[Senate Hearing 111-108]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
S. Hrg. 111-108
COUNTERNARCOTICS ENFORCEMENT:
COORDINATION AT THE FEDERAL, STATE,
AND LOCAL LEVEL
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON STATE, LOCAL,
AND PRIVATE SECTOR PREPAREDNESS AND INTEGRATION
of the
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 21, 2009
__________
Available via http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
50-386 WASHINGTON : 2009
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
JON TESTER, Montana
ROLAND W. BURRIS, Illinois
MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado
Michael L. Alexander, Staff Director
Brandon L. Milhorn, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk
AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON STATE, LOCAL, AND PRIVATE SECTOR PREPAREDNESS
AND INTEGRATION
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas, Chairman
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
JON TESTER, Montana LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado
Kristin Sharp, Staff Director
Mike McBride, Minority Staff Director
Kelsey Stroud, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Pryor................................................ 1
Senator Ensign............................................... 3
Senator Bennet............................................... 4
WITNESSES
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
John Leech, Acting Director, Office of Counternarcotics
Enforcement, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.............. 5
Frances Flener, Arkansas State Drug Director, State of Arkansas.. 7
Douglas C. Gillespie, Sheriff, on behalf of Major Cities' Chiefs
Association, Major County Sheriffs' Association and Las Vegas
Metropolitan Police Department, Las Vegas, Nevada.............. 8
Alphabetical List of Witnesses
Flener, Frances:
Testimony.................................................... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 30
Gillespie, Douglas C.:
Testimony.................................................... 8
Prepared statement with an attachment........................ 37
Leech, John:
Testimony.................................................... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 23
APPENDIX
Maps submitted by Senator Pryor.................................. 42
Questions and responses submitted for the Record from:
Mr. Leech.................................................... 44
Ms. Flener................................................... 53
Mr. Gillespie................................................ 59
COUNTERNARCOTICS ENFORCEMENT:
COORDINATION AT THE FEDERAL, STATE,
AND LOCAL LEVEL
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 21, 2009
U.S. Senate,
Ad Hoc Subcommittee on State, Local, and
Private Sector Preparedness and Integration,
of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:35 a.m., in
room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mark L.
Pryor, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Pryor, Bennet, and Ensign.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PRYOR
Senator Pryor. We will go ahead and get the hearing
underway. Thank you all for being here today. I would like to
call the hearing to order.
This hearing is significant for several reasons. It is the
first hearing of the Subcommittee on State, Local, and Private
Sector Preparedness and Integration for the 111th Congress. It
also is the first hearing where Senator Ensign will be the
Ranking Member. He is on his way here, but he encouraged us to
go ahead and start. I look forward to working with him and
helping him work on his agenda as well as making progress
towards preparedness through the Committee and the
Subcommittee.
Welcome, Senator Ensign. Thank you for being here.
Let me start with a very brief story. Last year, the
Arkansas State Police made what at the time appeared to be a
routine traffic stop. As part of that stop, they were given
permission to search the vehicle.
The police were given permission to search the vehicle, and
as they did, they found a hidden compartment with over 40
pounds of cocaine stashed in the vehicle. And through their
good police work and also in sharing that information with the
DEA and, again, a lot of discussions back and forth and
legwork, the DEA realized that they had the exact same type of
vehicle somewhere on the West Coast that had been impounded.
They searched that vehicle and, sure enough, found the very
same hidden compartment with over $300,000 in cash in it.
I bring that story up because it is an example of how local
law enforcement--in this case, the Arkansas State Police--can
work with the national agencies--in this case, DEA--to get a
lot of great police work done and make inroads in fighting
these drug cartels. It is also an example of how the Federal,
State, and local law enforcement agencies can work together and
can get great things done.
Today's hearing is entitled ``Counternarcotics Enforcement:
Coordination at the Federal, State, and Local Level.'' We have
three witnesses representing three levels of government. Each
of them play an important role in our Nation's counternarcotics
enforcement efforts. I want to thank you all for being here
today, and I am going to introduce you in just a few moments.
The purpose of this hearing is to provide an overview of
the role and mission of DHS' Office of Counternarcotics
Enforcement (CNE). I hope that we will hear today about the
level of coordination with other counter-drug programs within
DHS and the Federal Government, as well as coordination with
State and local partners. The link between the Federal
Government, State, and local partners is crucial, in my
opinion.
We have all seen the recent news stories and media accounts
of the escalating violence along the U.S.-Mexico border. This
violence is attributed to drug trafficking and smuggling, led
by several of Mexico's most powerful drug cartels. There is a
poster here that we have put up that shows a map of the
territory that each of these cartels controls. We got this
image from The Economist magazine, and I am pleased to say,
right now at least, that our law enforcement agencies believe
that most of the violence has not spilled over into the United
States. It does occur on the Mexican side of the border, but it
involves mostly Mexican citizens.
The Federal Government is taking measures to ensure that
the violence happening on the Mexican side of the border does
not carry over to the U.S. side. The efforts include, one,
increasing the number of Border Patrol agents and Customs and
Border Patrol officers along the border; and, two, the creation
of Border Enforcement Security Task Forces, called ``BEST
teams,'' in which various Federal, State, and local partners
work together in cases such as southbound vehicles' inspections
and investigation of suspected stash houses; and, three, the
development of an updated southwest border security strategy,
which I understand is due out in late April or early May of
this year.
State and local governments around the country have also
taken steps on their own to try to curtail smuggling and
trafficking operations in their areas. These efforts include
the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area program, which is a
Federal program but is used at the local level, and the
leveraging of Fusion Center resources to address drug
trafficking.\1\ The need for State and local partnership is
highlighted by the findings of the 2009 National Drug Threat
Assessment, which is produced by the Department of Justice's
National Drug Intelligence Center. This report identified 230
cities--and we have a map here at the front of the room on this
poster,\2\ these 230 cities within the United States that have
an established Mexican drug-trafficking organization. As you
can see, these cities are spread throughout the country, so we
cannot say that this problem is limited to the border region
with Mexico. This truly is a national problem, and these are
some of the things we would like to discuss today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The map referred to appears in the Appendix on page 42.
\2\ The map referred to appears in the Appendix on page 43.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With that, I would like to turn the microphone over to my
colleague from the State of Nevada, whom I welcome as Ranking
Member. I know you have some agenda items you would like to
discuss either now or in the future, and I look forward to
working with you during the 111th Congress.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ENSIGN
Senator Ensign. Well, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it. We
have a great friendship, and I know that not only the two of us
but our staffs will make this a very effective Subcommittee
here in the U.S. Senate. I look forward to your leadership and
know that you have grave concerns in a lot of the areas that
will be before this Subcommittee. And I think that we can have
a very effective partnership--I know we can, and I look forward
to the next couple of years working together.
In today's hearing, I am looking forward to the testimony
of our witnesses. You mentioned the 230 cities that are
represented on that map. Three of those cities--Reno, Carson
City, and Las Vegas--are in my State. Methamphetamine and
specifically crystal meth produced in Mexico is imported into
my State, and it has become the principal drug concern of
Nevadans. Unfortunately, Nevada often serves as a transshipment
point for various drugs to the central and eastern sections of
the United States, and I am particularly interested in hearing
from DHS' Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement on how they
are working with State and local law enforcement officials to
combat this drug trafficking.
And on that note, it is a pleasure that I welcome the
sheriff from Las Vegas, Sheriff Doug Gillespie. He began his
law enforcement career with the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police
Department in 1980 as a police officer, and his promotions
included sergeant, lieutenant, captain, commander, deputy
chief, and under sheriff. Sheriff Gillespie assumed the
position of Sheriff of Clark County leading the Las Vegas Metro
Police Department, in January 2007. He has a multifaceted
career which includes many programs he founded, such as Friends
of Las Vegas, K-9 Foundation, SWAT's Explosive Breaching
program, and the Executive Leadership Training for Metro
Supervisory Employees. In 2003, he and former Sheriff Young
established the Sheriff's Multicultural Advisory Committee.
Sheriff Gillespie is also the Chair of the Homeland Security
Committee for the Major Cities Chiefs of Police, which
represents the 56 largest cities in the Nation, as well as Vice
President of Major County Sheriffs, representing the top 100
counties.
I am pleased that Sheriff Gillespie has agreed to be with
us today and discuss his role in the Southern Nevada
Counterterrorism Center and specifically how it addresses the
interrelated problems of violent crime and drug trafficking.
Obviously, I am also very interested in effective funding of
Fusion Centers, and making sure that we are not wasting that.
Also, that the grants are being done properly and that there is
not any kind of abuse or fraud or waste going on with any
because the dollars that we have are so precious. It is a very
vital role for this Congress to do proper oversight, working
with the agencies and making sure that those dollars are used
in a very specific and very efficient manner.
So thank you for holding this hearing today, and I look
forward to the testimony of our witnesses.
Senator Pryor. Thank you, Senator Ensign.
Senator Bennet, thank you for joining us. Welcome to the
Subcommittee. Would you like to make an opening statement?
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BENNET
Senator Bennet. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a statement
that I would like included in the record. I will say that
Colorado, like Nevada, is a place that shows up on this map in
many red dots. And having spent the last 2 weeks traveling my
State, the meth problem is one that people in our rural areas
in particular are feeling extreme concern. And everywhere I
went, people said it was getting worse, not better.
So in this time of limited resources, the cooperation of
law enforcement at every level of government becomes that much
more important. So I would be interested to hear our witnesses
on that, and thank you for being here today.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Senator Bennet follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR BENNET
I am grateful that the three of you are able to appear before us
today. I would like to thank Senator Pryor for convening this important
hearing. As a large geographic State with natural barriers to seamless
State coordination, Colorado depends on coordination between Federal,
State, and local authorities to keep families safe and go after bad
actors.
Colorado has been hit hard by the trafficking and sale of
methamphetamine, cocaine and marijuana, an overwhelming majority of
which is trafficked from Mexico. The Department of Justice National
Drug Intelligence Center recently identified seven cities in Colorado
as having distribution or supply networks associated with Mexican drug
cartels or their affiliates. Any problem impacting seven Colorado
cities is basically impacting our entire State. Given this reality, it
is important that we ensure that the necessary resources are available
for programs such as the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA),
which has assisted 17 counties in Colorado combat drug trafficking.
The problem of meth is really a public health problem as much as it
is a law enforcement problem. Issues such as drug addiction, mental
illness and disparities in economic opportunity drive this very serious
problem, which impacts cities and rural areas alike. I believe we must
conceive of the meth problem as a whole, as we design strategies for
combating it.
That said, law enforcement is one of our most important tools.
Rural law enforcement in particular relies on Federal resources to halt
the trafficking of methamphetamine. For instance, Colorado has a
problem with trafficking through secondary roads. I hope the Committee
and the Obama Administration assigns sufficient gravity to this very
serious problem impacting smaller cities, towns, and rural areas.
Senator Pryor. Thank you.
I will go ahead and introduce the witnesses, and I ask the
witnesses to, if possible, limit opening statements to 5
minutes. There is a little red light there that should come on
as you are getting close to the time limit.
John Leech is Acting Director of the DHS' Office of
Counternarcotics Enforcement. He serves as the primary policy
adviser to the Secretary of the Department, and from 2003 to
2009, he served as Chief of Staff to the Director of CNE and
will return to that position when a new CNE Director is
appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
Second, we have Frances Flener, who happens to be Arkansas
State Drug Czar. She was appointed the State Drug Czar by
Governor Mike Beebe in April 2007. She serves as the
Chairperson of the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Coordinating Council,
which oversees the spending of State and Federal dollars on
alcohol and drug education, prevention, treatment, and law
enforcement.
And, third, I am not sure I can add to the sheriff's
introduction by Senator Ensign, but would you like to say
anything else about him?
Senator Ensign. He is a great sheriff. [Laughter.]
Senator Pryor. Great. Well, if we may, let's begin with
you, Mr. Leech.
TESTIMONY OF JOHN LEECH,\1\ ACTING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF
COUNTERNARCOTICS ENFORCEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Mr. Leech. Thank you. Chairman Pryor, Senator Ensign, and
Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to
appear before you today and provide an update on the activities
of the Department of Homeland Security's Office of
Counternarcotics Enforcement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Leech appears in the Appendix on
page 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secretary Napolitano is actively engaged in securing this
Nation's borders from the violence waged by the drug cartels in
Mexico and the general threat posed by the flow of illicit
narcotics. The Secretary has stated that the violence is not
only a threat internal to Mexico, but it is also a homeland
security issue in which all Americans have a stake. Our mutual
security is inextricably linked to our shared border.
To this end, the Secretary recently announced several
departmental border security initiatives that call for
additional personnel, increased intelligence capability, and
greater coordination with State, local, and Mexican law
enforcement authorities. My office is and will continue to be
instrumental in furthering the Department's plans.
Among many other responsibilities, DHS' Office of
Counternarcotics Enforcement (CNE) is statutorily charged with
two primary functions. One is to coordinate counter-drug policy
and operations between DHS and other Federal departments and
between DHS and State and local agencies; and, two, to track
and sever the connections between illegal drug trafficking and
terrorism.
CNE along with DOJ's Office of the Deputy Attorney General
were designated as the executive agents to lead the interagency
development of the 2009 National Southwest Border
Counternarcotics Strategy. The strategy focuses on
substantially reducing the flow of illicit drugs, drug
proceeds, and associated instruments of violence across the
U.S.-Mexico border by fully developing specific counter-drug,
counter-violence actions within 10 threat domains that include
intelligence and information sharing; at the ports and between
the ports of entry; air and maritime domains; investigation and
prosecution; money; the southbound flow of weapons; technology;
cooperation with Mexico; and tunnels.
In addition to complementing the Merida Initiative and the
Southwest Border Violence Plan in terms of strengthening our
security at the southwest border, the strategy is one component
of a broader and more comprehensive counter-drug border
security effort developed by CNE. In 2008, my office submitted
to Congress the Department's Northern Border and Maritime
Transit Border Counternarcotics Strategies. These three
strategies will collectively integrate and synchronize the
Department's overall ability to respond to changes in drug-
trafficking routes.
Another overarching CNE responsibility focuses on
connections between drug trafficking and terrorism. Worldwide,
illicit drug trafficking generates significant revenue that
buttresses the infrastructure of organized crime and terrorism.
CNE is statutorily tasked to track and sever connections
between illegal drug trafficking and terrorism. Our Drug Terror
Nexus Division (DTX), works closely with our interagency
partners--primarily within the Joint Terrorism Task Force
(JTTF), construct--to collect and analyze information about the
links between terrorist groups and drug trafficking and to
target those connections. A critical DTX function is to ensure
a steady exchange of drug-terror information between the law
enforcement and intelligence communities at the Federal, State,
local, and tribal levels of government.
As part of this effort, our DTX Division is working to
improve relationships with High Intensity Drug Trafficking
Areas (HIDTAs), JTTFs, Fusion Centers, and State, local, and
tribal entities. Less than 2 months ago, we met with key
personnel from the South Florida HIDTA to establish working
protocols and to ensure accurate and timely information flow on
drug-terror issues.
In addition, at the request of the Director of the Gulf
Coast HIDTA, CNE senior staff participated in the HIDTA
Investigative Support Center Managers meeting to establish
robust interface with HIDTAs nationwide. We will continue to
foster relationships between various Federal, State, and local
partners by sharing intelligence related to drug trafficking
and terrorism and other data related to this evolving threat.
I will conclude by reflecting back on my experience as the
CNE Chief of Staff and most recently as the Acting Director for
the past 5 years. Over this time, it has become readily
apparent to me that successful counternarcotics efforts cannot
be solely conducted at the Federal level. Our communities, and
especially those at our borders, are directly impacted by drug
trafficking. State, local, and tribal partners have tremendous
responsibilities, and they possess the expertise since they are
on the front lines of the fight. I am committed to partnering
with these colleagues. Only through a combined Federal, State,
local, and tribal effort, highlighted by robust communication
and coordination, can this Nation hope to combat illicit
narcotics activities.
I thank the Subcommittee and would also like to personally
thank Ms. Flener and Sheriff Gillespie for all the work that
they do and for this opportunity to testify today. I look
forward to answering any of your questions. Thank you.
Senator Pryor. Thank you. Ms. Flener.
TESTIMONY OF FRANCES FLENER,\1\ ARKANSAS STATE DRUG DIRECTOR,
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Ms. Flener. Good morning, Senator Pryor, Ranking Member
Ensign, Senator Bennet, and honored guests. It is indeed my
pleasure to appear before you today. On behalf of Governor Mike
Beebe and our State, I would like to thank this Subcommittee
for its continued support of counternarcotic enforcement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Flener appears in the Appendix on
page 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Pryor, we are grateful for your continued support
of the men and women in law enforcement. Your first speech as a
Senator dealt with the importance of continued and increased
funding for this group. Through your ongoing support and
dedication to this issue, our State and Nation have both
benefited, and I wanted to take this opportunity to thank you
for that leadership.
Methamphetamine is the No. 1 drug threat in the State of
Arkansas, followed closely by cocaine and marijuana.
Pharmaceuticals continue to rise in epidemic proportions within
the State. Our local meth lab seizures have risen slightly in
2008; however, most methamphetamine found in Arkansas is now
produced outside of the State and is being transported into
Arkansas by Mexico-based poly-drug-trafficking organizations.
These groups have developed distribution networks that have
been responsible for a series of drug-related crimes and social
problems. To compound what Senator Bennet from Colorado stated,
for instance, my home town of Batesville, Arkansas, was the
center of a 3-year joint drug-trafficking investigation led by
the DEA entitled ``Tienda Hielo,'' or ``Ice Store.'' To date,
it has resulted in 52 arrests, seizures of more than 100 pounds
of methamphetamine ice, with a street value of over $11
million, and the dismantling of a drug-trafficking organization
with ties to a violent Mexico drug cartel.
This little town of Batesville, Arkansas, is less than
10,000 in population. However, the investigation was a textbook
example of multi-agency coordination. Seven Federal, five
State, 10 local, and four drug task forces were actively
involved. We are fortunate in Arkansas in having outstanding
relationships between Federal, State, and local law
enforcement.
In February 2008, Arkansas received a tremendous boost in
its ability to disrupt illicit drug trafficking. With the
support of you, Senator Pryor, Senator Lincoln, Representative
John Boozman, Governor Mike Beebe, and the entire congressional
delegation, four counties in Arkansas were added to the HIDTA
program as a part of the Gulf Coast HIDTA. We now have two
initiatives in Arkansas--one in the northwest corner, one in
the central portion of the State.
The Byrne-JAG program funds 19 multi-jurisdictional drug
task forces (DTFs). The size of our local law enforcement
agencies is so small that most find it impossible to conduct
proactive drug-related investigations without Federal
assistance. While this funding for 2009 is expected to
increase, the optimal effectiveness of the DTFs is in jeopardy
due to low and reduced staff and low morale. Without the 2009
increase, some programs would disband, leaving Arkansas
communities with little or no proactive organized efforts to
combat drugs.
If we are to have a robust national drug control strategy,
we must not cut the resources available for these efforts.
Federal assistance is the incentive that has caused dramatic
improvements in cross-jurisdictional cooperation. The impact of
diluted drug policies and a reduced Federal commitment would be
devastating to society.
Senator Pryor, we support your inclusion of the budget
amendment that calls for expanding the number of counties
participating in the HIDTA program. Other parts of Arkansas
desperately need those HIDTA resources to address their own
drug-trafficking problems. The Byrne-JAG assistance grant
should be funded at full strength of $1.1 billion as originally
recommended by the Senate.
Our Nation's drug problems are extremely complex and will
not be solved quickly or easily. However, by using a
comprehensive approach that embraces education, treatment, and
enforcement, we can dramatically reduce illegal drug usage and
associated violent crimes.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify before this
Subcommittee, and I will be happy to answer any questions at
the appropriate time.
Senator Pryor. Thank you very much. Sheriff Gillespie.
TESTIMONY OF DOUGLAS C. GILLESPIE,\1\ SHERIFF, ON BEHALF OF
MAJOR CITIES' CHIEFS ASSOCIATION, MAJOR COUNTY SHERIFFS'
ASSOCIATION AND LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, LAS
VEGAS, NEVADA
Mr. Gillespie. Thank you, Chairman Pryor, Ranking Member
Ensign, and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. Today I
speak for both the Major City Chiefs as well as Major County
Sheriffs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Gillespie with an attachment
appears in the Appendix on page 37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because Las Vegas is home to many of the world's largest
hotels and a major center of international tourism and
entertainment, my jurisdiction is continuously mentioned by our
enemy as a potential target. To counter this well-established
threat, we have created the Southern Nevada Counter-Terrorism
Center, which embraces the ``all crimes, all hazards'' fusion
doctrine. The Fusion Center is comprised of 13 different
agencies, representing Federal, State, and local government,
including the private sector in the terrorism prevention.
In our community, there are over 6,700 private security
professionals and thousands more valet attendants,
housekeepers, and bell captains, each poised and capable of
detecting suspicious behaviors indicating criminal activity. We
are working to harness this incredible force multiplier.
To supplement and enhance this ground-level suspicious
activity reporting, we are participating as a pilot city in the
Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative, referred
to as ``SARs.''
Embracing the intelligence-led policing philosophy within
the Fusion Center: Within the Fusion Center, we have a robust
analytical group that focuses on traditional criminal activity
and crime patterns. These crime analysts scour raw crime data
looking for patterns and trends, as well as any social
causative factors.
Now, narcotics trafficking and associated violence in our
Fusion Center: Las Vegas has long been considered the
``crossroads'' for narcotics trafficking between the suppliers
in Central and South America and the consumers in the United
States. As the site of a HIDTA, we are on the front lines of
the war on drugs. With drug trafficking comes the associated
violence. In October of last year, we found out just how
ruthless drug traffickers can be. Six-year-old Cole
Puffinberger was inside his home in Las Vegas when armed
intruders posing as police officers snatched him away from his
mother. My detectives quickly learned that young Cole was
likely abducted because his grandfather owed Mexican drug
cartels several millions of dollars. As detectives worked to
locate the young boy, special agents from the FBI and DEA
worked feverishly to learn more about the abductors and their
criminal organizations, all of which took place within our
Fusion Center. The intensity and tenaciousness of the
investigators paid off when Cole was recovered unharmed 4 days
later.
The role of DHS in combating drug-trafficking violence:
Because Fusion Centers are the heart of Federal, State, and
local information-sharing efforts, we urge the distinguished
Members of this Subcommittee to consider this when
contemplating the role of DHS in countering violence related to
drug trafficking. We would like to have these information
channels in place and firmly entrenched within the Fusion
Centers so we can react quickly and effectively when violence
related to narcotics trafficking occurs in our community.
The Department of Homeland Security has a number of
agencies under its control which have a statutory
responsibility for the counternarcotics mission. It is critical
to the Nation's security that the efforts of these various
agencies are coordinated with the DEA.
The roles of the respective Federal entities that are
tasked with this mission have overlap and in some cases
redundancies. Neither are in themselves a negative; they do,
however, require coordination at the Federal level. The
important aspect of this, I believe, is to ensure that the
respective agencies are focusing their efforts on what it is
they do best and are best situated to address.
To further enhance our counternarcotics and
counterterrorism capabilities, we in Las Vegas are considering
the options available to us to improve the coordination between
the Fusion Center and the HIDTA. Among the options are
exchanges of intelligence analysts, relocating the
investigative and operational de-confliction function into the
Fusion Center, and the possible future collocation of the
Southern Nevada Counterterrorism Center and the Las Vegas HIDTA
task force.
On behalf of the Major Cities Chiefs of Police as well as
Major County Sheriffs Association, I thank this distinguished
Subcommittee for the opportunity to share our views. Thank you.
Senator Pryor. Thank you. Sheriff, let me start with you.
You mentioned Nevada's Fusion Center, which sounds like it is
very effective and is running the way one should be run. How
many staff work out of the Fusion Center and from what
agencies? Could you please discuss its organizational
structure?
Mr. Gillespie. We have a total of roughly 60 people that
actually, I would say, work in what you are referring to as the
``fusion aspect'' of that particular center. That is the
analytical people that we rely on day to day to analyze a
variety of information, from local crime information to
national and international as well. We have representation
there from all public safety within southern Nevada.
Senator Pryor. Including the Federal side?
Mr. Gillespie. Correct. Yes, we have DHS as well as FBI
participation.
Senator Pryor. And you are happy with how the Fusion Center
operates?
Mr. Gillespie. Well, I am much happier now than I was a
number of years ago in regards to the information exchange. We
are not where we need to be yet. We continually work through
the obstacles that we find. But I think anytime you place that
number of individuals in a room, in a building, cross-
jurisdictional and cross-disciplinary--because we have fire in
that room, we have emergency managers as well. So when you are
combining all those things, you run into some of these
territorial-type issues, policy procedural-type issues that you
have to continually work through. But we are making progress.
Senator Pryor. Good. And what would you guess is the
percentage of the workload that relates to drugs?
Mr. Gillespie. At our Fusion Center, very little right now.
Actually, the Fusion Center concept, there was not a lot of
discussion early on about the integration of the narcotics-type
information. However, I have seen at the national as well as
the local level, renewed--I should not say ``renewed
interest,'' but interest in that.
One example I would give you, Senator, is I happened to be
participating in a meeting where the Chief of Police of, I
believe it was, Newark, New Jersey--a gentleman by the name of
Garry McCarthy--talked about the Fusion Center in New Jersey
and that they had recently incorporated the narcotics
information as well as their HIDTA information, and they were
seeing huge benefit from it; not to mention, as I stated with
the Cole Puffinberger case, bringing in the DEA in particular,
with that particular case, because day to day they do not have
a seat in the Fusion Center, was invaluable to us from the
resources that they were able to bring to the table.
I do not mean to go on too long, but in regards to that,
our HIDTA in particular has just funded an analyst position
that will now be in our Fusion Center. So I think we definitely
see the benefits of having that information incorporated into
our Fusion Centers.
Senator Pryor. Great. Senator Lieberman yesterday had a
Committee field hearing in Arizona, and there some of the
witnesses talked about the obstacles in Fusion Center
participation. I think the biggest obstacle they focused on was
funding. They do not have the resources to fully staff and
fully equip a fusion center.
What have been the obstacles that you have had with your
Fusion Center? You mentioned some of the cross-jurisdictional
turf battles. But what else has been an obstacle?
Mr. Gillespie. Funding, actually people, and other entities
willing to give up a full-time position to be at the Fusion
Center. I have been very fortunate up until, I would say,
roughly a year ago to have a very robust economy in Las Vegas,
and my police department was growing, which afforded me the
opportunity to shift some resources. My counterparts throughout
Clark County were not quite so lucky.
So funding continues to be an aspect for us, and I think
long term one of the challenges that we will see within the
Fusion Center aspect is that sustainment-type funding because
the majority of your costs associated with these centers are
your salary and benefit packages associated with your
personnel.
Senator Pryor. Thank you.
Ms. Flener, in Arkansas we have drug task forces, and they
have been around for a long time. And we also now, as you
mentioned in your testimony, have been able to utilize the High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Area program. How do the drug task
forces coordinate with the HIDTA effort? How does that work in
the State?
Ms. Flener. Well, it appears to be working quite well in
both places where the HIDTA is physically located. That is in
the extreme northwest and in the central. But, for instance,
the Tienda Hielo operation that I mentioned, that brought in
several of the drug task forces which were not in those
sections of Arkansas that required that.
So because Arkansas is small, we work on a very personal-
type relationship. We all know one another, and through that, I
think we work as well as can be expected. We just need
additional resources to incorporate the northeastern part of
Arkansas, which is a tremendous area for methamphetamine
trafficking.
I think I mentioned in my written comments that those drugs
that came in from Mexico came in three hubs in the western part
of the United States with a population of 4.1 million, and then
they were transported into a county of less than 30,000 for
redistribution back to another 4 million.
So we do have tremendous trafficking problems, and our drug
task forces need the Federal assistance, dollars and resources,
to attack those problems.
Senator Pryor. I think most Senators, it is fair to say, do
not mind allocating resources if we feel like there is
accountability and we know that the money is being spent
properly and is being managed well and being used effectively.
So from your perspective as a State stakeholder, what
assurances can you give the Subcommittee here that the HIDTA
money and the other money that you were able to get from the
Federal Government is actually being used effectively?
Ms. Flener. Well, the Gulf Coast HIDTA, of which we are a
part, has established best practices, and those have been
adopted. And through the efforts with Tony Soto, we intend to
put those best practices in place with all of our drug task
forces as well as the HIDTA initiatives.
Senator Ensign. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just to follow up on that, maybe all three of you could
answer this. I think more specifically what we are looking for
is metrics. How do we measure effectiveness? We can say that we
all want more money, we want this, we want that. But it is just
like job training programs. We have, I think, 13 different job
training programs in the U.S. Government, and not all of them
are the same. They use different metrics, and metrics are
really important whether something is effective or not.
So under the areas at least under your jurisdiction that
you are testifying here today, what would you establish as far
as some of the metrics for this Subcommittee to be able to look
at and see whether you are using the money effectively? We will
start with Mr. Leech.
Mr. Leech. Senator, that is a challenging question to
answer. I can say that in an indirect way--not specifically on
the funding of the HIDTAs and the drug task forces--that the
Southwest Border Counter-Drug Strategy, which I believe--I
think we submitted a copy to Congress sometime ago of the 2007
version. I have the 2009 version here that we are in the
process of finishing up and soon will be putting the
implementation plan to it.
When we developed that implementation plan, what you will
see in the strategy, the counter-drug strategy--and it will
cover those nine areas that I spoke to earlier--rather, those
10 domains that I spoke to earlier. Those will have performance
measurements and metrics attached to the various actions that
we will be executing along the border. Many of those actions
have to do with our HIDTAs. As a matter of fact, of the 93 sub-
supporting actions within the strategy to achieve our
objectives, 24 of those have to deal with our HIDTAs, and those
various actions--which it is pre-decisional right now, so I am
not free to discuss it in detail. But of those 24 actions,
there are metrics and performance measures attached to them.
Senator Ensign. Before we go to the other panelists, on
those metrics what is the feeling in DHS as far as the Title 21
authority specifically that DHS I guess maybe lacks when it
comes to--the DEA supposedly has full Title 21, and you all do
not. How do you think that is going to affect your metrics? In
other words, do you need more flexibility under Title 21?
Mr. Leech. Senator, I think for ICE to have Title 21
authority, I think it is a very good idea. Now, I know that
issue is being worked at very senior levels. The Secretary is
very interested in trying to work this issue. I think we are
now, as you know, operating in an environment unlike any
environment we have ever had in the past, and I think it is
imperative that we marshal all available resources to fight
this drug fight. And I think that we have to equip our
soldiers, our front-line fighters, which includes our ICE
agents, with every available tool out there to help them move
the counter-drug effort forward.
So I think the whole issue of ICE having Title 21 authority
would be a tremendous benefit for the overall drug fight.
Senator Ensign. I just raised that point because I think it
is also. I think that it reminds me a little bit of pre-
September 11, 2001 when we had all of these basically
stovepipes in our intelligence community, and, Sheriff
Gillespie, you mentioned the whole turf battles. There will
always be turf battles, but we need to minimize them whenever
possible. From what I understand, for ICE, for instance, if
they have somebody they arrest, and it turns out to be a drug
problem, they do not have the proper authorities that they
need, and the bureaucracy basically gets in the way and the
rules get in the way of effectively protecting our country.
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir.
Senator Ensign. So thank you for that.
Ms. Flener, if you could just address what I had asked,
basically for specific metrics to--for instance, the Gulf Coast
HIDTA that you are talking about.
Ms. Flener. Well, to me that is one of the beauties of the
HIDTA program. It enables a group of executive law enforcement
officials to sit down and to adequately outline performance
goals and what those goals are. And I might make mention that
in Arkansas, within 6 months of having our HIDTA initiatives up
and going, we had already met our yearly goals. Now, maybe they
may have been set somewhat low----
Senator Ensign. Give me some examples of those yearly
goals.
Ms. Flener. Well, with the different types of--well, I am
just drawing a blank.
Senator Ensign. That is not a problem. If you could all
come back to us because we just want to know as a
Subcommittee--if we are going to judge you on performance, we
want to know what your metrics are going to be. And we want to
be able to look at that and have our staffs look at it and see
whether we think those are also fair metrics, whether we have
any ideas for other metrics to be involved because we are the
folks who have to authorize the funding.
Ms. Flener. Absolutely.
Senator Ensign. And I like to authorize and appropriate
funding to things that are being effective, not just because
somebody likes the idea, but because they are actually being
effective.
Sheriff Gillespie.
Mr. Gillespie. I think if you look at the Fusion concept
itself and how it has grown since it began being discussed
after September 11, 2001, it shows at the local and State
levels a desire to have an efficiency aspect to it. When it
originally started, it was just homeland security-type
information that we were looking at exchanged, and we realized
that we did not just want to put all of our people in that
building just to do that. We wanted to approach this ``all
crimes, all hazards,'' have it a robust, 24/7/365-type
operation, and the different types of information that you
could exchange.
I think from a Fusion Center standpoint, what you need to
do is talk to our customers. Are they getting the information
that they desire to get? Are you getting the information that
you need? Is the governor? Are other rural counties, agency
heads from an information-sharing standpoint?
From a narcotics-type standpoint, I think you can look at
the numbers per se that the HIDTAs do produce and that we as
HIDTAs have to produce in an annual--I do not know if it is an
annual or biannual actual evaluation where they come out and
they take a look at your individual HIDTAs and how much
narcotics have you seized, how many arrests, how many pen
registers and a variety of other things that they look at. But,
really, so much of these Fusion Centers is focused on not only
pushing the information out, but are they user-friendly for the
information coming in? And I really think if we developed a
process to talk to our customers and there would be a little
filtration coming back to you as to our effectiveness, it would
hold us more accountable to what it is that we are doing as
well.
Senator Ensign. Good suggestion. When we look at, for
instance, the Fusion Centers, you mentioned personnel coming
from different agencies, and this gets back a little bit to
turf and whether different agencies think things are important.
Are you getting the proper level of expertise? And also within
that, do you think that DEA should have a seat? In other words,
should we have DEA people within the Fusion Center as well
permanently?
Mr. Gillespie. I think from an analytical standpoint, yes,
the information that they have. And, that is our challenge at
the local law enforcement level from my perspective, Senator,
when you are talking about personnel. Because bringing in a 15-
year veteran police officer and placing them in a Fusion Center
from an analytical standpoint is not necessarily the best way
to spend your money. There are a lot of people out there that
have become very good at analyzing this type of information.
But they do not come cheaply. There is a huge demand for them
out there. And what we are seeing is people that we may get or
other Fusion Centers may get, we are losing them to other
places, based on salary and benefits, not only in the public
sector but the private sector as well.
Senator Ensign. But to further answer the question, I
guess, do you feel comfortable with the expertise that, for
instance, DHS would put in the Fusion Center or the FBI would
put in the Fusion Center right now? I know that you have some
control over the locals, but you do not have a lot of control
of who DHS puts over there or who the FBI puts over there.
Mr. Gillespie. Within our Fusion Center, I am very pleased
with the level of expertise that is there. There is definitely
at the local level a commitment to giving us quality people
within the center.
Senator Ensign. Very good. Mr. Leech, just a final
question. The whole issue of guns going to Mexico. I think that
there is no question when the President talks about and when
Senator Clinton, the Secretary of State, have talked about the
demand for drugs in the United States certainly drives the drug
trade. I think we would all agree with that, and we should do
everything that we can to diminish the demand in the United
States in every possible way, and I am hoping that the
President uses his bully pulpit to talk about drugs. The whole
``Just Say No'' campaign that Nancy Reagan embarked on was
laughed at, but drug use in the United States dramatically went
down during the 1980s. And I think that the President can have
a tremendous role on using the bully pulpit, especially with
young people, and his influence right now with young people and
talking about drugs and the danger of drugs and things like
that.
But the gun issue itself, the Mexican Government--it has
been said 90 percent of the guns turning up in Mexico are from
the United States. From what I understand, the statistic is way
off. It's my impression that 90 percent of the guns that the
Mexican Government turns over to us for a background check to
find out where it came from, and not 90 percent of all guns
that are seized are turned over. That they only do the ones
that they know come from the United States, and the vast
majority--I mean, let us just use common sense. There are other
countries in the world that produce guns that it is a lot
cheaper to buy from than it is from the United States where you
have to get most of these guns illegally in the first place.
I just visited a wonderful machine gun manufacturer in
northern Nevada the other day. The controls that we have--and
this is for military machine guns, obviously. The controls that
we have in the United States from those weapons manufacturers
are so strict that to get those weapons is very difficult
versus buying them from other countries that produce these that
do not really care and have the kind of responsibility the U.S.
Government puts on these weapons.
So if you could get that information so we can share much
more legitimate numbers, especially when we are talking, in the
political realm with our neighbors down south, I would
appreciate that.
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir, I will. Sir, if I could also comment
on the issue of guns in a much broader sense in what we are
trying to do, in particular our office, what our office is
trying to do. I had mentioned earlier about the Southwest
Border Counternarcotics Strategy for 2009, which you should be
receiving soon, hopefully towards the end of April or very
early May. It is an interagency effort in which our office was
asked to serve as executive agents with the Deputy Attorney
General, Office of the Deputy Attorney General, Stuart Nash,
over at his office. And if you look in a broad sense about what
the U.S. Government is trying to do to secure the U.S.-Mexican
border, we try to look at it in terms of three legs on a stool.
South of the border, we are talking about the Merida
Initiative, resources going to the Government of Mexico and how
they can strengthen their law enforcement community. And then
on our side of the border, we have this, the Southwest Border
Counternarcotics Strategy. And then the third leg of that stool
would be a plan, if you will, a strategy, the Border Violence
Plan, which I believe you may have been briefed on the Border
Violence Plan. Admiral Rufe is running the operations on that.
And so we see the security of the border is very dependent on
those three legs, and if Merida fails, I think this will fail.
If this fails, Merida is going to fail. Very dependent--as I
said in my oral, ``inextricably linked,'' the security of our
border.
But to get back to address your arms issue, this is a very
complicated issue, but the wonderful thing about it is that we
have brought the two primary interagency players to the table,
which is ATF and ICE, and we have actually produced an arms
chapter. And I think you will be very proud of what the United
States of America has put in this document in terms of trying
to get control of the arms problems and the southbound flow of
arms going to Mexico.
So it has been a maturing process over the years. I think
we have hit our stride, the interagency has hit its stride. I
think we are making a very concerted, collective, collegial
effort to get at the heart of the gun problem, and not so much
concerned about numbers, 80 percent, 90 percent, or what
percent is traceable, what percent is not as traceable; but to
really address the gun issue with tremendous respect for the
Second Amendment rights of every American citizen. And that is
what we are seeing different in this new strategy that we have
not seen before, and I think you will be very proud of that.
Senator Ensign. Just quickly, since you did put that report
together, are the guns that are coming from the United States,
are they bought legally? Are they obtained legally or
illegally, the majority of them?
Mr. Leech. Sir, I am not an expert. I feel out of my league
to qualify.
Senator Ensign. Can you get that answer for us?
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir, I will.
Senator Ensign. OK.
Mr. Leech. I mean, I can tell you in a general--only in
general terms, a little bit of both. But I can get you exact
numbers. I am just not qualified----
Senator Ensign. No. That is fine. As a matter of fact, we
will have a lot more written questions for all three of you for
the record, simply because of limited time, and I know I have
gone way over my time. But I appreciate the indulgence of the
Chairman.
Senator Pryor. Thank you very much. Those were great
questions.
Let me start with you, Mr. Leech, where you left off. You
mentioned the Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy. Is
that still scheduled to be released in the April-May time
frame?
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir. The strategy itself is with the White
House now. Our office, CNE, with the Deputy Attorney General,
as the executive agents, have been working since this past
summer with the interagency to develop the actual strategy
itself, roughly 40-something pages. That strategy is up with
the White House. It will be now interagency vetted through OMB,
and it will come to you. We will immediately get into the
implementation planning process, which typically in the last
strategy, the March 2006 strategy, expanded that basic document
up to around 260 pages, the implementation portion of it. So
you not only have a strategy, but you have the implementing
mechanisms to execute the strategy.
Senator Pryor. How long will it take you to work on the
implementation?
Mr. Leech. Sir, from the time we start--and I anticipate
once the document is delivered to you--for planning purposes,
let us say you get it May 1. I hope to have the implementation
complete, the implementation phase complete, by the end of May.
Senator Pryor. OK. So it should take you 30 days?
Mr. Leech. To complete it, but then it goes through the
coordination process, which is out of our hands at that point
and is now with the White House and OMB. Yes, sir.
Senator Pryor. OK. Well, you may have anticipated my next
question, but as you are preparing the strategy and the
implementation, who are you working with to do that? In other
words, is it just your Department? Are you reaching out to
local folks? Tell us about the perspectives in the room as you
have these discussions.
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir. Let us first talk about at the Federal
level. Of course, virtually all of the DHS law enforcement or
pseudo-law enforcement agencies within DHS, which would include
ICE, CBP, U.S. Coast Guard, would include our Policy Office,
our Intelligence and Analysis, our State and local folks, our
intergovernmental affairs--that is from the departmental side.
ODAG, Office of Deputy Attorney General, Stuart Nash will reach
out to his Justice subordinates and bring those folks to the
table. And we will go out to the remaining of the interagency.
ONDCP works with us in corralling the remaining of the
interagency together. So at the Federal level, we do quite well
in bringing the entire interagency together.
Now, we also recognize--and in terms of evolution, when we
built the first strategy, the 2006 strategy, two people pretty
much masterminded--or choreographed that strategy, myself and
Mr. Cronister sitting behind me, the two of us worked overtime
in trying to bring the interagency together.
It was a learning process. At that time, we reached out to
State and local players, but not anywhere near to the extent
that we have reached out this past effort, this most recent
effort. We sent out roughly 160 invitation letters to our State
and local and tribal partners asking for input on the strategy
itself. Not only that, but Ted Sexton, who is part of our State
and Local Law Enforcement Office within the Department of
Homeland Security, I now have partnered with him in biweekly
teleconference calls with all of our southwest border sheriffs,
roughly 23 sheriff communities, and State and local folks,
where we teleconference with them every 2 weeks.
The most recent meeting was about a week ago where we
solicited more input from our State and local partners. And if
you would allow me just to take about a minute, this is an
example of the feedback that we are getting from our State and
local partners. This is from Assistant Sheriff Jim Cooke, San
Diego County. The call went out for the strategy: Please give
me your input and tell us what you would like to see. What
would help you do your job in a national strategy? And Sheriff
Cooke came back, and he said, ``The increased cooperation and
collaboration among Federal, State, and local enforcement
agencies to address drug trafficking and drug-related violence
are encouraging and have established the foundation for the
kind of integrated and comprehensive approach that is
necessary.''
And then he listed specifics. He said, ``I would like to
see enhanced intelligence capabilities associated with the
southwest border among all agencies.'' And I can provide you
his letter, which I have made copies for everyone on the
Subcommittee. But he goes into further detail. He talks about
Fusion Centers and information sharing and what needs to be
done. That is, in fact, we addressed in the strategy.
He said, ``I would like to see increased interdiction of
drugs, drug proceeds, associated incidents of violence through
patrols, land, air, and sea, and checkpoint operations at the
ports of entry.'' Then he goes on to talk about what San Diego
County is doing in that area.
He said, ``I would like you to explore alternatives to the
prosecutorial protocols based on the amount of narcotics
seized, the various thresholds.'' It gave him an opportunity to
comment on that.
He said, ``I would like to see you disrupt and dismantle
drug-trafficking organizations through the use of a layered
approach involving Federal, State, and local law enforcement.''
He said, ``Please explore the possibility of expanding
involvement of all DHS agencies and local law enforcement task
forces, for example, providing sworn DHS personnel who can be
cross-sworn.''
``I want you to increase deployment of counter-drug
technologies and use off-the-shelf technologies.'' We developed
a chapter on technologies.
``Enhance U.S.-Mexico cooperation regarding joint counter-
drug efforts by encouraging Mexico law enforcement and intel
agencies to share or provide anti-narcotic information, camera
feeds, license plate readers, to our State and local Fusion
Centers.''
And the last one, he said, ``Authorize Federal field
personnel more latitude and discretion in making resources
available to assist with local anti-narcotic and anti-crime
initiatives.''
Mr. Leech. So the point I am trying to make is that this
did not occur in the first strategy, nothing like this. We
asked for input. Most of it was either via E-mail or phone
calls. This time we have gotten a little more robust in trying
to integrate State and local into this strategy.
Now, we are getting ready to open up the Northern Border
Counternarcotics Strategy and the Transit Zone Strategy. I
talked about that in my oral testimony. What you can expect to
see as we start securing the southwest border, you can expect
to see increased activity in the transit zone, most likely
through the northern border, and our office in 2008 submitted
to you those two strategies. Right now those are sitting at the
departmental level, and we are working with the White House to
try to develop those at an interagency level, and we will have
to build interagency--we will have to expand that to an
interagency strategy, and we will have to build implementation
plans around those strategies. And what we have learned by
developing this Southwest Border Strategy and working with the
State and local is that we will have to make every effort to
meet them face to face and include them at every level of State
and local government to make this an effective strategy.
Otherwise, it will fail if State and local are not reflected in
these strategies.
Senator Pryor. Well, that is helpful. Let me say that last
month, you were over at the House Homeland Security Committee
and testified.
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir.
Senator Pryor. And you mentioned a recommendation for the
adoption of criminal penalties for ``persons who construct and
use a tunnel or subterranean passage'' for illegal trafficking
of drugs, guns, money, or people.
Can you talk about that in more detail? Specifically I
would like to know about what is going on with the tunnels and
the subterranean passages and what the current penalties are
for that behavior and the use of those entry methods and what
you think the penalties should be to be more effective.
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir. What we have done is--and, again, pre-
decisional, and I will provide you actual legal reading from
our Office of General Counsel because they provided input. But
the use of tunnels and subterranean passages is actually a part
of the strategy. So the ONDCP reauthorization of 2006, part of
that reauthorization is the requirement to build the strategy,
and so every 2 years ONDCP has to update the original 2006
strategy with the executive agents for that.
But in the most recent reauthorization, we were required to
address tunnels and subterranean passages. And, again,
everything is pre-decisional. But I will provide you, if you
would allow me to, what the Executive Branch will let me
forward to you very soon.
Senator Pryor. Yes, I would appreciate that.
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir
Senator Pryor. That would be helpful because I think that
is an important piece that we need to understand and keep an
eye on.
Let me ask, Sheriff Gillespie, if I can--we have already
talked about you would like more resources, you would like more
Federal money, if possible, and more resources, more people,
etc. Are there any changes in the Federal law that you think
would be helpful to your job out in the field, especially as it
relates to counternarcotics?
Mr. Gillespie. Not off the top of my head, Senator. I am
one of those police practitioners that believe we have got a
lot of laws on the books, and I do not always know that
creating new ones is the best approach.
We have to be flexible with that, and I think
methamphetamine is a really good example of that. The
byproducts to make methamphetamine were readily available to
anyone, and when we, as States, restricted the availability of
those items, it significantly impacted the amount of
methamphetamine that was being made in our communities. So I
think it is one of those things you have to be flexible with,
and off the top of my head, I could not tell you right now of a
new Federal law I am hoping for.
Senator Pryor. That is fair enough.
Ms. Flener, do you have any Federal law that you think we
ought to change?
Ms. Flener. No. I would agree with what Sheriff Gillespie
has said there. We need to work better with the laws that we
have on the books. We, in Arkansas, were quite successful with
our precursor limits that we set. That reduced our local labs
by 50 percent, and then the tracking with an actual online log,
that reduced--blocking some 12,000 purchases.
We just need to do a better job and have to break down the
silos that Senator Ensign mentioned earlier, and that comes
through dialogue. The things like the Fusion Center I think go
a long way in creating an environment where we can work
together.
Senator Pryor. Good.
Mr. Gillespie. If I might, Senator.
Senator Pryor. Yes.
Mr. Gillespie. My memory just kicked in a little bit. One
of the challenges that we are projecting to see at the
enforcement level is our ability to monitor communications with
encryption and a variety of other sources that have come out.
Now, I am not prepared at this point to tell you what
exactly the law modifications would be, but I can tell you, as
early as yesterday in a meeting that I was in with other agency
heads, we are projecting in the out-years this to be a
challenge for us. Unlike a number of years ago, we were readily
accessible via wiretaps and things available to us, and we are
seeing that diminish with the advancement of technology.
Senator Pryor. OK. Good point.
Mr. Leech, I was pleased to hear you, in response to
Senator Ensign's questions, mention that ATF and ICE are
working together on the gun portion of this issue, and I do
think it is important for us to understand the facts, and the
facts have been a little bit murky.
Is it your impression that--and I know you are not an
expert on this, but maybe if you know you can tell me; or,
otherwise, you can come back to us--but is it your impression
that most of the guns going into Mexico are from the United
States? Or is it your impression that, as Senator Ensign
alluded, that it is really only a portion of the guns and that
others are coming in from other countries, and they report a
pretty high percentage back to us?
Mr. Leech. Sir, I am not an expert, and I just do not feel
qualified to provide that because I have seen what would appear
to be valid arguments on both sides. I have seen arguments for
the straight 90 percent; then I have seen arguments for, well,
that 90 percent represents only a small percentage--for
example, in 2007 I believe there were roughly 15,000 weapons
seized. Of those, 6,000 weapons were traceable back to the
United States; the other 9,000 had serial numbers taken off, or
the gun control law of 1968, the paperwork was not available on
certain ones of those, or the Federal licensees would have
already gone out of business. So there was a great portion of
those that could not be tracked. But I do not know the answer,
and I am not the expert, so I do not want to mislead you in any
way or give the impression that I know the answer. But I will
get back with you with a DHS position on that.
Senator Pryor. That would be helpful. Like I said, I think
what Senator Ensign and I would just ask is that we have a
better understanding of the real facts.
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir.
Senator Pryor. That would be very helpful if you could get
back to us on that.
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir.
Senator Pryor. The last thing I have for you, Mr. Leech, is
a concern about the Mexican drug cartels reaching out to,
perhaps recruiting U.S. street gang members and gangs, as well
as U.S. prison gangs, in their operation. Is that a valid
concern? And can you tell me about that?
Mr. Leech. Sir, if I could get back to you on that. The
DOJ, my DOJ counterparts would have, I think, better
information for you. They have gang units set up over there
that study that, and anything that I could add would just be my
own personal opinion or speculation, and I do not think that is
of any value to you. If I could get back with you, I would
prefer to do that.
Senator Pryor. That would be helpful, too, because I think
the first time I saw some news media reports where my
impression after reading the news story was that somehow the
drug cartels were operating in the United States in a lot of
these cities, and they were doing it largely through gangs. It
will help us considerably if we know the real state of the
facts on this matter and to have a better understanding of what
is really going on there.
Mr. Leech. I will speak with Mr. Nash and the Deputy
Attorney General's office and get a DOJ position on that for
you. As you said, the cartels have reached into 230 cities.
They have to recruit someone for their supply chain operations,
for collection and distribution of those drugs. I would assume
many do come from gangs. I just do not know exact numbers. But
I will get that information and provide it to you.
Senator Pryor. A corollary of that question would be: Are
they also using other organized crime entities that exist in
these areas? Are they tapping into--I will call it
``distribution infrastructure,'' for lack of a better word? If
so, how are they doing this?
Mr. Leech. Yes, sir.
Senator Pryor. We have some additional questions for the
record that I would love for you to answer. I have some,
Senator Ensign has some, and there are probably a few more
around the table that do. We will leave the record open for 15
days, and we will try to get those to you as quickly as
possible. Then if you could get those back to us within 15
days, that would be great.
I really want to thank you all for being here today. This
is very helpful to us, not only because this has been in the
news media quite a bit, but also just because it is a real
national problem, as we have talked about, and it is an
international problem with our neighbor to the south. So I
really appreciate you all helping us get a better handle on
this and understanding the Federal, State, and local
coordination that needs to happen and helping us identify ways
that we can be more effective in our fight against these drug
cartels and these drugs coming into our country.
So, with that, we will leave the record open. I know that a
few people will submit either their opening statements, like
Senator Bennet, or questions, and we will leave the record
open.
Thank you very much. We are adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:46 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0386.035
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
