget request for the fiscal year?

    Mr. PICKARD. The budget request for the FBI is $3,500,000 [sic].

    Mr. CONYERS. And is that larger than the last year's request?

    Mr. PICKARD. Yes, it is. It's $270 million larger than last year.

    Mr. CONYERS. And, Mr. Marshall, what is your request for funds for the fiscal year?

    Mr. MARSHALL. Our total request, sir, is an increase of—I'm sorry—a total of $1.5 billion, approximately, and that's an increase of approximately 120 million over current year funding.

    Mr. CONYERS. So what's the request total?

    Mr. CONYERS. $1.5 billion.

    Mr. CONYERS. 1.5 billion, and how much is that over last year's?

    Mr. MARSHALL. $120 million, approximately.
 Page 120       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. CONYERS. And Dr. Hawk Sawyer?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Our total request is $4.6 billion, and it's roughly $300 million more than we requested last year—than we received last year.

    Mr. CONYERS. Is that in your testimony?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Yes, sir.

    Mr. CONYERS. Okay. Were those figures in your testimony?

    [Mr. Marshall and Mr. Pickard gesture in the positive.]

    Mr. CONYERS. Let me start with the FBI. Doesn't the FBI have responsibility for conducting investigations of violence and brutality under the color of law?

    Mr. PICKARD. That is correct.

    Mr. CONYERS. Do you know or can you find out for me how many such investigations have been conducted under Director Freeh?

    Mr. PICKARD. I do not know the answer to that, but I'm happy to get my staff to find that out for you.

 Page 121       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Mr. CONYERS. Okay. Now, we have a problem here of a question of race and the criminal justice system. I hope you've all heard about it, the fact that for 13 percent of the population, more people of color, mostly young males are arrested. More of them are convicted. More of them are sentenced to longer sentences, and more of them end up on death row. So there seems to be some kind of connection here. Has this come to your attention or has this discussion been raised with you, Mr. Pickard?

    Mr. PICKARD. Yes, it has, and we've instituted some things to try to reach out to the community, try to work with the young people. We have a community outreach program, and a school outreach Junior Special Agent Program to try to address at an early age with the youngsters in the fifth and sixth grades values that we're looking for them, trying to help them to aspire to become FBI agents or to go into law enforcement, how to deal with confrontational situations.

    Mr. CONYERS. Okay. Mr. Marshall, are you aware of this issue that I raise or is it a new one to you?

    Mr. MARSHALL. Certainly, I'm aware of it, sir.

    Mr. CONYERS. Okay. Let's discuss it. I mean, what's the problem here? More and more people of color are being locked up, and some suggest that because more are arrested and more end up convicted, more end up with longer sentences and proportionally more end up on death row. Is this something that you're sensitive too?

    Mr. MARSHALL. Yes, we're certainly sensitive to that, Congressman, and I would like to describe a number of things that we're doing within our agency. First of all, we are focusing very much on creating a diverse work force, because the criminal organizations that we encounter are themselves very diverse. When we bring our agents in for basic agent training, we do quite a bit of training in the area of ethics, human dignity, community relations, the importance of maintaining public trust and confidence, and I think that we carry that throughout our training at all levels within DEA.
 Page 122       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    In my vision statement for DEA, I've articulated the importance that I place on diversity within the organization among our employees as well as the importance of maintaining public trust and confidence.

    Mr. CONYERS. Excuse me.

    Mr. MARSHALL. And, finally, if I could just add——

    Mr. CONYERS. Okay. I'm going to have to ask for an additional minute, because my time is——

    Mr. SMITH. Mr. Conyers, we're going to have a second round of questions. If I could ask you to hold off and finish up then.

    Mr. CONYERS. All right. Okay. Please complete your statement.

    Mr. MARSHALL. Finally, I would add, sir, that DEA is a criminal investigative organization. We do not randomly target the potential defendants that we investigate. We open an investigation when we receive from a source credible investigation that leads us to believe that the individual involved is a drug trafficker, and that's the basis for all of our investigations.

    I would also point out that we don't investigate, as a normal course, simple drug possession. Only 5 percent of the drug prisoners in the U.S. prisons—and the majority of those were as a result of DEA investigations. Only 5 percent of those are for simple possession.
 Page 123       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. CONYERS. Thank you.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Conyers. I am going to have to leave because I have another engagement that is, unfortunately, in direct conflict with the last few minutes of this particular hearing, and I'm going to ask the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Green, to serve as Chairman of the Crime Subcommittee, and he will continue until we finish.

    But on the way to my leaving, thank you all for being here. It's been very, very helpful.

    Mr. Green.

    Mr. GREEN. [Presiding.] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    As you know, being Members of Congress, we have the dubious distinction of being able to be in several places at the same time. I am still in the Housing Subcommittee just down the hall. I apologize for being late and not being able to be here to hear much of the testimony, but I do have a few questions I would like the ask.

    For Mr. Marshall, there has been, obviously, a rise in the popularity of drugs created in the lab, Ecstasy, methamphetamine. Does the DEA expect this trend to continue, and what special problems do these drugs present to law enforcement agencies that are not associated with, for lack of a better term, more traditional agrarian drugs like marijuana, cocaine, and heroin?
 Page 124       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. MARSHALL. Congressman, I certainly hope that the trend does not continue, but unfortunately I suspect that it will. The problem we see with chemically-produced drugs that we don't see with the agrarian drugs are really several. Number one, it's difficult to attack these types of drugs because the precursor chemicals that they use very often have many other uses, not only in our country, but throughout the world. So we are a number of substances that are not illegal per se, but we have to limit the criminals' access to those chemicals in order to limit the production of these drugs.

    They also present more of a problem because the chemically-produced drugs can basically be produced anywhere, the United States or any other country in the world, whereas with the agrarian drugs, save marijuana, those are produced outside the United States. So we have many, many significant challenges with chemical drugs that we—that are different from the agricultural-based drugs.

    Mr. GREEN. With those otherwise legal drugs that go into Ecstasy or methamphetamine, how do you limit access to those chemicals? What can we do?

    Mr. MARSHALL. We have a number of programs whereby we have established what we call listed chemicals, and we try to identify the current chemicals that are used in various—production of the various drugs, and the main ones that we establish are List I chemicals, and we try to attack that through a number of means. We try to work with Customs to limit import and exports and investigate the backgrounds of companies that are either an importer or exporter, as well as the destination of those chemicals, and we do that with going both ways, frankly.
 Page 125       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    We try to have liaison with the chemical companies themselves, and we have a number of other programs where when we do encounter chemicals in the actual laboratories that we seize, we have an operation called Backtrack that tries to trace those chemicals back but to the companies through which they passed in getting to that lab, and then sometimes we will work with those chemicals, or sometimes we establish—I'm sorry—with those companies, or sometimes we establish that those companies themselves are either gray market companies or rogue chemical companies, in which case we have been known to criminally sanction the companies themselves.

    Mr. GREEN. Thank you.

    Mr. McKinney, switching gears, can you tell me how many outstanding Federal fugitive warrants there are at present?

    Mr. MCKINNEY. Yes. As an approximate, 24,000, sir.

    Mr. GREEN. I'm sorry?

    Mr. MCKINNEY. 24,000.

    Mr. GREEN. And how many new ones on average are issued each year?

    Mr. MCKINNEY. Congressman, I can respond to your question as completely as possible, but please allow me to submit a statement for the record.
 Page 126       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. GREEN. Sure. We will look forward to seeing that. Then, finally, how many fugitives who are subject to a Federal fugitive warrant were apprehended last year? Do you know? Do you have that information?

    Mr. MCKINNEY. I believe, sir, it's about 22,000. Correction, sir. It was 27,000.

    Mr. GREEN. 27,000. Thank you. I understand that when special operations group team members are activated, the local U.S. Marshal in the district where the team member ordinarily works can deny that team member permission to participate in a special operations group mission. Is that accurate, and if so, why is it?

    Mr. MCKINNEY. No, sir, it is not. That's controlled by headquarters. When the SOG is activated, it's strictly controlled by headquarters. They cannot deny the member to go on special assignment, we call it.

    Mr. GREEN. So the local command doesn't have that ability?

    Mr. MCKINNEY. No, sir.

    Mr. GREEN. Okay. I appreciate it.

    Mr. Conyers.

 Page 127       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Mr. CONYERS. Thank you, Mr. Green.

    Let me get back to where I was about the question of race and the criminal justice system return to the prison system. Dr. Hawk Sawyer, are you familiar with the many claims of race being a factor in the incarceration and treatment of prisoners?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Yes, Mr. Congressman, I am.

    Mr. CONYERS. And could we discuss it here in terms of what steps you're taking to alleviate this problem?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Well, in terms of alleviating the problem, it's a little tough for us to do it completely in that we don't control who comes into our institutions.

    Mr. CONYERS. But you control what they do after they get there, completely.

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Absolutely. That's what I was going to say. We don't control who comes in the door. We can only control the opportunities we provide for them once they are there, and we do several things. One is we assess the deficits of all of our inmates coming in, and often times our minority inmates do have educational deficits, work skills training deficits. They've perhaps been involved in drug abuse and require drug treatment, and we ensure that those inmates have those opportunities very readily available to them.

 Page 128       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    As I commented earlier in my opening comments, our Federal Prison Industries program, which is a wonderful work skills development program, has been shown to have a great impact upon recidivism, but also particularly for minor inmates.

    Mr. CONYERS. I'm for the Federal Prison Industry system. I'm one of the few supporters you've got on the Committee.

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. I know you are, sir.

    Mr. CONYERS. But there's only a fraction of people involved in that.

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Well, 20 percent of our inmates.

    Mr. CONYERS. You've got to go way beyond that. A lot of—those have to be the model prisoners, but what about the people that come in that are functionally illiterate, have never been through high school and are subject to all kinds of privations both before they got there and while they're in the prison?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Absolutely, Mr. Congressman. We have vast education programs that deal from special education needs. Every institution is required to have special education programs all the way up to GED programs. We impact the inmate at whatever level he comes into the institution.

    Our work programs, every inmate has to work. So in addition to Prison Industries which employs 20 percent, we have vocational training programs through local technical colleges or from the institution itself, plus apprenticeship programs through Department of Labor. We try to ensure that every inmate coming in who does not have an employable skill when they join us, do have an employable skill when they walk out the door.
 Page 129       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. CONYERS. Well, that's good, and we want to continue these conversations beyond this hearing. I intend to contact all of you.

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Very good, sir.

    Mr. CONYERS. Do you remember your testimony before Appropriations Committee last year when you observed that three-quarters of the female prisoners should not even be in prison, but must be there because of mandatory minimums?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. I think my comment in a fuller statement was that if the purpose is simply to impact recidivism and ensure that they do not return to crime, then three-quarters of them, you would get the same impact if they were not in prison, because the vast majority of our female inmates do not recidivate.

    Mr. CONYERS. Are there other inmates who shouldn't be prison because—but are there otherwise because of mandatory minimum sentences, which you are not responsible for?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. It depends upon the purpose of incarceration. If the purpose is truly to ensure that they do not go out and commit new crimes, then there's a fair number of our population that do not go out and commit a new crime after their first offense. If the purpose is incapacitation or other things, then it's a little different discussion, but if the true purpose is really to ensure they don't recommit offenses, then, yes, there are a fair number of our population.
 Page 130       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. CONYERS. But how many are there that never committed violent offenses to begin with? A lot?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Yes.

    Mr. CONYERS. So——

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. I'm not disagreeing with you, Mr. Conyers. It depends upon the purpose of incarceration. If it's to ensure that they don't recommit, the majority of our females do not. Twenty percent of our inmates that are with us are low level nonviolent offenders. So one could argue that those——

    Mr. CONYERS. But a person comes before a judge. They get a sentence. The judge doesn't say I'm giving you five to twenty because we want to keep you in prison or I'm sentencing you to this because it is not the purpose of preventing you from committing further crimes. You come before the judge and you get it, and increasingly in the Federal system, the sentences are longer. Those that are seeking to prosecute and get longer sentencing terms ironically turn to the Federal system which sends more and more people to you and have you requesting 800 million more dollars for prisons.

    Well, I'm sorry. We're going to have to figure out something better to do with our money. We can't keep building prisons from now on because we're sending people who haven't even committed violent crimes there.

 Page 131       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. You won't hear disagreement from me on much of that, sir.

    Mr. CONYERS. Thank you.

    Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Conyers.

    Ms. Jackson Lee, questions?

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and to again the witnesses. Let me indicate, Mr. Chairman, that there is an energy consumption hearing going on about two floors up, and we are obviously facing some very extreme issues as relates the question of energy utilization and energy capacity. So I apologize to the witnesses whose testimony I did not hear. I'm on two Committees that are functioning at the same time.

    But I do want to pursue the line of questioning of my opening remarks and some other lines of questioning, particularly, the Ranking Member was sort of proceeding in the direction that I think is important to proceed in. It takes a lot of time sometimes to express the questions, and then we're shortened on time.

    But, Dr. Sawyer, I think that you have the responsibility for presiding over a system, and I would imagine—I don't want to put words in your mouth—that you're not a stakeholder per se in the increased penalties that come about through the mandatory sentencing, but you fall victim to it, and all of us travel the country and of course hear so many painful complaints from family members of individuals who did come under that large net that we wish that those individuals whose crimes were non-violent, etc., would have some ability to come out.
 Page 132       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Let me try to find out, because we were discussing a matter, and I will pursue that in a one-on-one, but what I was concerned about is I think what I was hearing as we were discussing the matter about how much time the person had served and your hands were tied, are your hands tied or is there something that we can help in reauthorization to give some leeway with respect to individuals who may be by their behavior, their health condition, or whatever their circumstances are, and their particular offense, really even in your mind, your academic mind, your management mind, warrant movement from a particular facility to a less secure, more healthful facility? Do you need legislation? Do you need policies? What do you need to assist you in that?

    Ms. SAWYER. Well, we have authority to move individuals within our system from a more secure setting to a lesser secure setting. Where my hands are completely tied is to achieve any early release, early release from custody for anybody. The only options we have to, in essence, shorten someone's sentence—when parole was removed back several years ago, the only thing left to us now is the potential of up to 1 year off if you successfully complete drug abuse treatment and a compassionate release situation. If an individual is near death, has very serious terminal illness, we can petition the court for early release of those; but short of those two categories, we have no authority to enable anyone to release from custody earlier.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. But do you consider release from custody over to one of the halfway house circumstances?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. No. A halfway house is simply a lessening of security for an inmate.
 Page 133       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. So you can do that through internal policies?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. We can. Our current policy indicates that individuals can go to the halfway house setting roughly 6 months prior to release. There are some exceptional cases that get a little more than that, but 6 months is our average. Part of that is a costing issue, because we obviously pay separately for the halfway house than we would for an entire institution, and also, part of it is that our experience with the halfway houses—and the halfway house individuals will say that anything more than 6 months in that kind of the setting really becomes very difficult for an individual because they really have one foot on the street and one foot inside an institution, and the many different factors that pull on them, whether it be family, job, social, whatever, become very difficult for an extended period of time in that setting.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me raise a point, and I think this is not something we can sort of pursue as we give and take here, but let me raise a point. I think that if you have that flexibility, it would be worthy of you looking at your internal procedures to analyze inmates on a case-by-case situation. You may find that there are some who are psychologically ready to be able to handle a longer period of time, being grateful that they have the opportunity to be in a less secure arena.

    And I've again taken my time. I don't want to pursue that, but I raise a question about that. I'm concerned because I think it falls heavily on women. I think it falls heavily on minorities, particularly in the low grade offenses. When I say that, I'm talking about the nonviolent drug offenses that they've come in on, wrapped up in the RICO and the mandatory sentences, and that's where you find us, you know, 20 years we're still there, 9 years we're still there, and I think it's extremely tragic.
 Page 134       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Let me also make mention to you that I personally want to engage in the questions dealing with a Federal detention center that is in the 18th Congressional District, just a private area, particularly on treatment of employees, and the diversity of employees as well is very important to me. So I would greatly appreciate it. We had that discussion.

    I see the Chairman, but I hope the Ranking Member will get an extra 5 minutes so that I will be allowed to ask a few more questions, Mr. Chairman, and I'd be happy to yield at this time, but I would make that request and I'd appreciate it. Good.

    Oh, I see—good. I see Mr. Scott is here. So I hope you will allow us, please.

    Mr. GREEN. The Ranking Member has made a request, and the Chairman agrees. I'd like at this time to recognize Mr. Scott, who has not had his turn for questions yet.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. GREEN. Mr. Scott.

    Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I again apologize. We're having a markup in education, and things required my attendance.

 Page 135       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Ms. Sawyer, I want to thank you for the opportunity to visit with several of your prisons, looking specifically at the prison industry and the success we've had there in terms of giving meaningful employment opportunities to prisoners so that they would be much less likely, as we found, to return to prison.

    I had a question on a bill we passed either last year or the year before on co-pay for health care. Is it fair to say that after you've deducted administrative and accounting expenses that we didn't save any money by passing that bill?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. The intent was not to save money directly in terms of the two dollars, the minimal cost we're going to be asking the inmates to pay. The intent is to reduce the frequency that inmates abuse sick call and show up in sick call lines when they really are not sick. We have not implemented that program yet, Congressman Scott. So I don't really know yet what the savings or lack thereof is going to be. We're still developing the regulations, and then we have to negotiate it with our union. So it's liable to be almost a year before that thing is finally activated.

    Mr. SCOTT. Okay. We also saw some of your drug rehabilitation programs. Do you have sufficient funds to enable all that want to get into drug rehabilitation to, in fact, get into drug rehabilitation?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Yes, sir. In FY 2001, we have had sufficient funds. We anticipate 14,000 inmates completing residential drug treatment in 2001. We are hopeful that our budget will allow us again in 2002, if we can get the amount that we've requested, to be able to ensure once again that all the inmates who need drug treatment and who are willing to enroll—and so far, 92 percent of all inmates who need drug treatment have been enrolling and successfully completing the program before release.
 Page 136       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. SCOTT. Do you have any evidence that the program is successful?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. Yes, we do. We've been tracking them now for 3 years. Once they finish the program in the institution, they then go to a 6-month period in the halfway house. Then we've tracked them from 3 years after release from the halfway house, and we're seeing significant impact upon drug treatment. In fact, those who completed the program are 15 percent less likely to be rearrested 3 years after release, and we'll be continuing to track this over time.

    Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. I'd like to ask the DEA representative a question on the—by focusing so much on international—the gentlelady from Texas mentioned the situation where the plane was shot down. The effect of focusing so much on the supply side, what effect is that having on international law enforcement? For example, how much of the international law enforcement corruption, killing of judges, and so forth is a direct result of United States drug policy?

    Mr. MARSHALL. Well, with regard, sir—you asked several questions. With regard to the shoot down of the airplane, that was not an operation that DEA was involved in. Our international operations is a small part of DEA's overall operation. We have about 4500 special agents. We have about 500 of those stationed overseas.

    The philosophy there is that we have our overseas people to work with host country authorities to gather intelligence, to support domestic, primarily domestic prosecutions. I think that the corruption aspect that you asked about, I think that obviously crime in general and drug crime as well has a corrupting effect on societies, on institutions and that sort of stuff. We have been, I think, very successful in some countries in providing training and institution building that go a long way toward countering those corruption—those corrupting influences, and I hope that we can have more of that impact in other countries as well.
 Page 137       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. SCOTT. Obviously, our goal is to reduce drug use. If you we're going to spend another billion dollars on the drug problem, is there any question in your mind that it all ought to go into rehabilitation if our goal is to use it as effectively as possible?

    Mr. MARSHALL. No, I don't think it all should go into rehabilitation. I've said many, many times, and I've believed for many, many years and I continue to believe that we have to have a balanced approach to our drug policy. If we focus too much on education and leave the law enforcement component out of it——

    Mr. SCOTT. I didn't say leave. I said if you had an additional—leave everything else as it is, you had an additional billion dollars, where it could it be put to the best use?

    Mr. MARSHALL. I, once again, put it in a balanced approach. I would increase our education and prevention programs substantially. I would increase law enforcement, perhaps more modestly than the education and prevention programs, but an increase nonetheless, and I would ensure that treatment was available for those that need treatment.

    Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, could I have an additional minute? I have one additional question.

    Mr. GREEN. Yes.

 Page 138       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Mr. SCOTT. And that is on the—I guess it's somewhat related to the issue of profiling.

    Mr. Pickard, I guess it would be FBI. Is there any reason why we can't strictly enforce exclusionary rules to give—to remove any disincentive for police officers to break the law and use bigotry as a standard for who they stop?

    Mr. PICKARD. Recently, the chief of police in Chicago, one of his officers was arrested, and he stated if officers act like criminals, they'll be treated like criminals, and I think that's the appropriate response we should have. We need the supervision of the officers, just as we try to make sure our agents are well supervised, and I think when that breaks down, you have incidents like you had in Los Angeles where there's a lack of supervision and other places where there's abuse by law enforcement authorities.

    Mr. SCOTT. Specifically, on strict enforcement of the exclusionary rule where illegal evidence should not be admitted in the court?

    Mr. PICKARD. I would defer to the decision of the judge in that particular case as to where they come out on it.

    Mr. GREEN. As requested, Mr. Conyers, the chair will yield you an additional 5 minutes under your control for questions as you see fit.

    Mr. CONYERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Could I put in a request for the Ranking Member of the Committee, Ms. Jackson Lee, to get 5 minutes additionally as well?
 Page 139       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. GREEN. Sure.

    Mr. CONYERS. Thank you so much.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. CONYERS. Let me ask if any of you are—if there are any among you who are unfamiliar with these figures: African Americans constitute 13 percent of the nation's drug users. They represent 35 percent of those persons arrested for drug possession and are 55 percent of those convicted for drug possessions and 74 percent of those sentenced to prison for drug possession. Question: Is there anybody that is unfamiliar with these statistics?

    Mr. MARSHALL. That's the first time I've personally heard those exact numbers. I'm familiar with the concept though.

    Mr. CONYERS. Okay.

    Mr. PICKARD. I'm also unfamiliar with them.

    Mr. CONYERS. I beg your pardon, Mr. Pickard.

    Mr. PICKARD. I'm also unfamiliar with those.

    Mr. CONYERS. This is new to you. Okay. I'd like the subsequently provide you with the source for these numbers.
 Page 140       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Now, Mr. Marshall, do you see drug use as a medical problem as well as a legal problem?

    Mr. MARSHALL. I see it as a medical problem, a legal problem, a crime problem, a social problem. It's a very complex problem, and people use drugs for many, many varying reasons. From my standpoint, I see one of the main reasons is that the criminal organizations are very shrewd and aggressive marketers of their product, and they market that product to the weak.

    Mr. CONYERS. Now, look here——

    Mr. MARSHALL. I think it's all of those problems rolled up into one.

    Mr. CONYERS. Well, that's very nice, but drugs are addictive. That's the medical component. Drug users don't have to do anything but sell their product and addiction kicks in. So if you just see it out there as, okay, then that's why you answered Mr. Scott the way you did. If you had as much money to prosecute, criminalize, bring cases, incarcerate, you still wouldn't want to put the money to what gets people off of drugs, and that gets me to the RAN Corporation study, which I'm going the ask you with what familiarity you may have of it, and you can't read everything, but the RAN Corporation found that $34 million invested in treatment would reduce cocaine use as much as an expenditure of $336 million for interdiction.

    Are you familiar with that?
 Page 141       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. MARSHALL. I'm not sure I'm familiar with those exact numbers, but again, I'm familiar with the concept, sir.

    Mr. CONYERS. You get the idea. So if you're trying to eliminate the drug problem, this beats interdiction. This would be the way to go, and so if we keep having nice people that come up and run the DEA, run the prisons, run the FBI, run the criminal justice system, and I'm including U.S. attorneys that prosecute, and judges, we still get into the interdiction kick. $1.3 billion into Columbia, a wonderful civil war going on there, which we're going to cut off the supply, but the demand is what brings drugs to America. It doesn't accidentally come here. It comes here because the biggest market on earth are people that want to use drugs, many of whom become hopelessly addicted.

    Is this a theory you're familiar with, Mr. Marshall?

    Mr. MARSHALL. It's a theory I'm familiar with. It's a theory that I don't completely agree with, sir.

    Mr. CONYERS. You don't completely agree? Fine. Would you explain the parts where you have some reservation about that?

    Mr. MARSHALL. Yes, I will. First of all, I want to comment, sir, that I am not opposed to treatment. If you look at everything that I have written, everything I have testified——

 Page 142       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Mr. CONYERS. But you don't sound like it this morning. That's all I'm—I have to say that.

    Mr. MARSHALL. If I might, I'll try to explain.

    Mr. CONYERS. I haven't looked at everything you've read and said, but just from what we've heard in a couple hours, it doesn't sound like that I could put you in the pro treatment classification, but go ahead.

    Mr. MARSHALL. Not at all, sir. You misunderstand what I say.

    Mr. CONYERS. Oh, okay.

    Mr. MARSHALL. I'm in favor of the balanced approach, which includes treatment, which includes education and prevention, but which also includes a strong——

    Mr. CONYERS. But what don't you like about my theory that you've had some reservation about?

    Mr. MARSHALL. I will try to get to that, if I may, sir.

    Mr. CONYERS. Okay.

    Mr. MARSHALL. The supply and demand is not as simple as saying demand creates supply.
 Page 143       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. CONYERS. It doesn't happen that way?

    Mr. MARSHALL. No, it's not that way in all cases.

    Mr. CONYERS. Well, how does it happen?

    Mr. MARSHALL. If you will allow me, I will try to logically explain my position. It is not a typical supply and demand situation, because we see that we have weak and vulnerable people, young people in our society who are not equipped with the maturity or the good judgment to make good decisions about whether to use drugs. We have many people that are ill-informed on drugs and don't have the adequate knowledge when they make that first decision to start using drugs.

    On the other hand, we have criminal organizations that aggressively market drugs to our young people to, to weak and vulnerable people who don't have the tools that they need to make good decisions. We have these organizations advertising on the internet that Ecstasy is a safe drug. We have these organizations putting heroin inside their shipments of cocaine as a condition of selling cocaine. We have heroin organizations that actively target methadone clinics.

    Mr. CONYERS. They're just doing their jobs.

    Mr. MARSHALL. They sell heroin to the very people who are trying to recover from addiction, and the marketing of drugs is a very, very significant part of our drug problem.
 Page 144       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. CONYERS. That does not—everything you said does not compromise my theory a bit. Well, then shouldn't we invest more money in prevention?

    Mr. MARSHALL. Yes. I said that in my testimony. I've said that in many op ed pieces. I said it this morning in answer to one of the other questions. Absolutely yes.

    Mr. CONYERS. Well, I don't see what the problem is then.

    Mr. GREEN. Mr. Conyers, if you could wrap up.

    Mr. CONYERS. I'm sorry.

    Mr. GREEN. If you could wrap up your questions.

    Mr. CONYERS. All right. All I want to do—we've got a—this is not an insignificant discussion we're having. If you think that my theory is compromised by the fact that criminal drug peddlers try to market to innocent young children, I quite agree with you, but all these kids out in the suburbs that are using every drug known on earth, they're not being hit up by criminal elements.

    Mr. MARSHALL. Oh, quite the contrary. Quite a contrary, sir. They are.

 Page 145       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Mr. CONYERS. Quite to the contrary? They're getting their supplies—usually they drive into the inner city to get all the supplies they want, which is where we have a lot of problems where people that get incarcerated for drug possession end up with the Federal and State prisons when the bigger people go untouched. That's why we got a lot of low level people and people that are only in prison because of possession, filling up the prisons, talking about we need 800 more million dollars, and we need to privatize more prisons. I think that is not the correct direction.

    Mr. MARSHALL. If I may——

    Mr. GREEN. I'll allow your answer. I hate to cut this off, but we're running into a time constraint yet again. So finish your question.

    Mr. MARSHALL. With all due respect, I am not against treatment, and if you've interpreted my comments as that, then I apologize. I am not against that.

    With regard to the young people going into the inner cities for drugs, that's true with some drugs, but it's not by any means true with all drugs, and the flip side of my contention that we need to have a balanced approach would be, really, I think if we focus solely on treatment, we are treating people after they have become addicted. Wouldn't it be much, much better to prevent them from getting drugs in the first place and to give them the educational and the informational tools that they need to keep from becoming addicted in the first place?

    Once they are addicted, those who become addicted, certainly they need treatment, and we need to have better and more treatment programs.
 Page 146       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Marshall, for your testimony.

    The chair would now recognize, finally, Ms. Jackson Lee for 5 minutes.

    Mr. CONYERS. Would the gentlelady allow me 30 seconds?

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. I'd be happy to, Mr. Conyers.

    Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Marshall, the more I think about this, the more I feel like engaging you. How in the world can we be talking like this when you must know that at the high school level more than half the kids have experimented in drugs? Are those criminal elements that are in there pushing pot and marijuana and Ecstacy? Come on.

    Mr. MARSHALL. I would ask you in return, sir, with all due respect——

    Mr. CONYERS. Yes.

    Mr. MARSHALL. How can we possibly abandon our youth who have not yet made that decision to begin using drugs and simply, Oh, well, let's treat them after they become addicted?

    Mr. CONYERS. Prevention. That's what I've been talking about all day. That's how you prevent them.
 Page 147       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. MARSHALL. And so have I, sir. I've been talking about law enforcement, education, prevention, and treatment.

    Mr. CONYERS. You've been trying to sell me that the criminal elements and drug people that are preying on these youngsters—they're experimenting with drugs all the time, and it's not taking criminal elements to do anything but provide them with the source for buying the drugs.

    Mr. MARSHALL. That's a pretty significant role in the equation, the supply of drugs.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Conyers for that line of questioning.

    I going to try and put my questions in bullet points and solicit answers from you in that context, and let me say, Mr. McKinney, don't feel that absence makes the heart grow fonder or we're not found of you because we're absent in questioning you. Let me thank the U.S. Marshals Service for its work, and I might mention my United States Marshal, Marshal Contreras, for his great work. So we appreciate the efforts that you make, and we'll be looking at your budget and looking at reauthorization to see how we can be helpful.

    I will ask you a question, if you could get it to me in writing, and if my memory serves me well, we implemented a new process. I think the legislation passed dealing with the civil service approach to appointments as opposed to presidential appointments. If you can give that to me in writing, whether I'm accurate in that, because I want to—I'd like to see how it's working, and I'd also like to pose a question on the professional.
 Page 148       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Did not pass. I've been informed by counsel that it did not pass. So we're still under presidential appointments. So what I will say to you, my interest would be in the increasing diversity of the U.S. Marshals. I know that was a problem before, but I also would appreciate in writing if you could tell me what you have implemented for professional development, for professional training for the Marshals Service. And I apologize for not trying to get that verbally, but I if I could get that in writing, I would appreciate it very much. But thank you for the service.

    Dr. Sawyer, let me—if I can just get some pointed questions. About 8 days from now, we are going to be engaged with Senator Hatch and Senator Clinton in a fundraising effort to help the children of prisoners, and maybe I cannot capture the eloquence of Mr. Conyers, but if you can understand that a dominant number of individuals who are incarcerated come from our communities over and over and over and over again.

    I note that you have a limit, 300 minutes for these individuals to be talking to their family members. I always get calls about funerals. Sometimes I think the prison authorities make light of it. It's not a situation that is funny in our offices, but many times they're denied. Why can't we extend this 300 minutes? If I could just get a sentence, then I can expand it, because I've got a series of questions.

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. We absolutely support the relationship between our inmates and their families. It's a critical link to them adjusting properly when they release as well as touching their family in a positive way. The 300 minutes is a brand new thing that we've added on to our phones in order for us to get controls over those who abuse the telephone and commit illegal activity on the phones. It's a result of an inspector general investigation of our phone usage.
 Page 149       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Seventy-five percent of our inmates do not even use the telephone for 300 minutes, and if there's ever a family emergency, we will always access phones for the inmate. So it's not intended to separate them from their families, just to control abusers.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me pursue that with you. I'm thinking that if we get those numbers, I'd like to see how we can work through that. I think it's punitive, and I appreciate the inspector general's efforts, but I want to see how we can delineate the family-related calls if they want to do 10 hours if they're legal dealing with the family.

    The other thing is the Human Rights Watch provided a report on the high rate of prisoner rape. That is one of the most abusive, violent, direct ways to create a violent person who then goes out and acts violently if they're ever released. What are you doing to address this problem?

    Ms. HAWK SAWYER. That's an issue that we take very seriously in the Bureau of Prisons, and the incidence, I won't say is nonexistent, but it's very, very low. There are three factors involved in preventing prison rapes. One is that you have a good classification system which separates your predators from your vulnerable inmates. Our classification system is very sound.

    Two is you have a system where staff are out and about the institution all the time in the housing units, ensuring that if anything is happening there that we're aware of it; and thirdly, we have a very strong reporting system that once an inmate even let's us know that there's been an indication of a rape, we attack that very quickly. We send them out for medical care. We do the rape kit determination to determine whether or not anyone has actually been raped, and we will go after prosecuting the inmate that's been involved in carrying out the rape.
 Page 150       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    So, therefore, our incidence is very, very low. We need it to be at zero, but it is very, very low because of those three factors.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. And I would appreciate it if you would get that to me in writing, and I probably will want to meet with you on that. I hope any offices pay attention so that we can schedule the appointment, because I'm very concerned.

    I have some questions on women incarcerated. So let me go forward.

    Mr. Chairman, I'd ask an additional minute to pose to these two gentlemen here, Mr. Marshall and Mr. Pickard.

    Mr. GREEN. No objection.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you very much.

    Mr. GREEN. No objection.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Marshall, let me just that please understand the depth of our just being overwhelmed or passionate about these issues. You are a good friend of mine from Texas, and I was getting ready to grab your introduction from Mr. Smith, but I just recall he's from Texas. So I didn't have a legitimate excuse to introduce you.

    So let me really say to you that I appreciate the work that you've done. You were in the hot seat here the other day in the government oversight on some issues in Houston. I appreciated the way you handled that.
 Page 151       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    But what we are seeing is that the members from—say particularly the African American community, I think Mr. Conyers is making another point that young drug users is just overwhelming. So we're trying to find out how we can bust that open other than what you're doing, which is the incarceration issue. Do you have any racial profiling language or instructions? Are you sensitive to the issue of racial profiling, or are you just taking a big net in the work that you do and just running people into it, and are you working on that to be assured that you're working to get those perpetrators, but not just profiling people and saying let me just lock you up? Let me just get this question so I can get both of you on the record.

    Mr. Pickard, the FBI has always been looked to for the issues of justice, and I'm sure they're involved in this recent conviction, though it was delayed, down in Birmingham. We appreciate that. I'd like to be assured that when we try to engage the FBI—they did a very good job in the Jasper case. I wanted to thank you for that, but I wanted to make sure that when we engage or call the FBI that you are sensitive that when the community, particularly minority communities, call because they sense the balance.

    I want to know do you have some blocks of responding to discrimination—when I say discrimination calls, say Cincinnati called you or someone is calling you from Houston, for example, because I've got a family that's been abused with a cross burning, etc., I've got a little slow response. How do you respond to that? And I also want to make sure that you are, in fact, implementing lie detector tests in light on the Hanssen situation.

    If I can get quick answers, I think the Chairman will indulge me on those issues.
 Page 152       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. MARSHALL. Ms. Jackson Lee, I'm very sensitive to racial profiling issue. I feel like I'm addressing that in a number of ways. First of all, I speak out very strongly against that practice in public appearances wherever I go, both internal audiences, State and local police audiences, and audiences with the general public. I've covered that in many, many speeches that I give across the country.

    Secondly, I strive for a diverse work force within DEA because I believe the more diverse we are, the more we are able to address these issues within our society and within our agency.

    Third, we conduct a lot of training, both for our own employees and for State and local police officers, and we try to weave threads of ethics and threads of human dignity into that type of training, and all of that training where we—particularly our highway interdiction training that we do for State and local officers has a very, very strong unequivocal element that we do not condone, tolerate racial profiling, and on top that, it is bad investigative technique and should not be practiced in any way, shape, form, or fashion.

    Mr. GREEN. Mr. Pickard.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you very much. I'll be in touch with you.

    Mr. PICKARD. On the incident in Katy, Texas, I was called about that on Tuesday night. The SAC of the Houston division was up in a conference that we have with all the special agents in charge. The ASAC down there, Gail Seavy, I understand she called back to your office. Working with the local police, we have identified a 17-year-old suspect. We're trying to see whether his story is accurate or not, but we're in—we have identified an individual, and I think the response was appropriate for that, but we were very concerned about the Ross family in light of what had happened.
 Page 153       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you. I thought the response initially was very timid. It might be because a Member of Congress was calling. I did find out a 17-year-old was—has been at least brought in under the circumstances. But people look to the FBI, and I thought they were particularly timid and confused about what was being asked, and the fact that there was history with the Ross family, I think there should have been a more pronounced We have it under advisement; I'm so glad you called; It is in our jurisdiction; We're going to be looking at it, as opposed to I'm talking to this or that or the constable or waiting to be called. Too timid.

    I mean, I'm not asking to violate your procedures. I'm glad they did call you in Washington, and I'd like them to be more responsive, and it might have been because the SAC was out of town.

    Mr. PICKARD. I would hope that that would not be the answer. The ASACs are there, empowered, and they should be able to respond to those situations.

    As far as the Hansen matter, we're currently polygraphing almost 600 employees. That includes our senior executive service, all the employees who work national security matters, data base administrators who have the keys to the kingdom of our computer systems, as well as personnel who travel frequently internationally. When we complete that, the director and I will be taking a look at expanding that to other employees, and we'll also be waiting for the Webster Commission and the inspector general report.

    Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you very much. I look forward to working with you.
 Page 154       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. GREEN. Thank you. I see that my colleague and friend, Mr. Barr has arrived.

    Mr. Barr, 5 minutes for questions.

    Mr. BARR. Thank you. I apologize for being late. We have a hearing down the hall in the Government Reform Committee, the Deegan murder case that the FBI I know is very much aware of, and that's still going on. So I apologize.

    But I do appreciate the witnesses being here today, and I know there's been a lot of information. I don't think, though, that in a couple of areas, and these concern primarily the FBI, that there are being questions asked, and I would like to go into a little bit into the NICS system, the National Instant Check System.

    Mr. Pickard, could you explain has the—it's my understanding the system has been shut down a couple of times recently. What occasioned those delays and delays in the National Instant Check System?

    Mr. PICKARD. There were two incidents last year in which the NICS system was down, one in May and one shortly before the holidays at the end of the year. The first one in May was occasioned by a change in the software. We were trying to upgrade the software for the system. It's a very complex system. I've asked Assistant Director Bob Dies, who joined the FBI after 30 years in IBM, to personally go up there to take a look at the system, and he's come back to me with certain recommendations as far as vulnerabilities in the system and areas that we need to enhance so we do not have those system failures.
 Page 155       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    The incident in December of 2000, that occasioned by a power failure. The wiring of the system could have been done better. We have since changed out that wiring system from when we go from the outside power to the battery power on the system.

    Mr. BARR. So there have not been any shutdowns this year?

    Mr. PICKARD. That is correct.

    Mr. BARR. Okay. I know Mr. Dies is here. I had the opportunity to meet with him earlier in the week, and I appreciated that very much. We didn't talk about this in particular, but I know he is looking comprehensively at a lot of areas involving computers and software and technology and cyber crime for the bureau, and I appreciate that and would look forward to maybe speaking with him specifically about this at some point.

    The other area that I wanted to get a little update on, if I could from you, Mr. Pickard, has to do with another area that we've gone into in the past and certainly will in the future, and it has to do not exclusively but essentially with the problems that we see in Project Carnivore. Now, I know that the name has been changed. Unfortunately for you all, I think the name Carnivore, which was such a misnomer in the first place, has sort of stuck, but what has been done with regard to the comprehensive look that the attorney general was taking at not just that project, but generally what needs to be done in order to more properly in the context of 21st Century technology, which was not with us when the electronics surveillance laws were last overhauled about three decades ago; where do we stand now in terms of that comprehensive look, and is the attorney general or are you, the bureau, prepared to make some recommendations to us at this point or in the near future with regard to protecting privacy concerns with the internet and electronic communications generally in today's world without unduly inhibiting the ability of law enforcement to gather necessary information with proper judicial oversight?
 Page 156       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  

    Mr. PICKARD. As you know, the world has changed so much from the telephone systems to the internet now. More and more communications, whether they be by E-mail or by voice, are now going over the internet systems. The Illinois Institute of Technology Research Institute did a study in December of 2000. It was commissioned by the attorney general to take a look at Carnivore. I don't think we'll ever get rid of that word. But they had certain technical recommendations. We're taking a look at them now.

    The attorney general, John Ashcroft, is looking personally at the privacy considerations in it, and we've been providing briefings to him on that, and based upon them, we'll have a decision as to how to move out smartly so that we can protect the privacy of individuals, but also so that we have this ability to deal with the criminal element who has moved on to the internet.

    Mr. BARR. Do you know at what stage the attorney general is in that comprehensive review?

    Mr. PICKARD. I do not know. I'm sorry.

    Mr. BARR. Okay. Would you check on that for us, please? Because that's something, certainly, not just in this Subcommittee, but the Committee generally, I think will be wanting to go into and perhaps some other Committees as well. And will both the bureau and the Department of Justice make itself available to communicate ideas and work with the Congress to see if there is a legislative framework that we can come up with?

 Page 157       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC    Segment 1 Of 2  
    Mr. PICKARD. Of course, we would. There are some recommendations that I think would help us greatly in this new information age.

    Mr. BARR. Thank you.

    And I'd just like to take this opportunity to thank the other witnesses here, and if you would please convey not only mine, but I speak and anticipate I speak for the entire Subcommittee and the entire Committee, and please convey to the men and women of your agencies the tremendous regard and thanks that we have for the work that they do. Thank you.

    Mr. GREEN. I think that's an excellent note upon which to end this Subcommittee hearing. I thank all those in attendance for their patience, and we stand adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 12:35 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

Next Hearing Segment(2)

Join the mailing list