[House Hearing, 106 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
INS SUPPORT FOR LOCAL EFFORTS: ARE THERE SUFFICIENT FEDERAL RESOURCES?
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
DRUG POLICY, AND HUMAN RESOURCES
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 19, 1999
__________
Serial No. 106-113
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
http://www.house.gov/reform
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
64-043 cc WASHINGTON : 2000
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland TOM LANTOS, California
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut ROBERT E. WISE, Jr., West Virginia
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
STEPHEN HORN, California PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
JOHN L. MICA, Florida PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
DAVID M. McINTOSH, Indiana ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington,
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana DC
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
MARSHALL ``MARK'' SANFORD, South DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
Carolina ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
BOB BARR, Georgia DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
DAN MILLER, Florida JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
ASA HUTCHINSON, Arkansas JIM TURNER, Texas
LEE TERRY, Nebraska THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois HAROLD E. FORD, Jr., Tennessee
GREG WALDEN, Oregon JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DOUG OSE, California ------
PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California (Independent)
HELEN CHENOWETH, Idaho
Kevin Binger, Staff Director
Daniel R. Moll, Deputy Staff Director
David A. Kass, Deputy Counsel and Parliamentarian
Carla J. Martin, Chief Clerk
Phil Schiliro, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources
JOHN L. MICA, Florida, Chairman
BOB BARR, Georgia PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
ASA HUTCHINSON, Arkansas JIM TURNER, Texas
DOUG OSE, California
Ex Officio
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Robert B. Charles, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Glee Smith, Counsel
Amy Davenport, Clerk
Micheal Yeager, Minority Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on April 19, 1999................................... 1
Statement of:
Cole, Cassie, parole office, Smyrna, GA; and Dan Bowles,
local business owner....................................... 59
Fischer, Thomas P., District Director, U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service; Bart G. Szafnicki, Assistant
District Director for Investigations, U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service; John Andrejko, Special Agent in
Charge, U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration; and Rick
Deane, U.S. Attorney, northern district of Georgia......... 5
Johnson, Mark, chief of police, Chamblee, GA; Captain Terry
Neal, city of Dalton Police Department, Dalton, GA; and
Bill Hutson, sheriff, Cobb County, GA...................... 38
Letters, statements, et cetera, submitted for the record by:
Deane, Rick, U.S. Attorney, northern district of Georgia,
prepared statement of...................................... 21
Fischer, Thomas P., District Director, U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service, prepared statement of.............. 8
Neal, Captain Terry, city of Dalton Police Department,
Dalton, GA, prepared statement of.......................... 43
Szafnicki, Bart G., Assistant District Director for
Investigations, U.S. Immigration and Naturalization
Service, prepared statement of............................. 13
INS SUPPORT FOR LOCAL EFFORTS: ARE THERE SUFFICIENT FEDERAL RESOURCES?
----------
MONDAY, APRIL 19, 1999
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and
Human Resources,
Committee on Government Reform,
Smyrna, GA.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:07 p.m., in
the City Council Chambers, Smyrna City Hall, 2800 King Street,
Smyrna, GA, Hon. John Mica (chairman of the subcommittee)
presiding.
Present: Representatives Mica and Barr.
Staff present: Amy Davenport, clerk; Glee Smith, counsel;
and Michael Yeager, minority counsel.
Mr. Mica. Good afternoon. I would like to call this meeting
of the Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resource
Subcommittee to order. I am pleased we are holding this field
hearing this afternoon in Smyrna, GA at the request of our vice
chairman, Congressman Bob Barr, who represents part of this
area. We are pleased to address the important topic at question
today, and that is ``INS Support for Local Efforts: Are There
Sufficient Federal Resources?''
I will start with an opening statement and defer to Mr.
Barr and any other statements Members of Congress will be
submitting to the record.
After that, we will hear all the panelists before we begin
any questioning.
Today, the Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human
Resources Subcommittee hearing will focus on the relationship
of the Immigration and Naturalization Service [INS] and State
and local governments. INS' resources have more than doubled
during the years of the Clinton administration. Specifically,
it is important today that we review in this hearing whether
adequate resources have been targeted toward assisting State
and local governments to meet our growing immigration
challenges, or have we, in fact, used budget increases simply
to be poured on the current organization and administration
activities of INS. It is hoped that we can deal with an agency
that has had serious difficulties in the past meeting its
administrative and organizational functional responsibility and
which still is often unable to fulfill its mission, and
unfortunately maintains a poor performance record, even among
the least responsive Federal agencies.
Anyone who has tracked INS over the years knows that the
agency has many institutional management problems that have led
to very horrendous consequences. Back in 1995 and 1996,
negligent management led to the naturalization of thousands of
individuals who were not eligible for citizenship. In fact,
thousands of ineligible criminals received clearance for
citizenship while scores of eligible candidates were denied
naturalization as their paperwork and fees were lost in the INS
bureaucracy. As a result of this and other incidents over the
last several years, this subcommittee, and also through the
efforts of Representative Smith of Texas and Representative
Rogers of Kentucky, respective chairs of the authorization and
appropriation subcommittees in the House, has vigorously
conducted oversight of INS management to ensure that the agency
cleans up its act. This hearing is a continuation of that
important oversight responsibility, which again, has been taken
on by the authorizers and the appropriators.
However, the purpose of this hearing is not to criticize
INS, but rather to focus on what improvements can be made to
the enforcement of our immigration laws through a partnership
between all levels of government and the private sector. So
today, we will hear from not only Federal agencies, but State
and local authorities who deal with INS on a daily basis. We
hope today to hear from INS and other Federal representatives
about what INS is doing right in this part of Georgia,
hopefully to provide us with an example at the Federal level.
This hearing is also an opportunity to hear, as I said, from
State and local representatives of law enforcement and
business, who can describe their partnership and their
successful activities with the agency and tell us how INS is
working with them in their communities. This hearing will
provide our witnesses with an opportunity to make helpful
suggestions which I hope we can return to Washington to improve
Federal policy.
Hearings such as this one today in this local community are
very important. Through them, we can learn a great deal and I
am looking forward to hearing today's testimony and the
testimony of our witnesses who so graciously appeared both
voluntarily and those under subpoena.
I want to thank first of all, to conclude my remarks, the
distinguished gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Barr, who also serves
as vice chair of this subcommittee, both for hosting our
subcommittee, for his interest in this most important topic of
how we make a Federal agency responsive with State, local and
private sector efforts, and how we, in fact, improve the entire
process of immigration and naturalization and enforcement, as
required by our Federal statute.
So I am pleased at this time now to yield to Mr. Barr, vice
chairman of our subcommittee and recognize him for an opening
statement.
Mr. Barr. Thank you. And I would like to personally welcome
you, Mr. Chairman, to our area here in Smyrna, GA, my hometown.
I know you have already commented on the wonderful facilities
here, which is the primary reason that we chose this venue for
today's hearing. The facilities here, under the leadership of
Max Bacon and the City Council of the last several years really
are an example of our urban and suburban redevelopment that
have received national recognition. We hope you will have a
chance today to go across the street and see the new law
enforcement facilities as well, with which our first panel of
witnesses are certainly very familiar, given the fact that our
local law enforcement under Police Chief Stanley Hook does an
awful lot of work with INS and with other Federal agencies, so
I know they are very proud, as I am, to have you here today.
This hearing is the result not only of Chairman Mica's
desire to have more field hearings and not simply limit our
hearings on important legislative, appropriations and oversight
matters to those we hold in Washington, but to hold hearings
out in the different districts around the country so that we
(1) can hear more local officials and U.S. officials who are in
those communities, to hear directly from them how we can do a
better job and the resources that they need to do a better job.
It also enables the members of the committee to hear more
directly and understand more directly the concerns of our local
officials and our Federal officials working out in the
different regions and districts around the country.
This also reflects the view of the leadership in the
Congress that more of these hearings, not just for the
Government Reform Committee and its subcommittees, but also
other committees of the Congress, should be holding more
hearings in different districts around the country rather than
simply limit ourselves to holding hearings in Washington.
As the chairman indicated, the main thrust of these
hearings today--and we have three panels of very distinguished
witnesses--will be to learn first-hand what problems, if any--
and one can presume that there are always problems in whatever
we do--are confronting our immigration effort in all of its
applications, not just INS, but DEA and its work, and the U.S.
Attorney's Office and its work, but also with regard to the
relationship between our Federal law enforcement officials--and
our local law enforcement officials. Immigration, of course, is
a Federal matter; yet, it affects local law enforcement because
of the problems of crime that inevitably, to one degree or
another, are attendant to illegal immigration. Trying to foster
a close working relationship between our Federal law
enforcement agencies and our State agencies helps better
protect our citizens in all aspects. So, that is something that
we are very much concerned about here today.
The focus of the hearing, as the chairman indicated, is not
on the problems, although some discussion of the problems
certainly is necessary to lay the groundwork for developing
solutions. I share the chairman's concern that over the last
several years, the funds that have been authorized and
appropriated by Congress for the interior enforcement effort by
INS have increased dramatically. Yet, what I am hearing--and I
do not think I am alone in this, other Members are hearing
also--that those significantly increased resources are not
getting down to the district and the working level. Quite the
contrary, what I hear is that not only are the districts,
interior districts such as Atlanta, not receiving increases in
funding as mandated by the Congress, reflective of the
increased appropriations, but are being told to cut back in
terms of all of the indices that one normally would use to
gauge whether or not there are sufficient resources in the
district offices, everything from overtime to travel to use of
cell phones, moneys that are used in undercover operations and
so forth. So this is of concern to us because Congress is
trying to get the resources to our districts and through them
to support the local law enforcement needs. Yet there seems to
be somewhat of a gulf there and we want to hear from these
witnesses today, to hear what, if any, the nature of those
problems are. Again, not just to highlight a problem, but to
lay the groundwork for them determining and us determining how
we can do a better job of assisting, because the problems of
illegal immigration and the enforcement of our immigration laws
in the interior is a tremendous concern to all of us.
So we appreciate the law enforcement officials before you
right now, Mr. Chairman. I have had the honor of working as a
U.S. Attorney with three of them; that is, with Mr. Fischer and
Mr. Szafnicki of the INS. I had the honor of working with Mr.
Deane while I served as U.S. Attorney and he now heads that
office, the northern district of Georgia, with tremendous
integrity and responsibility. I have known Mr. Andrejko since I
was elected to the Congress, he heads up, as the Special Agent
in Charge, the DEA operation out of Atlanta which covers a wide
area in the southeastern United States.
So I commend this panel to you and to our listening
audience. We appreciate very much the media being here today to
help us in our effort to educate the public as to improving our
law enforcement effort in the area of immigration laws.
Hopefully through this hearing today, through this initial
panel focusing on the Federal effort, through panel No. 2
focusing on local law enforcement and panel No. 3 focusing on
some of the civilian side, the civil sector, we can really, Mr.
Chairman, do a good job of helping you as the chairman and
through you our full committee. Ultimately imparting that
knowledge to the Appropriations Committee so that where
adjustments need to be made, as I think they do when we look at
the resources that have been appropriated, yet not available to
the field, those adjustments can be made. When we see some of
the recent policies coming out of Washington that relate to
release from detention of aliens, that really I think in the
view of our local officials and our district officials would
pose a danger to the community, why those policies are in fact
coming out of Washington and why, despite the fact that there
are more aliens being deported, the number of those with
criminal records is dropping dramatically?
So these, Mr. Chairman, are some of the questions that I
have that I know are on the minds of some of the witnesses
today. And again, I appreciate you coming down to Georgia to
hold this hearing and help all of us in our community do a
better job of utilizing the law enforcement resources that we
have to protect our citizens.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mica. I thank the gentleman from Georgia.
At this time, I also wanted to recognize Mike Yeager. Mr.
Yeager is representing the minority, the ranking member of our
subcommittee is Mrs. Mink from Hawaii who was not able to be
with us, but I recognize his participation. We cannot conduct
oversight hearings or really any committee or subcommittee
functions without concurrence of the minority, under the rules
of the committee and the House, so we are pleased that he is
joining us today.
I will also leave the record open, without objection, for 5
days after the hearing for additional comments or testimony for
the record. Without objection so ordered.
I would like to welcome our first panel today. Our first
panel has been partially introduced by the gentleman from
Georgia. We have with us Mr. Tom Fischer, District Director of
the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service. We have Mr.
Bart Szafnicki--you are most welcome, and you are the U.S.
Immigration and Naturalization Service representative. And Mr.
John Andrejko, Special Agent of DEA; and Mr. Rick Deane, the
U.S. Attorney of the northern district of Georgia.
Gentlemen, welcome to our panel. Now let me set a couple of
the ground rules. First of all, we have authorizing committees
in Congress and we have appropriating committees in Congress.
We are somewhat unique in that we are an investigations and
oversight subcommittee of Congress. Acting in that capacity,
that is why we are here today. We will swear you in in just a
moment.
Additionally, I might tell you that we ask you to limit
your oral comments, your verbal remarks to the subcommittee, to
5 minutes. If you have lengthy statements or additional
information that you would like to see included as part of the
record, we will be glad to do that.
So those are a little bit of our ground rules and then we
will go through the whole panel with your opening remarks to
the subcommittee, and we will proceed with questions
thereafter.
So our first order of business, gentlemen, is to stand and
be sworn in. Stand and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Mica. Let the record reflect that the witnesses
answered in the affirmative, and again, I welcome you to our
panel today and we will start with Mr. Tom Fischer, the
District Director for the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization
Service. Mr. Fischer, you are welcomed and recognized, sir.
STATEMENTS OF THOMAS P. FISCHER, DISTRICT DIRECTOR, U.S.
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE; BART G. SZAFNICKI,
ASSISTANT DISTRICT DIRECTOR FOR INVESTIGATIONS, U.S.
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE; JOHN ANDREJKO, SPECIAL
AGENT IN CHARGE, U.S. DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION; AND RICK
DEANE, U.S. ATTORNEY, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Mr. Fischer. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and distinguished
members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify on this most important issue of INS' support for local
efforts and whether those resources are sufficient.
As the District Director for the U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service in Atlanta, GA for over 10 years, I have
witnessed a dramatic change in the enforcement mission of the
Service. During the early period of my tenure, immigration
enforcement was confined primarily to administrative arrests of
illegal aliens and the occasional collateral investigation of
immigration benefit adjudications. However, more recently, the
enforcement mission has grown to include joint operations and
task force assignments with other Federal, State and local law
enforcement, as well as immigration-specific investigations
against violators of immigration law. There are many
explanations for this expansion of duties, including
legislative changes, modern transportation to the United States
from abroad, and a strong and vibrant economy, to name a few.
Immigration studies have placed the number of estimated
illegal aliens in the United States at over 5 million. While
increases in the border patrol have deterred many seeking entry
along the southwest border, these efforts alone cannot control
this influx. It is estimated half of the resident illegal alien
population entered the United States in some form of legal
status, only to have later violated the terms of their
admission. It is well known that the majority of those seeking
entry into the United States usually gravitate to the interior
of the United States, at which time it falls upon district
enforcement personnel of INS or some local agency to deal with
this problem.
The Atlanta office has attempted to be proactive in its
approach to this increasing problem. An example of this
District's approach was an initiative that this office launched
in the summer of 1995, called Operation South PAW. In a joint
operation with the U.S. Border Patrol personnel on detail to
Atlanta and Special Agents and Deportation Officers from the
Atlanta District, over 4000 illegal workers were arrested in a
30-day period from 45 different countries. It is believed to be
the largest interior enforcement effort in the history of the
INS. The income of the illegal workers exceeded $55 million in
gross annual salaries that was redirected to legal workers. In
addition, 20 criminal prosecutions were initiated and 10
employers were administratively fined for immigration
violations. This is just one of many efforts initiated by this
office. We are fortunate in our enforcement efforts to be able
to work with some of the finest and most professional law
enforcement agencies at all levels within our four-State area
of responsibility.
Immediately following Operation South PAW, the INS office
formed a joint partnership with the Dalton Police Department
and began one of the first immigration task forces in the
Nation. This joint effort has positively demonstrated that by
working together on matters of mutual interest, INS and local
agencies can work together with their respective jurisdictions,
to the benefit of the local community. This community policing
effort has led to a better understanding of the nature of
immigration problems and the solving of such problems by both
agencies in a reasonable and prudent manner. In addition to
joint enforcement efforts, this task force works within the
community educating employers and civic organizations on the
requirements of immigration law. The task force works very hard
at diminishing the fears of victimized illegal aliens from
reporting crimes, by focusing its efforts toward the criminal
activity associated with illegal immigration.
The Atlanta District is responsible for all immigration
enforcement in a four-State area, including Georgia, North and
South Carolina and Alabama. As recently as 1992, the District
had enforcement officers only in Atlanta, GA and Charlotte, NC.
In 1992, a one-man office was opened in Birmingham, AL. The
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act
of 1996 included a section to ensure an immigration enforcement
presence was in every State and in 1997, INS assigned three
special agents to the office at Charleston, SC. I am pleased to
report that the recent fiscal year 1999 appropriation included
a provision to increase the presence of INS special agents and
deportation officers to certain States identified by Congress
to work more closely with State and local law enforcement
agencies. Three of the States identified; Georgia, North
Carolina and South Carolina, which are within the Atlanta
District, have been included in this appropriation, which is
known as Quick Response Teams, or QRTs. The Atlanta District is
scheduled to receive an additional 35 officers, including 19
special agents, 2 supervisory special agents, 11 detention
enforcement officers, 2 deportation officers and 1 supervisory
deportation officer. The cities selected for these assignments
include Atlanta, GA; Dalton, GA; Savannah, GA; Albany, GA;
Charlotte, NC; Raleigh, NC; Winston, NC, and Greer, SC. This
will bring the total number of INS enforcement personnel to 128
officers.
The Atlanta District is committed to working with State and
local law enforcement agencies within its areas of
responsibility and with the assistance of Congress and the
administration, looks forward to implementation of the quick
response teams through the States of Georgia, North Carolina
and South Carolina.
Thank you for your attention and I am pleased to be here
and I look forward to answering any questions that you or
Congressman Barr or others may have.
Mr. Mica. Thank you. And as I said, we will defer
questions. I would like to recognize Mr. Bart Szafnicki, who is
with the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service also.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Fischer follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.002
Mr. Szafnicki. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Congressman
Barr, Mr. Yeager, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify here also.
Recently, there has been much rhetoric over the nature of
INS' role in the enforcement of the immigration laws in the
interior of the United States. There has been harsh criticism
over the agency's proposal of a new interior enforcement
strategy, shifting emphasis away from the illegal aliens at
worksite locations. It has been suggested by some that this
shift is a capitulation by the administration in enforcing
immigration laws inside the United States.
First, I will agree that no strategy should eliminate or
diminish any enforcement effort within the United States.
Worksite enforcement, like any other enforcement effort, should
be an effective tool in the difficult task of removing and
deterring illegal migration to the United States. However, the
simple removal of large numbers of illegal aliens without a
sound strategy and purpose is futile and a waste of taxpayer
dollars. INS' mission has grown dramatically over the years.
While some may see our mission as quite simply to locate and
arrest illegal aliens, enforcement efforts must also address
the cause of the illegal immigration.
The interior enforcement strategy which complements INS
border management efforts targets the agency's limited
enforcement resources on removing criminals and other illegal
aliens, disrupting smuggling rings, responding to community
reports and complaints about illegal immigration, stopping
immigration benefit and document fraud and enforcing
immigration law among employers. Here are but a few of the
activities of the Atlanta agents.
The Atlanta District is currently investigating a major H1B
visa fraud operation which is suspected of illegally bringing
in large numbers of illegal aliens from India to ostensibly
perform skilled labor in the computer industry. It is suspected
that few, if any, of these aliens are qualified for entry into
the United States and this operation is nothing more than a
front for a more sophisticated alien smuggling ring. This ring
brings in people, not in the dark of night across the borders
or in unseaworthy ocean vessels, but right through our Nation's
front doors by abusing and manipulating the visa system. It
attacks the very heart and integrity of our legal, controlled
immigration system. If left unchecked, it will break down the
system we know today to lawfully control and admit foreign
nationals into the United States.
In February 1998, the Atlanta office began implementation
of a pilot program known as the National Criminal Alien Removal
Plan. This plan was implemented at three metro Atlanta county
jails--Cobb, Gwinnett and DeKalb. From February 1998 through
February 1999, over 1,035 foreign-born nationals from 75
different countries have been identified and removed or
detained pending removal from the United States due to serious
criminal convictions. Many, if not most, of these individuals
would have gone undetected were it not for this program.
Here are just a few examples of the type of individuals
encountered.
Felix Ngana, a citizen of Kenya entered the United States
as a foreign student in 1993 to attend Beulah Heights Bible
College. He was encountered at the Cobb County Detention
Facility, having been arrested for aggravated stalking,
carrying a concealed weapon, burglary and obstructing an
officer. He had been previously arrested and convicted in 1997
for simple battery. He was subsequently convicted for the above
offenses on January 4.
Alfred Paez-Denada, an illegal alien from Mexico living in
Lilburn, GA was arrested on the charge of public drunkenness.
He was encountered at the DeKalb County Jail and a check with
the National Crime Information Center revealed that Mr. Paez
had 55 arrests in California and Arizona and 26 criminal
convictions for such crimes as larceny, burglary, theft and
shoplifting. He had been ordered deported from the United
States on four previous occasions.
In 1992, then Attorney General William Barr directed INS to
dedicate a number of INS special agents to assist communities
in combating ethnic violent gangs. The Atlanta office has
dedicated 10 special agents to this effort. Agents are assigned
to work with DEA, FBI and the High Intensity Drug Trafficking
Area [HIDTA], as well as specified, identified communities with
known or suspected gang activities. One such community is
Gainesville, GA, where in addition to a number of illegal
aliens working and residing, there are also no fewer than six
gangs. The murder of a 14 year old boy by a known illegal alien
gang member on June 1, 1998 led INS to an aggressive
enforcement effort, along with the FBI and the Hall County
Sheriff's Office, the Hall County District Attorney's Office as
well as the office of the U.S. Attorney in the northern
district of Georgia. Since this effort, there has been a
diminished influence of these gangs in the Hall County area.
In 1995, INS Atlanta undertook a unique concept in concert
with the Dalton, GA Police Department and initiated the
Nation's first truly joint immigration task force. The Dalton
Immigration Task Force has approached the immigration problem
as a community policing effort designed to educate employers
and the public, as well as to enforce Federal and State laws
specific to the problem of illegal immigration. To date, this
task force has been responsible for the identification and
removal of over 875 illegal aliens, 168 criminal aliens have
been arrested on State or Federal felony charges. Six joint
worksite enforcement operations and over 60 employer education
seminars have been conducted.
These are but a few examples of the nature and type of work
being conducted by agents of the Atlanta District. The
District's authorized investigative strength is 65 positions, a
total of 48 special agents, 5 immigration enforcement agents,
and 11 support personnel. The District is responsible for the
enforcement of the Nation's immigration laws in the four States
of North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama and Georgia. This
area represents 372 different counties and covers 188,000
square miles. This area has well over 1,000 separate State and
municipal law enforcement agencies plus other Federal law
enforcement entities. Currently, the Atlanta office has four
locations with enforcement personnel at Atlanta; Charlotte, NC;
Charleston, SC, and Birmingham, AL. Birmingham, AL currently
has only one special agent assigned to cover the entire State.
INS alone has the statutory authority to arrest an
individual for being illegally in this country. Quite simply,
when it comes to the arrest of illegal aliens for immigration
violations, INS is the only game in town. Unlike other Federal
law enforcement agencies who often share jurisdiction with
State and local law enforcement, INS, if it fails to respond,
leaves many jurisdictions with few alternatives.
INS' interior enforcement has been hit with increased
requests from other Federal, State and local law enforcement to
head up or participate in criminal enforcement efforts against
foreign-born nationals. This fact, coupled with new laws, has
required INS special agents to step up its efforts in the area
of criminal enforcement and at the same time attempt to address
its administrative responsibilities.
While the Border Patrol has deservedly received an increase
in its personnel and resources, INS' interior enforcement has
witnessed little or no growth. From 1994 through 1998, INS'
overall enforcement budget grew by about $1.3 billion and 7,493
positions. Most of the increased enforcement funding was
directed at the southwest border, where a buildup of an
additional 4,000 Border Patrol personnel was intended to
prevent illegal entry. During the same period, INS requested
1,167 positions and $163.2 million for worksite enforcement
initiatives. The Service received 525 positions and $56.4
million for worksite enforcement initiatives. Border Patrol
enforcement success has led directly to the evolution of more
sophisticated alien smuggling organizations attempting to evade
this increased presence. As pressure is exerted along the
southwest border, criminal groups are devising new routes and
methods to ply their trade in human cargo. In order to
complement the Border Patrol strategy, interior enforcement
must be prepared to respond to these criminal smuggling
organizations while simultaneously managing its other
responsibilities.
In an attempt to meet these demands, INS has developed an
interior enforcement strategy designed to focus its finite
resources at the underpinnings of illegal immigration. These
efforts should diminish the ability of illegal aliens to gain a
foothold in the United States and lessen the impact on local
law enforcement throughout the country.
I too thank you for your time and I would be happy to
answer questions at the conclusion of this panel.
Mr. Mica. Thank you. We will defer questions, as I said. I
would like to recognize the presence of the Congressman, U.S.
Representative from this area, Johnny Isakson, who has joined
us and also invite him to come up and join the panel. We would
love to have you on this side.
Mr. Isakson. No, with you two stars, I think I am going to
stay back here. Thank you though, Mr. Chairman. [Laughter.]
Mr. Mica. Thank you, sir.
Now I would like to recognize Mr. John Andrejko, who is a
Special Agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Szafnicki follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.007
Mr. Andrejko. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and
distinguished members of the subcommittee. I am honored to
appear before you today to provide oral comments regarding INS'
support for local efforts and resource needs.
I am the Special Agent in Charge of DEA's Atlanta Field
Division, which consists of the States of Georgia, Tennessee,
North Carolina and South Carolina. Within these four States,
DEA maintains 20 field offices staffed by 166 DEA special
agents and 160 State and local task force officers from
surrounding communities.
During the past several years, the Atlanta Field Division
has experienced an increase in methamphetamine trafficking and
abuse and methamphetamine is increasingly being seen in areas
that previously had not been exposed to this most powerful
stimulant. Historically, the suppliers of methamphetamine
throughout the United States have been outlaw motorcycle gangs
and numerous other independent trafficking groups. Although
these groups continue to produce and distribute
methamphetamine, organized crime, poly-drug trafficking groups
operating from Mexico, California and Texas now dominate
wholesale methamphetamine trafficking in the United States.
These trafficking groups are increasingly moving this product
eastward to markets in the Atlanta Field Division and DEA finds
itself increasingly investigating Mexico-based trafficking
organizations.
DEA has formed partnerships and implemented task force
operations with many of the Federal, State and local law
enforcement agencies in this division to develop enforcement
strategies directed at these trafficking groups. The INS has
participated in many of these planning sessions and has offered
to provide manpower to these task force groups. Unfortunately,
because of their many responsibilities and limited enforcement
agent personnel, they have not been able to assign INS agents
to all of the initiatives in the offices throughout the Atlanta
Division.
DEA welcomes the expertise, investigative skills and
cooperative efforts which INS has contributed over the years
and the INS plays an integral role in today's drug enforcement
mission. So often, many of the methamphetamine traffickers who
are arrested in this division are illegal aliens or foreign
nationals with ties to Mexico-based organizations. To assist us
in our investigations, INS has assigned one agent full time to
one of the DEA task force groups in Atlanta and we sincerely
appreciate all the outstanding assistance this agent provides.
DEA offices in Charlotte, NC, and Charleston, SC, also have
received tremendous help by INS enforcement personnel assigned
to those areas.
INS enjoys an excellent reputation within the law
enforcement community and its agents are recognized for their
dedication, hard work and cooperative spirit they bring to
their assignments. What INS needs in this area in my view is
additional manpower and resources in the area of criminal
enforcement to be able to increase its commitment to work with
Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies.
This concludes my comments and I would be more than happy
to answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Mica. Thank you and we will now recognize Mr. Rick
Deane who is the U.S. Attorney in the northern district of
Georgia. You are recognized, sir.
Mr. Deane. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished
members of the subcommittee. I should preface my comments by
saying particularly to Mr. Barr that my comments, as I noticed
as I was handing them out earlier, do not bear an attribution
line and that is of course due to the fact that my secretary
and your former secretary is not presently in the office--an
oversight that never would have happened had she been there.
[Laughter.]
But she sends her regards and she is recovering quite well.
Mr. Barr. Thank you, Rick.
Mr. Deane. Within the northern district of Georgia, Mr.
Chairman, we have launched strategies to reduce crime involving
illegal aliens and methamphetamine trafficking, as was just
mentioned. We are presently employing those strategies in
Gainesville, Cartersville, Dalton, Rome and Calhoun. The
strategies focus upon shared intelligence and collaborative law
enforcement involving Federal, State and local law enforcement.
These collaborative efforts have provided us with intelligence
that methamphetamine trafficking is expanding in north Georgia.
Although not officially a task force, each participant in the
strategies functions as a task force member. One important
result of the collaboration is to provide, or rather to avoid,
duplication of effort or wasted effort when one agency has part
of the puzzle and another some other part. INS is critically
important to these strategies.
For example, if an alien is arrested by local authorities,
INS is generally immediately notified. INS immediately begins
to investigate the alien's background. Should the alien be an
illegal alien who has been previously deported, INS may notify
our office because the alien may be prosecuted for illegally
re-entering the United States after having been deported.
Deportation alone has already been proven unsuccessful since
the alien has returned at least once, and often more than once.
Of course, not every illegal alien who has re-entered the
United States faces a realistic threat of Federal prosecution.
The number of illegal re-entry cases prosecuted by our office
has doubled in the last 4 years, although our prosecutive
guidelines have tightened. In 1995, this office prosecuted 75
defendants for illegally re-entering the country, essentially
prosecuting all referred defendants being found in the country
after being previously arrested and deported. Because of 1996
changes in the law, in 1997, we began to prosecute only those
defendants previously convicted of an aggravated felony in this
country prior to being deported. Our 1997 numbers still rose to
103 prosecutions. In 1998, we prosecuted 164 defendants on
immigration charges and the number continues to rise. These
cases arise from charges that the alien has committed such
offenses as aggravated assault, robbery, child molestation and
other aggravated felonies.
Currently, INS typically refers to us for prosecution
defendants with criminal history levels of three or better
under the Federal sentencing guidelines, the defendants having
prior convictions for drug trafficking or for other violent
felonies. Under these circumstances, the typical defendant
faces a Federal guideline range of roughly 71 to 87 months.
Thus, the INS participation is critical in removing aggravated
felons and preventing their re-entry into the United States
after deportation and being once again arrested.
INS, as a collaborative partner, also contributes in an
equally important way by sharing intelligence and by assisting
in investigations, even if the investigation results in a
Federal charge not involving immigration, or a State charge.
Not infrequently, illegal aliens who are arrested will possess
false immigration documents for use by themselves and by
others. In such cases, the alien may be charged with violations
of State forgery statutes. INS involvement is very important to
support these State prosecutions.
INS and its investigative resources play an important role
in maintaining public safety throughout the northern district
of Georgia.
I thank you for this opportunity to speak here.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Deane follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.011
Mr. Mica. I thank our panelists for their testimony and I
would like to start the questioning of our panel, if I may, and
our witnesses.
First of all, Mr. Fischer, how long have you been the
District Director of INS?
Mr. Fischer. Since January 1988, Mr. Chairman, a little
over 11 years.
Mr. Mica. My recollection is--I came to Congress in 1993--
from 1993 to 1998, Congress has more than doubled the INS
budget, from $1.5 to $3.8 billion. During these years, INS
staffing has increased from just over 18,000 to nearly 29,000
permanent positions. If you recall, back in 1993 or 1994, how
many personnel did you have in your District?
Mr. Fischer. If I may answer it this way, when I came to
Atlanta in 1988, I had approximately 280 employees for the four
States, and this was in the entire INS realm of activity--
investigations, detention, deportation, examinations,
inspections.
Mr. Mica. What was the number?
Mr. Fischer. Approximately 280. I had that same number, Mr.
Chairman, approximately 9 months to a year ago, only most
recently have I received resources that took me over my initial
1988 level.
Mr. Mica. So until about 8 months ago, you still had in the
280 to 300 range?
Mr. Fischer. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mica. Where has all the money and the staff been going,
to your knowledge? Why has this area not been the recipient of
the largesse of more than doubling the budget, $1.5--I am only
talking from 1993 to 1998--$1.3 to $3.8 billion. You have gone
from 18,000 employees to 29,000 permanent positions, and you
still do not have the personnel.
I think in your testimony, did you not tell me they are
still on the way? One of you all testified.
Mr. Fischer. The QRTs, the Quick Response Teams, those are
now currently being announced.
Mr. Mica. What is your FTE equivalent full time positions
now?
Mr. Fischer. Approximately 300.
Mr. Mica. 300? Right now?
Mr. Fischer. Yes, sir, for the entire district.
Mr. Mica. So you still do not have the resources at the
local level and we have doubled the expenditures and almost
doubled the personnel. Amazing.
Now I heard the figure of 1,035 removed, this was illegals.
Was that you, Mr. Szafnicki, who gave us those figures?
Mr. Szafnicki. Yes, sir, it was----
Mr. Mica. From February 1998 to February 1999, 1,035.
Mr. Szafnicki. That was just for the National Criminal
Alien Removal Program, the county jail program that we
initiated. That was not our total number of removals.
Mr. Mica. And how does that compare to say, 1997 to 1998?
Mr. Szafnicki. Well, again, that figure that I was
referring to was a program that was only instituted in February
1998, it does not bear----
Mr. Mica. So we would not have any----
Mr. Szafnicki. I have nothing to draw upon for previous
years.
Mr. Mica. No figures from prior to that.
Were there any other personnel from INS that you used to
achieve that number of removals?
Mr. Szafnicki. No, I just simply used my investigative
resource staff that I had available to me. Now, I was given a
few additional positions as immigration enforcement agents to
help me initiate that pilot program, but with the few resources
that we did receive, we were able to accomplish well over 1,000
individuals that were processed for removal. They have either
been removed or detained for removal.
Mr. Mica. Now do you attribute part of the ability, with
limited resources, limited dollars and limited personnel, to
achieving those numbers of removals by cooperative efforts from
other agencies? And if so, can you tell me how you were able to
do this?
Mr. Szafnicki. Absolutely. We entered into a collaborative
agreement with Cobb County, Gwinnett County and DeKalb County
to basically process individuals that are encountered at their
institutions through the intake system. Those individuals that
are encountered that are illegal aliens with substantial
criminal histories are immediately identified, processed for
removal and set up for deportation hearings, and we try to
expedite them through their system to get them into our system
basically.
Mr. Mica. Mr. Fischer, you talked about personnel, how
about hard dollars? You said that you had basically the same
number of personnel, 1988, 1993 and last year. Has your budget
doubled at this district level in that period?
Mr. Fischer. No, sir, it has not.
Mr. Mica. What kind of increases have we seen?
Mr. Fischer. We have had increases in our inspections
program, we have had decreases in our investigations program.
Our current budget for this fiscal year for operating, that Mr.
Szafnicki and his investigative staff has to utilize, as
Congressman Barr gave examples--undercover operations, vehicle
maintenance, travel, things of that nature--we are down 50
percent from last year.
Mr. Mica. For what?
Mr. Fischer. For investigations.
Mr. Mica. Was it Operation South PAW--did I catch that
right?
Mr. Fischer. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mica. Is that purely an INS effort or was that with
local and State also?
Mr. Fischer. It was primarily an INS effort and we utilized
cooperative agreements with the State and local where
appropriate. For example, the use of National Guard armories
for processing areas. We coordinated with the locals for
traffic control and security so that people would not be
injured when we did an onsite survey of the work force. But it
was primarily an INS operation.
Mr. Mica. And let me ask a question as far as the problems
relating to the--we passed legislation in 1996 and I think we
passed some other legislation giving different mandates to INS
as far as enforcement, deportation, et cetera, which I would
imagine has increased your workload. I think these figures
reflect that you have also handled a significant number of
additional cases.
Mr. Fischer. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mica. If you were in our position to change Federal law
or Federal policy, is there something we should be changing? Is
the law--are the laws that we passed requiring this expedited
additional enforcement emphasis, is it working well? What
changes would you recommend?
Mr. Fischer. I feel the law is very appropriate, it appears
to be very responsive to the community, the feedback that I get
from, whether it be residents or elected officials or law
enforcement officials. One of the difficulties that we have--
for example, the mandatory incarceration of criminal aliens,
one of the problems that we have at times is the sufficient
funding to ensure that this criminal alien is not released from
incarceration until the entire process is accomplished, which
should amount to removal from this country. And as Mr.
Szafnicki testified to, we are getting very, very large numbers
of people. I suspect in the State of Georgia, there are over
100,000 illegal workers right now, and that may be a
conservative estimate. And many of these individuals will come
into the local judicial system in some form or fashion. And the
law is responsive, we have difficulty though sometimes ensuring
that we can complete the entire mission; by that, the removal,
the hearing, the incarceration costs. And that's because of
budget and personnel problems.
Mr. Mica. Well, part of the reason for this hearing is to
figure out where the dollars have gone. Obviously, they have
not gone to the district level. We have increased your
workload, increased your areas of responsibility and it also
sounds like the detention problem, because of the sheer
numbers, and then the process that you must go through,
requires some staying power. How are you coping with that and
is that becoming a serious problem or reaching a crisis level?
Mr. Fischer. Well, it does reach a crisis at times with the
human factor, the overtime, the stress and strain on the
vehicles, the contracting we have to do with local officials
for jail space where we have to go out and bid on it.
Mr. Mica. So that is where you were incarcerating these
folks until the process is complete.
Mr. Fischer. Yes, sir. There is no INS detention facility
in the Atlanta District. We will either remove individuals to
INS facilities in other parts of the United States through the
Justice, JPAC system or we will contract with local enforcement
entities, sheriffs, whatever, and house our prisoners there
until a hearing can be performed before an Immigration judge.
Mr. Mica. Is your budget adequate to sustain the level of
your experience?
Mr. Fischer. Not all the times, sir. Sometimes, we have to
ensure that our input matches our budget.
Mr. Mica. Are any of these folks being released?
Mr. Fischer. No, sir, not in my District.
Mr. Mica. So you are getting by with the cooperation of
these local folks?
Mr. Fischer. Yes, they are doing a very good job for us.
Mr. Mica. Let me, if I may, have a couple of concluding
questions to other panelists. The U.S. Attorney, Mr. Deane, you
had talked a bit about repeat offenders and the problem of
repeat offenders. You say that has doubled in the last, was it
year or two? Could you tell us the situation dealing with those
individuals who have been deported and then they are back again
on the scene?
Mr. Deane. What I said, Congressman, was that the number of
prosecutions; that is, cases that we have actually prosecuted,
I believe over the last 4 years has doubled.
Mr. Mica. OK. What about repeat offenders, these folks that
we are deporting and seeing back, is that becoming a problem or
is it pretty much the same as it has been?
Mr. Deane. No, I think it is certainly becoming a problem.
The concern for us is figuring out which of the various
potential defendants that are out there will we prosecute, the
same as it is a problem for Mr. Szafnicki, on the front end of
trying to figure out which ones should be referred.
If you merely re-enter the country after having been
deported, our focus is on the aggravated underlying felony that
got you deported initially.
Mr. Mica. And you testified that since the 1996 law, that
your emphasis is prosecution only of aggravated felons--those
with aggravated felony charges.
Mr. Deane. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mica. That is correct?
Mr. Deane. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Mr. Mica. So what are you doing about the rest of them?
Mr. Deane. Well, quite a number of the rest of them never
get referred to us because we have worked out with the
Immigration Service on the front end those cases that they
should focus on that we can then progress through the system.
So they know on the front end the kinds of defendants that we
are looking for that we can get out. We are looking for the
worst of the worst.
Mr. Mica. And the others, are they falling through the
cracks?
Mr. Deane. Well, they are falling through the cracks in the
sense that they do not come into the criminal justice system,
but they are nonetheless being deported and detained.
Mr. Mica. Let me ask you a question. We had a congressional
delegation which I chaired, which we took to Central and South
America. Of course, when we got to El Salvador, the President
of El Salvador hit us with a barrage--we had deported an
incredible number of folks to El Salvador. Do you notify the
local El Salvadoran authorities when they are deported?
Mr. Deane. Yes, sir, we do.
Mr. Mica. The country police are notified?
Mr. Deane. Yes, sir, they are. And as a matter of fact, we
have a very regular meeting of all the law enforcement
executives here and that was just something we have discussed
over the last----
Mr. Mica. They were also telling us that it is sort of a
revolving door, because they are there, they have learned
criminal techniques in our detention facilities from others, or
in prison and they are turning around and going back.
Mr. Deane. Right.
Mr. Mica. So we do not have a way to stop the revolving
door and have almost an open border, a commercial border anyway
on the southwest.
Anything we need to do to revise this 1996 law to give you
better direction or should we make it more inclusive,
exclusive? Any recommendations on changing the Federal statute
what we have done?
Mr. Deane. The 1996 law actually served to expand the
definition of those persons that we could end up prosecuting.
Mr. Mica. Right.
Mr. Deane. And so our situation is that we have got the
statute in place. Our problem is much like----
Mr. Mica. The resources to carry out the job.
Mr. Deane. That is exactly right.
Mr. Mica. How is your budget doing?
Mr. Deane. Our budget is not adequate to do all that we
would like to do, I will leave it at that. But we are
absolutely going to focus--we were in meetings this morning
talking about the things that we can cut back on in order to
better accommodate the INS cases, because some of these cases
involve people who are just an absolute danger to the
community, so we have to prosecute them. And we will make
whatever adjustments we need to, to try to prosecute them.
Mr. Mica. From your standpoint, is there anything we can do
to expedite to provide quick passage out of the country--
quicker passage out of the country for these folks?
Mr. Deane. Well, Congressman, for the ones that come to us,
we are not interested in providing them with quick passage, we
are interested in assuring them of some extended time in
Federal custody, in prison, because those are the persons that
are a danger. We simply cannot deport them, these are people
who should be serving a jail term, an extensive jail term.
Mr. Mica. Well, is there--again, I am looking for any
recommendations that would expedite the process so we get rid
of those who have to be deported, who may have some minor
offenses, so we incarcerate those who are the baddies, and they
are taken care of. I understand we now have 27 percent of
113,000 Federal prisoners that are illegal aliens; is that
correct?
Mr. Szafnicki. Foreign nationals, not necessarily illegal,
could be legal permanent residents also.
Mr. Mica. And that is growing?
Mr. Szafnicki. I believe it is.
Mr. Mica. Well, thank you, and if you have additional
comments or think of things you would like submitted either
formally or informally for the panel, as we look at the law,
look at how we are spending these limited dollars, but
increasing dollars on this extensive effort, I would welcome
them.
I am pleased now to yield to the vice chairman of the
subcommittee, the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. Barr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Are all four of you gentlemen familiar with the Immigration
and Naturalization Service Interior Enforcement Strategy issued
in January 1999?
Mr. Fischer. Yes.
Mr. Szafnicki. Yes.
Mr. Deane. Yes.
Mr. Barr. OK. Mr. Andrejko, are you familiar with that?
Mr. Andrejko. Slightly familiar, yes.
Mr. Barr. What is--in terms--let me start with you, Mr.
Fischer, in terms of your ability to carry out your mission,
you described it fairly well, I think, how does this Interior
Enforcement Strategy affect that? Will this improve your
ability to carry out your mission or do you see some problems
with it?
Mr. Fischer. The strategy right now is being formalized in
our Washington headquarters office, selected colleagues of mine
have been pulled into Washington to expand upon the strategy
that you identified, Congressman, and it is my belief that then
operating instructions will be presented to myself and my other
colleagues throughout the country on how to implement this.
Mr. Barr. I think that is sort of a nice way of saying that
there are some problems with the strategy as it was issued in
January of this year, in terms of your ability to meet your
mission. Would you disagree with that assessment?
Mr. Fischer. No, sir.
Mr. Barr. One thing that I did notice, and I know this has
also been the subject of newspaper articles that have been
written in the Washington Post recently, for example, is in
terms of worksite enforcement. I know that both you and Mr.
Szafnicki and certainly the U.S. Attorney are very familiar
with what I have considered to be very, very successful
projects over the last several years, including Operation South
PAW, yet that part of the overall interior enforcement effort
seems to be, shall we say, downplayed in this interior
enforcement strategy. Would that be accurate, Mr. Szafnicki?
Mr. Szafnicki. I do not know if--it certainly gives the
appearance of being downplayed, Congressman. I think it is a
different approach and perhaps it could have been explained
better in the interior enforcement strategy. It is my
understanding that the emphasis will be placed toward who is
supplying those illegal aliens to specific worksite locations.
And by focusing on the suppliers, hopefully as we are able to
prosecute through the assistance of the U.S. Attorney's Office,
the actual people responsible for bringing them into the United
States, there will be a diminished number of individuals
actually coming to a specific area. It certainly does not
intend--it is my understanding anyway--to eliminate worksite
enforcement, it is just simply the idea of going to a specific
worksite location for the express purpose of doing nothing more
than picking up the illegals and removing them is not
efficient.
Mr. Barr. There is though, I presume, some benefit to
engaging in projects such as Operation South PAW, is there not,
to draw attention in the public arena to the need for interior
enforcement and highlighting the fact, for example, that those
jobs that are performed by those who are in this country
illegally are being performed by illegal aliens and that there
are repercussions for employers who do in fact knowingly
provide such jobs to illegal aliens--is there some benefit to
that?
Mr. Szafnicki. Absolutely. As a matter of fact, a lot of
our worksite initiatives, the actual criminal investigations we
were able to uncover during South PAW were as a result of just
going to the location and picking up large numbers of illegals.
I am just saying that I think we need to couple that with some
of the main focus of our efforts toward the smugglers in
looking toward something beyond just picking up the illegals
and removing them, go one step further to identify, if we do go
to a location and pick up a large group of illegals, how did
they get there, who was responsible for providing them if they
have fraudulent identification. We need to look beyond that and
I think that is what they are trying to do, to a certain extent
in this strategy.
Mr. Barr. OK, and hopefully in the rewrite of it or the
supporting documents that come out, that will be made a little
bit clearer than it was in that document issued in January.
Mr. Szafnicki. Correct, yes.
Mr. Barr. With regard to some of the budgetary problems and
detention matters that we have already touched on briefly, if
you could please, Mr. Fischer, explain briefly the mandatory
incarceration provisions contained in the 1996 act and the
point system that is used to determine when somebody is
detained and whether they are in fact continued to be detained
or released.
Mr. Fischer. The law is quite clear where someone who
qualifies or meets the standard under our definition of a
criminal alien, has to be incarcerated. Then of course we will
go through the normal procedures of a hearing and eventually a
final order of deportation or removal and then removal from
this country.
There was a suggestion earlier by our headquarters office
on consideration of release of those criminal aliens.
Mr. Barr. There was a memo dated February 1 of this year?
Mr. Fischer. Yes, sir, and it had a suggested point process
where if a person had a conviction of I believe sexual
pandering and larceny, perhaps that was 2 points. And if the
person did not get over 5 points, that the District Director
should consider removing that--releasing that person into
society. All the directors nationwide were not comfortable with
that at all, for a variety of reasons.
Mr. Barr. As a matter of fact, you went on record, I think
very appropriately and professionally, very strongly objecting
to that, is that correct?
Mr. Fischer. Yes, sir, I did. And that has been rescinded,
for lack of a better term, where now we are following the
letter of the law from our headquarters office down to the
direction that the directors are getting.
Mr. Barr. With regard to budgetary matters, I remain very
concerned, as the chairman has indicated also, with regard to
particularly the fiscal year 1999 budget, you know, we are
smack dab in the middle of that right now. What exactly is the
nature of the budget cuts that you have been ordered to put
into effect? Can you give us some notion of those and how they
are affecting your operation?
Mr. Fischer. When the budget was presented to me, and I
will discuss the investigations budget and Mr. Szafnicki
obviously can amplify on it if he feels appropriate, our budget
in investigations was reduced by approximately 81 cents on the
dollar for fiscal year 1999. And after myself and Mr. Szafnicki
then prepared some talking points and some justifications that
we felt was necessary for us to meet our requirements, whether
it be the 1996 law or whether it be just our commitment as
immigration officers to the people who we work with, it was I
believe elevated up to 43 cents on the dollar. So we are taking
a 57 cent hit or percent hit, however you want to look at it,
which does affect our ability to support Mr. Andrejko, the
local and State agencies where appropriate. And that is one of
my concerns, sir, with these quick response teams. We are very,
very grateful that Congress provided us those positions and we
think we are going to get a lot of mileage that is going to
really help our enforcement effort, but I am concerned about
the moneys that maybe go with it or do not go with it. And if
they do not go with it and numbers of a good sound professional
operational posture, we could have positions there, but we may
not be able to get the biggest bang for our buck and that is
what concerns me.
Mr. Barr. Are other district directors being directed to
sustain similar cuts for the fiscal year 1999 budget?
Mr. Fischer. I really do not know about the other district
directors.
Mr. Barr. Mr. Szafnicki.
Mr. Szafnicki. On the investigations program, it has been
universal across the board--across the country, the cuts. Now I
cannot say they are all at 43 cents on the dollar, but they
have all been sizable cuts.
Mr. Barr. When these cuts were mandated earlier this year,
what was the explanation given for them?
Mr. Szafnicki. I did not receive one, Congressman.
Mr. Barr. Could you give us maybe a couple of specifics in
the way that this sort of budget cut will impact your ability
to support Mr. Andrejko or other programs with which the U.S.
Attorney is involved, or our local law enforcement, and we will
be hearing from them later as well?
Mr. Fischer. Well, a good example is the Rome, GA office,
DEA opened up a Rome, GA office; the U.S. Attorney, Mr. Deane,
is supportive of that office and that initiative. We would like
to participate as a full partner, we just do not have the
resources to participate as a full partner and in turn, that
affects our ability to provide, as Mr. Andrejko said during his
statement, assistance, whether it be language skills, whether
it be cultural skills, whether it be the quick use of the INS
systems to provide them data, and it could affect perhaps the
prosecution in a case that Mr. Deane's office may eventually
have. That is an example I can think of.
Mr. Szafnicki. What I am facing with, basically a 57 cents
on the dollar cut, we have one of the largest geographic areas
in the United States to cover as a district office, it is very
difficult for me to keep my vehicles on the road. Obviously,
our ability to respond to State and local, since we have so few
offices within our jurisdiction means we have to jump in a car
and drive there and if that is a 4-hour drive, so be it. But
the restrictions hamper us greatly because of gas costs,
vehicle maintenance costs, things like that. I have got to take
that into consideration when I make a decision to respond.
Mr. Barr. Do either of you convey to those folks up in
Washington from whom these directives are coming the concern,
for example, or at least the obvious fact that even though
moneys are being appropriated in significantly increased
amounts specifically for interior enforcement, that you are
being asked to sustain very, very deep cuts in your budget?
Have you posed those questions to your superiors in Washington?
And if so, what is their response?
Mr. Fischer. We have, this has been done during quarterly
district director and chief patrol agent meetings with the
Executive Associate Commissioner for Field Operations, as well
as the Commissioner of INS. And they note that we gave them
that feedback.
Mr. Barr. And that is it. Duly noted for the record, as
they say.
Mr. Fischer. Yes, sir.
Mr. Barr. Well, we will certainly see if we can help.
Mr. Andrejko and Mr. Deane, if you could comment on how the
budget cuts that the interior enforcement effort, through DEA,
might be affecting your operations and your ability to work
cases involving illegal aliens.
Mr. Andrejko. With regard to DEA, we are seeing more and
more illegal aliens or foreign nationals involved in certain
aspects of the drug trade that are affecting the Atlanta Field
Division and when we noted that earlier, we had approached INS
to see if we can get from them additional manpower and support
with regard to their agent personnel assisting our enforcement
groups, mainly our task force groups, to widen and expand the
investigations and to delve deeply a little bit more into some
of the information we have uncovered. And because of the lack
of enforcement agent personnel on their part, they were not
always able to go ahead and respond to our requests, not able
to provide the assistance that we need in many of the
strategies that have been designed throughout the Field
Division, and that has certainly hampered the investigations by
not bringing forth a review and a follow-through on those
investigations, which would be possible had they had additional
manpower to assign to us.
Mr. Barr. Is one area in particular that you are seeing a
particular problem methamphetamine trafficking in this area?
Mr. Andrejko. Yes, we are very concerned. If you look at
the statistics, for example, in fiscal year 1998, we seized
approximately 668 pounds of methamphetamine either in
metropolitan Atlanta or on its way to metropolitan Atlanta. And
that is about a four time increase of the methamphetamine that
was seized in the prior year. And a tremendous number of other
investigations that we are proceeding on now also indicate that
the methamphetamine trafficking is increasing throughout the
division. I am receiving telephone calls from police chiefs and
sheriffs in areas, in rural areas, that never called me
requiring some additional help and assistance with regard to
methamphetamine, which is indicative of the fact that the
methamphetamine trade is expanding to those areas to the point
of alarm on their level as well.
Mr. Barr. One of the things that I hear consistently from
local law enforcement officials as well as county commissioners
and city council people is two things--one, tremendous regard
for the work that DEA does and tremendous gratitude for the
support that DEA does provide for local law enforcement; but
the same frustration that I think you just indicated, that with
regard to those who are involved in trafficking involving
illegal aliens and organizations in support thereof,
particularly with regard to methamphetamine, a frustration that
the support simply is not there. And I think it goes back to
some of the problems we have highlighted here with lack of
proper funding coming from Washington to the district INS.
Mr. Andrejko. That is true and I thank you for those kind
comments with regard to how DEA is perceived. But I know with
all the requests we have gone to Mr. Fischer and Mr. Szafnicki
with, the help that they have provided to us has been very,
very important to us in following through many of the leads
that we had developed. And it has really been an asset to us in
the investigations that are ongoing even at this time.
Mr. Barr. Thank you.
Mr. Deane, if you could comment. You have overall
responsibility for prosecutions in this area and familiar with
all the different agencies involved, could you indicate to us
briefly how your responsibility has been impacted negatively
perhaps by not being able to prosecute some of these cases
because of the INS cutbacks in the interior enforcement budget?
Mr. Deane. Well, Congressman, as you would know, any time
you institute a prosecution, you try as best you can to make
the most of what you are going to--the most of the case that
you actually do have. You try to build that case and expand
that case and to move up from a single stop perhaps on the
expressway or someplace, move that up in the investigative
chain. And in order to do that, you need to have people who are
willing and who are capable of going out and doing the followup
work. And that to me is where INS is most critical and most
important, because they have intelligence bases and data bases
and so forth that can be drawn upon, that can be available to
us to do the followup work and coordinate from some of their
other files perhaps in other districts, to see just what it is
that we are--when we do make a stop like that, just who it is
that we are dealing with. It could be that the person has only
gotten the one arrest here, but he may have multiple arrests in
other places that we would need to coordinate and followup on
those investigations as well.
It is very difficult when you have got a key player whose
job it is to be involved with foreign nationals that you cannot
go to--or you can go to them, but they are limited in what they
can do and what they can accomplish to help you to investigate
those foreign nationals and their involvement in drug
trafficking. Methamphetamine is a prime example of that. The
supply channels for methamphetamine, supply channels that we
have seen in the northern Georgia area really are--in order for
us to interdict those and to be successful in interdicting
those, we have to have the involvement of INS. We just cannot
accomplish it, in my view, without their full involvement. We
will be successful at some level, but we will not make the kind
of in-roads that I would hope we would want to see, without
their help.
Mr. Barr. If your office, just by way of comparison, if
your office sustained a 43 percent budget cut, that would
severely hamper your ability to carry out your mission, would
it not?
Mr. Deane. Absolutely, absolutely. We would be totally
ineffective in handling our jobs.
Mr. Barr. What would be--Mr. Fischer, what would be the
Border Patrol Chiefs and the Immigration District Directors
Association's position on the proposed restructuring?
Mr. Fischer. The Immigration Directors Association,
Congressman, has gone on record officially to the Commissioner
saying that they cannot support the restructuring plan the way
it is currently being formulated. The Chief Patrol Agents, to
my knowledge, also have not shown a high degree of any support
at all for restructuring.
Mr. Barr. Is that because of the problems that we have been
discussing here today, or are there others that are important?
Mr. Fischer. Well, I think there are some issues; one, it
is anticipated that it would be a very costly program, there
has never been a price tag put on it. And Mr. Chairman, as you
indicated when you were talking about our operating budget to
support the people here in our four-State area, it is difficult
for us to buy into a restructuring program that does not have a
price tag on it when we are watching the soul and the heart of
the investigations division be carved out. That is a concern.
Another concern would be the response to State and locals
and the full scheme to work with Mr. Deane's office, for
example, and other entities, because as Mr. Deane indicated, it
is not just an investigations process that is the law
enforcement effort of the INS. The file has to go where the
person is, there is a detention/deportation aspect, there is a
trial attorney involved to present the case before the
Immigration judge, that person also may work with Mr. Deane's
office. And the way the restructuring is currently proposed,
you would set up--it would set up zones and there is a shared
services concept built within those zones. And any time you
share something, you dilute it and there has been a high degree
of concern from the Immigration Directors Association, as I
said earlier that has been formalized to the Commissioner,
about our concerns and that we could not support it the way she
is currently providing it to the Congress.
Mr. Barr. Mr. Chairman, you have been very kind and very
patient in letting me run over time here a little bit. If I
could just ask one other question. One of the aspects of our
work, which is certainly one of the aspects of INS' work both
here and in other district offices, is to assist applicants,
applicants for citizenship. We have with us Ms. Jeanette
Hutchinson, who does tremendous work I know with your office
and with a lot of our constituents trying to solve problems of
the time delays. I think we can all understand that there are
going to be time delays involved in that process, particularly
as we have more people seeking to become citizens, which is
something very important obviously and we all support that.
But the cutbacks in your budget, would it be accurate to
say we have discussed also impact that part of your work as
well, because are they not cutting back overtime and denying
your folks and maybe Mr. Szafnicki also, use of that overtime
that has been available and now is not available to have some
of your people assist with the application backlog. So is that
now creating problems?
Mr. Fischer. Mr. Chairman, I am sure you remember the
Citizenship USA issue and concerns that the Congress had and
still does. In fact, we are being audited right now, our
office, by our own Office of Internal Audit as part of the
process to buildupon what Congress stipulated years ago. For
the record, we did not ever naturalize anyone in the Atlanta
District that was not eligible and deserving of citizenship.
But as Congressman Barr indicated, we have gone from a process
where when the initial application was filed, if everything
when according to the process, that person more than likely was
going to be sworn in within an 8-9 month window. Now it is at
least 2 years. We have seen a tremendous increase in number of
applications. We are concerned about the budget ramifications
because we are talking about now user fees and we have see a
fee increase for the application. And INS receives over half a
billion dollars a year in the fees that come in and our staff
has had some increases, but not to keep up with the number of
applications.
I cannot use any of Mr. Szafnicki's or Mr. Compos' or Mr.
Anderson's staff because the requirements are so stringent for
people who work the naturalization, you have to have certain
training, you have to have a certain degree of accountability.
But the process has gotten so--has had such a high degree of
oversight, I have three adjudicators doing noting but re-
verifying what other adjudicators have done during the
interview or the grant process. And that is to me very time
consuming and it takes away from productivity that could lead
to people having their applications processed quicker.
Mr. Barr. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mica. Thank you.
You have covered, Mr. Fischer, a great deal of ground and
answered some questions I would have asked relating to the
problem we are now experiencing with the backlog. But it still
mystifies me as a Member of Congress, that while we have
doubled the amount of--more than doubled the amount of dollars
to the agency, almost doubled the number of personnel in less
than 5 years, and when you are facing potential cuts in the
enforcement area and we still are not accomplishing the mission
and only through the grace of some cooperation I think that we
have heard testimony to the fact of here today with local
agencies and State and others, are you able to accomplish the
job that you are doing, at least from the enforcement
standpoint.
So it is important that we conduct these field hearings,
that we find out what is going on, where the dollars are going,
where the problems are, and we get that information back and
try to make corrections.
Just one final question since this subcommittee is entitled
Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources, and we
spend a lot of time on the drug policy; the U.S. Attorney
indicated that you are seeing--there appears to be a link or
Mexican connection, particularly in methamphetamines. Is that
correct and is that documented?
Mr. Deane. Well, yes, sir, it is, it is documented
certainly by the cases that we are prosecuting. Consistently we
are seeing trafficking patterns that involve Mexican nationals.
Mr. Mica. DEA, you are seeing meth that you trace back to
Mexico in new and significant quantities?
Mr. Andrejko. That is correct. The ties lead directly to
Mexico or they lead to trafficking groups in California and in
Texas that have ties to Mexican organizations.
Mr. Mica. You did mention cocaine I think one of you
briefly. What about heroin, are you seeing any increase in
heroin here?
Mr. Andrejko. Not in the Atlanta Field Division. We are
seeing still a consistent use of heroin but no great increase.
We have seen over the past year and a half at times some large
seizures, but when you look at it overall and put it in the
perspective of not looking at it by a quarterly basis, by
comparing it to a year or two process so to speak, the figures
still indicate that it is consistent, no special increase or
specific increase.
Mr. Mica. But you are both seeing significant increases in
activities among illegal aliens involved with this trafficking,
is that correct, Mr. Deane?
Mr. Deane. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Mr. Andrejko. Yes, sir, that is also correct, yes.
Mr. Mica. Well, I do not have any additional questions at
this time. Mr. Barr.
Mr. Barr. No. I appreciate these four gentlemen staying
perhaps a little bit longer than we had anticipated, I think
their testimony and response to the questions has been very,
very enlightening and I appreciate their attendance very much.
Again, if you would reiterate, Mr. Chairman, that any
additional material that they might have, we would be more than
happy to receive it.
Mr. Mica. Yes, and additionally, the minority has asked to
submit questions, which we will be doing. Those questions,
without objection, and others submitted to you will be made
part of the record.
There being no further questions of this panel, I will
excuse the panel at this time. Thank you.
Mr. Barr. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mica. I would like to call our second panel this
afternoon and that panel consists of Mr. Mark Johnson, chief of
police of Chamblee, GA; Captain Terry Neal of the Dalton Police
Department; Mr. Bill Hutson, who is the sheriff of Cobb County,
GA. We are pleased to welcome these three individuals to
testify before our subcommittee this afternoon.
I would like to welcome the witnesses this afternoon. Also,
as I informed the first panel, I will just provide you with a
few of the ground rules for our subcommittee and our hearing
today. We are an investigations and oversight subcommittee of
Congress and in just a minute, I will ask you to be sworn in.
We do swear in all of our witnesses.
We also ask that you limit your oral, verbal testimony this
afternoon to 5 minutes, try to stay in that time parameter. We
will, without objection, allow for the record the introduction
of additional material, information, data for the hearing
record upon request.
So with those comments, I am pleased to welcome you.
Gentlemen, if you could please stand and be sworn.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Mica. Thank you for joining us today and providing us
with your insight. You know, we hear a lot of it in Washington
from folks, but I think one of the best things we ever do in
Congress is to get out and hear from local officials,
particularly individuals in your capacity. Here we have local
law enforcement representatives. We are proud of the job you
do, and we have heard of your cooperative effort already from
some of the previous panelists, but we think it is most
important that you give us your candid observations as to how
we from the Federal level can work with you at the local level
to do an even better job. So with those comments, I am pleased
to recognize Mr. Mark Johnson, who is the chief of police of
Chamblee, GA. Welcome, sir, and you are recognized.
STATEMENTS OF MARK JOHNSON, CHIEF OF POLICE, CHAMBLEE, GA;
CAPTAIN TERRY NEAL, CITY OF DALTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, DALTON,
GA; AND BILL HUTSON, SHERIFF, COBB COUNTY, GA
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mica. If you can, speak up as loud as you can. The
acoustics are a little bit dull.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and the rest of the
members of the committee.
Just for some background, the city of Chamblee is a small
city located here in metro Atlanta. It covers approximately 3
square miles and has a population of 8,000, of which
approximately 41 percent are believed to be Latino. Chamblee
also contains one of the most ethnically diverse census tracts
in the State of Georgia. This diversity began growing in the
middle 1980's with an influx of southeast Asian refugees.
While the demographics of the city was changing slowly, a
culture clash began to develop with the heavy influx of
Hispanics that began in the early 1990's. At the same time, the
crime rate in the city was increasing rapidly, drugs, gang
activity and continuous graffiti problems were among the top
concerns of our community. While it is not fair for us to blame
all these problems on the influx of Hispanics, it is not
unreasonable for the mainstream community to do so. It is also
not surprising that this community demanded something be done
about the problems.
While most Hispanics are generally good people trying to
provide for their families, many have entered this country
illegally in hopes of finding jobs and a better life. This
problem must be dealt with appropriately at the national level;
however, failure to do so is clearly felt at the local level.
While the city of Chamblee has become accustomed to its
diversity and in fact is proud of it, the large number of
Hispanics that enter the country illegally present a
significant problem for us.
Hispanic workers are culturally accustomed to looking for
day labor type jobs. They generally stand in large groups, wait
for contractors and others to come looking for the workers.
Unless they are able to locate a company willing to violate the
law regarding employing undocumented aliens without proper
paperwork, that is their only option. These large groups of men
standing around would usually start with numbers of 125 or
more. Just the sight of an unusually large group of people
standing on a corner can cause concern on the part of local
residents. When combined with language and cultural barriers
and the increasing crime rates, this concern can easily become
fear. The large groups of day laborers also provide a
background and cover for drug dealers to hide amongst.
The Police Department in Chamblee believes strongly in
community policing and in developing partnerships with the
community to solve problems. Accomplishing this with a
culturally diverse population is difficult enough, without a
part of that population being in this country illegally.
While we can work to overcome cultural barriers that are
obstacles to effective law enforcement, we cannot overcome this
undocumented status and the fear of law enforcement that comes
with it. Rather than reporting crimes and working with law
enforcement, most of these undocumented aliens run just at the
sight of an approaching police officer. They are repeatedly the
victims of street robberies and other crimes resulting in
several having been murdered in the city of Chamblee.
As I said earlier, I believe that the problem of illegal
entry into this country must be dealt with at the national
level, but I also firmly believe that much more needs to be
done about undocumented aliens when they are found at the local
communities. The city of Chamblee has been very proactive in
dealing with its crime problems and community concerns. Several
ordinances were passed to deal with specific problems such as
day labor pools, loitering and vagrancy.
Apartment complexes were inspected and required to come
into compliance with all building and life safety codes. Many
of these complexes were dangerous and unfit for habitation;
however, they were primarily occupied by Hispanics that could
not or would not complain because of their undocumented status.
It is very difficult to work with these Hispanic communities
and gain their cooperation because of their fear of law
enforcement. Even the local nonprofit organizations are afraid
to work with them for fear of jeopardizing their own tax-exempt
status.
The Police Department has focused its efforts on the
criminal and offending actions of individuals and not where
they are from or whether they are in the country illegally. I
believe that one very important tool is missing from this
concept though. While the local INS office has been very
supportive of our efforts, they have been hampered severely by
limited resources. They have worked with us in the past to
round up known criminal aliens and this has had a great effect
at the time that it occurred. It is, however, too far and few
between.
As part of community policing, we encourage apartment
complex managers and owners to take more individual
responsibility for the quality of the persons they rent to and
to evict those that are found to be undesirable. It is a sad
state of affairs that the local INS office does not have the
resources to deal with such things as evicting an undocumented
alien who has illegally entered this country, even after he has
been arrested for a local crime. Many of those that we have
arrested have been arrested repeatedly. Most have no
identification and change their name regularly. Those that have
identification, the identification is still suspect because of
the amount of counterfeit identification being sold in our
community.
I would like to thank the District Director, Mr. Fischer,
and his assistant Bart Szafnicki, for all the assistance they
have given us in the past. But I would also like to thank the
committee for the opportunity to make this statement and answer
any questions, and I would encourage the committee to use
whatever means are available to increase the resources that are
available to deal with this problem.
Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony. I will call next on
Mr. Bill Hutson, who is the sheriff of Cobb County, for his
statement.
Mr. Hutson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
present testimony to the subcommittee. I certainly appreciate
and want to thank Congressman Barr.
For more than 20 years, I have had the privilege of serving
the citizens of Cobb County as the County Sheriff. Throughout
the years, I have seen our county change from basically a rural
community with a population of less than 200,000 people to an
urban county that has a population of more than half a million
people today.
During that period of time over my years as sheriff, we had
a jail population of less than 200 inmates; today, many days
our jail population exceeds 2,000 inmates. We routinely process
in to our facility more than 30,000 individuals each year.
Recent statistics show that more than 5 percent of the inmate
population at the Cobb County Adult Detention Center is
comprised of illegal aliens. The number of inmates is a
significant cost to the taxpayers of Cobb County.
More than a year ago, in February 1998, the Sheriff's
Office was asked to participate in a pilot program with INS.
Through a cooperative effort, the Sheriff's Office and INS were
able to identify and deport illegal aliens who had committed
felony criminal acts in Cobb County. When the program first
began, the Immigration and Naturalization Service had one full
time agent at our jail. However, as the illegal population
grew, two full time agents were required to handle this
interviewing process and all the documentation and paperwork
that accompanied it. In order to keep up with the increasing
number, it was necessary for INS to create a command center at
our jail. In November 1998, INS began a video-teleconference of
interviews with illegals from the jail. They provided the
equipment and training to the Sheriff's Office staff.
Currently, interviews are held at the jail Monday through
Friday at a specific time. A substantial savings in INS
personnel resources is realized by agents being able to
interview from their office in downtown. This cooperative
effort between the Sheriff's Office and INS Services has been a
very positive endeavor between the local and Federal
Government.
Over the past year, 926 foreign-born inmates have been
interviewed with more than 350 illegal aliens, that were
previously housed at the Cobb County Jail, having been
deported.
I would strongly recommend to this subcommittee and to you
gentlemen as Members of Congress that you consider additional
appropriations to INS, not only in the other areas, and
services like the program that we are operating today, I think
should be expanded into jails all across the State of Georgia
and possibly across this country. But this is an area that I
think Congress should direct some--seriously direct some
resources.
I am going to tell you, it is not in my prepared remarks,
but we are not going to deal with this problem of illegals in
this country until the United States gets serious about it. And
when they get serious about it, they will appropriate the money
to do the job with.
Thank you, gentlemen, I will be available for any questions
you may have.
Mr. Mica. Thank you for your comments and testimony. I
would like to recognize Captain Terry Neal with the Dalton
Police Department. You are recognized, sir.
Mr. Neal. Mr. Chairman and other members of this committee,
I appreciate the opportunity to come and speak with you today.
To give you a little background of our city, the city of
Dalton is a small community located 90 miles north of Atlanta,
GA, on Interstate 75. We are a community of approximately
30,000 residents in the city and a total of 100,000 residents
county-wide. This was as of the last census. We are known as
the carpet capital of the world. All the major carpet
manufacturers are home-based in Dalton, GA. We have an
estimated 77,000 jobs in our community and because of this, we
have attracted a large Hispanic population to Dalton to fill
these jobs, the majority of which are illegal aliens.
We started seeing an influx of these workers in the early
1990's and it has steadily increased until today we estimate
the population at 40,000 people. Our schools are now 45 percent
Hispanic, some of which are 90 percent Hispanic. The
government-funded housing is almost all Hispanic. Along with
these workers and their families comes a large element of
crimes that we as a small law enforcement agency of 74 sworn
officers, are unable to deal with. We started seeing gang
activity, large drug smuggling shipments, graffiti on buildings
and an increase of crime, which we attribute mainly back to the
Hispanic community. While we welcome the legal Hispanic
community to Dalton, GA, we cannot tolerate the crimes being
committed by illegal aliens.
Because of the crimes and the outcry from the citizens in
the community, the mayor and Council, along with the County
Commissioners came to local law enforcement and asked what we
could do to alleviate this problem. The Dalton Police
Department's Chief James Chadwick contacted Bart Szafnicki with
Immigration and Naturalization Service. He set up a meeting
with local government to deal with the problems, from this was
born a local task force which addresses just these problems.
The task force was set up to address criminal aliens
involved in drug smuggling, alien smuggling and other crimes
involving illegal aliens in our community. Currently, we have
two Dalton police officers assigned to the unit and two INS
officers and a secretary. This unit was established in
September 1995 and has performed remarkably with the small
resources allocated to it. We have approximately 25,000 to
30,000 illegals in the Dalton-Whitfield County and surrounding
area and the number is increasing every day. This task force is
doing everything it can to combat the problem, but they are
overwhelmed by the number of aliens.
We feel as a small community, as I am sure other small
communities do, that we all need the help at the Federal level
to combat these problems. We as local law enforcement cannot
deal with the large volumes of illegal aliens smuggled into the
community and along with them drug smuggling and the gang
crimes associated with these aliens. We need more interior
enforcement of these problems. Just Dalton alone could keep 10
to 15 INS agents busy all the time.
We are grateful and we commend the efforts of Bart
Szafnicki and his INS agents in support of our problem. When I
say our problem, I mean local, State, Federal problem.
We ask the subcommittee to expand the efforts already
underway and to commit more resources to this problem.
Thank you, sir.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Neal follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4043.016
Mr. Mica. I thank each of our panelists for their testimony
and I would like to start off with a few questions, if I may.
There have been some proposals, I think you heard one of
them, about to come from Washington, to start a point system
that would let some of these folks out. I guess for a sexual
offense, you get 2 points but you can get out if you have less
than 5. How would you all like that rating system to deal with
the problem? Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. In a perfect world, I would not like that.
Mr. Mica. Sheriff Hutson.
Mr. Hutson. I would be very much opposed to that. That
proposal, if I understand it, comes from an administrative
proposal inside a Federal agency, is that right?
Mr. Mica. Well, it has been withdrawn but it was proposed.
Mr. Hutson. Did they propose that to you or----
Mr. Mica. Well, it was proposed to deal with the problem
because we are getting more and more folks----
Mr. Hutson. I would have a serious problem with that and if
I were a Congressman, I would also have a problem if they were
trying to circumvent the laws of the United States by some
administrative procedure. I would have a serious problem with
that.
If you are going to do that, then Congress should say these
people should be allowed to stay. You know, that is another way
of--and we all know this is happening today--INS has a limited
amount of dollars to remove illegals from this country, to
deport them. And we all know that people are not deported
simply because of lack of funds. That is real.
Mr. Mica. Mr. Neal, you do not favor letting these folks
out as a solution?
Mr. Neal. Well, I do not think you can put a point system
to criminals and I do not think that is a solution. I think the
solution is going to be adding more resources and dealing with
the criminals.
Mr. Mica. Well, one of the problems we have and one of the
purposes of this hearing is that we have put double the amount
of money into this agency. I think I cited the figures of $1.5
billion to $3.8 billion in less than a 5-year period. That is a
significant amount of our tax dollars. We have increased the
personnel positions from 18,000 to 29,000 and you heard the
enforcement branch here is not only facing proposals to let
folks out on the street who have committed criminal acts or are
here illegally but also proposals to dramatically cut their
budgets for enforcement. So part of the purpose is to find out
where the dollars are going, why we are in this situation and
how it is affecting you as a local community and law
enforcement officers.
Sheriff, you told me about 5 percent of your population is
illegals. Are you also participating--are those folks that are
housed there being paid for by the Federal Government from INS
funds?
Mr. Hutson. No, sir.
Mr. Mica. These are just your folks?
Mr. Hutson. Those are the folks that we identified.
Mr. Mica. You picked up for some criminal act.
Mr. Hutson. Right, they are charged with a State offense.
Mr. Mica. What kind of cost impact does this have to your
community?
Mr. Hutson. It is substantial. The average cost of housing
inmates is more than $30 per day and that does not include any
capital outlay for construction of facilities.
Mr. Mica. And the local taxpayers pick this up, there is no
reimbursement from the feds for any of that cost?
Mr. Hutson. That is correct.
Mr. Mica. Did I hear you, Mr. Neal, say that you have--what
was the population you cited, estimated, of illegals in this
area?
Mr. Neal. The estimated in the Dalton-Whitfield area, which
would be a surrounding area, Murray County also, which is
adjacent to us, it is probably going to be in the area of
40,000.
Mr. Mica. How many?
Mr. Neal. 40,000 Hispanics.
Mr. Mica. Four-zero, 40,000?
Mr. Neal. Yes.
Mr. Mica. That is astounding.
Mr. Neal. We have probably 25,000 illegals, of that.
Mr. Mica. Absolutely astounding. Now, I do not want anyone
to think too that this panel is in any way here in any manner
to not support legal immigration.
Mr. Neal. Right.
Mr. Mica. You are looking at somebody whose grandparents on
both sides were legal immigrants to this country. I have seen
their papers from Immigration and Naturalization, and I could
not be a stronger supporter. I think that is what has made this
country great, the diversity it has provided and still
provides. I still support legal immigration, we all got here,
except for Native Americans, by the process of immigration, but
illegal immigration has completely distorted what this country
is about and the problems it is now bringing.
The offenses that these folks are coming in on, we heard
drug offenses have been increasing; is that correct? What are
you seeing, Mr. Johnson? Narcotics?
Mr. Johnson. Narcotics, drugs and then for us a lot of it
was just--it started with regular quality of life offenses. As
I said, it was a cultural issue and it started there. I would
like to re-emphasize what the chairman said. We are proud of
the diversity in Chamblee, but the undocumented or illegal
aliens basically create almost a separate class of people that
are not protected and cannot avail themselves of the services,
are victimized. So it is not just the crime problem, it is the
whole effect on the community.
Mr. Mica. Again, my question, Mr. Neal, dealt with the
kinds of crimes you are seeing being committed by the illegals.
Mr. Neal. The major crime right now is methamphetamine drug
smuggling. Basically the same networks that were set up in the
early 1990's to smuggle the aliens into our community, they are
being used, those networks are being used to smuggle
methamphetamines, marijuana.
Mr. Mica. Going from crack and marijuana to meth?
Mr. Neal. Yeah. Well, we still have a large amount of
marijuana coming in also with the meth, but it's Mexican
marijuana and also the Mexican connection to methamphetamine.
Mr. Mica. Sheriff, if I was to inventory your 926 folks who
were interviewed, what were they there for last year?
Mr. Hutson. Many of them for illicit drugs, illegal drug
activities. I am sorry I do not have it broken down by classes
of crime, but it runs all across.
Mr. Mica. You testified that 350 of the 926 were deported?
Mr. Hutson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mica. Where did the rest go?
Mr. Hutson. Back on the street.
Mr. Mica. Basically back on the street?
Mr. Hutson. Yes. Something you said earlier--excuse me for
interrupting--I think everybody in the law enforcement
community, certainly we in the Sheriff's Office, respect the
fact that there is a legal means for people to come into this
country from foreign countries. We do not have a problem with
that. When we talk about the problems----
Mr. Mica. I am glad to hear that because I would be in
trouble.
Mr. Hutson. I probably would too, but----
Mr. Mica. No, but we do want people to know the light in
which we conduct this hearing and the purpose of it is to look
at the problems created by illegal aliens and also the
resources that are provided from the Federal level to deal with
this problem. And when they are not getting into the community
such as Atlanta--when you cite the numbers that you cite that
are absolutely astounding, there is something gone askew with
the whole system. And certainly if that is not a Federal
responsibility, protecting the borders and those that transit
across those borders, I do not know what is.
The programs that we heard described here, the cooperative
programs, I think the Sheriff had indicated that there is no
reimbursement, there are no resources provided--or if you do
have any programs with resources provided or reimbursement,
could you convey those to me, Mr. Johnson? Is there anything
where you get Federal assistance, cash resources, personnel,
equipment?
Mr. Johnson. To our agency, no, sir.
Mr. Mica. So what you are doing is purely a cooperative
effort assisting a Federal agency?
Mr. Johnson. That is correct.
Mr. Mica. And Mr. Neal, the same?
Mr. Neal. It is the same situation with us, they provide
the agents and we provide the office secretary and all the
makeup of the unit.
Mr. Mica. So all the projects are voluntary, no
reimbursement, no resources from the Federal level?
Mr. Neal. Right.
Mr. Mica. Even an education, I think, would provide some
impact where we have problems. That is interesting that you are
impacted by Federal policy, but have no reimbursement, no
assistance coming from the Federal level.
What would you view as the Federal Government's strength in
dealing with this problem versus your agency's? And then what
are the weaknesses? If you could describe for the panel what
tools or what abilities we have to deal with this problem that
you do not, and then what do you think we could do with those
resources to better deal with the problem? Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. The biggest resource that comes to mind is the
manpower and the money, the financial backing to do something.
Mr. Mica. What about the laws? Are the Federal laws
adequate to deal with it? We have passed, and you have heard
maybe a description either by the witnesses or in other
discussions here, the laws that we have passed the last few
years. Now we at the Federal level have been very concerned
about this problem and we may have--well, we had a program in
effect a couple of years ago where they were just wholesale
naturalizing folks and thousands of criminals got naturalized.
Congress stepped in and put the brakes on some of that. Now it
sounds like there is a bit of over-management to the program
and the thing has sort of ground to a halt, but we also have
the problem of the influx of vast numbers of illegals.
How are we dealing with it, how should we be dealing with
it? This is your chance to tell us what you think, Mr. Johnson,
and then we will get to the other two.
Mr. Johnson. From--Mr. Chairman, from my perspective, with
a small city, in order to deal with our community problems, we
have had to take the stance that the influx of undocumented or
illegal aliens is something that has to be solved on a much
larger scale, and we have tried to deal with the actions, the
offenses that they may commit while they are here. The problem
that I see or that we have had is that the resources are not
there from the INS and at the national level to deal with even
the offending illegal aliens. As I understand the Federal laws
that you are referring to, they all amount to instructions
about prosecuting people for illegally entering a second time
or multiple times. I am referring even more so, as I compared
it to an apartment complex, a first time person that came in
here that may have been working and then violates our laws.
Those people, as the Sheriff said, are just put back on the
street.
Mr. Mica. So we do not have a way to deal with them.
Mr. Johnson. We do not even ask any more.
Mr. Mica. The U.S. Attorney said the same thing, that he is
dealing with those that committed an aggravated felony, and the
numbers are so huge that you are not able to deal with it.
Is that what you are seeing, Mr. Neal?
Mr. Neal. I would say so, it is the same problem. We need
some laws that will deal with just the illegal aliens being in
here that may be carrying a bad card. The way we are combating
this is on the State level, charging them with forgery by
possession of a forged document. And at that point, INS will
either incorporate it up on a State level, or they will not. If
they do not incorporate it up, then we actively prosecute that
on a State level and we send them to prison, either that or
they will flee. And when they come back out, they also are
deportable as a criminal alien because of the statute that we
charged them on.
The Federal laws could be a little more strict and give
some teeth into what you do with just an illegal being on the
street, if you pick him up. But that is an overwhelming task,
especially in my city, because I can load busload after busload
of just illegal aliens. We deal strictly with criminal aliens
that have committed a crime. But really you need to have more
resources down to the street level. If their budget has
doubled, I have not seen it since my dealings with INS, it has
not come down. There are rumors that they car pool to get to
work, they are short on gas money, all resources are short. I
do not know how extensive this is, but I think that money needs
to be allocated down and cut out the bureaucracy.
Mr. Mica. If it is frustrating for you, imagine how
frustrating it is for us. We passed those laws in 1996, we
passed the budget increases and Mr. Fischer still has 290 to
300 personnel.
Sheriff, did you want to comment?
Mr. Hutson. Yes, sir. I have had a chance to observe entry
points in the southwestern part of this country and what goes
on there, the flow of illegal drugs across that southwest
border. We all know that the majority of the illegal drugs in
this country are moving across the southwest border now, also
the illegal aliens. And the same principle applies to that,
when a truckload or trunk of a car filled with illegal cocaine
comes across that border into the United States and that comes
to Cobb County, GA and it is divided up in small amounts to go
out to the street level, do you realize how much it costs the
taxpayers of this county to try to remove those illegal drugs
then? I really think that Congress should look at doing a
better job with the Border Patrol. Those people have an almost
impossible job and I am sure you have probably seen some of the
same things I saw last summer on the southwest border. But they
have a very difficult job.
If the U.S. Government is going to be serious about dealing
with this problem of drugs and illegal aliens, they have got to
make a commitment to protect those borders before it comes in.
You get a lot more accomplished for your dollars by dealing
with those border points.
At the same time, I think we are going to have to deal with
it here locally and I think you heard these gentlemen talk
about it today, there is a lack of personnel and resources,
monetary resources of INS, to do their job properly. Now you
are talking about the increase in dollars that the Congress
appropriated, look at the amount of illegal activity that has
increased, I assume with that.
Mr. Mica. Thank you, Sheriff. You will be pleased to know
that we have tried to turn around some of the past mistakes of
the 1993 to 1995 Congress and administration when they
dismantled a lot of the interdiction and eradication programs.
I think it is our first responsibility to stop the drugs at
their source, where they are grown, where they are produced,
and then catch them along the way before they get to the
borders through interdiction, through use of whatever means,
including the military. We are getting back to that. This
subcommittee actually is in existence and entitled Criminal
Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources really at the
suggestion of this Speaker, Mr. Hastert. Mr. Barr, myself and
others worked with him in the past trying to put this effort
back together. We put almost $1 billion into this last year,
some of it we are trying to get out there, to restart those
source country programs and stop them. We know it is very
difficult when the illegal narcotics get to your streets, as
you said, and are divided up, it becomes almost an impossible
task to catch all of those drugs, the criminal activity at the
street and community level, that is involved with the
trafficking and distribution. So we are also working on that
problem getting additional resources there.
This hearing is going to find out why and make corrective
changes as to why this community and this area and this
district is not getting the resources it needs, even though we
are appropriating the positions and the dollars to deal with
the problem relating to illegal aliens. So we will work on both
of those issues. I just wanted to provide that as a commentary.
I would like to yield now to the vice chairman of our
subcommittee, Mr. Barr.
Mr. Barr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I would like to
personally welcome the three very distinguished witnesses we
have before us today, each of whom has tremendous experience in
public service as police chief, deputy chief and as the sheriff
here in Cobb County.
I believe, if I am not mistaken, all three of you listened
in on the previous panel?
Mr. Johnson. Yes.
Mr. Hutson. I heard some of it. My other Congressman was
bending my ear a little bit.
Mr. Neal. Yes.
Mr. Barr. Well, that has been known to happen, Congressmen
are like that. But we appreciated very much Congressman Isakson
being with us for a short period of time today, even though he
is not on this particular panel. He is a tremendously important
asset to us because he understands these problems as well and
is working to solve these problems.
But did all of you get a feel--and I think also from
Chairman Mica's remarks--that we are trying at the national
level to put our money where our mouth is and put the money
where the Federal law is? Immigration is a Federal
responsibility. Certainly addressing the problem of illegal
aliens, because it impacts local communities, is best addressed
by having joint task forces and a joint approach. And from that
standpoint, its enforcement is a joint responsibility, but
ultimately, as you have indicated, Sheriff, in your opening
remarks, this is a Federal problem. And until the Federal
Government gets serious about it, it is not going to be solved.
We have been trying over the last 4 years to solve the
problem at least from the standpoint of providing significantly
enhanced resources to the INS and, in particular, for interior
enforcement. They have received very significant increases for
border enforcement as well, and I know your experience there is
very accurate, as you described it.
But as Chairman Mica said, we share your frustration
because the problem is increasing out there. We have been
appropriating what we have believed to be, if not sufficient
resources to solve the problem, at least sufficient resources
by more than doubling them over just the last few years, to
much better address the problem. Yet, as we have heard from the
previous panel, those resources are not getting from Washington
down to the district where they could really help you all. And
I must say that with the limited resources that you all have to
work with with INS, as was indicated with INS and DEA
previously, they all are doing remarkable things and I commend
you for that.
With regard, Sheriff Hutson, to your particular program
that you mentioned, and you were kind enough to show me this
particular portion of the work in your county jail, the video-
teleconference interview system; does that take the place of
the two INS agents that had been full time?
Mr. Hutson. Yes, sir, that takes the place of them
physically being there at the jail. We can do everything with
that video-teleconferencing that we could do when they were
physically there in the facility.
Mr. Barr. Do you find that it works out actually better,
and that it is more efficient to do it that way, or was it
better to have the two agents there?
Mr. Hutson. Well, we get a lot more for our money with the
teleconference.
Mr. Barr. Do you know the cost of that system?
Mr. Hutson. No, I am sorry, I do not, Congressman. INS paid
for the equipment, I think we put the cable in, but they paid
for the equipment and I am sorry, I do not know the cost of
that equipment.
Mr. Barr. OK. District Director Fischer or Bart, do you
know the cost of that particular system?
Mr. Fischer. About $24,000, sir.
Mr. Barr. So $24,000, significantly less than having one or
certainly two agents.
Mr. Mica. We may need to let the record reflect that it was
a response from Mr. Fischer and the answer was $24,000.
Mr. Barr. $24,000, which is significantly--at least I hope
it is significantly less than it would cost to have one or two
agents out there. That is very interesting and that might be
something, Mr. Chairman, that we could look into, to provide
more programs like that. They seem to be very cost-effective.
With regard, Captain Neal, to the local task force you
addressed, who all participates in that? Is it just your
department and the INS or are there other jurisdictions also?
Mr. Neal. It is actually funded by the city of Dalton and
by the Whitfield County Commissioners, it is joint funding, 50
percent by each. I have a budget of $200,000. From that, I
operate an office with two Dalton investigators and a
secretary. The INS has two agents assigned to it and they have
some computer equipment assigned so they can check and verify
aliens.
Mr. Barr. And this task force, is it just to handle the
problems in the city of Dalton?
Mr. Neal. Well, in actuality it is really north Georgia. We
respond to Calhoun, we have gone to Cartersville, Rome, Murray
County, Walker County, Catoosa County. And we have responded
out to the interstate on interstate interdictions by the GSP.
They are sworn deputies and the task force actually responds to
all of northwest Georgia. But it is funded by the city and the
county.
Mr. Barr. OK, and the figures that you provided, both in
your written testimony as well as a response to questions from
Mr. Mica, you say you have approximately 25,000 to 30,000
illegals in Dalton, is that just in the city?
Mr. Neal. Not just in the city, no, sir, that is within the
hub of the carpet industry there and it would also encompass
Murray County. Those figures in actuality come from Central
Latino. Central Latino is a Hispanic outreach group that is
based in Dalton, GA. And that and our enforcement is how we get
our numbers. They estimate that they have about 40,000 there
and from our enforcement efforts and going in on these
industries and doing inspections, we estimate that probably
25,000 are illegal.
Mr. Barr. Sheriff, do you have any figures that you could
provide to us for comparison purposes in your jurisdiction,
which is all of Cobb County, encompassing I guess five
municipalities including Smyrna where we are here today, what
the nature of the illegal immigration problem is, how many
illegals do you estimate you have in the county?
Mr. Hutson. I am sorry, Mr. Congressman, it is real
difficult to get a handle on the numbers, and I would be
reluctant in this large area because there is constant
movement, the day laborers, it is real difficult.
You know, one thing that I did not point out in all this
and I probably could speak for the law enforcement community at
the local and State level, Tom Fischer and John Andrejko, the
guys we work with, people in the U.S. Attorney's Office, we
have a good working relationship, those people are real
cooperative to deal with. I do not want anything I have said
today or probably anyone else to imply anything otherwise. I
think they are great people to work with and I commend them for
the job they do.
Mr. Barr. I do too, and I think we all are unanimous in
that the problems we are pointing out are simply problems with
funding from Washington.
Mr. Hutson. Right.
Mr. Barr. Not getting the resources that we have been
trying to direct to the District so that Mr. Andrejko and INS
Director Fischer and Bart Szafnicki and the U.S. Attorney can
do a better job pursuant to what we in Congress would like them
to do. But they are doing a tremendous job with the resources
that they have and I am very glad to hear of the cooperative
spirit between your office and the Federal officials, which was
my experience when I served as U.S. Attorney.
Chief Johnson, with regard to your work in Chamblee, you
made some very interesting points with regard to the nature of
dealing with the immigration problem involving illegals, even
to the extent that it hampers a lot of the social services
agencies, I think you talked about, and even the nonprofits,
you mentioned the nonprofit organizations that try and work
with illegals.
Do you find that the best approach is to try and work with
all different agencies in the community, not just law
enforcement, but the different social services agencies to try
and get a handle on the problem?
Mr. Johnson. That is absolutely correct, Mr. Congressman.
You use everybody that you can and that was one of the problems
that we faced early on when we first tried to do something with
the problem, we tried to recruit a lot of the nonprofits. They
were working with the communities, providing job services,
advice, but they were clearly doing it and said so, that they
could only do that to documented citizens for fear of losing
their tax-exempt status or repercussions.
But yet those would be the same people that would point the
finger at law enforcement and say we were being too aggressive
or too--picking on one ethnic group over the other. And I kind
of basically say it is a little unfair, if they are not able to
get in the trenches with us and do something, they can sit back
and take pot shots.
Mr. Barr. It's politics too.
Mr. Johnson. It is not just the crime, it creates a whole
group of people in the community that are just--cannot avail
themselves of the services and they are victimized by their
own. And again, where do we draw the line? I think Sheriff
Hutson said what I say all the time, that it is obvious to us
that at the Federal level, even though we are putting more
resources to it, or Congress is, enough is not being done. And
while the people are freely able to come into the country
illegally, the least that we can do is take action against
those that while they are here illegally break laws other than
as has been mentioned two times for child molestation or one of
this or one of that. That is hard to explain to my community
that well, I know they are illegal and they are not here
legally, but they have not broken enough laws to be evicted or
removed from the country.
Mr. Barr. Well, that is why we spent some time talking with
Mr. Fischer about that and hopefully that proposal will not see
the light of day. I know that it had been a problem because it
was proposed earlier this year by some folks in Washington
apparently.
I know you, Chief Johnson, had mentioned the problem with
day labor pools. Is that a problem, Mr. Neal, in your area or
is the nature of the illegal employment problem different up
there because of the carpet business?
Mr. Neal. No, it is a little different. The nature of the
carpet industry, we have 77,000 jobs in Dalton-Whitfield area
and they are all going in and either through temp services,
going into the carpet industry or they are hiring directly into
the carpet industry. It is not day labor.
Mr. Barr. Sheriff, what is the nature, if you can summarize
it, of the illegal employment problem in Cobb County? Do you
see both the problem that Chief Johnson has with day labor and
whatever disruptions there might be with that, or is it a
different problem?
Mr. Hutson. No, there are areas of the county where there
is a large congregation of people and we just assume that some
of these are illegally here, where they congregate,
construction does pick them up off the street.
Mr. Barr. Do you have any particular problems associated
with that in your experience?
Mr. Hutson. Yes, there are problems. We get constant
complaints from businesses about them loitering in a particular
area in the mornings, primarily in the mornings, up until maybe
midday.
Mr. Barr. Is part of the problem--and I direct this to all
three of you--is part of the problem the fact that there are
employers ready and willing and able to hire illegals and is
the Federal Government not doing enough to stop that, or to
enforce the existing laws, or are the existing laws not
sufficient to enforce it, to stop it?
Mr. Neal. I would think that the resources are not
sufficient to stop it. We do educational seminars with our
employers all the time about spotting illegal documents,
spotting illegal aliens. The overall majority is they want to
do that, they want to do it correct, and we have focused on
them stating that we are not trying to take your work force, we
are just trying to make your work force legal. They want to do
it and they want to do a good job and we do that through
educational programs with them, but there are unscrupulous
people there that would rather hire the illegals than hire
legal people. And we have targeted those and been successful on
taking out a few of the targets there with employers. We have
charged employers for knowingly hiring. That is not a large
majority, but the majority of them really want to do the right
thing. They are confused by Federal law and what it takes and
what requirements they have to have to fill out the I-9s. We
try to establish that, but really it is going to take a lot
more resources to get inside and target from that end than what
they have allocated to them.
Mr. Barr. Chief.
Mr. Johnson. Again, as we were saying earlier, the
experience in Dalton versus Chamblee is completely different
because of the type of business. With us, it is primarily day
labor and it is unscrupulous employers. We have an ordinance
that we passed 18 months ago that dealt with assembling for day
labor purposes and it basically says that you cannot do it on
private property, you cannot either hire yourself as day labor
or hire--for a contractor to pick somebody up, without the
owner's permission. So we have been able to cite a lot of
contractors for doing that. They knowingly are coming into
these places to these day labor pools and picking up people and
they could care less about their legal status, about filling
out an I-9, and it is a daily basis. We have several locations
that have 100 plus people waiting for work every morning--
landscapers, construction people, that whole trade in the
Atlanta area is very heavily involved with hiring undocumented
people.
Mr. Barr. Are any of the three of you familiar with the
Operation South PAW that we talked briefly about previously?
Chief, Deputy Chief Neal, are you familiar with that, were you
involved in that?
Mr. Neal. We participated in it, yes, sir.
Mr. Barr. And Sheriff?
Mr. Hutson. [Nods head.]
Mr. Barr. Would all of you agree that that was a very
positive operation?
Mr. Hutson. Yes.
Mr. Neal. Without a doubt.
Mr. Barr. And it probably would be worthwhile to do more of
that?
Mr. Neal. Yes, sir.
Mr. Johnson. That was what I was referring to when I talked
about some of these operations were too few and too far
between. If anything, until the borders can be protected
properly, that helped at least keep it a little bit honest. In
the process, my biggest concern is the backlash from the
community when you try to take the stance that we cannot solve
the national immigration problems so we are going to deal with
actions. Somewhere there is a line that that word can get out
that in Chamblee it is kind of open season, they are not going
to worry about immigration, so where do you draw that line.
Things like South PAW and some of the other operations that
have been done at least give the message that it is not just a
free ride that you can go unchecked whatsoever.
Mr. Barr. So it would be fair to say that in your judgment,
worksite enforcement is an important part of the overall
interior enforcement effort by INS, it ought to continue and
ought to be expanded.
Mr. Johnson. Absolutely.
Mr. Neal. Yes, sir.
Mr. Barr. Thank you. And I presume that Mr. Fischer and Mr.
Szafnicki would agree with that. That is one reason why we are
holding this hearing today, to identify those aspects of the
effort that have worked in the past in trying to encourage
through the appropriations process perhaps more of that in the
future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and chief and Deputy Chief Neal
and Sheriff Hutson, we very much appreciate your law
enforcement work generally on behalf of our citizens and your
taking time to be with us today to share your very valuable
insights.
Mr. Mica. Before we move to the next panel, I just wanted
to see if any of our witnesses had any final comments, anything
we may have missed. This is your chance. We have got Mr. Barr
in a captive situation.
Mr. Barr. The Sheriff always has me in a captive situation,
I am one of his constituents.
Mr. Mica. This panel is open to your recommendations.
Anything else you would like to add at this point, Mr. Johnson,
Mr. Neal?
Mr. Johnson. No, sir.
Mr. Neal. No, sir.
Mr. Mica. I have never seen a more cooperative group in my
life, Mr. Barr.
Mr. Barr. You are in Georgia.
Mr. Mica. Yes.
Mr. Barr. We aim to please.
Mr. Mica. Thank you. We do sincerely appreciate your
participation. Believe it or not, all the answers are not in
Washington and we do struggle to try to be responsive and make
these programs and agencies work to everyone's benefit, but it
will not work unless we have dedicated public servants like you
come out who are willing to participate and let us know how we
can improve the system.
So I thank each of you for your participation today and
your work on the local level.
We have a request for a 5-minute recess, which we will make
into 7 minutes and then we will call our third panel forward.
So we will stand in recess until 25 minutes before the hour.
[Recess.]
Mr. Mica. I would like to call the subcommittee back to
order and ask, if we could, our two witnesses to be seated.
Our third panel this afternoon consists of Ms. Cassie Cole
who is with the Parole Office in Smyrna, GA. Our other panelist
this afternoon is a local business owner, Mr. Dan Bowles. I
would like to welcome both of you this afternoon and thank you
for providing testimony.
As I mentioned to the other panelists, this is an
investigations and oversight subcommittee of Congress and for
that purpose, we do swear in all of our witnesses. I do not
want this to be too intimidating and we do appreciate citizens
coming forward and volunteering their testimony and also I did
mention that we do try to limit the verbal or oral testimony
before the subcommittee to 5 minutes and you are welcome to
submit additional documentation or information or lengthy
written statements to the subcommittee.
So with those comments, if you could please, would you
stand and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Mica. The witnesses answered in the affirmative, and
again, we are pleased to have you both come and give testimony
to our subcommittee this afternoon. As you have heard, the
title of this hearing is INS support for local efforts, are
there sufficient Federal resources; and we have heard some
perspective from the Federal agencies, both INS, DEA, other
Federal agencies, U.S. Attorney's Office, and then we heard
some from our local enforcement officials, the sheriff and
police and local officials. Now we would like to hear your
comments as to how you view the situation and any
recommendations you may have in regard to the subject at hand
today.
With that, I will recognize first Ms. Cassie Cole, who is
with the Parole Office of Smyrna, GA. You are recognized, and
welcome.
STATEMENT OF CASSIE COLE, PAROLE OFFICE, SMYRNA, GA; AND DAN
BOWLES, LOCAL BUSINESS OWNER
Ms. Cole. Thank you, sir; thank you, Bob Barr, for the
invitation.
Mr. Mica. As loud as you can speak.
Ms. Cole. Sorry. Thank you for the invitation. I am very
honored to be here to testify before Congress.
Some of the things that I would like to present are the
things that we deal with on the probation level. These are
issues that I deal with on a day-to-day basis.
We have had several--I carry a caseload of about 250, I
would say that about 65 percent of my caseload is Hispanic. I
am of Hispanic descent, so therefore, I am able to tap into
some resources that most people probably would not be able to.
And what I have done is pretty much done a presentation, just
highlighted some of the issues that I deal with in the law
enforcement area to also support what the other agency has
actually addressed here.
One of the main issues that I have in my department is
actually--or actually in all of the probation or parole
department, is actually immigrants who are providing false or
fictitious names to agencies. This makes it very, very
difficult for us to determine who that person is. When we are
running criminal histories and putting in that name, we are not
sure who actually is--who that person is, which makes it very,
very difficult to arrest, if we have to make an arrest.
Other things that the probation and parole department deals
with is falsifying Social Security cards from alternative
unauthorized establishments or others possessing Social
Security cards that are borrowed from other people. Once again,
this poses a problem when we are doing criminal history
background checks because if we run--if we put the Social
Security number into the GCIC or NCIC data base, what happens
is that particular Social Security may go with another name.
Issuing licenses to immigrants without passing
qualifications is another issue that is a very big concern to
probation and parole for the fact that we are not sure how they
are obtaining these licenses. Some of the things that I have
been able to tap into, the sources that I have been able to tap
into, is that according to some of these immigrants--and once
again, I can pretty much visit with them and find out some
things that I need to know--is that there are several States
within the United States which do not ask for any type of ID
like Social Security or a photo ID and they can go ahead and
pick up these licenses. Then they come into our State, commit
the infractions here and once they have met the conditions of
probation or parole, they fix their information here and they
go back to those States to go get licenses again.
Also the DUI and risk reduction programs are issuing
certificates to immigrants who have not properly met their
criteria requirements. I do not understand how someone can go
and sit in an English speaking DUI class and obtain a
certificate when they do not speak English themselves. That is
very, very difficult, but we do have agencies who actually are
doing that. And I do not know if it is for the money or what
reason they are doing it for other than the money, but the
immigrants are getting ahold of DUI certificates and going and
getting licenses as well.
The main--one of the main things that concerns a lot of the
citizens, and this has been brought to my attention----
Mr. Barr. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, could I go out of order
and just ask one quick question just on that one point that Ms.
Cole mentioned?
Mr. Mica. The gentleman is recognized. If you do not mind,
we will interrupt.
Ms. Cole. No.
Mr. Barr. What happens when they go back into court, does
this raise a question in the judge's mind?
Ms. Cole. Yes, it does, sir, it does. And I am able to
actually, in my department--and I hate to use the word
manipulate, but manipulate the situation into being able to get
the answers that I need in order for these individuals to tell
me where they are getting their driver's license at, how they
are getting their driver's license or fake Social Security
cards, and why they continue to keep producing a new license
every time they come through this court.
Mr. Barr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mica. If the witness would continue.
Ms. Cole. Another issue that--there are several others, but
this is one that I feel is very, very critical is how an
illegal alien is able to buy a vehicle without any type of
insurance or proof of driver's license. And this is not from
the big dealerships that I am actually addressing, these are
from the small dealerships that are actually out there on the
corner of certain streets that they are able to purchase
vehicles and drive them off the parking lot with no type of
identification whatsoever.
Those are some of the issues that I have pretty much
confronted in the department of probation and parole and I know
that those are issues that we deal with. I deal with the
recidivism of the Hispanics when they do come in. They come in
with one name at first, turn around and they come in with
another name the second time around, come with another name and
then we are having--and if you have a probation officer that is
able to identify that person on those occasions, then you have
to take all that information and consolidate it so that we can
build a criminal history on that particular person. Now the
question is, who is that person.
Mr. Mica. Thank you. I guess that concludes your testimony?
Ms. Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mica. I would like to now recognize Mr. Dan Bowles, a
local business owner.
Mr. Bowles. Thank you very much for the opportunity here
today. I own the Texaco Express Lube at Powder Springs and
Garrison Road, it is about half a mile off the square in
Marietta, I have been there approximately 11 years and I just
opened a brake and tire center directly behind it for about
2\1/2\ years.
We have got a terrible problem with day laborers loitering
and hanging out in front of our business. And in a two block
area in front of about 8 to 10 businesses, we have at least 100
to 200 day laborers on a daily basis out there. In front of our
business, it is not uncommon to have 15 to 30 at one time on a
given day and some of the effects of this are it is a decrease
in our car count, which is what our business operates on
basically. It is not what one desires when you are starting a
new business as well. We have had no increase in our sales in
the last year because the problem has gotten a lot worse,
especially in the last 6 to 9 months. We feel like we are
probably losing $3,000 to $6,000 in revenue, you know, just on
a monthly basis, just in sales.
Our landscaping has been trampled and destroyed in front of
our business, trash and litter is a constant problem, we have
to police it on a daily basis. We deal with a lot of customer
complaints regarding the situation. We have had well over 500
complaints from our customers where men and women both tell us
they were afraid to pull in the location, they saw a group of
people out front, they didn't want to pull in our business. We
call the police one to two times a day, 6 days a week; 10
minutes after the police leave, basically the people are right
back out front looking for work.
It appears to me that the police do not have any authority
to do anything about this situation, especially with the
current loitering and trespassing laws in the city of Marietta,
where my business is located. So I guess that is where it is
applicable there.
We have had some of the same individuals, especially the
ones that do not get picked up for work it seems like, they
tend to want to congregate in the rear of the business. So
usually 8 to 10 is when most of them get picked up. If they do
not get picked up, they tend to go to the gas station next door
and pick up beer or whatever and they sit up on the hill behind
our business and they drink most of the day and they litter. We
have had a lot of problems with that as well. We have even been
cited by the City for trash, rubbish and debris on the vacant
lot behind our business, which none of it was our doing, but we
are responsible for picking up and paying to keep this clean.
Some of the preventive steps we have taken, you know, just
to combat the problem, is that we have put up barbed wire on
the back of the property line. I would like to make a note,
there is an apartment complex directly behind us where a lot of
these people are residing and they are walking, you know, down
in front of our business location for work. We have posted it
with no trespassing signs. After replacing the signs three to
four times and replacing the barbed wire where it has been cut,
it is a bit frustrating. We have talked with the local police
and they have their bike patrol back there now. They have put
new signs in Spanish and English and they are patrolling back
of the property basically.
We have made sure that our pay phones had no incoming
calls, we have had Cobb County Transit, after about 6 or 8
months of fighting and talking with them, remove the bus stop
in front of our location. We have also discussed hiring
security guards amongst some of the local businesses there to
have somebody patrol in front of our business locations, you
know, in the 8 to 10 a.m. hours of the day I guess. We formed a
committee called Clean Up Powder Springs Streets, that consists
primarily of homeowners, business associates, residents,
attorneys and so forth. And we have contacted our local police
department, the city planning and zoning department,
councilmen, mayors and commissioners and we have discussed all
this with them and I have got a sheet I will be glad to give
you on basically what we have done with our committee there.
We have discussed strengthening the loitering laws and the
trespass laws. They also have a law allowing sting operations
on the city square in Marietta but we are trying to get them to
expand that for the whole city, maybe to help combat the
problem somewhat there.
Just a few incidents here. There is an insurance agent that
was there when I started my business, Ward Proctor, he moved
just recently, he said he had had enough with the situation.
Fortunately for him, he just leased his location, so he was
able to up and move across town.
Operama Pools has been there 40 years, it is a family owned
business, Karen Scherer is the operator. They had never had any
break-ins their first 39 years in business, they have had five
to six in the last year alone.
My Express Lube, I told you I have been there 11 years. In
the fall of 1997, us as well as the gas station beside us were
both vandalized, just our location alone had over $20,000 worth
of vandalism in the area there.
There are several other incidents that I do not have a
whole lot of details on, but there has been increase in traffic
accidents in the area. Several pedestrians especially have been
hit. One of the biggest problems is they are darting across
five lanes of traffic trying to get to a contractor to get
work.
Also, one other note I would like to make, based on
Marietta Police records, 600 Powder Springs Street, which is
the area from 596 to 600 Powder Springs Street, that is their
No. 1 call-in zone in the city of Marietta for crime, and
basically it has been because of the loitering incidents and so
forth, just the things going on in front there.
That is just basically what we are having to deal with
there at our location.
Mr. Mica. I thank you both for your testimony.
Ms. Cole, let me ask you a few questions if I may. Tell me
your agency again, you are part of the State parole?
Ms. Cole. I work for the city of Smyrna Probation, it is
the Smyrna Probation Department, sir.
Mr. Mica. Only with jurisdiction within the city?
Ms. Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mica. So you are dealing with parole cases for the city
only, not State or Federal?
Ms. Cole. That is correct and all of them are misdemeanor
traffic offenses, DUIs, VGCSAs and city ordinances.
Mr. Mica. And what estimate of your problems or your cases
deal with illegal aliens?
Ms. Cole. The majority of them are no proof of insurance,
DUIs, invalid licenses and no license.
Mr. Mica. But are they illegals or are they----
Ms. Cole. Yes--well, no, they are--it is everyone, but I
would say there are so many, DUIs are very high with Hispanics.
No proof of insurance and no license are other high, but as far
as illegals, no; we deal with anyone who comes through the city
of Smyrna.
Mr. Mica. Can you estimate for us how many may fall into
the illegal realm?
Ms. Cole. I am not familiar with Smyrna other than what I
deal with in my department, so I really could not answer that,
sir.
Mr. Mica. Well, in your department.
Ms. Cole. I would say that probably maybe 40 percent--and I
may be underestimating--are, the majority of those caseloads
are illegal aliens.
Mr. Mica. Forty to fifty percent?
Ms. Cole. I am sorry?
Mr. Mica. Forty to fifty percent?
Ms. Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mica. Is there anything at the Federal level you think
we can do that would help resolve this problem?
Ms. Cole. I know that there is a lot that Congress is
doing, and as I heard testimony earlier from the Immigration
Department, that they do ship and deport a lot of felonies,
people that are felony offenses, but there is not anything
being done for the misdemeanor cases.
Mr. Mica. So the aggravated felonies which the U.S.
Attorney testified to and which the law I guess specifically
addresses are the focus of attention, but there are a lot of
other people falling through the cracks and you are dealing
with misdemeanors and other local ordinance violations to the
tune of 40-50 percent that may be committed by those illegals;
would that be a fair statement?
Ms. Cole. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Mr. Mica. And my question was the Federal Government, you
said they are doing some things, but there is nothing under
Smyrna's jurisdiction to deport these folks or handle the
situation, no reimbursement for costs; is that correct?
Ms. Cole. That is correct, not that I am aware of at this
time.
Mr. Mica. These are not felony cases, but lower level
crimes, are there any Federal assistance programs, to your
knowledge, or any reimbursement for the costs incurred by the
local community for these expenses?
Ms. Cole. Not that I am aware of, sir.
Mr. Mica. And tell the panel, if you will, is this
something that--how long have you been with the agency?
Ms. Cole. I have been here for almost 9 months, but I have
been in probation for over 4 years.
Mr. Mica. For 4 years.
Ms. Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mica. Was it this severe 4 years ago? I mean are we
seeing the same level of problem or is there an increase?
Describe for the panel what you have seen over the 4-years you
have observed this problem.
Ms. Cole. The problem has increased. I was in Floyd County
before and I dealt with probation in Floyd County and from the
time that I began back in 1995 up to the current, I have seen
that this problem is getting progressively worse instead of
better.
Mr. Mica. I appreciate that.
Mr. Bowles, you have certainly described the impact on your
business, I guess you are the owner of the business?
Mr. Bowles. That is correct.
Mr. Mica. And you have been in business 11 years.
Mr. Bowles. Right.
Mr. Mica. How would you describe the evolution of this
problem, has it been all 11 years or you have seen most of the
increase over what period of time?
Mr. Bowles. The problems really just started in the last 2
years, in the last year it has probably tripled. Like I say,
there are 8 to 10 businesses in the location that are impacted.
Mr. Mica. Are there other areas of the community that are
impacted? Is there some reason why you have been picked out for
this particular----
Mr. Bowles. Several years ago, the problem persisted on the
square in Marietta and like I say, they created a task force
having sting operations and they have basically moved the
crowd, dispersed them and they have filtered down and over the
course of a couple of years, now they are congregating in front
of our six to eight businesses there.
Mr. Mica. And you have seen a dramatic increase in crime,
you said, not only----
Mr. Bowles. Right, mainly in the last year.
Mr. Mica. In the last year.
Mr. Bowles. Year, year and a half.
Mr. Mica. Is there any program you are aware of that the
locals or Federal or States have undertaken to deal with this
problem?
Mr. Bowles. Based on my experience, I do not really feel
that, you know, there is anything on the books that gives the
law enforcement the authority to do anything. We have met with
this committee I mentioned and, you know, basically they have
mentioned, you know, putting a security guard out front, taking
a warrant out on each individual but that is very time-
consuming and costly for a business owner. It is hard to
identify when they are in such large groups and they disperse
and come back. It is really--I do not know that there is, you
know, anything on the books right now that gives them the power
to do something like that.
Mr. Mica. What recommendation do you have to this Federal
panel to deal with the problem?
Mr. Bowles. Well, basically I feel that the INS is lacking
support because on one incident we called--I had a cousin come
in from Hiram/Dallas area, 15 to 20 miles away. I asked him
what he was doing, he is in the construction business. He said
we heard this is where you pick up day laborers. I said well,
you heard right. He had a Hispanic working with him that had
been employed for him 2 years, he is legal. They went out and
talked to about 30 people, 20 minutes later he comes back and
says we just talked to 30 people out front and only 2 of them
had their green cards. So, you know, out of that percentage, a
large number of them were illegal. Now this has been probably 6
months or so ago. We contacted the INS and basically we were
told they did not have the manpower to deal with our problem.
Mr. Mica. You contacted them how long ago, 6 months?
Mr. Bowles. Roughly, yes, sir.
Mr. Mica. And they have not sent any enforcement people
out?
Mr. Bowles. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Mica. So I guess your recommendation would be to
provide the resources so you can stay in business.
Mr. Bowles. Right. Locally, I am interested in some of the
laws that the other police officers have proposed in like the
Chamblee area and so forth. We have talked to the police
officers on a daily basis when they come out and one of the
things we proposed, you know, amongst ourselves with them is if
we could put a law on the books basically stating it is illegal
to pick up day laborers unless it is a specified location. We
feel this would give the police officers some authority to make
arrests, we feel it would centralize the location for them to
be picked up and----
Mr. Mica. You are in Marietta.
Mr. Bowles. That is correct.
Mr. Mica. And did I hear, I think one of the gentlemen, the
representative from Dalton, did they not enact a law similar to
what you are talking about?
Mr. Bowles. They had a day labor law I think he mentioned
in Chamblee.
Mr. Mica. In Chamblee. So you are recommending the locals
enact something like that?
Mr. Bowles. I think it would be beneficial.
Mr. Mica. Well, I appreciate both of your testimonies this
afternoon. I yield now to Mr. Barr.
Mr. Barr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bowles, followup on the last point that the chairman
asked about, have you had the opportunity to speak directly
with the city attorney about the possibility of drafting such
an ordinance?
Mr. Bowles. We have met with the zoning and planning
department, Judy Garrett is her name, and she is working as the
liaison between all the city department heads--we talked with
our representatives out at my location, the mayor has been
invited to our meetings, she has not shown. We have talked to,
like I say, the councilmen and just some of the local people
there. We have not gotten any results as of yet.
Mr. Barr. Which councilman has your area?
Mr. Bowles. Johnny Sinclair is the one that we have spoken
with. I spoke with him again today and, you know, just followed
up on our meeting 2 or 3 weeks ago to see if he had made any
progress and of course he did not have anything for me at this
time.
Mr. Barr. Have you contacted our office in Marietta, spoken
with anybody there?
Mr. Bowles. I believe Fred Akin was present at one of our
meetings.
Mr. Barr. The gentleman back there?
Mr. Bowles. That is correct, yeah.
Mr. Barr. Let the record reflect it is the distinguished
gentleman in the gray jacket, gray hair and the gold rimmed
glasses.
Mr. Bowles. But he was present at one of our meetings. And
like I say, it is mainly just a concerned group of citizens in
the area, they are worried about their property values going
down and mainly the south side of Marietta is just getting
really run down and a lot of people tend to want to avoid the
area. And you know, you hate to see it happen because it just
came about so quick and I feel like, basically, that if there
was some type of law enforcement or something that the police
officers could do, that we could deter the problem.
Centralizing them would make it a lot easier to--you know, that
would make the ones that are legal want to go there and if you
wanted to set up any communication or what-not with this group,
you know, it would make it possible. The ones that would be
left out would probably be the ones that are illegal. And you
know, those are the ones that I guess we need to be dealing
with.
Mr. Barr. Also, Moore, could you identify yourself? This is
Mr. Moore Hallmark, who is our legislative director for the
district. If you would contact him, we would be glad to assist
in any way we can.
What is there--and I am very familiar with the area, I
drive by it virtually every day that I am in the district
because it is between our district office and other parts of
the district and our house and so forth. Is it your area that
sort of became the magnet for a lot of these folks because it
is the first area as you are coming from the square past the
conference center resort that has some open area where they can
sort of hang out and there is room for trucks to drive into?
Mr. Bowles. Like I say, the problem existed on the square,
there is an apartment complex behind us and the zoning and
planning department has been back there checking code
enforcement and so forth. They keep the premises very neat.
There is also a lot of rental houses on the opposite side of
the street in that particular area and that seems to be where a
majority of them are residing. Also before they moved the bus
stop, I mean it was not uncommon to see them on the buses
unloading at our location. How they picked it, I do not know,
but we would love to have something done about it if possible.
Mr. Barr. Well, I think there should be some solutions and
I know it is a difficult balance that local governments have to
deal with because of certain court rulings, but there have been
jurisdictions such as perhaps Chamblee that might be able to
provide some guidance for us.
I was also interested, I was not aware of the fact that the
city has authority or has given itself authority to conduct
sting operations on the square but not in other parts of the
city?
Mr. Bowles. That was our understanding. We have had several
representatives from the police department at some of our
meetings and basically they said that that was on the books in
the city limits on the square there--excuse me, on the square
only, but not for the entire city. And I have talked to Mr.
Sinclair, our councilman, about maybe expanding that zone. And
like I say, that is one of the things I have asked him to work
on for us.
Mr. Barr. OK. I know Mr. Szafnicki is still here, we
appreciate Mr. Szafnicki sticking around the hearing today and
I know he is very concerned about these things. With INS
generally though, it is just a matter of getting the resources
to them. And that is why this hearing today, including your
testimony, is very, very valuable to us. And if you would,
contact Mr. Hallmark and we will be glad to do whatever we can
to assist in the effort. Ultimately, it is going to have to be
something at least on the local level that the city can do, but
we can certainly help out whatever way we can and we will
certainly help out in what we are doing today in following up
on this. I know this is a concern to the chairman as well.
Ms. Cole, I know that, as you indicated previously and as I
know, you have extensive background in a lot of these matters
dealing with the problems of immigration and the impact of
illegal immigration on individual communities, whether it is
our court system, schools, businesses and so forth. And your
background prior to the time when you have been down here in
Smyrna has been up in Floyd County, Rome, Floyd County area.
Ms. Cole. That is correct.
Mr. Barr. Are the problems that you are seeing pretty much
the same, they just seem to keep getting worse because there is
no handle we can get on them, or is the nature of the problem
changing?
Ms. Cole. The problem is getting worse. I know when I was
in Floyd, I was very isolated from this area. When I came out
here, I could see that the problem, you know, here is much
bigger than it is in Floyd County because we are dealing with
the--Cobb seems to be the central and then we are dealing with
all the outer counties or other areas around there. So I do see
that it is getting progressively bigger at this time.
Mr. Barr. Do you deal at all with INS directly yourself?
Ms. Cole. No, sir, I do--well, I take that back, I do on
occasion if one of the offenders actually ends up getting a
felony charge or receiving a felony charge. At that point in
time, I normally will submit a modification to the judge after
I receive all the paperwork from whatever county is submitting
it to my agency or department and then basically terminate the
case and suspend everything that is with this particular
department. And then I just make a telephone call to INS, if
there is a contact person; 9 times out of 10, I just submit it
back to that agency and tell them that everything is terminated
here and they can proceed with whatever they need to do at that
time, at that local agency.
Mr. Barr. Would it be fair to say that of course your
primary concern is, as a probation officer, fulfilling the
mandates of your job, fulfilling your job? Would it also be
fair to say that your primary concern has nothing to do with
being anti-immigrant because obviously you are not, none of us
are, but the public safety?
Ms. Cole. That is correct.
Mr. Barr. Where you have people who are driving cars,
getting DUIs, getting their licenses back, using false
identification to get cars without having proved safe to drive
in the community. Is this a major concern of yours?
Ms. Cole. Yes, it is. Not to stress any kind of negativity
toward any immigrants because of course my family did come in
legally once again, and then became natural citizens. But my
primary concern is the safety of the community. Anyone who
receives a DUI and goes and has an accident, a person is
injured in the other vehicle or possibly killed, now we have
got a different situation to deal with and I am seeing that
more and more--well, on the level that I am in, I am seeing
that we are having a lot of people coming in here who are
driving with no proof of insurance or license and they cannot
be held accountable to rectify the problem to the other person,
the victim who is actually involved, because they leave the
country or we do not know who they are, they change their name
about midway and they disappear off the face of the Earth. And
now we have got a victim here who has no compensation to do the
repairs on their vehicle or if there is any type of injury, to
reciprocate those funds in order for them to go ahead and take
care of that as well.
Mr. Barr. Mr. Bowles, you indicated earlier that during
these past couple of years since this problem has manifested
itself, you have incurred some degree of expense.
Mr. Bowles. Right.
Mr. Barr. Lost income, lost profits as well as damage to
your property. Has there been any injuries that anybody has
suffered yet on your property as a result of this?
Mr. Bowles. Not necessarily on our property, but like I
say, there have been several reports of, you know, pedestrians
being hit primarily from the traffic where there is a lot of
people out in the area and so forth. We have seen several
fights break out in the parking lot, you know, amongst
themselves. I do not know what they are scrapping over, but you
know, the police have had to come in and break it out. That
used to be not a common thing around there.
Mr. Barr. Is the problem in the morning that the employers,
let us call them, who are seeking these day laborers, do they
come onto your property to solicit and pick up?
Mr. Bowles. We are a Texaco Express Lube and right beside
us there used to be a Texaco gas station, they just sold out to
Exxon, but there is a food store and a gas station. And
basically that is where the majority of these people are
coming, they are waiting on the contractors to pull in there to
get their coffee and gas in the mornings and if you pull up in
a truck, you know, it is not uncommon to have three or four
guys jump in the back of your truck and not even say anything,
they just try to get in, like you are in a truck and they want
you to go do some work for them.
So it is a growing problem and it is very intimidating,
especially to young ladies.
Mr. Barr. Thank you both very much for your work and for
being with us today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mica. I would like to thank both of you for your
testimony and again, as I relayed to the other panels, we
particularly appreciate those at the local level and
particularly the private citizens or those with local agencies
testifying before our subcommittee to provide us with some
insight and also recommendations and personal experiences to
how we can do a better job in enforcing and applying the laws
at the Federal level and also changing the administration and
execution of the Federal policy that evolves from our Federal
laws.
So we again thank both of you for coming, being part of
this subcommittee and providing us with your testimony this
afternoon.
Now, as I did say--and we will excuse you at this time.
As I did say, we will leave the record open for 5 days for
additional questions that will be submitted to some of our
panelists. Anyone who would like to make comments can address
them to the subcommittee or contact us and we will make certain
that they are made a part of the record.
There being no further business--excuse me, Mr. Barr?
Mr. Barr. If I could once again thank you and Ms. Lee Smith
here with us today and Mike that came with you today, very much
for the time and preparation for and conducting these hearings.
I would also like to especially commend you, Mr. Chairman, for
properly pronouncing the name of our city here, it is Smyrna.
We have a lot of visitors that need to be corrected when they
come here and say they are very happy to be in Smyerna.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Mica. Well, I have New Smyrna Beach in Florida, which
is part of my district, so I feel very much at home.
We do thank the local officials for the use of their
beautiful city hall facility, and again, for the cooperation of
all those who have participated in our subcommittee hearing
this afternoon.
There being no further business to come before the
subcommittee, this meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:16 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
-