ratings, so i think further improvement is needed in the infrastructure in the development of banks to help them improve their financial positions. i mentioned that some banks will need more than the minimum capital required because of special situations they face with their loan portfolios. there will need to be continued efforts to improve the strength of management of banks so they are well run. i think this is the case of a sort of half full glass. quite a bit has been done but there's lot more that needs to be done in this area. then the word leakage. i was referring to money that's paid by our taxpayers, but for various reasons doesn't end up in the treasury. and what i'm talking about here is really an issue that every country faces. every country has leakages. perhaps they're larger in afghanistan than many other countries, but it's very important there's better compliance. not just to fund the treasury to

help pay for needy social spending and poverty reduction, that's important. but also as a very important part of improving governments and combatting corruption, you don't want to face a culture where every time you meet the tan tax man, you're having a long haggle as to how much of your tax payment will go to him or her and how much will go to the treasury. you're wasting time negotiating with the tax man, you should be negotiating with your customers and suppliers. so there is a twofold impact there. >> let me just follow up on that. for those of us who rely on the newspapers and television to inform ourselves of developments, there were these abiding images of pallets of hard currency being exported every day out of cabo to buy. has that stopped?

because if there is a leakage, and if the money is spent within the country, then even then the economy would profit from it even if it didn't go through the filter of government. some might think that's not a bad thing. but has there been enough done to stop the outflow of money which has been facilitated by either corruption or by lax laws? >> the nature this is, you don't really have numbers to see how much is being exported. there were great articles i remember, particularly in late -- when was it -- 2012, at the time of the public inquiry into the kabul bank crisis. there were great articles about cash exports, but there was no new data, so i don't have a

sense of how that's changed over time. i agree with you, i think it's important that money is invested in the economy, preferably the formal sector than the public sector. >> don't you get it before it leaves kabul or is this all s g smuggled? >> we don't have information to say where cash is coming from in other countries. it also depends on whether or not that cash ever actually ends up in a bank. a lot of this cash stays outside of the banking system. >> okay. >> microphone coming for you. >> you're talking about the private sector, so maybe i can make some question or input. the first question that i have

is that one of your graphs showed expenditures and revenues, and it was huge and something like $10 billion, something like that. it sustained over a long period of time. so my question is that do you expect the donors to continue with the support of this level? and then the second link question is, aren't the donors thinking in some way that this is linked to performance? because if it just comes clean and nothing happens, is that because you've got corruption, you've got all those things, and then you've got developing of the capacity for projects and things? is there something to how you link this thing to actually results?

second question is that is there a little bit thinking of a different model of development where there could be huge focus on a couple factors in the economy, and you said the resource sector could be one and the second could be just simply development and not have the whole development expenses spread out over many, many areas and therefore it just gets -- you don't see what the results are. is there some thinking that that kind of thing can happen and what kind of advice can be given to the government? what's the likelihood of the government accepting such advice? >> thank you. yes, there are long-term commitments of donor support. and they will be revisited at the conferences later this year. in 2012, the securities -- international partner support for security was over a 10-year

horizon. there was a 10-year commitment made. and for the development assistance, it was made for a horizon of just over five years. and linked to that, there was a framework established which was designed to promote reform in various areas, and the donor support would be linked to those reform commitments actually being achieved. so there is a framework for that where donors say, we would like to see progress in the following areas, and these are the sort of milestones that we're looking for you to achieve within certain timelines, and the donor support is linked to the achievement of those. in terms of the development model, this is an area that's not -- we're not great experts in as an institution. but there does seem to be, at least in the near term, some comparative advantage for the agricultural and the natural resource sectors. so that's where in the near term

there does seem to be potential to get growth from moving ahead in either exploiting natural resources or developing and improving the agriculture sector. >> now, paul, the fund does work with the world bank very closely, and you have joint missions also, discussions. what can you tell us about their thinking on this? and are you also in touch with the bank and the view that you're supporting each other in the afghanistan bank to become stable and begin to grow at the right pace and the right direction? >> we are working very closely with both the banks, the world bank and the asian development bank, as well as a number of the large bilateral donors who are active in many of these areas. so, for example, on the natural resources sector, the world bank

has been advising on the mining law, which i think has just passed parliament. we've tried to complement that work by working with the government to develop a fiscal regime or tax regime for the natural resource sector that on the one side shares some of the rent with the government for tax revenue, and on the other side makes sure there are adequate incentives for companies to invest in that sector. >> thank you. do we have a question at the back there, young lady? okay. then let me take -- we have two questions there. >> thank you. i'm michael. i'm just an interested citizen since i developed my public career on research in afghanistan. i see legal reform being absolutely essential towards encouraging and basically guaranteeing economic reforms, but one thing i've seen in my

personal experience is that enforcement is often lax. my favorite story is when you fly into kabul international airport and you're leaving the international section of the terminal and you see this sign, and it says basically, bribery is forbidden in the government of afghanistan. and there is a guard standing next to it. in my first trip to kabul, i see a person come up and press a couple pieces of money in the guard's hand and walk up to the gate. so public opinion of what people believe to be right, and you see if you look at the survey of the afghan people from the asia foundation that's done every year that many people did no no support the idea of bribery, especially if it doesn't benefit them. how can the world bank sort of engage this public support in terms of enforcement of laws?

>> thank you. that's a very good question. one we often ask ourselves, actually. i think that when we work on these things, we partner with the host country government and the central bank, and we try and promote reforms in that way, including in governance. but we also do have a soapbox where we try to go over our reviews publicly, like today. also in kabul we try to express our views. recently we had a press conference with some kabul journalists where we talk about these issues. but we are not in a position to launch, shall we say, a mass wave to persuade public opinion. but we do try and reach out and make our views public. that's why, for example, we've published all the papers that includes some of our work on governance in afghanistan. and we continue to -- we plan to

continue to do so. >> frank. >> frank miller, i just returned from afghanistan from being there for a long time. and one of the things i wanted to make sure i said was i would love to have you on my staff if i was king of the world in afghanistan. the issue that makes me wonder, because you do have a considerable amount of depth of the organization for the requirements for the assumptions. is there some -- because i felt that there wasn't, but is there some type of an authority that the afghan people, the afghan leadership, looked to for the international community for the guidance, and do they believe us? and are there enough afghan leadership or people in leadership, because it's not just afghani or dala-dala, it's all those people supporting them that has the insight and understanding to take the advice

you have and potentially other folks from similar situations and other strains and actually be able to enact that, or is it just three generations away and we just have to knick away at it and knick away at it? >> that's a hard question. i think in the afghan government people understand very well what are the economic issues, and they agree with some of the points we have, but not all of them. but we can discuss with them very clearly. i'm not sure that concerns about the economy are broadly based within the political leadership. and i think that that's not uncommon. afghanistan is not the only country that faces that. but i think there are people that understand the economic challenges and economic issues and possible options and recommendations to address some of the challenges that afghanistan faces to make good problem in this area already. and i think they have made some

pretty good progress since 2002. it's not -- the progress hasn't always been in a straight line. there have been a few zig-zags along the way. but i think there is some capacity to move forward and address these challenges, and there is understanding of what the economic challenges are. but that's also tempered by various interest groups like in every country, because some of these economic reforms create losers and it's natural that with any political system that if you feel that a reform may hurt your economic interests to oppose it. so there are interest groups that oppose reforms in afghanistan like in all countries. >> sorry. we had a question here first? and then at the back. thank you. >> hi, my name is mike bendel. i work for cigar. i just wanted to pivot back to a

framework for moving forward for donor assistance based on agreed-upon metrics of afghan performance. if you look at previous agreements like the imf's extended credit facility arrangement, that has not moved forward. the second and third reviews have been delayed, disbursements of funds have been delayed for several years as well. in fact, the afghan reconstruction trust fund, which in part is hthe disbursement of funds is predicated on movement of the credit facility. since that has been delayed, why should donors have any kind of reasonable assurance that their money will be well spent or afghanistan is making sufficient progress if the imf's own program isn't disbursing funds

or having program reviews? why should people have reasonable confidence that donor assistance will be well used in the future? >> well, there are two answers to that. the short one, which is donors decide what they wish to disburse. the longer one is that although we haven't completed a review for over a year and a half, progress has been made, still, on the economic agenda. it's been slower than we had hoped, but progress has been made. so, for example, inflation is still under control, 6%. the budget position remains quite manageable. the external position, too. debt remains low. reserves remain comfortable. also some important structure reforms have gone ahead. perhaps not as quickly as i would have looked, but there is a new anti-money laundering law, a new bank law has been prepared, the kabul bank crisis

public inquiry has been completed. there have been -- in our framework, i think there was something like 25 structure reform benchmarks for 2012 and 2013, and 22 have been fully completed and the other three have been partially completed. so donors have taken that into account in making the decisions what level and how to support afghanistan. so although reviews have not been completed, there has been some progress. not as much as one would have liked. >> i work with a group called capitalized international in washington, d.c. my question is about gender equality and economic development in afghanistan. what specific measures and reform recommendations is imf along with other donor agencies in afghanistan is doing or

recommending to the afghan government to ensure that growth and development is not just p inclusive in those broader terms but is specifically addressing gender equality in the economic development and trajectory of afghanistan so that afghanistan doesn't become another latin america in its development performance? you know, latin america is the most unequal region, developing region, in the world. so what measures is imf taking to ensure gender equality and growth? thank you. >> well, look, there are two aspects to this. one is there are a number of measures that are designed to make sure growth is broad-based. they are not necessarily gender equality, but they're meant to

be broad-based so it affects everybody. principally the types of combat corruption, improving the investment environment, business environment and job creation. so the benefits of growth are widely spread through a better business and investment environment, which i've discussed. in terms of gender equality, here we are not -- this is an area which is not within our principal expertise, but i did mention some of the measures that have already been taken. there is the ministry of women's affairs. there are measures taken so the female participation in parliament. it's not 50%, but it's relatively high. the number 40 out of 50-some countries follow the parliament. and the millenium goals promote

female health. >> paul, i think we're coming to the end of our appointed time, but i wanted to come back to one question that you hinted at in your presentation, which is the role of trade and regional trade. afghanistan has often been described as a potential economic bridge in the region between central asia and south asia and then on to the gulf. making an assumption that the security situation allows it, how big a factor would this be in stabilizing the economy and helping it grow without necessarily being solely dependent on financial flows from the west? >> yeah.

i think that greater trade would benefit afghanistan considerably. and as you know, there are a number of initiatives to try and, you know, build up the trade flow, say, in the energy sector between central asia and south asia, which would obviously benefit afghanistan as one of the transient groups. the more reaching integration would have two benefits. obviously the direct benefits on income and growth for afghanistan, but it would also tie economic interests and, thereby, security and therefore act as a sort of stabilizer and a source of greater stability, because then everybody would see that there is a common interest in maintaining and improving regional stability. >> maybe on that expectant and optimistic note, i would like to thank you for joining us today, and i want to thank the audience in the hall as well as the

audience at home or in their offices through c-span. thank you very much. [ applause ] ken feinberg has been retained by general motors on crashes leading to defective switches. he will be live on c-span2 at 11:00. booktv sat down with hillary clinton in little rock to discuss her newest book, "hard choices." >> i've learned as secretary of state to expect the unexpected. nobody expected the so-called arab spring until it was upon us. and we have to learn to be agile and ready for the unexpected while we try to build the world that we want, especially for our

children and now for my future grandchild. but we've got to be aware of the fact that all of these other countries, all these billions of people, they're making hard choices every single day. we have to be ready for that. because i am absolutely convinced that we have to continue to lead the world into the kind of future that we want. we can't sit on the sidelines, we can't retreat. we're going to have setbacks, we're going to have disa appointments, but over time, our story has become the dominant story. it represents the hopes and aspirations of people everywhere. that's what i want americans to understand. and the main reason why i wrote this book, i know there is a big debate going on about our role in the world, and we have some real unfortunate consequences still to deal with from prior decisions and the like. but we can't abdicate our

responsibility. how we define it, how we execute it will be the stuff of political debate. but the world needs us. america matters to the world, and yes, the world matters to america for our prosperity and our security and our democracy. >> hillary clinton spoke with us about her decision-making process, the perceptions of the united states around the globe and some of the decisions she had to make as secretary of state. the full interview airs on saturday, july 5 at 7:00 p.m. eastern and sunday, july 6 at 9:15 a.m. eastern. the obama administration is asking congress for $2 billion in emergency funds to stop the mass migration of women and children from central america illegally entering the u.s. the house judiciary committee examined this issue and heard from federal officials on how they are handling the situation. this is about three hours.

the committee will come to order, and without objection, the chair is authorized to recess at any time. we are talking about an administration-made disaster, the south texas border surge of unaccompanied alien minorminors. i will begin to recognize myself for an opening statement. there is a tsunami hitting our southern border. unaccompanied alien minors and adults traveling with mineors ae arrive in huge numbers. they are making a perilous journey through mexico and walking miles through a hostile border environment assisted by smugglers and coming to the united states according to law. robert bellow, who will testify today, they expect to accompany more than 90,000 unaccompanied

minors on the border this year. the estimated number of uams apprehended in 2014 represents a 1,381% increase since 2011, while the projected number of 142,000 apprehensions in 2015 represents a 2,232% increase. it is not just uams who are arriving. adults bringing along minors are also coming. since 2011, the number of apprehended individuals comprising family units has increased from 13,600 to 42,000 for this year as of june 16. taking into account just half of this year, we have seen a 143% increase in families apprehended at the border since 2012. the administration claims that these unlawful aliens are coming to the u.s. based on generalized violence, strife, conflict and

discord in their home countries. it is true that these factors have always played a role in central americans coming to the u.s. illegally. undoubtedly, seeing strife in disadvantaged countries as well as seeing children at our doorstep arouses some deep sympathies. however, the reasons causing the recent and unprecedented surge are very different than those claimed by the administration. a may 28, 2014 rio grande sector intelligence report tells a story that is strikingly different than the claimed humanitarian crisis the administration paints as responsible for the surge. the report, summarized interviews conducted with hundreds of apprehended central americans, minors, and quite frankly paints a very different picture of the situation. according to the report, when these individuals were asked why they made the journey to the united states, approximately 95% indicated that the main reason was to take advantage of the new

u.s. law that grants a free pass or permit referred to as promisos being i recollect yoss u.s. government to women accompanying minors. while no new law has been enacted, this has greatly affected policies. the time of change in policies correlates closely with the steep uptick of individuals showing up at the border. apparently word has gotten out that once encountered by border patrol agents and processed, thanks to this administration's lax enforcement policies, one will likely never be removed. word as spread to the americas and beyond that the obama administration has taken unprecedented and most likely unconstitutional steps in order to shut down the enforcement of our immigration laws for millions of unlawful and criminal aliens not considered high enough priorities,

especially minors and adults with minors. the world seems to know that dhs refuses to enforce the law under the guise of prosecutorial discretion. and now these beneficiaries include those minors and families who continue to arrive at our border, and the administration ushers in via 100% via escorts -- that's a term -- into the interior of the united states. most are ultimately released, often into the hands of those who paid smugglers to bring them here in the first place. in addition, to simply not pursuing removable aliens, dhs has been granting hundreds of thousands of these individuals administrative legalization and work authorization.

dhs does this under many guises, invoking doctrines under names such as reverse action and parole in place. the net effect of these policies has been described by former ice acting director john sandberg, quote, if you are a run of the mill immigrant here illegally, your odds of getting deported are close to zero, end quote. apparently those arriving at our borders now know this. indeed, father hayman vasquez, the director of a migrant shelter in mexico, told news outlets that children and families are encouraged to cross into the u.s. illegally because they think they will be given amnesty. vasquez said, quote, i remember a little boy of nine years old. i asked if he was going to meet someone, and he told me, no, i'm just going to hand myself over because i hear they help kids. in addition, like so many others across central america, robin taleo, a 13-year-old, said his

mother believed the obama administration had quietly changed its policy regarding unaccompanied minors, and if he made it across, he would have a better shot at staying. in the meantime, central american media touts an open door to the u.s. for minors and families. based on information the committee has received, it seems that the administration has known about this problem for some time. reverend richard ricecabbage, who serves on the immigration rights panel, agrees. he claims the administration hid the growing crisis from the media because they're still trying to pass a very unpopular immigration rewrite, end quote. he indicated, quote, that's the administration's

congress' ability to reform our immigration laws. it was easy to predict that people in south and central america, as well as in mexico, would recognize a veiled invitation from the administration to send their children and families to the united states with little chance of deportation. these individuals know that the administration's policy of non-enforcement of our immigration laws presents a golden opportunity for unaccompanied minors and families with minors to come to the u.s. most likely to be released with very little chance of ever being removed. the administration's message is tragic because the journey the administration encourages is so

dangerous and results in death, disease and harm to so many minors along the way. it is often said that nero fiddled while rome burned. unfortunately, it seems that obama fiddles while our borders implode. i look forward to finding out from the witnesses today what, if anything, the obama administration plans to do about this crisis and what would end it. i would like to thank many of the witnesses, many of whom are career law enforcement professionals, to testify. now i would like to welcome the gentleman from michigan, mr. conyers, for his opening statement. >> i had hoped that we could have a balanced discussion about the root causes of the humanitarian crisis we're seeing play out along the southwest border and also begin to identify solutions to this pressing issue.

i now see that some have already made their conclusions before even hearing the facts. i am very, very disappointed about the conclusions and surmises that have been made in the opening statement. and the title of this hearing seems to say it all. an administration-made disaster. the south texas border surge of unaccompanied alien minors. i couldn't more strongly disagree with a misleading title such as this and supplanted by the arguments just presented. my concern is not just that this title unfairly attacks the president of the united states

or that it presupposes a conclusion without substantial evidence, but that it also dangerously mischaracterizes the issue at hand. the increased a in unaccompanie children apprehended along our southwest border in recent years is evidence of a humanitarian crisis unfolding in our region. the facts simply do not support the claim that this administration's actions have somehow led to the current situation. the dramatic flow of children across our southwest borders is a symptom of the real humanitarian crisis that's going on every day in honduras, el

salvador and guatemala where most of these children come from. in each of these countries, the level of violence is sky high and the ability of the government to protect its most vulnerable citizens is terribly low. honduras has the highest murder rate in the world and has had it the last four years. el salvador and guatemala are close behind at fourth and fifth. our state department even warns american citizens not to travel to the honduras and el salvador because the level of crime and violence is critically high. and as a result, many people are fleeing to ask for protection abroad.

it's important to note that they're not just heading to the united states. since 2008, mexico, panama and costa rica has seen a 712% increase in asylum claims from these three countries alone. the number of children we're seeing is sure to test our resolve in the law, and people fleeing persecution is a test we must not fail. i can't help but think of how we responded when tens of thousands of haitians took to the seas in small boats and dangerous conditions after the coup that ousted president juan betra betran ariste.

coast guard vessels interrupted many of these boats and took people to face persecution without a hearing. let's not repeat mistakes of the past. though the current situation gives a great challenge to our country, we must rise to face the challenge and demonstrate our continuing commitment to the rule of law and the protection of refugees. let us not forget the urgent issue in the background. we need to fix our broken immigration system. it has now been a year since the senate passed bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform that would bring much-needed

relief to american families, businesses and communities. and with that, i want to just conclude by pointing out in the 12 months since the senate passed a bill a house version, hr-15, has gained the support of 200 co-sponsors. the congressional budget office has reported that these bills would jump-start our economy and decrease the deficit by $900 billion over 20 years. and public sentiment remains decidedly in favor of comprehensive reform. but here at the end of june and another work up or doperiod, we

nothing to achieve needed reform. so what are we waiting for? i'm ready to take a vote now. and if that happened, i'm willing to believe that a majority of members of the house of representatives would vote right along with me. but leadership in the house still blames their inaction on the president saying that he can't be trusted. the need to fix our broken immigration system, thousands of children flooding across our border, humanitarian crises right in our backyard, these are difficult issues that cannot be explained, let alone solved, by this simplistic accusations and

recycling of political sound bites. i am very discouraged. but i will not stop. now is the time to lay down our legislative armor in the political theatrics and do something simple, because it is the right thing to do. if the house fails to act, i fully support the president doing what he can under current law to improve our broken system. either way, america is waiting. and i conclude my remarks on that note. >> the chair thanks the gentleman and will now turn to the gentleman from south carolina, mr. goudy, for his opening statement. >> it is my pleasure to yield to the chairman of oversight of government reform who has done great work on this issue as well

as, mr. chairman, fraud and the asylum process, the gentleman from utah, mr. chafes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. from the onset, the obama administration has made it clear that certain broad classes of aliens would not be deported if caught at the border of the united states. this created an atmosphere conducive to the rash of thousands of minors, some of them alone and some accompanied, coming to the border of the south united states. in order to deal with this, the obama administration declared that ice will extend the amount of detention beds and send someone to the border to handle the surge of children and adults trying to enter the country illegally. unfortunately, the failure to make our immigration laws will

do little to solve the problem it's created. many of the people coming to the border will be able to overcome our laws because the obama administration has severely weakened them. they will only ensure that the claims will get adjudicated quickly and the minors will be put on the fast track to remaining in the united states permanently, legally and with a rash of united states provided benefits. many, if not a majority of them are eligible for immigration relief. many of the minors and families arriving at the border are claiming asylum or a credible fear of persecution. these minors can apply for and will likely receive asylum because it's just as easy to gain the system. the committee gained a report that shows at least 70% of asylum cases contain proven or possible fraud. in addition, approval rates of

asylum applications are skyrocketing, and former members of violent gangs who supposedly renounced their position are getting asylum. a minor who wants to make an affirmative claim of asylum will first apply with a u.s. asylum officer. approval rates by asylum officers have increased from 28% in 2007 to 46% in 2014. approval rates by immigration judges in affirmative cases have increased from 51% in 2007 to 74% in 2013. combining these two bites at the apple, the vast majority of aliens who affirmatively seek asylum are now successful in their claims. this does not take into account the appeal of immigration appeals and federal courts. furthermore, family units caught

along the border by ports or ports of entry can face a federal persecution in order to face a hearing before an immigration judge and receive work authorization while their case is pending. over the past several years, fear claims have been granted by the obama administration. currently data provided by the department of homeland security shows that u.s. citizenship and immigration securities makes positive affair findings in 92% of all cases. in fact, credible fear claims have risen 513% from 2007 to 2013 as word has gotten out of the virtual rubber stamping of applications. this is disturbing because drug cartel members are using this process to bypass background checks to get into the country. the

the therefore, they are in the united states for the reasons that caused them to flee their countries in the first place. cartels hit squad members who entered the united states who said they feared violence when they fell out of grace with their, quote, unquote, employers. in one case two families came to the united states claiming fear of persecution and then began targeting each other when they came here. often they've been the perpetrators of the violence themselves. if the administration really wanted to fix the problem, they should have forced our immigration laws already on the books, reversed policies that created this mess in the first place and worked with congress on targeted legislative fixes. i thank the chairman and i yield back. >> the chair thanks the gentleman and recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms.

lohkin, for her opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. today's hearing is a serious topic and deserves serious discussion. unfortunately, as mr. conyers has said, the title and administration-made disaster looks like some have made up their minds and may, indeed, intend to turn this into yet another partisan attack on the administration. the facts don't support that attack, and i hopewell be able to give this topic the consideration it deserves. there is, indeed, a spike in the number of unaccompanied minor children apprehended along the southwest border. although the increase actually began in 2011, the rate of apprehension has increased sharply. we may apprehend as many as 90,000 kids during the current fiscal year, and they have overwhelmed our resources to cope with them. in the past, the majority of kids coming alone came from mexico, and they tended to be

older children, 16, 17-year-old boys. that is no longer the case. the current spike is driven almost entirely by children from three countries, and we have a chart here and you can see it starkly laid out. the source of these children coming to the united states are el salvador, guatemala and honduras. and the current population has changed as well. we don't have that on the chart. it contains lots more girls, lots more younger children than have come in the past. it has been pointed out, and i think all of us will agree, the journey to the united states is extremely dangerous. along the way, these children could be raped, they could be killed, maimed, become victims of traffic ex torted. many of them know the danger

they will face, so we need to know what they face a causing them to come here, anyway. what is so horrible going on in those countries that you would face being trafficked or raped in order to get here. the u.n. refugee agency has taken a look at what's going on in these three countries, and they report a spike in violence by transnational criminal organizations. in fact, news reports indicate that officials in el salvador recently discovered a mass grave containing the remains of people, including children, who were killed and dismembered elsewhere. in honduras, the covenant house reports that murders of children are on the rise. and according to the state department's 2013 country report on guatemala, many hundreds of women and girls are killed each year. the report notes, and i quote,

that in most killings, sexual assault, torture and mutilation were evident. but only 1 or 2% of these murders ended in conviction. this was a regional catastrophe, and the united states is not the only country experiencing an increase in the number of young people fleeing from these countries seeking protection, as mr. conyers again mentioned. there has been a 712% increase in asylum applications in mexico, costa rica, nicaragua, panama and belise. it's significant that there is no measurable increase of any sort from children coming from these other countries. look at nicaragua. there is no spike there, and nicaragua and actually a country that is poorer than honduras, guatemala and el salvador. there is no spike from these other countries. so if the majority is correct

that there is somehow a change in policy, which there has not been, that has encouraged people to come to the united states, why only from three countries? why not from the the poor count nicaragua? i think also that the unhcr which is probably the most experienced in dealing with refugee matters interviewed 404 of these unaccompanied children that 58% of them spoke of serious harm of protection concerns. i remember last year we had a hearing on so-called asylum abuse and the chairman asked whether there really had been a situation where things had gotten more dangerous in recent years. i think it's obvious when it comes to honduras, el salvador

and guatemala, the answer is yes. unfortunately, some have tried to politicize the situation and argued the administration is responsible for this crises and indeed the title of this hearing is conclusion naer in that respect. put aside the obama administration has set records, i think we need to know that nothing has changed in terms of the law. looking back at the state of the law, the 1997 court ordered settlement flores versus reno established that children should be released to the least restrictive environment because at the time little children were being housed in prisons with adults and the courts found that unconstitutional and wrong. dick army of texas introduced

the act of 1992 which said that unaccompanied children must be released into the least restrictive environment and the protection act that we all championed here co-sponsored by mr. berman, our former college and chris smith also signed into law by george bush further cod fewed that ruling that we are not going to put little children into shackles. it's true that the government is not now using expedited removal to deport these children without an immigration hearing. why is that? because the law prohibits it. they are following what the law says that they must do. this was the law signed into a law when george bush was president in a republican congress. the regional humanitarian crises

requires a regional solution. i'm hopeful that some of the steps announced last week to encourage, even demand the governments of guatemala, el soul va dor and honduras will have an effect and i'm going to be looking closely at how we detain families. the chairman is correct, we have a surge of families with young children and we are as we know, opening up additional facilities for those families to be housed. as the chairman, i'm sure, will recall, in the refugee act of 1980 as well as the illegal immigration reform and responsibility act of 1996 authored by congressman smith of texas, it is required that each case be reviewed closely and on

a case-by-case basis and no child be returned to face persecution abroad. this poses an enormous challenge and not suggest that by following the law we are making up a new policy. we are following the policies that have guided us in treating children since 1997 and i hope that we will not play partisan games with this very dangerous situation. i yield back. >> without objection, all other opening statements will be made a part of the record. we welcome our distinguished panel today and if you would all rise, i'll begin by swearing in the witnesses. do you and each of you swear that the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god. let the record reflect that all

the witnesses responded in the affirmative. mr. thomas hoeman is the executive associate director for enforcement and removal operations for u.s. immigration and customs enforcement in the department of homeland security. in this role, he has direct oversight of critical ice programs and operations to identify, arrest, detain, and remove illegal aliens from the united states. mr. hoeman is a 30-year veteran of law enforcement and has 27 years of immigration enforcement experience with a bachelor's degree in criminal justice. he began his career as a police officer in new york. mr. ronald batello is the deputy chief of the u.s. border patrol. as the border patrol's chief operator officer, he is responsible for the daily operations of the border patrol and routinely reports to and assists the chief u.s. border patrol in planning and directing nationwide enforcement and

administrative operations. he entered the border patrol in 1985 where he served as a supervisory border patrol agent and has been with border patrol since. chris crane currently serves as the president of the national immigration and customs enforcement council 118 american federation of immigration employees. he has worked for the u.s. immigration and customs enforcement at the u.s. department of homeland security since 2003. prior to his service as ice he served for 11 years in the united states marine corps. brandon judd serves as bored patrol council and border support staff. beginning in 1997 mr. judd brings with him more than 17 years of experience as a border patrol agent. he was first elected president of the border patrol local in california in 2001 and was later

elected president of the largest border patrol local in tucson, arizona in 2010 where he served a two-year term. mr. judd is currently a border patrol agent stationed in van buren, maine. mark j. sites was named the 6th bishop in 2013. bishop sites began his priestly formation in 1972 at holy trinity seminary in irving texas on may 17, 1980. he holds a bachelor of arts degree in philosophy, a master's in beginty. in 1985 he received a masters degree from saint john's university in collegeville, minnesota. we welcome all of you. i ask that each witness

summarize his testimony in five minutes or less. to help you stay within that time there's a timing light on your table. from the light switches from green to yellow you have one minute to conclude your testimony. when the light turns red, that's it, your time is up. we start with you mr. hoeman. we're glad to have you with us. >> good afternoon. members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today about u.s. immigration and customs enforcements role in addressing the influx of unaccompanied children around the rio grande valley. we are determined to address this situation in a manner that's comprehensive, coordinated and humane. on may 12th secretary johnson declared a level four condition of readiness. on june 1st president obama pursuant to the homeland security act directed secretary johnson to establish the unified coordination group to ensure

maximum coordination were engaged. this includes the departments of health and human services, defense, justice and state and the general services of administration. secretary johnson has designated federal emergency administrator, craig fugate, to serve in this u.s. government wide effort. when they encounter a child entering the united states, they begin the interview process to determine the child's status, review of available documentation and determine if the child is accompanied by a parent and legal guardian. under the reauthorization october of 2008, an unaccompanied child may be permitted to withdraw his or her application for admission. however, this is not true for the vast majority of children in the rio grande valley because almost all of them are from

honduras, el salvador. upon determining that an unaccompanied child cannot withdraw their application, they notify the office of refugee resettlement. once hhs notifies ice that a shelter bed is available pursuant to the requirements of the law, it is ice's legal responsibility to quickly and safe transport the unaccompanied child to an orr shelter facility. ice transport unaccompanied children via ground, commercial air, and charter flights. in order to speed up the safe transportation of unaccompanied minors to shelters, ice has leased additional aircraft planes and is closely working with the houston airport authority to fly to houston

rather than making a trip to the rio grande valley where inbound and outbound flights are limited. ice enforcement removal operations from other parts of the country are assisting the transportation needs. this allows for more escorting capabilities, prevents officers from breaking the overtime salary cap and offers relief to officers working at an incredible pace. all 24 field offices have primary and back-up coordinators, each of whom received annual specialized training with respect to the unique vulnerabilities of children. ice has detailed more than 91 officers to the rio grande valley to assist with the transportation needs. in conclusion, ice continues to work closely to ensure we have the resources we need to address the situation. together with unified

coordination group ice is accommodating the needs of these children. distinguished members of the committee, i thank you for this opportunity to talk about ice's ability to manage unaccompanied children. i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you for the opportunity to appear today to discuss the role of u.s. customs and border protection in addressing the influx of unaccompanied children. for the past three years the area of rio grande, texas has increased the number of children in texas. the recent increase is difficult and challenging on many levels. to date this fiscal year the number of unaccompanied children is over 51,000. they have more than doubled as compared to the amount over the entire previous year. today there are over 2,700

children in custody. the sector has expanded enforcement actions against identified south texas campaign criminal targets and networks using resident and detailed personnel resources. the border patrol has augmented with experienced agents across the southwest border. they're increasing their footprint within the area of operation. these children are an especially vulnerable population. unaccompanied children are generally separated from unrelated adults. they are provided drinking water, food, and medical assistance. while these basic necessities and facilities may be adequate for a short-term stay, facilities were not designed to accommodate large volumes for an extended period of time. we are working closely with ice, our dhs and other federal

partners to surge resources, personnel, facilities, equipment and supplies to quickly, safely and humanely screen and process children in accordance with the reauthorization act and support the custody to the department of health and human services office of refugee settlement. we are working with other federal partners to improve conditions to temporarily detain, stage unaccompanied children that are awaiting transfer to hhs custody. the border patrol and dhs affairs have established medical units at our busiest stations and conducting public health screens with the coast guard and hhs preparedness and response. for all incoming and adult detainees fema has deployed teams to the rio grande valley and nogales center to assist

with the care pending transfer to hhs. i must commend the work that fema has done in their initial and on going coordination. the fema team has greatly improved the conditions for our work force and these children. assistance from nongovernment and charity organizations has had a big impact. they provided much needed relief to law enforcement agents and officers who have been and are the care takers of this children, including mixing formula and giving of their own children's clothing. they're committed to making sure these children are treated in the most respectful and humane way possible. our agents have stepped up to work this problem with compassion, dedication and professionalism. border patrol continues to work closely with our partners, all

the while protecting america while protecting the border. i thank you for this opportunity to testify today and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. mr. crane, welcome. >> good afternoon, chairman and distinguished members of the committee. before congress discussions changes related to illegalization, it must first ensure that the appropriate safeguards are in place. that's the lesson that must be learned from the humanitarian crises taking place on our border. reports from ice officers in texas corroborate intelligence reports that the majority of individuals entering illegally into the united states are motivated more by amnesty than the situation in their countries. many reporters have confirmed this information through their own interviews. if the administration continues current policies, it can expect

the crises to escalate and other problems to potentially emerge. desperate people in impoverished countries don't read our laws or policies and pay no heed to cutoff dates. continued talk in united states of legalization without appropriate safeguards first in place will continue to draw millions like a magnet to our southern border. the most humane thing we can do to deter crises like this one is to consistently enforce our nation's immigration laws. since the crises started over a year ago, ice employees in the rio grande valley have been overwhelmed. they attempted to adjust but due to limited manpower had little effect. they have worked day and night since the early stages of this situation. as the severity of the situation

increases, other offices are experiencing similar work loads. ice officers are transferring hundreds of children, family units and adult aliens out of the rio grande valley every day to points across the nation. without ice officers performing their critical border security mission, border operations in the rio grande valley would have quickly broken down. ice transport planes have been to heavily used that two additional planes have been leased in addition to support from aircraft, 60 to 120 ice officers from around the nation board commercial aircraft daily escorting children for placement with the officer of regee settlement. they're under orders to be parked for travel and ready to respond day or night. from border areas, ice officers

are scrambling to process, transport and provide space in response to the crises and support border patrol operations. this crises is placing a tremendous strain on ero and its limited manpower and resources nationwide. ice has permanently transferred some officers to the border. as the crises broadens, ero is experiencing manpower and resource losses nationwide. as one example, a new detention center established this week in new mexico will be manned by pulling i officers from other locations within the u.s. fugitive operations teams in some areas have been shut down with officers reassigned to process and transport children and family units. officers and other programs such as the criminal alien program likewise are pulled daily from their public safety missions.

ice ero's many missions are being impacted. since 9/11 the border patrol has tripled in size while ero has become smaller. in addition to its own mission, they're also responsible for the detention, transportation and removal of aliens apprehended by the border patrol, making ero a critical border security asset, long overlooked and now severely undermanned as it struggles to secure its mission. in closing, i know that border security is important to every member of congress. i hope that my testimony today regarding the mission during the current border mission assists congress in addressing the problem. ero cannot continue in its current state, drastically

understaffed with morale plummeting to record lows. we would like to work with congress and ice to make the mission better. in doing so, the proappropriati committee has taken the first step. we greatly appreciate your sass. thank you. >> mr. judd, welcome. >> members of the committee, i testify before you today from a law enforcement perspective. during my 17 years on the border patrol i've seen how policy can affect border security. the latest surge in unaccompanied minors are not a surprise. this crises is the culmination of a variety of factors including but not limited to, first, the catch and release program. this program is bad policy and

encourages people from countries other than mexico to enter the united states illegally. under this policy and in most cases, individuals entering the the u.s. illegally know they will be released if apprehended. the result is no one is afraid of breaking the law. currently my understanding is about 90% of the unaccompanied minors are being placed with a family member or close family friend, many of whom are in this country illegally themselves. although still subject to deportation, we have to be honest with ourselves, most will never honor the notice to appear in court and face deportation. they fail to appear and blend into the community. the real life impact of the decrease means that we have effective lost about 1,100 agents. this manpower decrease did not go unnoticed for those trying to enter the country illegally. third and possibly the most

important, organization's crimes ability, our borders are constantly under attack and this latest surge is another example. these cartels are very skilled at exploiting our weaknesses. it is no coincidence that they're also making hundreds of millions of dollars smuggling unaccompanied minors across the border. it's made all aspects of smuggling easier. if efficiency and safety were the goal, it would make more sense for the cartels to cross to the u.s. by way of the u.s. customs service. they can avoid risking harsh terrains while still gaining entry into the united states. the cartels purposely cross

between ports of entry, creating hol holes. this is big business for the cartels. it has been reported that nearly 40% of our manpower is being pulled from the field. this has stressed our work force to the breaking point and makes it nearly impossible to fight against organized crime. the question many of you are asking is what we can do to address this. in your catch and release policy we need to detain unaccompanied minors until their cases are properly adjudicated. as long awe continue to release them to family and friends, this problem will grow. organized crime will continue to take advantage of the policy. we know from experience that once released into the community the chance of minors being

deported after they fail to appear in court is small. we need to follow through enforcing the laws of this nation so that breaking the law carries consequences. do not grant special status. this is a correlary to the catch and release program. we need to be crystal clear that unaccompanied minors and their families will not be rewarded from breaking the law. we need to acknowledge that our policies over the last 30 years have been at best inconsistent. if we are to stop this latest crises, we have to change the cost benefit analyses for those who exploit holes in border security. address manpower short fall immediately. the congressman introduced the border patrol pay reform act that would restore manpower while saving the american taxpayer millions of dollars. this is ground breaking and will increase the effectiveness of the agency while saving money. several members of this committee are already

co-sponsors and i want to thank you for your support. we need to strengthen interior enforcement. we have discussed how a lack of consequences in breaking the law of the catch and release program has encouraged a new flood of immigration. a lack of consequences for those who successful enter our country is also encouraging illegal immigration. our laws only work as a deterrent if they are consistently enforced. this is a difficult issue but i believe a fix is well within our reach. the humanitarian crises is real and our agents are fully aware of the hardship many of the children have endured in search of a better life. many agents try to contribute in small ways. some spend their own money to buy toys and diapers. in the end, the current crises needs to be addressed through consistent enforcement of the laws we have and through

adequate manpower the border. we must change the current cost benefit analyses for illegal immigration so the rewards and incentives are less appealing. again, i want to thank you for the opportunity to testify and i look forward to answering any of your questions. >> thank you, mr. judd. reverend, welcome. >> good afternoon. thank you for the opportunity to testify on unaccompanied children entering the united states. i've been called to serve the church as a bishop of the diocese on the border. my challenge is to the best of my ability and under the guy ans of the church to apply the apply the gospel of jesus. in visiting with these children, i've witnessed the human consequences of the violence they have endured. this challenge tests the moral

character of our nation. it is a test we must not fail. other nations are watching how we handle this matter. our moral authority and the world is at stake. let me say upfront that the u.s. catholic bishops support the right of our nation to control her borders and to enforce the rule of law. migration to our country should be orderly, safe and controlled, consistent with the common good. this is why the u.s. bishop have supported the immigration system so that the rule of law can be restored in a humanitarian manner. we hope the house will understand this call and consider immigration reform as soon as possible. in our view, the current challenge we are facing is driven primarily by factors in central america and mexico, most specifically the rise of

violence against children with organized criminal networks, including drug cartels. they act with impunity, threatening families and youth to join their membership or face violence and even death. there are more young children arriving, many who are young girls, 13 or younger. while there are avariety of on going push factors, violence is the straw that stirs the drink. otherwise, it is unlikely we would see such large numbers of unaccompanied children on our doorstep. over the languaong term there me a concerted effort to address this, specifically the rampant violence in the region. as part of this effort, humane re-integration practices and prevention programs would compliment anti-violence

efforts. for the short-term response, we recommend the following, unaccompanied children should be placed in child care centers and not warehouses. they should be placed in alternative community settings. unaccompanied children should be appointed council so they can navigate our complex legal process. post release services including case management support should be provided to children placed with families and in foster care both for their safety and to ensure they appear at their legal proceedings. sufficient fundings should be provided to care for these children so federal agencies do not have to raid other budgets such as the refugee budget.

pastoral services should be provided to these families. mr. chairman, with your permission i would like to relay one story of why children are fleeing their homes. in november i led a delegation of the u.s. conference of catholic bishops to visit el salvador, guatemala and mexico. we met two boys ages 15 and 17 who were clean cut and respectful. they had recently arrived from honduras, a city with the highest murder rate in the world, higher than kabul, afghanistan or syria. organized crime members had attempted to recruit them and told them that they and their families would be killed if they did not cooperate. the families quickly insisted

they leave and flee to safety. now as they waited for repay treatation, they told us they would not return to their home city to what they felt was certain death. they would try again. any risk they faced seemed like a better option than returning to their home. this story is typical of many of the children coming north. it shows the decisions faced by parents and families who are unable to protect their children in their homes and communities. this was brought home to me by a mother our delegation met in el salvador who told us i would rather my child die on the journ journey seeking safety in the united states than on my front doorstep. in conclusion, i ask you to consider the individual stories of these vulnerable children my grants and open your minds and hearts to their plight the while

seeking meaningful solutions. not to turn them away, as americans are a compassionate people, we should not turn our back on these children. >> thank you reverend. without objection i would like to enter into the record the following documents, five e-mails from ice enforcement and removal operations regarding 100% reverse escorts, unaccompanied minor run away cases, notices to appear and unaccompanied minor daily reporti reporting broadcast message, a fema brief, a dhs unaccompanied minor fact sheet which shows that dhs was aware of this problem in july 2011 and the four charts presented here today. >> mr. chairman, i'd like to ask -- mr. chairman, to your right, i'd like to ask consent to include in the record the e-mail sent to all members of

congress and their staffs on a tour in which it says no recording devices, no questions, no interaction, and photos will be provided only by the government, no photography. >> without objection, the e-mails will be made part of the record. >> i would like to ask consent to place the following statements into the record, a statement from the focus campaign for children, human rights first, lutheran immigration and refugee services, the national immigration form, the u.s. committee for refugees and immigrants, the women's refugee commission, the american immigration lawyer's association and also the chart showing the various numbers of children coming from various central american countries. >> without objection all the documents made a part of the

record. the gentleman from texas? >> first of all, i'm glad that the first focus was put into the record and i'd ask consent to include into the record a statement from united nations unhcr, the high commission for refugees, children on the run, and i'd like to put into the record a letter to president obama that mentions the document. >> those documents will be made a part of the record and i'll begin the questioning and i'll direct the first question to mr. batello and mr. judd. yesterday white house press conference josh ernest challenges republicans stating that if they are truly concerned about border security we should back the comprehensive immigration reform package that passed the senate last year and

is strongly supported by president obama. unfortunately, these statements show the administration's lack of understanding of this issue, its failure to secure or borders mitigate security. further, the senate bill does not contain provisions that would allow us to effectively address the current surge at the border. we could line border patrol agents shoulder to shoulder and it would not matter due to this administration's policy. isn't the point of apprehending aliens to ensure their return to their home countries, not to provide them a golden ticket into the united states? i'll start with you, mr. patello and then go to mr. judd. >> i'm not sure -- >> isn't the point of your job of apprehending illegal aliens to ensure that they return to their home countries, not to

provide them a golden ticket to the united states. >> it is the work of border patrol, yes. >> thank you, mr. judd. >> the question needs to be asked why are they entering between the points of entry. why aren't they going to the points of entry? it would be easier and less dangerous. if we line our border and were arresting these people and taking our manpower out of the field, we're opening up holes for criminal cartels. >> so the administration's alleged commitment to border security is irrelevant because the ways the laws are written and the fear of persecution and asylum policies, the more border patrol agents we send to the border, the more opportunities to be released into the country at a promise of a court hearing years down the road. is that an accuratery?

>> our agents are arresting these individuals and we turn them over and what happens to them from there -- we're seeing what is happening to them from there but again, from an enforcement standpoint, if we arrest them and we're letting them go, we're going to continue to see more. >> let me ask you this, while 47,000, according to these charts, unaccompanied alien minor advertise have arrived in the first six months of this year, it's not just unaccompanied alien mine rs who are arriving. adults taking along minors are also coming. since 2011 the number of apprehended individuals, we've seen a 143% increase in families apprehended at the border since 2012. dhs has less than 100 beds, meaning that these families are usually released.

adubaditiona additionally, families who arrived earlier may have received work authorization. to what extent do you think this has caused families to come to the united states in violation of the law and more appropriately i should address that to you, mr. hoeman. the question is, to what extent do you think that the families who have arrived earlier and received work authorization has caused families to come to the united states in violation of the law? >> i can't speculate on why everybody is entering the country. i defer to border patrol because they do the interview of the subjects when they enter the country and are processing them. i only know what i read. i haven't had direct contact with the aliens. >> when they do enter, you only have 100 beds for them. is that correct? >> i have 96 beds.

>> 96 beds for this year, 42,000 people. that's kind of cramped, isn't it? >> i have 96 family beds is all i have. >> thank you. mr. crane, you want to add anything to that? >> i would just say that it's ridiculous. there's no way that we can do our jobs and enforce the laws of the united states if we don't have bed space to hold the people that we apprehend, period. >> we understand that you're a career law enforcement official and we thank you for that. we're just trying to understand the operational realities associated with poor policy decisions. part of the white house's mantra on this matter is that everyone is being put into removal proceedings, yet as reported by the "new york times" this weekend, that doesn't really mean much when some will wait years for their first court date. then there will be procedural moving and posturing that will last years, even if the aliens show up for their court dates which many will not.

by the time a removal order is issued, won't these individuals be so low for removal that ice's stated priorities that they'll never actually -- under the stated priorities of ice they'll never actually be removed. is that the case? >> every unaccompanied child and family unit member are surged with ntas and scheduled to be put in front of an immigration judge so they have their proceedings scheduled but there's years out. there's a lack of judges so some of these hearings can take years, two years or five years. >> isn't it true that ice has only been able to remove less than 2,000 unaccompanied alien minors per year since 2011 since we've seen this surge taking place? >> yes. last year we removed 1800. as i said about the immigration courts, when we looked at all the unaccompanied alien children that ntss were filed in the last

five years, 87% are still in proceedings. >> mr. conyers? >> thank you. as we've listened to this story unfold, many including some of the witnesses today say that we can only stop the migration flow by changing the cost benefit analysis made by these children. i wanted to start off with you, deputy chief patello, and ask you this question. might the not be clear that the

possibility of coming to this country is motivated by a huge fear of violence and death that many of these children have in their home countries? as a matter of fact, an attitude shared by frequently their parents as well? >> in the reporting that i've seen there are several factors, violence and conditions at home is among one of the top four, correct. >> do you have any reason to believe that your organization and as well the enforcement and

removal operations are all working in good faith with homeland security to do their best in terms of an incredibly dangerous situation? >> we have done quite a bit to improve conditions on the ground in rgv. with fema's help, with help from the coast guard, office of health affairs, we're doing the best we can given the situations faced there. >> is there any assurances that you will be getting further assistance? >> we've gotten quite a bit of help from fema and the interagency coordination directed under the national response framework continues, so increased transportation both from ice and from other sources, increased detention capacity for ice and increased places for placement within hhs.

>> my last question to you is that our staff reports that the number of unaccompanied children from nicaragua that have been apprehended by border patrol for this fiscal year is 164. does that comport with your records or knowledge? >> i don't have that number in front of me. i know that the number from nicaragua is small in comparison to the other three. >> thank you very much. bishop sites, how do we deal with a problem of these huge vulnerable populations from these three countries, el salvador, guatemala and honduras and have to recognize that from

other countries around we don't have these same numbers? doesn't that seem like some kind of a discrepancy to you or anomaly that we might want to inquire into? >> yes, mr. conyers. you began by asking how do we deal with an issue so large. of course my first answer is always a good deal of prayer would be a good idea. it's a huge challenge that we face. i think it's so interesting that when you look at the sending countries that nicaragua is involved in that number, the one thing that we can distinguish is different in nicaragua from the other three is the presence of pervasive violence within those countries. so certainly a part of the response has to be that we need

to do what we can both church and our government to try and bolster the ability of these governments and communities to deal with the incredible levels of violence, unimaginable levels of violence that these families are facing. >> i want to thank you for your comments, and i also want to thank the entire panel for the seriousness which they approach the gravity of this incredible circumstance of young people who are risking their lives and are exposed to all kinds of unimaginable dangers in terms of a risk of trying to get to this country. my last observation if i can, it's very quick, do you have any

information that our government could in any way be aiding or encouraging them to come to this country? >> we'll allow a brief answer. >> i don't have any answer right now, sir. >> if they have answers they can submit them at any time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. >> thank you. you all may have touched on this, mr. patello but if you did i want you to reiterate it. what consequences specifically would you like to see put in place to stem the flow of unlawful aliens into our country? >> consequences matter. when we were struggling with the high levels of illegal migration in tucson we did quite a bit of

work to classify people and place them into some sort of proceedings, whether federal prosecution or administrative hearings for removal. >> these were juveniles for the most part? >> no. the problem in tucson, these were adults and mostly from mexico. so what we're working on together in the interagency specifically with ice's help is increase the tension for the family units. we think that that's going to make a difference in this problem. >> the bishop's suggestion is always in order, too. prayer should not be cast aside. mr. patello, i want to ask you this, we've been reading about these unescorted juveniles coming to the border. when did this start? >> i think we've seen an increase over the last several years. this year is much different than anything we've seen previously. typically in the last several

years the high levels of traffic would have leveled off, if you will, in the spring. this year it has not. >> has enforcement during this time been relaxed as far as enforcing our immigration laws? >> it has not. >> let me ask you this. i'm not sure hughow i want to fe this. whoever can answer this. to what extent has there been an increase in gang entry, members of gangs coming, be they juveniles or adults? >> that's always a concern for law enforcement. we haven't seen a marked increase in the number of people who are gang affiliated during this influx. >> i know much of mexico is gang infested. i didn't know how much of a

pourover there had been? anybody else? >> yes, congressman. we have to look at most of these unaccompanied minors are coming across and giving themselves up. the gang members don't come across and give themselves up. there very well could be an influx of gang members. unfortunately because our work force is so stressed and we're creating the holes, it's becoming much easier to smuggle those that would do harm to our country through the holes being created. again, the question has to be asked, why aren't they presenting themselves at ports of entry at secure locations instead of going through dangerous desert terrain, across rivers, over fences. they could easily go to the ports of entry, present themselves there, ask for asylum and receive the exact same thing that they would be getting going through the desert, but they're

not doing that. they're going through the desert and stressing our resources. >> i'm wondering if parents of these juveniles were told send your kids to america, we'll take care of them, and then they relied upon this to their detriment? anybody know details about that, what they were told, when they were told, if they were told? bishop? >> i'm sure that some folks, the ones who bring them across, have been building up that possibility. there's no question about that. but again, from what we have seen and heard, the main reason that they're deciding to leave and still face the tremendous dangers that they face on the journey is because they don't feel they have any other choice because of the violence.

>> thank you. chairman, i yield back. >> recognize the gentleman from new york for five minutes. >> before i start my questions, let me first express my dismay at the title of this hearing. it shows what a fars it is. you announced the conclusion before the inquiry. if we're here for any purpose other than politics, we're here to find out what's going on, but the conclusion is announced in the title. the conclusion i believe is wrong, but nonetheless, a proper title for the hearing might be a disaster or a problem at the south texas border surge of unaccompanied alien minors, instead of saying it's the administration's fault. maybe it is but i don't think so, but that's the conclusion. it's wrong to have a hearing

with the conclusion announced before you start the testimony. bishop sites, we have heard today and you have talked about the violence that's propelling these kids to come here through danger to come here, et cetera. we've also heard that the immigration policies of the obama administration, particularly the deferred action policy is responsible for the recent wave of unaccompanied alien children coming to the united states. these kids are making a sophisticated cost benefit analysis and with their sophisticated understanding of american policy they're determining that if i get into the united states i probably won't have a hearing for a few years and i will probably be in a bed somewhere so i might as well trek across the desert and come here. how would you respond to the assertion that what's causing this surge in kids coming here unaccompanied is the

administration's policies, deferred action for childhood arrivals as opposed to the violence in these countries? >> from what i've seen there hasn't been a significant change in recent months as far as the policy. what has changed, it appears, is the violence on the ground in these countries. in honduras, if you can imagine this, the population of the country is something like 8 million million. the number of children being killed each month has been in the last couple of years around 70 children. in the month of may it was 102. so it seems that gangs and traffickers are choosing to target children and to try and

co-op them into their gangs. >> these kids are fleeing in terror in effect? >> exactly. >> now, are we seeing an increase, a similar increase, in unaccompanied youth fleeing these three countries for other countries just to get out of there? >> that's what one would expect if it would simply owing to poverty and an administration invitation. but as i mentioned and others did as well, nicaragua which is perhaps even poorer than those other countries that are senders has not seen a change -- >> no. you misunderstood my question. from the three countries where the violence is, have we seen an increase in kids fleeing there for places other than the united states? >> yes, we have. we've seen huge increases. i believe the chart that was up earlier shows that, that

countries that are receiving such as panama, belize, nicaragua itself are receiving many more asylum seekers, i believe 400 some percent. >> this would be consistent with the conclusion that the increase in kids coming here as well as other places is because of the violence, not because of any administration policy. let me ask, would you say anything to disagree with what bishop sites was just discussing? why should we not reach the conclusion that this increase in kids, unaccompanied kids coming to the border and presenting themselves to the border, not trying to sneak across the border, presenting themselves to the border guards, why should we not believe that this is because of violence and that it's because of instead some administration policy and

something else? >> violence is one of the contributing factors but there has been some confusion reported by the media in these locations, that there be some benefit to be had in the united states. that's why it's important i think -- >> that explains why they're going to other countries, too? >> i'm not sure. but the secretary did write an opinion piece for an editorial for the families in this country to tell them that there isn't this benefit, that maybe the media is promoting something that doesn't exist. >> is there any evidence -- >> the time has expired. >> can i finish the question? >> very quickly. >> the entire premise of this hearing is that it's administration policy on deferred action of childhood arrivals that's causing this problem, are you aware of any

evidence that it's that as opposed to violence in the sending countries? >> i work for the border patrol so we're the ones that arrest them upfront. we have to interview these individuals that we arrest and one of the things that we have to ask, especially if they ask for asylum, we have to ask what's the credible fear. oftentimes they will tell us that they're coming here to be reunited with their family or they've been told that they'll be released if they come. so, yes, in the interviews, the initial interviews that take place with the agents and those people that we arrest, they are telling us that they are coming here because radio is telling them that if they come they'll be released, the churches are telling them if they come they'll be released and other organizations are advertising. these are the initial interviews that are taking place and they're documented. these interviews are documented. they're a matter of record.

>> time of the gentleman has expired. the chair announces a series of votes on the floor. the committee will reconvene following the votes but we have time to get one more member's m member's question in. the chair will recognize the gentleman from alabama, mr. bachus for five minutes. >> appreciate that. bishop seitz, i worked very closely with the catholic church on debt relief and jubilee and head the debt relief bill in the house. i've actually spoken out for legalization of 12 million immigrants that are here. i've spoken out for the need to have some pathway to citizenship for our dreamers. i've criticized the alabama bill. i was one of the only public officials that criticized as

being an overreach. i think i have established at least an immigrant-friendly position. i very much sympathize with them. we are a country of immigrants. i'm curious. these children are coming from honduras, guatemala, el salvador, for some mexico, but the catholic church, obviously, and i think you all offer more, i think your statement, you're the largest refugee resettlement agency in the world. is the church undertaking any effort to discourage these children from taking these long journeys? are you speaking out in these countries, the church, the

bishops, the fathers? >> very much so. during our mission to central america in november, we spoke to many groups that are working with the children, with the youth in these areas. their universal message is, "don't go." that's personally a message that i've conveyed when i've been there speaking to young people. we really want to do what we can to stabilize their situation there. there's a program, i believe it's organized by catholic relief services called youth builders which is working directly to help children who are at risk for fleeing to be able to stay and they've been very successful. >> i think even speaking out against the drug trafficking, the violence, the church i think could be very effective in doing that.

i don't think whether you are pro-immigration, anti-immigration, you don't want these children being sent unaccompanied. even with the government. i don't know if the catholic church in countries like mexico, these countries, they have quite a bit of political clout. even goes to the president of mexico and saying, you're allowing trains to come here, freight trains with children hanging off the tops. that could be stopped. i would think just a minimal government effort could stop a lot of that. i can't imagine the mexican government not being able to stop children on their border. i know some of this is just a force and demographics. >> we certainly don't encourage them to make the journey. at the same time, i think we have to recognize that if these

children feel that their life is in danger, they may well feel like a person getting out of a burning building. >> is there a place to offer those children a refuge within those countries? where the catholic church has a large presence, i mean in convents and places, you know -- we have boys, girls ranches here, places of that nature. >> we have a large presence, but unfortunately, limited resources. we are trying to do the best we can with the resources we have. >> that's, you say wouldn't they be safer in honduras or el salvad salvador. i wish the church, and i'm not speaking -- we always say is there a way to stabilize the situation there. i really think if they make to

the united states you offer them refuge and shelter. >> when they arrive in the united states, i don't think we can say i'm not going to show you compassion. i'm going to leave you on the street. we have to care for the situation as it is. >> they are going to continue to do so. there needs to be an effort. i know i'm speaking to the choir. >> thank you. >> could i ask unanimous consent to submit to the record from i.c.e., escort services accompany alien children,

bkrsrfi, noting they are expecting 65,000 unaccompanied children in the months ahead. this was january of this year. i ask it be submitted. >> not objection it will be made part of the record. the committee will stand in recess until the conclusion of the five votes. for the witnesses, i advise would be 45, 50 minutes. make yourself comfortable. you can get something to drink, whatever. we'll reconvene probably close to 4:00. 4:30. committee will stand in recess. i'm going to recognize mr.

scott and allow him to continue. thank you for your patience. gentleman is recognized. >> thank you. has any law changed that creates the situation you are in. >> has any law change? >> was that a change in the law or change in circumstances? i mean the children are showing up. >> law has not changed. >> okay. when a child shows up and is apprehended, what sanction does the law now provide? >> when the child is apprehended by the border patrol, they process the child, documentation, identify the child. if they identify that child being unaccompanied, not in the presence of a parent or legal guardian, then either border

patrol or i.c.e. will contact health and human services and advise them we have an unaccompanied alien child. we have 72 hours to turn them over to the custody of orr. my office per the trafficking protection act requires that i.c.e. transfer that child to a bed identified by hhs. not only is it within the tbpra that we are required to do that by law, also in my appropriations. i'm appropriated for the transportation of aliens, which includes and even delineates that, includes transportation unaccompanied alien children. >> is each child entitled to an individualized hearing? >> yes. >> are they entitled to -- do they have lawyers? >> pardon me? >> do they have lawyers?

>> most of them do not. >> they have the right to a lawyer, is that right? >> they have the right to a lawyer at their expense. >> if they can't afford it, no lawyer is provided. >> correct. >> you have to ascertain whether or not they're victims of trafficking, is that right? >> yes. i will defer to border patrol. that's part of the processing and review of that border patrol does with each uec. >> when do you ascertain whether or not they are entitled to political asylum. >> i'll defer that to border patrol. >> in the screening, in the screening that the border patrol does on site, they are screening for critical fear. if there is indication of credible fear matter is referred

to the asylum offices at the department. it would move to their venue. >> what happens in that venue? >> so as i understand it, then those officers will review and do an interview to define whether or not credible fear exists or likelihood credible fear exists, then refer the person to asylum hearing. >> and how long is the asylum hearing take? >> i'm not familiar with that. they are referred to immigration court for that purpose. >> now, does border patrol and immigration, do you have enough resources to process all these children showing up? >> so we are, in fact, processing them rather quickly given their age and the circumstance. yes. >> the present law provides that you find a suit able place for