will hire people and promise them this. you have to accept the canadian one size fits all plan with this rationing and long lines and inefficiencies and people dying in line. you have to accept that because it's against the law in canada to treat somebody without a vote of processing. you have to get in line. they enforce it differently from province to province, but the law exists. let's say you need a hip replacement. you go get in line with the people that need hip replacements and there are written criteria on what the prioritiesr but once you shake those out, you are standing in line. no matter how badly you need it, you can't cut in front of the line or find another provider, you are just stuck in that line. . employers will package up with this a health insurance plan that flies them out of canada into the united states so they did get -- can get american

health care. let's say you got two people of such tremendous skill that you want to hire them because that's what it takes to keep your company going. that's what the president thought about tim geithner by the way who will be before our committee tomorrow. he was such a valuable person the fact he hadn't paid his taxes was not a large enough factor to weigh against him. if you have those kind of people that you can hire in canada, you offer them this nice package which is when it's convenient for you use the canadian plan. when you need the health care, we have an insurance program for you. you need heart surgery, we'll fly you out of toronto to houston and we'll give you heart surgery down there. we can do it tomorrow. your heart gives you trouble today? we'll operate on you tomorrow. might even be today if it's early enough in the morning. that's what goes on in canada now. nice packages offered to people who will be flown out of the country to america, the united states of america, for their health care. because it's rationed in canada. that's not enough, mr. speaker. would anybody go out and go

through the websites and yellow pages in canada and take a look at the companies that have formed up there, the travel companies that package up health care trips to the united states. hip replacement is easy to figure out. let's just say you live over in british columbia, vancouver, make it further. how about calgary in alberta? you got one of these painful hips you're gymping around on and you stand in a long line in the cue and finally get into the government doctor and he looks at you and does the x-ray, your socket is burned out. all worn out. you have to have a hip replacement. i knew that. i stood in line for hours or days to have you tell me that. i have been limping it for years. i want it fixed. that's fine we have a line over here you can get into that. let's say a it's 400 long and we do those couple of them a week. we'll get to you. figure it out. 52 weeks in the year. about four years or so. i don't know if these are real numbers or hypothetical. you understand are you in a long

cue in canada. so you understand also that you can go on the internet today and do a little search, go to the yellow pages dorks a search, and come up with a nice travel health care company. there are a number of them in canada who are in the business of packaging up the health care services. so what they'll do is this. you don't want to drive because we are going to do this surgery for you in seattle. short little hop. we'll set this up for you. that's what these companies dofment we'll set up your transportation, we'll fly down to seattle, and then here's your transportation -- can you get to the airport, right? i'll drive my car. park it here. get on this plane. we'll set this all up. fly you from calgary down to seattle. and can pick up the shuttle to the hotel. the hotel's next to the hospital in seattle. you check in into the hotel. go over to the clinic, the doctor will look you over, check you in, schedule for surgery. but are you already scheduled because that will be the following morning at 8:00 a.m., you go under the knife. they give you a day and a half of therapy.

we'll bring you back to the hotel. from the hotel they'll shuttle you to the airport and come back to calgary and get in your car and go back home. all of that for what? turn key, mr. speaker. they'll cut you a deal turn key so you know what it will cost you to package it up from transportation, hotel room, doctors visit, surgery costs. all the things you get and including the therapy, the physical therapy on the tail end of that thing, and get you back home again. write one check or put it on your credit card. there's a company for you. they are the entrepreneurs that have survived in canada in the face of socialized medicine because it created a demand for people to come to the united states. would we shut that all off? would we destroy the opportunities for the entrepreneurs in canada that have so adeptly found and met a market demand? i say no. we should not do that in this

congress. i don't know there's anybody in this congress that knows that better than judge and congressman louie gohmert from texas to whom i would be very happyp to yield so much time as he might consume as i am informed by the gentleman from texas. mr. gohmert: i thank my friend from iowa. i appreciate the chance to participate here. the prior republican hour was -- we discussed health care and the socialized medicine that's coming and supposedly going to be jammed down america's throat next week. at least as far as the house is concerned. and then i got back to my office and i listened to my friend from across the aisle talk about his socialized -- progressive, but obviously you look at the history of the progressive movement, it's a nationalization of things. it's a socialization of things. that's where it's all headed. and i was intrigued as i

listened to my friend from iowa talk about these horror stories from canada and we keep hearing some horror stories from england and other places that have socialized medicine. i was struck by our friend across the aisle commenting -- this isn't canada, this isn't england. this is america. we are going to do it right. we are going to do it better. i was struck, and if it weren't so tragic and if it didn't mean that going to socialized medicine as they want we are going to have people i love dying unnecessarily, it would be a joke, but it's no joke. it's tragic. because for years, for years we have listened to people say, we need to have nationalized health care like canada. we need to have nationalized health care like england where everybody has alt care we need. that's what we have heard for

years. so some of us like my friend from iowa have gone to the trouble to find out more about this socialized medicine, this nationalized care, this public care in canada, in england, in europe, other places. what we find is this isn't something we want. so now we are no longer hearing we need to be like canada and england and just have public health care, national -- whatever term they want to use that particular day. because now we know more of the truth. i talked to man from canada last week who was visiting with me. and he was telling me about his father that died a year or so ago. from a heart attack. and his father knew he needed a bypass surgery. he got -- he had to go on the

list to get a doctor's appointment. and then when he finally got the appointment and finally got the diagnostic care, he found out he needed a bypass. so then he went on the list to get bypass surgery. and he was on it for nearly two years. and i said, i knew the lines were long, my friend from iowa pointed out, there are people in canada that would fly you down to houston if you're with a company that makes enough money they can do that, but rank-and- file canadians can't do that. rank-and-file americans had no place to go. they would stand in the line and die like his father did. how was it he stayed in the line so long? he said bureaucrats move people in front of him for over a year they kept moving -- i said, wait a minute. i know enough about canadian care and i know this bureaucratic socialized piece of crap they have up there, it gives them a generalized

standard of care. i know they are very caring doctors. in fact back 30-something years ago my mother after a brain tumor was found had checked with one who was revolutionizing areas of brain surgery. not anymore. you come here for that now. anyway, my mother got the best care that medicine could provide because they were very caring doctors in this country and there no lines. but with his father i said, as i understand anywhere you have socialized medicine you have to have people waiting in line. because if you don't, the system goes broke. you can't give people all the care they need when they need it or you go broke because the government can't collect enough tax to pay everything like that.

the government can't do that because the government has no money of its own. it has to rely on taxes until it goes socialist completely as the soviet union did. then they were able to last 70 years because they'd kill people and put them in prison if they didn't do what they said. so they set a record 70 years of socialism. we won't last that long once woo get there. -- once we get there. you have to put people in line let them die waiting for treatment and care. i also know you have to make it a crime for people to move themselves up the list or pay somebody to move them up the list and so how was it that people kept moving in front of your father, and kept bumping him down the list to get bypass? he said, well, you're right. it is a crime to do something to get yourself moved up. but bureaucrats are allowed to sit in their little cubicle or office somewhere and at their

whim decide whatever they may guess whoever they may guess ought to be moved up. this guy may need bypass surgery worse than the others. they kept moving people in front of him. well, the bureaucrat guessed wrong. the man that needed the bypass surgery the worst died because some bureaucrat wouldn't let him move up the list in a timely manner. that stuff is coming to america. so when we were promised about this great nationalized or public -- people have figured out socialized care is not something they want, so now we are hearing it's public. it's a public care thing. well, they talked -- i heard my friend across the aisle say, an hour before me they talked about a bureaucrat being between you and your doctor. he said what they talked about an hour ago was fantasy. well, if we go to the program

they are proposing, it may end up seeming like it's fantasy, but it will be a nightmare. and there will be no waking up and walking away from it. you get stuck in that system until it breaks your country because none that i know of have ever been able to successfully come out of it. i was an exchange student to the soviet union back in 1973. i visited their medical schools. i visitsed with doctors. i met with doctors. i met families of doctors. people were embarrassed to tell me one of their parents was a doctor because they didn't pay them much. now, if you were an assistant, factory manager, you got a couple weeks on the napa river and got benefits and that was a good thing. but people were embarrassed because doctors didn't get paid much. folks, that's where this goes. because -- i know we've even got some doctors that have said we ought to go to this thing.

insurance companies, we hate them. they delay payments. and things need to be done. maybe we need a public health care insurance. the problem is they may reimburse for a little bit, but eventually you'll get to the salary. eventually the salary does not cover the education it takes to have the level of care we get now. and so you have to dumb down the education. your best and brightest don't aply. i like to talk to people in my class being the ones going to medical school. i was encouraged to do that. i had one doctor saying you would be a good doctor. please don't throw your life away and go to law zool, but i did. nonetheless, we are talking about a nightmare for the american people. when i hear the sob be stories about if we just had public health care. if we had socialized medicine then these people would be able to get the mammograms and they would get the care and they

would find out about their breast cancer and they would get treatment. well, i got some hard news for you. the fact is that in this country for localized tumors, we have a 98% survival rate at five years. that is incredible the progress that's been made. things like the komen efforts for the cure. just done great work. 98% survival at five year for a localized tumor. well, if you go to the socialized medicine countries, you find about 20% worse results. you get it? one in five people have to die because they went to socialized medicine. now, i've got three daughters

and a wife. i would hate to think that among five women, one of them is going to die because we go to socialized care and we have to have these long lists to get a mammogram, once you find it, to get treatment. it is insane. now, i agree with my friends, we need change. and i have been to the emergency room and i have been with my kids and i have been with myin laws. it is not a fun place to be sitting there in long lines, but what you realize is the lines are long because we are having to provide free health care to people that don't pay. . many are undocumented i will -- illegal aliens and the plan i have proposed is one that you

have to deal. because that is causing unnecessary pain and suffering in the health care that are being provided to people who need it who pay their way, who have health insurance, they shouldn't have to wait and pay for people who are here to get free care. the plan i have starts with the fact that if because we know that we are moving to as one of my friends pointed out in some research he has done, we're moving toward a $22 trillion a year medicare/med said system. $22 trillion, we have about $2.5 trillion in income tax last year. you cannot sustain a nation at a $22 trillion medicare/medicaid system. we can make it better and

cheaper. but we can't have the government bureaucracy handling it. the proposal says, this is a matter of national security. our health care is a matter of national security. we saw what happened in the soviet union when you can't pay your bills, you go broke and cease to exist. if we're going to continue to attract people from around the world, we need to have a country that is not going broke. so under my proposed plan that we're trying to get into a bill, there have been more other pressing things, we had to get the resolution for michael jackson, but under this plan, it makes clear we have to deal with this issue. so if you're going to ask for a visa into our country so we will continue to have a country that you want to come to, then you have to show proof that you will have a health savings account

and which you will be part of when you get here and have catastrophic coverage to cover everything over that. if you don't have proof of that, then you don't get a visa and come into this country. we have been told by the supreme court that if you are here, even illegally, then we have to provide you health care. so that's what we'll do. we'll follow the law. if you are here illegally and have no insurance, then, we will treat you and get you well enough to transport and then you will be deported. and because this is a matter of national security and our country is at risk here of going broke and ceasing to exist, if you come back into the country after giving you free health care and you are caught here, then you are a risk to our national security to break the country and you will be put in jail. it will be a felony offense if you have taken free health care

and been deported and then come back. i yield. mr. king: i thank the gentleman from texas. the federal law is that a health care provider can't deny health care to illegals in their locality. and because of that, there are no trauma centers south of tucson. they have gone broke providing health care for illegals that are flowing across our border. but it goss beyond that. we are providing free health care for people who get injured in mexico and brought into the united states for free health care services. it's not something that you see in any of the data. you find these things out by dropping in at a surprise visit at the port of entry where i stopped a couple of years ago. i went in and said and i thought i would introduce myself and i said i'm congressman steve king from iowa. and the first officer said, i

can't talk to you. so i went to the next officer and said, congressman steve king from iowa. trying to see how things are going. i can't talk to you. talk to mike, he is the shift supervisor. that much fear about talking about what's going on. i was standing there talking to mike and i pray he is doing well and he began to tell me what was going on at the port of entry and discussion about illegals crossing the border and got a phone call and said excuse me. he came back and said i got a call. there has been an emergency that has been created on the mexican side of the border in this town where they stage illegals and looks like a foot, a drug fight, booze fight or both, but there was an individual that was knifed. so they will be bringing him

across the border pretty soon in a mexican ambulance. and i called the helicopter to come down from tucson and u.s. ambulances to come in with oxygen because we can't stablize the patient. i happened to have a paramedic with me so i asked him. mike, will you look at this man. save his life if you can and i want to know what's going on. he went in and went to work. and the mexican ambulance came over the border. and the para medic with me jumped right to work and tried to save the man who was stabbed. there was no oxygen, not anything in the mexican ambulance except a little bit of gauze and surgical gloves. that was it. no other medical supplies. it was an ambulance that looked like an ambulance, but on the inside, it was an empty chamber. he did what he could and then put him on oxygen and stablized

him and loaded him into the helicopter and flew off to tucson university hospital. stabbed in the chest and onto the u.s. ambulance and put on a lifeflight to go up to tucson. and by the way, he was covered with tattoos and all kinds of signs of being a bad hombre and he was stabbed by a knife by a three-inch blade. i went to the hospital and asked to visit him and i found out. here's the short version of it. the net cost to the american taxpayers was $30,000 roughly for the helicopter, medical care he got. he was on parole into the united states to get health care and he would be escorted back to the border when he was stablized, all of that paid for by the

american taxpayers. american health care, health insurance premium payers out of their pockets. i sat down while i was there with the chief financial officer of tucson university hospital. and there they rolled out some numbers where their annual cost was, and this is by recollection, around $14.5 million of health care that they provide to illegals. they told of a circumstance where there had been a bus full of illegals that had been in a wreck and about 25 in there that were injured. 15 of them were so badly injured that they were brought into the intensive care unit. i.c.u. was packed with 15 illegals, no room for people of tucson to provide for that kind of emergency care. so they were lifeflighting the residents of tucson up to phoenix to go to the i.c.u. in phoenix and the i.c.u. in tucson

was full. and that is the only trauma center in southern arizona. another situation where there was a mother who was pregnant with multiple babies, five of them. in order to avoid the high cost of multiple births in tucson. and she was living in mexico. they had been sending people down there to train how to deal with multiple births, set it up so they didn't have high cost of anchor babies in the united states, five new citizens created to go on the rolls -- i would yield to the speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. king: mr. speaker, i don't see a speaker from the other side of the aisle. i would ask unanimous consent to extend the time for the duration. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional 25 minutes.

mr. king: and so, the multiple births that were to take place in the home country of mexico where they had sent american health care workers to train mexican health care workers, in spite of all of that investment to prevent the extra costs and five new anchor babies, as soon as she went to go labor, she snuck into the united states. this is the thing that is going on because of this law and i wanted to inject that in. we aren't providing health care to illegals, but for people who are injured in other countries and brought into the united states because we have such a great health system here. our taxpayers pay for it and people in the communities pay for it. and i yield back to the gentleman from texas and ask him to carry on with the thought process i interrupted.

mr. gohmert: i appreciate my friend from iowa and those wonderful i will us trations is what we're talking about. and i know that there's so and i know that there's some people in america have skrn and i have heard people say i'm afraid there are so many immigrants coming in south of the border that we are going to lose my american culture and my personal feeling is that really i think america was blessed with three really central things. one is the faith in god throughout our history and another was a love and devotion to family. and the other was a very good hard work ethic. and so when i see most of the people i know that have come frl south of the border up here, faith in god, they have a love and devotion to family. they have a strong work ethic. so i'm actually hopeful that this will strengthen our american social scene here where

people have lost faith in god, where they've lost devotion to family, where they don't want to work. but the problem is, we have to be unified out of many one means we speak one language and that means you don't teach kids in some foreign language. you teach them in a language so they have a chance to be president of a company, not the manual laborer for the country. so i'm still hopeful that when people come legally and assimilate, it's going to make this country stronger and better, but it has to be legal and cannot ignore the rule of law. that is what has allowed us to be the greatest economy in the world or maybe in history and the country just south of us, which should be one of the top 10 economies in the world, but it's not, because they pay no mind at all to the rule of law.

there's graft and corruption. i appreciate the efforts of the president across the border trying to clean things up and i hope and pray he has some success. but i wanted to also respond to my friend from across the aisle who said, it's time for change now. seems like i heard a presidential candidate saying that last fall. and then what we've gotten is about 10 to 20 times more deficit spending than we had when he took office and is about to break the country. i agree it's time for a change and let's quit having so much deficit spending. i agree it's time for a change in health care. we cannot allow our government, our country to be brought down because of runaway health care costs. and there's a way to fix this. and it's an american system. i mean, for somebody to come in here and say before god and

america and everybody that yeah, we're not talking canada or england here, we're talking about a uniquely american, basically socialism. my friend from iowa knows i was a history major. i'm a student o iowa knows i wa a history major. i'm a student of history. and sometimes i am just amazed by the thinking in this body that somehow we are so smart and so much better than all of those who have gone on before us that we can do the same thing that's been done throughout history and get a different result. but if you're smart enough to learn from history, you know and everybody in this body is smart enough to learn from history if they just will. then you learn that if you do the same things that historically over and over and over again been tried and gotten the same result, you're going to

get the same result, too. and you should try something different. so that's why we've got to fix medicare. we have to fix medicaid and can't keep on this course of s- chip getting bigger and bigger. after consulting with different experts in these different areas is, you know what? for 2007, the latest numbers we got, we spent $9,215 with the best estimate with how many households in america, $9,200 between medicare and medicaid, for every 112 million house holds. so you look at it and you put your pencil to it and you realize at most there were 93 million americans who either got

medicare, medicaid, s-chip. we are better off saying folks, we want you to have the best care possible. i want my mother in law who is still grieving over the loss of her husband last august, i want her to have the best care. and if you're in america and you are an american legally here, then we want you to have $3,500 in your health savings account that you will control with a debit card and we'll put that $ 3,500 cash from the government in your health savings account that you control with your debit card and we'll pay for catastrophic insurance to pay for everything above that. . that's health care people can believe in and deserve. look at the cost. less than a third of americans would need that or be entitled

to that that are on medicare, medicaid, they are belove the poverty level that we rea . . . . .

to deal with the car insurance company, it was right about to deal with the car insurance $10,000 in health care. well, that's kind of consistent with the kind of bills i have seen. people have been in the hospital two days, all the tests, doctors they see. that's about normal. and yet when it came down to conclusion and the determination had to be made as to how much was actually paid and by whom,

all of those health care providers that added up to the $10,000 said they had been paid in full, consistent with their contract with the health insurance company. so then in checking with the health insurance company as to how much they were actually out of pocket in paying those $10,000 in claims in full, it was $800. now, if we get to the transparency that my friend from iowa's talking about, then everybody in america gets the same deal that health insurance company did at $00. could you have two days of hospitalization it doesn't take but a fraction of your health savings account up. and the other thing i wanted to point out was that kind of segues into i thinkp topic that my friend wanted to get into before he concluded, but that is this bill -- business of the same costs.

and what we saw in the last two weeks over the crap and trade bill that got shoved down america's throat through the house at least and i'm hoping and praying won't get through the senate, we are talking about skyrocketing electric bills as the president promised a year ago back when he was senator running for president. we are talking about skyrocketing gasoline prices and what is so very tragic about what my friend from iowa pointed out that with gasoline it's the same price whether you are rich or poor or whomever. those high electric rates, those high gasoline rates, the high propane rates they are going to be inconvenient for bill gates. but they are going to devastate the people i know in east texas, the people i have met in iowa. they are going to devastate

rank-and-file americans and we really need america to respond and say we can't handle that. inconvenience for the rich is one thing. but devastation to rank-and-file americans is something we should not have congress do. i yield back. mr. king: reclaiming my time. i thank the gentleman from texas. i say, but, mr. speaker, we have a stimulus plan. we have a $787 billion stimulus plan that's going to jump-start this economy and get us out of the doldrums and solve this problem with unemployment and put americans back to work and get the dow jones back up above 8200 or somewhere and make america feel good again and give confidence in the venture capitalists out there and in the markets and in the dow and in the entrepreneurs. well, all of that was part of a stimulus plan. i came down on this floor while that was being debated and i put up a poster that looks a lot like this. only it didn't have $16.1

million on it. it had $32 million on it. it had the quote from president obama here rather than the quote from speaker pelosi. the quote from president obama was, we are not going to do earmarks. we are not going to do member-sponsored initiatives. and i'm not going to sign any bill that has earmarks in it. well, depending how you counted it, it seems to me that the number of earmarks in that bill came to around 9,000. maybe a little less. 8,500 depending how you define the earmarks. and this is the picture of this cute little guy -- i don't know if it's a girl or guy, actually. but you see how cute he is. he is a pet project. this is speaker pelosi's pet project. her pet mouse project. this is the not quite yet infamous -- here's what it is. he's the saltwater marsh harvest mouse. that is swmhm for short.

this little mouse lives outs there in the marsh near san francisco and he's been a special project of the speaker for years. she's tried to get earmarks for this mouse. now, take a close look there. you don't see it, but there's an earmark there now. even though i said that this stimulus plan had an earmark in it for the saltwater marsh harvest mouse, everybody that spoke for the speaker and the people over on this side of the aisle said, oh, no. that's radical reactionaryism. there aren't any earmarks in this bill. and furthermore, the saltwater marsh harvest mouse is not going to be one of those earmarks because that would be a pet project, a pet project, for the speaker. and that would be inappropriate given that the president has ordered that there will not be pet projects. well, this is what the speaker said. i don't want to have -- this is january 25, 2009. after the beginning of this 111th congress.

she said, i don't want to have legislation that is used as an engine for people to put on things that are not going to do what we are setting out to do which is to turn this economy around. i have the most to prove with this package. the most to prove. the choices we are making are those that will work, that must work. our economy requires it. america's families need it, this is urgent. well, the mouse family may need it. maybe it's a good thing $16.1 million for this little ole mouse that couldn't rise high enough in the priority scale in previous process of the united states congress, but here in the desperate straits of 14.5 million unemployed and another 5 five million or nine million looking for a job. 20 million people who would like an opportunity to fend for themselves. and we are not going to drop 32 million any longer.

we are going to drop 16.1 million into the saltwater marsh harvest mouse. earmarked in this little bet protect, this little pet project, is earmarked for $16.1 million. no, steve king is a reactionary radical. it isn't in the bill. isn't going to a w wouldn't do a thing like that including the speaker who has defined she won't do a thing like that now has $16.1 million going into the marsh for the saltwater marsh harvest mouse. this viability i presume. he's doing ok without this earmark. if we need jobs in an economy that works, we don't need to be dumping money into the mouse. by the way that is an earmark. it is a pet project. his ears are notched. that's what we do and that's where the name came from. . i wanted to point that out while

this microphone is still alive that this is the day that there is confirmation that the people who pointed this out back then in january and early february were right. and those who defended the speaker and said it will never happen were wrong, $16 million dropped into the saltwater marsh harvest mouse. i want to put something else into the record here this evening and that is, we have had a couple of votes this week, one today and the night before last that i thr are important. night before last, we had a vote on a resolution that would place a stone in the visitors' center that honors the slaves that contributed to the construction of this capitol building. they did do that. they contributed to the construction. we ought to acknowledge that. but you know we had the huge room over in the congressional

visitorso center that was designated as the great hall. the great hall, which brings to mind the great hall on ellis island that would honor all the immigrants that came to america, those that came voluntarily and those that came involuntarily and it's an image when you walk through the great hall over at ellis island. but the name had to be changed because of the congressional black caucus that wanted a higher acknowledgement. the great hall's name was changed to emancipation hall. ok. no objection here. emancipation was a big thing for the world when we put an end to slavery here in the united states at great cost, however. the resolution to do so was traded off in a quid pro quo and for those people who didn't go to law school, i have to tell

you there was a deal made. and the deal that was made was this, the arc text of the capitol has been trying to scrub any reference to faith from anything that is developed around this will capitol complex and allowing refusing to allow the severity that designates that it was flown. if you want to say july 10, 2009 in the year of our lord, he wants to scrub the reference. never mind above the speaker's seat, it says in god we trust. been there for a long time. that is our national motto. and the arc text of the capitol sought to block our national motto from being displayed in the congressional visitors' center along with the pledge of allegiance. so in order to require the

architect to recognize one nation under god, there had to be a deal made that in addition to emancipation hall there would be an extra monday youment -- monument put up to recognize slavery. i'm fine. i would have been an abolings nist. it's an article of faith. it's an article of fundamental. and a good thing that this country put an end to it. but if it's going to be the devil's bargain and have a reference to god in the congressional visitors' center, you have to pass another way to recognize slavery in order to pacify the congressional black caucus a separatist organization in this congress in order to get a reference to god.

the quid pro quo was pass this resolution first and then bring up the resolution and vote on whether there's going to be in god we trust. the vote three days ago was 399-1. i voted no because it was making a deal with requiring that to pass before the words god could go up in the congressional visit or' center even though it's on the speaker's chair. that resolution passed tonight with eight members of congress voting against putting our national motto up in the national visitor' center and pledge of allegiance. eight voted no, two voted present. 10 couldn't acknowledge that god's a great big part. and no matter who stands against it. mr. speaker, i thank you for being recognized.

and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa for a motion. mr. king: mr. speaker, i move the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn.

coming up, they invested a mexican drug cartels. >> policies been funded? >> the u.s. government. >> i do not know. i think some of it is government to raise. >> it is not public. >> probably donations. >> i want to say from my tax dollars. >> 30 years ago, america's cable companies created c-span as a public service, a private business initiative, no government mandate, no government money.

>> house speaker nancy pelosi said today that the house is likely to take up health legislation before the august recess. her weekly briefing with reporters also included questions about cia briefings to congress. democrats on the intelligence committee say the cia misled congress during the bush administration. this is about 15 minutes. >> we talked about a bill to reduce pollution in the air and to make american health care, to invest in innovation and grant technology and rebuild america and a greenway and making green jobs.

now we are in the process of bringing our health care to the floor. this is absolutely essential. inaction is too costly for our country in terms of dollars and in terms of health. our goal is a healthier america and in congress is moving with comprehensive health reform that provides a portability, accessibility, quality, and it will pass. the only debate on the public auction is what it will cost. -- public option is what it will cost. as we move forward, we want to fix what is broken about the system. i have told the three tenors, mr. waxman, mr. miller, and mr. rangel, that we must bring every possible dollar -out of the

health-care system. we need to do this to help cover the cost. it will still be paid for. members now are establishing priorities and our ways and means committee is talking about some of the pay forces as they go forward. we will not be taxing benefits in any legislation that comes from the house. this is essential. health care reform is very important for the middle class in america. middle income families will see health care costs go up about $1,800 a year. in between now and 2020, that means $18,000. in that 10 years, and $18,000 increase. that is just not feasible for

families to sustain that kind of cost. that is why our bill is a middle income initiative. we will lower costs. we will have greater choice. we will have higher quality. we will be able to convey stability and peace of mind. that'll be great for individual people. it'll be a healthier for families and their economic economic standpoint. it'll be important in terms of small businesses and our country to be competitive, and it will be important to our national debt. president says health care reform is entitlement reform. i am losing my voice. with great excitement, i promised the president the we would have legislation out of the house before we went on our

august break. that is still my goal. depending on the tactics that are on the floor, we hope to stick by that. with that, i will be pleased to take any questions. 61 second, my throat. >> did an attitude that democrats say they told them that the cia misled -- >> i've not have everything. -- had that briefing. i have learned from the letters yesterday that it was brought to our attention. >> did say they will o end of voting for will option plan, but what did the senate to reject it? -- but what if the senate

rejects it? [unintelligible] >> we had this question almost every time legislation comes up. the house will set the pace for how we go forward and hope that the senate priorities are ones that we can come to agreement. i am confident that we can. it was said about the budget and the energy bill, but the fact is that we believe that a public option is essential to the success of real reform that will work for the american people. we are committed to that. i can only speak for the house. you know that. i am confident that we will have -- and me be clear about what it

will be. it'll be a patient option or a health security. it will be in -- administratively sustainable. it'll be a level playing bill that will increase competition. it is not something that is designed to outdo the private sector but to have real competition. the private sector has had the field to itself up until now. the system has not really worked for a large number of people and our country. the public option is a way to keep the private sector on this. it has to be a level playing field, not something that is subsidized by the federal government in any way that is different in subsidies to

individuals which can be used in the public or private sector. >> back onto the intelligence question. will we be pursuing this? >> i know what you know. i have seen the letters and the numbers. they have concern. the intelligence committee has oversight responsibility in the house. i am sure they will be pursuing this in their regular committee process that is the way we will go. >> what about the propriety of your making charges about the substance? >> i did not know there is any question about propriety. i'm very proud of my work in human rights over the years. people know where i am on the issue. .

>> majority leader banner has taken a pledge that he will not vote for a health-care bill that he has not read pick. -- that he has not read. will you take that pledge? >> is this a pledge that is in keeping with his having read all the bills he has ever voted for? [laughter] i don't know what his pledges, but we pledge to have a full process with ample time for the legislation to be well known to the public. every person in america is an expert on his or her health

care, and they are all very curious. >> madam speaker, the other date in los angeles congressman jackson lee held up a copy of the resolution on the life it -- praising the life and work of michael jackson. >> we are into the popular culture now. michael jackson was a great, great performer, and there is a lot of sadness there for many reasons. what i have said to my colleagues over the years, and certainly as leader and speaker, is that there is an opportunity on the floor of the house to express their sympathy or their praise any time that they wish. i do not think it is necessary for us to have a resolution. i think in this case, if the idea is to praise the life and work, as i assume that resolution does, then why not do

that? resolution would open up contrary views that are not necessary at this time to be expressed in association with a resolution whose purpose is quite different. >> how long did you speak to leon panetta? >> i do not know when i last spoke to leon panetta. he called to say that he would be named, and i offered my enthusiastic support for his becoming the director. that was probably the last time i spoke to him, or maybe i had one briefing from him earlier. it could be two, i do not know, but recently. the director of national intelligence, dennis blair, has been briefing me. >> have you gotten in position to name the members of --

>> i will let you know as soon as we have them. >> it was mentioned there might be a need for a second stimulus. what is your position on that? >> i am committed to the first stimulus. i do not think it has been given time to work. the third quarter is a big order for the stimulus, and i think that people will begin to see more of the results. even the doctor who says that if it falls short, it will still be 2.5 million jobs saved or created. we hope that it will be better than that. the question is always open as to what the administration may recommend to us, but right now, i believe that we have much more to gain from seeing through the first stimulus. i am a proponent for bringing up the full transportation bill, which is a great jobs bill.

at some point, we may have to do something on the extension of unemployment benefits, but as to the terms of the investments that were made in the first package, i want to play that out. we have to be very careful about the spending on this, and i respect the open opportunity that the distinguished majority leader put out there, right now i think that we have big issues with health care and how we find that, and if we do go someplace, i would like to see it be the transportation bill. >> before the final health care bill is voted on the house -- it is there a limit to the new debt you are willing to occur from that bill? >> we have to have that cbo score. that is the world we live in.

the cbo does not score any benefits from prevention, and we want to know that our goal is to lower costs, improve quality, and make america healthier. we have other delegations, and some may be the omb, others academic and other distinguished institutions who can quantify exactly how much the hundreds of billions of dollars of savings are in some of the initiatives we take. we will respect what the cbo score some say, but we will put it in a larger context. some want to direct scoring to include the benefits of prevention, for example, an early intervention. we have to have that score before go forward. that is part of what we are waiting for as to what the bill

will cost. as i have said, i have told members as recently as this morning, squeeze out what you can out of the system. savings, savings, savings, and then we have to establish priorities, and that is very challenging. otherwise, the bill is endless, so we have to contain it, and it must be paid for. >> now to house majority leader

john boehner. topics include economic stimulus, healthcare, and cia briefings to members of congress. this news briefing is about 15 minutes. >> vice-president by and is traveling to my home state of ohio today to discuss the democrats one trillion dollars stimulus plan. ohio's unemployment rate is above 10%. the nation's unemployment continues to rise, and families and small businesses across the country are asking, mr. vice president, where all the jobs? the administration promised the stimulus would keep unemployment below 8%, and the promise the stimulus would create jobs immediately. it is pretty clear now that the administration was wrong. the bottom line is this. the stimulus is not creating enough jobs. here is one thing that the stimulus is accomplishing. you will recall earlier this year during the debate on the stimulus bill, the democrats

promised that the stimulus would be free of earmarks, and a lot of us disagreed. we pointed to one particular request that we were convinced was going to be funded in this. that was to protect the assault marsh harvest mouse near speaker pelosi seditious -- harvest mouth near a speaker pelosi's -- $16 million of the stimulus money was appropriated to take care of the salt marsh harvest mouse. people 100 miles away have farms that are drying up because they would not use the stimulus money to help turn on the pumps so that the central valley would have the water it would need to grow crops this summer and fall.

listen, if we want to protect and create jobs, instead of doing another wasteful stimulus, what we need to do is to start here in congress by stopping job killing legislation like speaker pelosi'nashs an energy tax and the government takeover of health care which includes a big tax on small businesses. these bills will kill jobs in america, hurt families, and her small businesses. on the national energy tax, it will raise prices on everything from electricity to gasoline to food, and it is really going to increase the costs for all families in america. and frankly, for every business in america. it will drive millions of jobs to countries like india and china. somewhere in the range of 2.3 to 2.7 million jobs every year. many of the democrats who supported this bill are feeling

the backlash at home, because the american people are outraged over this job killing legislation. it now appears that democratic leaders will walk their members down the plank once again when it comes time for their plan to have the government take over health care. earlier this week when i flew to washington, the flight crew gave me a note. i woke from a nap and here was a note from the flight crew. thank you for standing up and fighting against the government taking control of our health care. it was signed by the captain and his cocaptain and a flight attendant. if you do not think people in america are not beginning to understand what is going on here in washington, let me tell you, they are understanding pretty quickly. americans will not support a plan that raises costs, increases taxes, and let's bureaucrats take care or deny

the care that their family and their children need. they also will not support a government takeover that forces 114 million americans off their current plans, according to an independent analysis of the house democrat proposal. their plan will also destroyed 4.7 million jobs in america, according to methodology by dr. cristina romer, who chairs the president's council of economic visors. if user methodology and use -- if you use her methodology, 4.7 million jobs killed as a result. families and small businesses cannot afford this. here we are at a time when we are trying to save jobs in america, help get our economy going again, and all people see as a lot of wasteful washington spending, a job killing -- job killing measures light energy in

healthcare, and we have to take care of the saltwater marsh mouse. no wonder the american people think we are not. questions? >> [inaudible] what is the approach of the republican party because in places like ohio that are struggling with jobs [inaudible] >> most american once their job back, or they are concerned that they will be the next one to lose their job. they heard all the promises from the administration that the stimulus bill was going to help, or that a national energy tax would create more jobs. the fact is, the national energy tax bill would destroy more

jobs than it will ever create. people want their jobs. they want to see the economy moving again, and they do not see anything happening. they were promised by this administration that this money would go back quickly on the infrastructure side, that it would be -- we would have shot already projects. when you look at how long it took to get a contract out, and you look at how some of the money is spent, you will see it is not for show already projects. it took $20 million of stimulus funds to do a study of a proposed project in southwest ohio that the supporters will admit could not begin construction for at least seven years. >> [inaudible]

what is your reaction that it's somehow backs up the speaker's plan -- >> our intelligence professionals are on the leading edge of helping to keep americans save an american assets around the world set oaf. i have worked closely with our intelligence professionals, and they are professionals. i cannot believe that the cia lie to congress. i am waiting for speaker pelosi to either put up the facts or retractor statement and apologize. i don't know that this letter changes anything with regard to the speaker's action.

>> [inaudible] >> i think some people are trying to mix apples and oranges here. when it comes to the information with regard to an enhanced interrogation technique, it is clear what the cia briefed members of congress on, and for the speaker to say that she was not brief, and then she said she was briefed, and then to come out and accused them of lying -- i think it is way over the top. i do not think it has anything to do with this issue that is being discussed by my colleagues across the aisle. >> do you think a lot of the fact that the administration was [inaudible]

do you feel vindicated in your opposition? >> what we want is to get the economy going again. we believed then as we do now that the best way to get the economy going again would be to allow american families and small businesses to keep more of what they earn. our projections, again by dr. cristina romer, using her model, would be that we have created twice as many jobs at half the cost, given the fact that unemployment continues to rise. we probably could have created 10 times as many jobs as they have, because the plan is not working at all. >> [inaudible]

>> i asked my colleagues to go sign a petition that has this commitment at let freedom ring.org. they do not want people to read this. they might find out how ridiculous it is. if you have watched how they brought these major bills to the floor, they bring them to the floor, they bring big amendments in the dead of night, and pass them before anyone has any clue what is there, because as we found out when i went through the 316 page amendment that was filed at 3:09 a.m., members were appalled at just what was in the amendment. can you imagine what the rest of

the bill looks like? >> [inaudible] >> i think that the cat fight going on within the democratic party can continue. [laughter] the speaker and i, along with majority leader read and leader mcconnell have had this conversation with our intelligence professionals and the white house, going back a year and a half or so. there is a protocol and place, and i think the protocol that the leaders have agreed to, along with the previous administration, is an appropriate one.

[laughter] >> i am not used to having this much room, although it is nice having you further away from me. >> [inaudible] >> when we used dr. romer is economic model for our stimulus proposal, we used the most conservative assumptions and the most conservative multipliers when we did. i do believe that we did the same when it came to developing the estimate of how many american jobs would be lost as a result of their health care proposal. this is not hard to figure out. when you raise the cost of employment, guess what? you get less employees.

there is no question that their proposal raises the cost to employers to have employees, because it requires all employers to provide health care. if you do not supply health care, guess what? you get taxed an equivalent amount. so you are raising the cost of employment, which means that employers will be much more discerning about whether they should add more employees, at a time when we are trying to get him -- get the economy going and create jobs in america, we do not need to be moving policies that make it more difficult for employers to bring on new employees. thank you all.

>> you are watching public affairs programming on c-span. up next, a congressional panel investigates mexican drug cartels. after that, the house examines an obama administration proposal to get the federal reserve more involved in regulating the financial markets.

on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," a political reporter for town hall.com will discuss the recent health care debate in congress. after that, gene mccarthy of the internal protection agency on the epa's clean air regulations. later, erica williams will talk about the annual conference which featured speaker pelosi and former president clinton's. "washington journal" begins each morning at 7:00 eastern with the day's news and recalls. senate hearings began on monday for supreme court nominee judge sonia sotomayor. you can watch live coverage from the senate judiciary committee starting at 10:00 eastern on c-span. it is also live on c-span radio and add c-span.org. >> now, a house hearing on mexican drug cartels. we will hear about efforts to

stop violent clashes between rival cartels near the u.s.- mexico border. occultist towns of new york chairs the oversight and government reform committee -- adolphus towns. >> good morning, and thank you all for being here. mexico has long been an important ally and friend of the united states. it is this country's third largest trading partner. as one of the largest economies in the americas, it remains the third largest source of foreign oil for the united states market. unfortunately, over the past few years, organized crime has made mexico a major producer that transit's state of illegal drug trafficking into the u.s. as much as 90% of cocaine that

enters the united states comes to mexico. criminals in mexico are now the largest suppliers of marijuana and methamphetamine. apparently, crime pays. this criminal enterprise is estimated to reduce annual revenues ranging from $25 billion to $40 billion. in december 2006, shortly after taking office, mexican presidents felipe calderon began a major crackdown on the drug cartels operating in his country. since then, almost 11,000 people in mexico have been killed in drug-related violence. almost daily, reports from mexico depict killings, acts of torture, and kidnapping. >> is getting worse. this past june was the deadliest month on record, with

over 800 killed in drug-related violence. in short, in mexico, drugs and violence are a growth industry. as a result, mexico is facing one of the most critical security challenges in its history. many who have had the courage to confront the drug cartels have been threatened or killed. this includes police then, soldiers, judges, journalists, and even the clergy. however, there is some basis for optimism. the courageous efforts of president calderon have resulted in important changes. law enforcement agencies and other federal officials have reported positive developments in their working relationships with the mexican counterparts. they say these changes are having a significant effect in addressing the drug threats posed to both countries. at the same time, there is a

front-page article in today's focal washington post," which reads, mexico accused of torture in drug war. army using brutality to fight trafficking. as the effort in mexico to address the drug threat continues, we must be clear that abuses from the state are equally intolerable. i will seek to understand more about the facts related to this article as the committee's investigation continues. nevertheless, i believe the drug cartels and their associated violence constitute a major threat to security and safety along the southwest border. they have caused major disruptions to commercial activities including international trade. because of my growing concerns about this problem, i sent a bipartisan team of committee investigators to the southwest

border to get a firsthand look at what is happening on the ground. our investigators met with numerous federal, state, and local officials, including law enforcement, military intelligence, and others, and observed field operations in both daylight and night. this hearing was designed as a follow-up to the staff field investigation, to provide the committee with an overview of federal efforts to disrupt and the smell the mexican drug trade and to examine whether federal agencies have sufficient tools and capabilities to do the job required. over the past few years, there have been nagging questions about the effectiveness of federal policy with regard to the southwest border. while it is clear that this administration takes the drug cartel threat very, very

seriously, questions remain. just one month ago, the administration published a document entitled "national southwest border counter narcotics strategy." this is a blueprint on how the administration will address the threats posed by mexican drug smuggling. but the key issue remains, who is in charge? we know who is leading the fight in iraq. we know who is leading the fight in afghanistan. what we do not know is who is leading the fight on our own border? is it the border czar? is it the drug czar? will it be the national guard? perhaps we will obtain a better understanding of this question today. one more thing before we began. with us today are top

representatives from keep law enforcement agencies involved in the ongoing struggle to address the mexican drug trafficking. the work they do is critical, both to united states national security into helping mexico in its progress to turning the corner on the threats in now confronts. i commend their efforts, and i look forward to working with them on this critical national security matter. thank you. before i recognize their ranking member for his opening statement, i would like to thank the minority for its assistance during this investigation, and all the work related to this hearing was conducted on a bipartisan basis. i would like to thank the ranking member for his leadership and his staff for continuing to build on this important relationship. i look forward to continuing to work together on important

matters such as today's topic. i will now yield to the ranking member for his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman, but i would have led to go on for as long as you wanted. as the chairman said, this is a bipartisan issue in which there is no distance between the chairman and myself. our staffs did work closely on it and intend to continue. there is no surprise that we will reach different conclusions on some of the fixes and some of the things that should be done. we will read some differences in the priorities of the administration, including its representatives before us today, and the two of us. when it comes to finding the facts and to agreeing on the portions that can be agreed on, so that we can then disagree on very little, i think this committee is setting a high standard, and i intend to continue that. i ask unanimous consent that my

entire opening statement replaced on the record. >> without objection, so ordered. >> with that indulgent, i will take a moment to recognize allen berson. i do not know the rest of you as well, but our new borders are is not new to san diego, and he is not new to dealing with border issues. his work in education and his work on the airport -- the list of work is too long to do as an introduction, but you have been a champion for so many causes in san diego, and i could not be more delighted that the president has selected you as someone who rises above the politics, rises above either party to do what is right for our country. i look forward to your testimony today. i am particularly pleased that the border as a separate issue is getting attention. i must admit that the reduction of the drug czar from a full cabinet level position concerns

me deeply. i think it sends the wrong message at a time in which your efforts and the efforts of the mexican government are going to be critical. the fact that we pulled away to 0.5 years ago from colombia, we curtailed our support for plan columbia, and on a partisan basis, failed to support the colombian free trade initiative. it sends a chilling message to countries who bled so long with us in order to eradicate drugs that once, literally, controlled the government in colombia. today in mexico we have a very brave president who is fighting the same battle, and so far appears to be making progress. i say that because you are only one key assassination away from a dramatic change in mexico. we need to understand that the death of corruption in mexico --

depth of corruption, when it is in the hands of people with guns and a willingness to use them, 11,000 murders this year alone, says a great deal. we will hear about the spillover or lack thereof, and i believe that people in san diego at the border, the u.s. attorney and others, are doing a good job, doing everything they can to ensure that the activity north of the border is disconnected as much as possible from the activities out of the border. but let's be clear. whether you are in san diego or st. louis or cleveland, you are directly affected by our failure to stop narcotics from coming into our country. every city in america and many rural areas have organized crime directly linked to those assets being made available and sold. some in my party would say that it is another country's problem alone. i am not one of them.

today, with former speaker danny hastert, we announced a drug task force, one that had been somewhat dormant for several years. we felt we needed to work hard to bring new emphasis to this growing problem. but also because we want to make sure that the facts are very clearly stated to the american people. first of all, we are the consumers, and we are the suppliers of money. we all take a certain amount of blame for the fact that our money ultimately leads to these cartels' operations in other countries. additionally we will hear today about guns going south wall of drugs go north. i have no doubt that drugs and go south. one of the questions is, is it through the tunnels that i have seen personally and move the drugs? or is it somehow through the border? would we do any real good if we set up an exit american

checkpoint at the border, or would it simply be one more burden borne by our border patrol people at a cost much higher than either the mexicans doing their job or, in fact, would be accomplished very little other than to find a small amount of drugs and a small amount of paraphernalia, when in fact, anything serious in the way of guns or other activities are probably going to the very means that bring drugs norrith. if we did not find the drugs going north, where just as unlikely to find a gun is going south. having said that, i look forward to a lot of information we do not have every day in san diego. i want to thank the chairman, because the only way we will really support the efforts of this administration and hold the administration accountable is on a bipartisan basis. we are off to an incredibly good start, and i expected to continue. i yield back.

>> i would now like to recognize mr. turner to make an opening statement if he would like. >> i want to thank you and our witnesses for being here this morning. in march, a subcommittee on national security and foreign affairs had a hearing on the issue of money, guns, and drugs , and whether united states inputs were fueling the violence on the mexican border. we heard testimony about what factors inside the the united states are contributing to the strength of the mexican drug cartels. they are continuing to -- it will be an endless task if we do not address the other related aspects of the drug trade. more progress needs to be made in drugs, guns, and cash. according to some estimates, as many as 90% of the high caliber weapons being used by drug cartels to perpetrate the violence we of seen in the past

few years originated in the united states. the violence threatens the safety of our citizens if we do not halt the flow arms into mexico. this is a significant challenge for the border patrol. we have to check the gun flow at the border as well as in the interior of this country. the second major factor in the drug trade is the cash flow coming in from the united states. we heard testimony at the march hearing that as much as $25 billion in bulk cash flows into mexico in drug sales in the united states each year. one of our witnesses testified that federal law enforcement is hampered by its efforts to find and stop these cash flows by what he called antiquated legislation. it appeared that there may be a lack of coordination between the various agencies that have jurisdiction in this area. i hope our witnesses today can

address those issues in more detail as well. we must address the fact that it is the demand for drugs here in the u.s. that has allowed the cartels to become profitable. 9% of the cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana purchased and consumed in the u.s. enters our country from mexico. americans spend as much as $65 billion annually on illegal drugs. there are no simple solutions to the problem. we need to recognize that our internal drug policies and our success at curbing the use of these substances can have a profound effect on the stability of our neighboring countries and our own national security. there is a global problem, not simply an issue in the united states and mexican border. we heard testimony that cocaine from mexican cartels is now headed to europe and russia. mexican and colombian drug cartels have made inroads in africa as well.

our shared border makes the situation a particular concern to us, but it is just one piece of the global puzzle. i hope our discussion can of form -- in former approach with the adjure -- with the other regions as well. >> i yield to congressman bilbray. >> as a lifelong resident of the frontier area, i want to thank you for this hearing. it seems like everyone is talking about wars overseas, we are ignoring our own backyard, where fatalities are skyrocketing and the death rate among law-enforcement just out of our border was far beyond anything we had seen anywhere else in the world. we just sort of ignored it because it was not on the radar screen for the meeting. i want to apologize to the other two gentlemen. i have to mention my friend mr. berson. when it comes to the choice of

our guy in san diego in the western sector, no one could have been a better choice than alan, and i want to thank him for being willing to serve again. it is not an easy job. you knew what you were stepping into, and we do not have time for learning curve here. i want to thank the administration for bringing him back on line. the one thing i have to say is that too often we hear the media talk about the drug cartel. we need to change the terminology to the smuggling cartels, because we are talking about not only drugs going north, but we are talking about guns and money coming south, and the same cartel is involved in illegal alien smuggling. it is all a network. i grew up in an area where begun in the habit of seeing illegals being used as the meals for the cartel's, and the abuses -- being used as the mules for the

cartels. i just want to make sure we understand that we talk about this issue, they are all tied together. the cartels have controlled the border an illegal crossing for much too long. i am glad to see this hearing because too many people on our side of the border think this is a problem that is across the border and not a threat to the american communities. this is a major threat for all of us along the frontier area on both sides of the border. i hope i am able to get you photos that i do not think we will show in public, but just so the members understand how bad this is, we have a hospital in my county that has someone walking in with two fingers and saying is there any way to preserve these fingers so that when we get the hostages back, we can so them back on? when you have law enforcement that finds the remnants of

decapitation, this is the kind of thing we have going on in our neighborhoods, not just in tijuana, but in the san diego county region. it is crossing over, and now is the time to win this battle. present -- president calderon is the bravest elected official i have ever known. we have to give credit to him and throw aside our disagreements with mexico and work with him now. we either fight this battle on mexican soil and win it, are we will be fighting it on american soil at a much higher cost. i appreciate the chance to be able to be heard today and i yield back. >> i would now like to introduce our first panel of witnesses who will testify today. the director of the office of national drug control policy in

the executive office of the president. mr. lanny brewer, criminal division, united states department of justice, and mr. alan berson. he has been praised all day. assistant secretary for international affairs and special represented for border of affairs, united state department of homeland security. we will go as far as we can. let me just where all be in. please stand and raise your right hand. [reading oath] that the record reflect that all

the witnesses entered in the affirmative. >> i practiced all last night announcing your name correctly. >> i am honored to be with you and all committee members that are here today. last month, secretary napolitano, eric holder and i -- this is comprehensive interagency plan that was developed through the work of the office of national drug control. it was done in a way that ensured all of the partners that you see here today being actively involved in it. this is a plan that is not going to sit on a shelf and gather dust. it is being put into action even as we speak. it is being done in partnership also with the courageous and

dedicated work of mexico's president calderon. the commitment of all the federal agencies and the state and local agencies that we have talked to. to ensure it is turned into action, the administration will be announcing a dedicated interagency working group which i will lead to push for the full and effective implementation of the strategy. that framework is being developed. it will put -- we will provide a public report on the implementation of the strategy as part of the administration's first national drug control strategy which will be published early next year. as part of my oversight responsibilities, my office recently identified overarching national drug control strategy goals to help guide all of the federal agencies as they develop their policy initiatives, the programmatic efforts, and the budget proposals. of the coming months, we will be working with the department of

homeland security, justice, state, defense, and others to develop cross agency performance goals and metrics for the stock was border initiative. in addition, as the agencies update their she plans, will be working with omb and the departments and agencies for key southwest border priorities that are identified in the strategy. this will insure accountability and make it clear that combating the flow of drugs and money and weapons across the southwest border must be a core element of our nation's approach to the entire drug problem. it is essential that we work together as one team to stop the flow of drugs into our country as well as the flow of all currency and weapons that fuel cartel violence. the congress and the ministration will need to work very closely together. i am looking forward to working with this committee, and i know that part of the focus you have

identified is accountability, and we are proud to ensure that. -- we are proud -- we are prepared to answer that. i asked the directors of the high intensity drug trafficking areas to meet with me along the southwest border last month. what the director has told me and what i believe the members in this committee already know is that our front-line state and local law enforcement partners have been under enormous strain. the retiring share of of 50 years of law enforcement has been friends for many years. i listened to this very closely. although the strain is most acute on the border, as the ranking member mentioned, clearly this is a national problem. it affected us in seattle during the nine years i was police chief as well as my colleagues in minnesota and across the

country. the administration intends to continue to help those law enforcement agencies who needed and that are on the border and also within the interior. we will keep an intense focus on this threat and make a difference. the knowledge of local law enforcement, meaning the state, county, and city, is a great advantage to the work of the federal government. when it comes to the critical challenge of interdicting this out and flow of weapons and currency, a partnership with those agencies is essential, and i think i can be of great value in that. state and local law enforcement personnel possess unmatched knowledge about the organizations that operate in their jurisdictions every day. law enforcement operations are most effective when this knowledge is combined with a skilled technology and resources that the federal agencies can bring. all of us in this administration are committed to pursuing a truly national approach to the critical problem. thank you, chairman, and i look

forward to answering questions. >> thank you very much. >> chairman and ranking member issa and members of the committee, i appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the department of justice's important role in the administration's overall strategy to address the threats posed by the rise of mexican drug cartels, particularly along our southwest border. the justice department's goal is to systematically dismantle these cartels which threaten the national security of our mexican neighbors, pose an organized crime threat to the united states, and are responsible for much of the skirt of illicit drugs and the increase in violence in mexico. this commands priority at the highest level of the department's leadership. as you know, on june 5, attorney general holder, department of

homeland security secretary napolitano, and office of national drug control policy director released president obama's shall southwest border counter narcotics strategy. the strategy is designed to stem the flow of illegal drugs and their illicit proceeds across the southwest border and to reduce the associated crime and violence in the region. i look forward to working with the director and assistant secretary berson and are many partners to ensure success of the administration's strategy. the department reviewed the justice department plays a central role in supporting the strategy. the department's approach to the mexican drug cartels is to confront them as criminal organizations. to do so, we employ extensive

and coordinated intelligence capabilities to target the largest and most dangerous mexican drug cartels and focus law enforcement resources. our intelligence and based, prosecutor led, multi agency task force focused our investigation on the x -- investigation, extradition, prosecution, and prosecution of key cartel leaders. destroying the leadership and seizing the financial infrastructure of the cartels is critical to dismantling them. stemming the flow iof guns and money from the united states to mexico is an important aspect of the administration's comprehensive approach to the problem. in concerted efforts with the department of homeland security and other law enforcement entities, we are committed to investigating and prosecuting

illegal firearms trafficking and currency smuggling from the united states into mexico. another key component to neutralizing the cartels is to work closely with the government of mexico. the department plays an important role in implementing the initiative, including serving as the lead implemented in programs in prosecutorial capacity building, asset forfeiture, extradition training, and forensics. we continue to work closely with mexico to address the issue of cartel related public corruption, including through investigative assistance. we also work together on extraditions of key cartel leaders and other fugitives. the calderon administration has taken bold steps to confront this threat. we are committed to assisting our mexican partners in this fight. we believe that the department

is the right comprehensive and coordinated strategy to disrupt and dismantle the cartel's and stem the southbound flow of firearms and cash. the strengths of the department's approach are illustrated by for example of the tremendous successes of operation accelerator. multinational organizations targeting the sinaloa and gulf cartel's. we recognize there is much more work to do. last month, i traveled to the southwest border, along with my friend, assistant secretary berson is all the challenges that are brave law enforcement personnel confront on a daily basis. the department is committed to working together with our colleagues and with our state, local, and travel partners and

with the government of mexico to build on what we have done so far, and to develop and implement new and refresh our strategies. the recently signed agreements are emblematic of our glover to come a coordinated approach to the threats posed by the mexican drug cartels. by continuing to work together, we can and will rise to the current challenge. again, thank you for your recognition of this important issue and the opportunity to testify today. i will be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you very much. we have votes on the floor, and we will adjourn for one hour and be able to come back 10 minutes after the last vote, just in case we run into some problems on the floor. i think we should be back in an hour. at that time, we will continue

with you. we have to vote around here. >> the committee will reconvene. again, we apologize for the delay, but boats are something that we have to do. -- votes for something we have to do. >> members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity. the rise of the mexican drug cartels and u.s. national

security poses the critical issue clearly and directly. this is a subject critical to our nation, and one with which i am familiar, having served as the southwest border represented for the department of justice from 1995 to 1998. since my appointment to dhs in mid-april, i have travelled to the border into mexico five times to meet with u.s. officials at the federal, state, local, and tribal level as well as counterparts in the administration of president felipe calderon. i have also met with advocacy groups and civic and business groups along the border in brownsville, laredo, del rio, a passel, albuquerque, tucson, phoenix, and san diego. my experience living and working on the border has given me an appreciation for the strategic importance of our political and law enforcement relationship with mexico, as well as for the gravity of the crisis that we

face presently, given the rise of the drug cartels on the u.s.- mexican border and within mexico itself. it is indeed a crisis, though in using that word, i note that the chinese word for crisis is written in mandarin by combining two characters, the characters for danger and opportunity. our current crisis certainly presents both. the danger comes from the fact that the mexican cartels or violent and have created a national security threat to the government of mexico, and therefore derivative bleak, to the united states. the power of the cartels is alarming. they have polluted the political system of mexico. that have corrupted the legal system. the second element of danger is the competition among the cartel's along with the mexican government's attempt to combat them. it has led to unprecedented

violence in the northern states of mexico. it resulted reportedly in 11,000 deaths in the last 3.5 years. our opportunity arises from the historic and courageous efforts and the heroic efforts of the calderon administration. first to fully knowledge the power of the cartel's, and second to willingly confront the stark reality and systematic corruption that exist in mexican law enforcement. the united states government has been bold as well, starting with the unqualified acceptance of the consumption of drugs on the u.s. out of the border is a major contributing factor to the power and influence of mexican cartels. for the first time, we view drugs going north and guns and balkhash going south as two ends of the same problem. it is not the occasion for finger-pointing between mexico

and the united states. the acknowledgement of a shared problem paves the way for cooperation between dhs along with doj and the government of mexico that would have been unthinkable 10 years ago, and even unsalable three years ago. dhs is working in full partnership with the government of mexico to respond to the dangers and the opportunities that the current crisis as presented. this is a relationship of trust with verification, and one that is expected by both countries on that basis. on march 24, secretary napolitano and david ogden announced the president's major southwest border initiative, a reallocation of agents, technology, equipment, and attention to the border. those deployments are now complete. dhs is also taking steps to deepen our relationship with

partner agencies in the government of mexico. . . i note to positive changes that we will succeed in our efforts to reduce the power of the smuggling cartels burda first, it teaches provides to give them

a better resource capabilities to confront security issues it also has a unified chain of command overseeing and inspection responsibility. secondly, i have been impressed by the cooperation. it is embodied in a relationship that the director and assistant attorney general have forged in short order. this is particularly true on the initiative, the long-term vehicle for cooperation between u.s./mexican law enforcement agencies. it has been said that the challenge of our time is that the future is not what it used to be. when it comes to u.s./mexican relationships and the prospect for building on that cooperation, to deal with

mexican criminal organizations, that is a good thing, a very good thing indeed. i did forward to exploring this matter further with you. thank you. >> thank you for your testimony. we now will move to the question and answer period. i have a broad question for you. are we winning the war against the mexican cartels? >the mexican drug cartels. >> we are. that is thought to say we didn't have much to do. if you could get the work with respect to operations that we have, whether it is operation accelerator or predict reckoning, where we have systematically gone and prosecuted the cartels, we have

attracted enormous blows between lower cartels against the gulf cartels. we have hired letters of extraditions of drugs than ever before. we are making very effective strategies with respect to intelligence base investigations and prosecutions that is not to suggest that we do not have more to do. the battles among the cartels themselves are showing that the pressure we are putting on them do demonstrate that we are being very effective. >> generally, i agree with mr. brewer that this is a long-term struggle about reducing the power of the cartels from the government of mexico and turning it from what is currently a national security threat and into a more conventional law

enforcement problem. measured by that standard, i think we have a ways to go, but i am in accord with mr. brewer for the reason that he stated. we are making progress and it is measurable progress. if we can intensify what we are doing and continued to see weakening of the cartel power, which now is alarmingly high. >> it has been indicated that the president is planning to send national guard troops to the border. of course, if we send national guard troops to the border, who would be in charge of them? >> mr. chairman, the decision whether or not to send the national guard at any border is a decision reserved exclusively for the president. secretary gates and secondary

napolitano have been confirming -- conferring and will submit a recommendation to the president. the mission is a function of a presidential decision. i am confident that in due course it will be made one where the other. >> what are the implications for u.s. national security should the administration fail in its efforts to take on the american drug cartel? what the stakes for both mexico and the united states? >> mr. chairman, in their very significant, certainly for mexico as we have said. they are confronting a national security challenge right now in their battle against the cartels. with respect to us right now, it

is absolutely an organized crime challenge. we cannot permit president calderon to fail. this may be a once in a generation opportunity. his courage and willingness to take on the cartels. the consequences are very extraordinary. we need to deploy the appropriate resources and cooperation to ensure we do everything we can to support the president. >> can i hear you on that as well? >> i am in agreement. secretary of peloton no -- nepal tonneau is referring to the window opportunity. we will continue to see mexico that is systematically corrupt in which decisions and not be made on the merits are being made because there bought and paid for. that kind of a influence political system south of the

border presents a whole series of long-term security threats to mexico, which is why it is so important that we use this window of opportunity with the called ron administration to weaken the powers of these criminal organizations. they do enormous damage to our society and even more damage to the mexican society. >> what would victory really look like? what would really look like, victory for us? >> one thing it would look like this certainly that president called ron eric holder run -- calderon has a highly skilled force to be responsive to the need of protecting the people rather than the heavy use of the military. the other thing that with the cat is has been remarked by

representatives from the government of mexico. that is the increasing addiction population, the size of the population involved in drug use. traffickers often pay their careers and product rather than currency. -- their couriers in product within currency. we have to be willing and a hard look at providing resources that work toward the prevention and end of drug use in the country and the treatment. those are other parts that we hope to play. >> i yield to the prime minister from california. bu>> during your tenure you were known for going after the coyotes, literally stopping those who traffic human beings.

along the way you lost a lot of drug charges that they were involved in and the meals they carry. can you give us your opinion of current laws, particular 1326 and 1324, some of the penalties that you have at the border as tools. are they sufficient? >> you raise an important point. this era has a sharp division that uses -- exists between drug organizations and other organizations has been blurred by the efforts of pressure being brought and the cartels by u.s. enforcement and by mexican enforcement. it is also by the recessionary economy. we began to see a blurring of those lines. certainly speaking from the perspective of 10-years ago, the series of statutes available to prosecutors -- and i will defer

immediately to mr. brewer -sendi where a farmer had is a prosecutor -- is that an enforcement official, 1326 and 1325 which is a misdemeanor work well. 1324, which is a penalties for alien smugglers is something that 10-years ago would lead to require review. it could stand a further review at this time. >> basically, what i'm trying to get to is that we have had the talent at the border that i have observed, which is that the first several times that he kept a trafficker -- you can a trafficker, he gets treated like an amateur who happen to stumble by mistake. it is 60 days to serve.

the second time is not much more. we have had cases of the dozens of time in which we cannot get, sometimes because the statute, and the kind of enforcement. do you believe, all three of you, that the congress should be looking into giving you as prosecutors and courts at least a greater ability to have the upper limits -- have the lower limits raised and/or give them the ability to have tougher sentences on the first or second time? >> thank you. i definitely think it is an issue that needs to be explored. i think what we need to do is that we need to give thit to our attorneys. i think we need to give our

u.s. attorneys, particularly in the southwest border states, the discretion antall said that they can effectively and comprehensive peace deal with the issue. i do not think candidly that there is one size fits all. i think we have to get the u.s. attorney's the discretion to prioritize. if we are going to charge under one aspect of the law we have to ensure that we appropriate -- we have appropriate facilities, whether prison or other. >> let me go through that. california has tens of thousands of people who are petty criminals and illegal aliens. are you saying that if we wanted to incarcerate every coyote, every person who is trafficking either in drugs for human beings, that you do not have the capacity today to incarcerate every single one of the people for a significant amount of time? >> i think there would be terrific challenges.

i think to have the appropriate facilities and infrastructure would require a lot. as it did get this comprehensive approach, would we really did what we want to do is give the u.s. attorney's the tools so they can dismantle the very cartels that you are talking about. >> the only truly have the ability to incarcerate. any tool sort of that is an alternate. if you turn on the rest of your cartel, we will not locked up for 10-years. that is a powerful tool. if you turn on your cartel or you are going to spend 60 days, somehow had nothing that is a horrible tool. i'm asking this for three reasons. should we have it? mr. burton was a more likely to say he would have it at his disposal. it can use it as a tool to get cooperation.

the bigger question for us up here is are we clogging the system without having a comprehensive immigration reform, without having relations with mexico that allows us to return more of their citizens sooner with a full faith belief that they will incarcerate them? although my time has expired, i would like it if you looked at it from that standpoint, because we are the committee of oversight and reform. we are the first top in if there are tools the do not have either north or south the week to begin shedding light on. >> you have identified exactly the issue. we absolutely ought to have comprehensive immigration reform. there is absolutely no question. secondly, and are building -- and are building a relationship with the mexican government, a very effective tool is that we do want to be able to return

people to mexico and know that the mexican government is going to treat them appropriately. those are part of the puzzle absolutely. >> i yield to the gentleman from massachusetts. >> to be fully appreciate the amount of corruption and death of corruption? with the large amounts of money that is indicated that is involved that is going into mexico and the reports so we see about corruption and the police departments and military -- what can we do about this? what are we doing about it? do you have confidence that we will get a grip on this? otherwise, we are just spinning our wheels. >> it is an enormous challenge. you are right. one of the tools that we do have and that we hope to do more of is our ability to work with and

train law enforcement in mexico. we are making great strides with respect to training the unit that we have a lot of confidence in. they are not subject to bribery, whether there is subject to polygraphs and the kind of background review. >> your timing of the military as opposed to police? >> i am talking about the police. >> there is a significant amount of fear among the police, no amount -- no matter how much you pay them. sometimes taking money is a better alternative than having your family violated. >> that is an enormous challenge. there are many courageous law enforcement in mexico. these units are good representation of them. >> the internet to sending about the money? -- don't we have to do something about the money? what are your thoughts about disrupting the cartels by

seizing their money? what are we going to do to do that? >> you are right. i defer to my colleagues. what we are doing from the law enforcement point of view, we have levels of seizure of the profits of the money in the possession of the cartel's members. one of our training programs is to teach and incorporate in mexico the same concept of forfeiture and seizure. >> that we have to do that further back from the line? >> absolutely. >> one of the changes that has taken place daily is the acknowledgement on our end of the bargain that the consumption of drugs in this country that generates the traffic and the kind of sums of money that the current -- that has corrupted mexican politics

is something that will continue until we get a better handle on reducing the demand. >> how are we going to further this? >> with regard to the drug demand reduction, the south was border strategy that was unveiled place a heavy emphasis on that. >> it is still going to be cash. >> the cash is going south. having cbp and border patrol pay attention to that so that for the first time while we haven't in the past, we have systematic checks going south now. this is a project that is very much geared to cooperating with mexico as it builds up its enforcement capacity for the first time. >> a couple months ago, you had

sporadic checks southbound. they were much too sporadic to be affected. we may not have the impression it should there to really be affected. -- infrastructure there to really be effective. when the going to do to make sure we have southbound and steady in fact? -- what are you going to do to make sure we have southbound and steady text? >> it was not until april when the secretary change policy that we went from very sporadic checks to systematic checks from brownsville to san diego. we need to continue to assess the effectiveness of that to conduct the inspections. we need to assess that. whether not we should have a major investment is one that is

on the table. we need to learn a lot more about it. >> anything about coming further back from the chain? but no question. >> what are we going to do about that? >> there is a lot of progress. there are a couple of things intervene them. they are using local law enforcement to help. in seattle we sent officers trained with canine's along with the sheriff's department. all of these local agencies across the country are more than willing to do their part to help. that is only one part. the other part, at the hyatt trafficking areas are in 20 places around the united states. they often have the roots and mexico. they not only sees the drugs and make the arrests and work with federal prosecutors or local prosecutors, but they also go after the money.

you are not stopping the cache of the border. you are starting the cash in seattle and california. there is more progress in training being done. treasury is working very hard and the new credit card act to develop ways of looking at the usage as a card that is going to carry thousands of dollars of cash. there is a lot more to be done. there is a lot of progress. choking off the money is the key. >> thank you. >> the gentle man from illinois. >> thank you. i know the issue of the national guard was raised earlier. is it accurate? about 500 national guardsmen are in the national border as the speed? >> there are national guard but have been engaged in an ongoing project that has been in

existence for more than 22 decades. this is in support of law enforcement activities. i believe that number is one that i need to confirm. i do know that most of the guardsmen are actually away from the border, engaged in intelligence and analytical activities. i will need to confirm whether it is 400 or some smaller number that are actually physically on the border today. >> the first follow-up would be the activities that they are claiming as to talk about. do they relate to the drug cartel of activities? >> the counter drug program that has been in existence for two decades and that i am very familiar with with my time as a prosecutor is definitely counter dragon nature. that is the basis that congress has authorized the activity. these are activities that

involve supporting law enforcement in a variety of ways that are consistent with the division between law enforcement and the military. >> you have probably read about the accounts that discuss the possibility of the administration increasing the number of national guardsmen, perhaps to another 15 under. is that your understanding? it is still in the planning? >> this is all in the discussion stage, as indicated, between secretary of peloton no, secretary gates. they plan to make a joint recommendation to the president to will make the final decision. >> excuse me if this has been discussed. where between votes. -- we are between votes. we have had in previous hearings about the conflicts between the a and -- between dea and i.t.

i anniston there has been an agreement signed. what is the problem and how was it solved? do you sense that it is all this? >> what it shows is that they just entered into a memorandum of understanding. it is fair to say that there is a remarkable commitment to work to get their and they have been working well together, but now what happens is that they can work together. patients can be designated to pursue drug-related crimes that are border related, but they can do that throughout the country. very importantly, the information that i gathered in the investigations can be shared in a day diffusion center so that all the information from i.c.e a share together. it can be used to go after the

cartels. >> there is an information live double follow back and make sure it continues to be the case. >> it is. there is a great commitment. homeland security in the department of justice is making sure if this happens. i am confident it will happen. >> you will have an agent from immigrations and customs who will speak very treacly to your inquiry -- very directly to your inquiry. >> the third point is that we often hear this figure of 90% of the guns compensated in this conflict come from the united states. given that we are not tracing all of the guns, how are we determining that figure? >> i think the precise number

may be a little hard to identify. you are absolutely right. of those guns recover, for which one can trace, the number you identified as the number that has been set. i think that is right. the larger issue that it is inescapable that a very large percentage of the guns enter mexico to come from the united states. as we are joining with our friends in mexico to combat the battle, that is one of the issues that we will have to confront here ourselves. but why are not more guns traced? is it because some of them are untraceable or is it the volume makes it difficult? >> what may work is in the second panel, billy hoover

explained in a better manner than i have. when possible, a good number of them have been trees. he will be in a better position than i to tell you some of the challenges. >> i appreciate that. i suppose it will be easier to control that if we continue with what the clinton administration did which was a ban on semi-automatic weapons. it is much easier to control of their not being sold. -- if they are not being sold. >> i like to pick up here. i was embarrassed by the performance of our country when the episodes, a terrible episodes, of armed conflict some thought might even bring down the government -- may have been somewhat exaggerated -- guesses

supplying the guns? -- guess who was supplying the guns? not only arena configuring -- not only are not considering to find these guns with the most elementary inspection capacity but the action when we did sporadic outbound inspections, they got their guns out anyway. the notion that this country would have been so central which

were in such conduct will supply that it was like an army that the government itself was over from. they had so much weaponry. we know we are not doing much. we know does not take much to get them to mexico. i'm far more interested in how these funds -- thugs so easily pick up guns in this country. many of these guns are being sold. how the can pick up large amounts of guns, equip yourself

as if you work and army with such force that the government for a while there was essentially fighting an internal army supplied in no small part by the united states of america and -- where do these guns come from? how're they able to pick them up in such large numbers? how are they able to get out would amount to enough guns to arm a virtual small army? many of them are from the united states. regardless of the figures and the notion that a lot of them came from x, y, or z, you know exactly where they came from, mr. brewer.

what you might not be able to trace them, and you have law enforcement jurisdiction and united states of america. why are you not keeping these guns from being either bought or otherwise in such large numbers so that they now are a small army? it is extremely embarrassing for the mexico has been very kind to us. i would have been very angry. i will have been angry of the big kahuna in the north that was essentially shipping down arms to tell my people. they will not do anything about its own weapons ban. nobody knew administration even spoke out about illegal guns and the proliferation of guns in our country except the attorney general who did say something

about it. it looks like body had to do is get some guns and you get them across the border very easily and nobody in the united states is doing very much to keep thugs from acquiring those guns in the first place. i am interested in this country what you are doing here before you get to the border. >> i share your concern. i want to begin by saying there are people who were working very hard. our atf agents are doing an extraordinary job with their resources. >> water they doing? he was selling the guns? -- what are they doing? who is selling the guns? what they are coming from license a fire arms dealers. the power of these calls is extraordinary. -- cartels is extraordinary.

in their reach is great. some are coming from a licensed firearms dealers. >> is there nothing you can do? >> our agents are doing a lot. they have limited resources. >> water they doing? what they are visiting -- >> there visiting in doing inspections. >> are they doing any undercover work? >> yes, they are. they are doing a lot of it. it is not fair to be critical of our agents. they are doing an extraordinary job every day. they are serving the american people well. >> i am critical of your leadership, not your agents. i love the atf. i am talking about what it takes to dismantle the gun cartel and this country that is not only enabling but making possible this. >> your time has expired.

let me for thank you for your testimony. i apologize for the delay. i am wondering if you could hold the record open and get some information for us. the rest raid which seems to be very aggressive in what is happening in mexico -- can he get some information on the conviction? it is one thing to make a lot of arrests, but if we get some information in terms of the percentage of convictions, we would appreciate it. >> absolutely. >> and also the length of sentences. we will hold the record open for that information. thank you very much. >> thank you very much.

>> now on to our second panel. >> mr. william hoover? mr. roberts mcbryan. rise so i can swear you in. to agree to tell the truth and nothing but the truth? if so, answer in the affirmative. he may be seated. they all entered in the affirmative. let the record be stated. but to introduce our second panel. anthony pacitto, the assistant

commissioner for intelligence and drug enforcement administration bu. welcome. mr. kumar kibell, united states customs enforcement and homeland security. mr. todd owens, assistant commissioner of field operations, u.s. customs and border protection, u.s. department of homeland security. mr. william hoover, assistant director of field operations, of fear of alcohol and explosives, united states department of justice. mr. robert mcbryan, office of foreign assets control, department of the treasury. it is our committee policy to

have five minutes for your presentation and then you allow us an opportunity to raise questions with you. why do not we go right down? we can just go down the line. mr. owens, you first and then we will go down the line. >> good afternoon. thank you for the opportunity to be here today. i am pleased to be here with my colleagues from many agencies. i would like to express my gratitude to the congress for its support of the mission and people ofcbp, among the numerous parties that were recognized in the investment act of 2009. we provided cbp was $600 million for improvements to our infrastructure to enhance our technical communications equipment and upgrade our inspection technology. it will allow them to more

efficiently meet the goals of border security and facilitation. then taken steps to protect americans from the threats that face our nation. i like to focus meyer remarks about the violence on the southwest border. the campaign of violence is being waged by drug cartels in mexico and remains a major concern. illegal drugs and weapons flow both ways across our border and link the united states and mexico in this battle. the department homeland security has implemented a security strategy and the office of field operations is responsible for implementing the strategy at our ports of entry. we have taken significant action on the southwest border and have enhanced our outbound enforcement efforts with deployment of additional manpower and equipment and technology. teams of officers and border patrol agents and special

agents along with local law- enforcement are now conducting outbound inspections of the report of entry with a focus on firearms in currency. the mobile response teams are also utilize to ship personnel between the ports of entry to further disrupt smuggling efforts. they are supported by non intrusive inspection equipment which allows this to scan for presence of anomalies which may indicate contraband. the currently deployed 227 large-scale systems. many are mobile and are being used in our outbound efforts as well. we are grateful for the hundred million dollars in stimulus money which will allow us to agree their systems. there also deploying canines to detect currency in firearms. we are dying -- it adding

additional canines during the summer. these tools will allow our of measures to quickly scan is up on traffic looking for cash and firearms. we are seeing the success of these efforts. since we began these initiatives on march 12, we have seized more than $15.8 million in currency destined for mexico. there also pursuing activities which increase support in collaboration with their mexican counterparts at u.s. and mexico border crossings. thank you for your support. yet many of our responsibilities. i thank you for the opportunity to be here. >> thank you. >> on behalf but the secretary

and assistant secretary, of like to thank you for the sovereignty in helping us secure the borders. as the primary investigative agency, we target national criminal networks and terrorist organizations that might exploit potential abilities. our partnerships are central to this effort. we recently strengthened to these crucial precious by renegotiating agreements with the dea and ftf. it to approve and enhance information sharing. the violence on the border requires comprehensive and collaborative efforts. on march 24, the department of homeland security announced the southwest border initiative designed to crack down on mexican drug cartels. this was augmented by the recently released 2009 national southwest border strategy.

since the announcement, we have seen significant increases in seizures of drugs in currency compared to the same time. in 2008. during the time between the two, together they have increased narcotics seizures by over 40%. they continue to work with the federal partners to collaborate in various ways. in 2005 they created the border enforcement task force. the 15 best are a series of is led task forces that identified and stroke criminal organizations that oppose some of it again for a. they have reported over 4000 criminal arrests and seized over 2,000 pounds of narcotics, 2500 weapons, and three under 70,000 rounds of ammunition, including $26 million in u.s. currency. one recent success story iled to

the indictment of four individuals trying to export weapons of the united states. the ones it tried to purchase included 300 rifles, 300 short barrel tellable rifles, 10 caliber sniper rifles, to 40 millimeter machine guns, and 20 and fans with silencers and a large amount of ammunition. it had a street guy of over five and a thousand dollars. -- $500,000. we have doubled the amount of agents working on the southwest border from 95 to 190. a large number of weapons were recovered in mexico. this must be an urgent priority. in june 2008, ice and other

partners launched an operation. it has resulted in the seizure of 1600 weapons, more than $6.4 million and over 108,000 rounds of ammunition. i says partnered -- ice has partnered in operation fire wall. it has resulted in a seizure over $210 million, including 65 million seized overseas and foreigners in the five arrests. they also recently established a great transparency unit with mexico to identify trade anomalies which are in a thicket of trade based money schemes. -- which are indicative of trade base money schemes. these efforts have led to more than the million dollars in cash seized during the last fiscal year. we proactively act against those

performing human trafficking. we have identified various methods used by criminal network to small people into the u.s. to target these routes, we partnership with the doj strike force. we combined our investigative resources to target and dismantle foreign based criminal travel networks. complementary is the pivotal role they continue to play as a co-chair of the project of the working group on alien smuggling. ice is committed to working with this committee and congress to address the challenges we face to secure the borders to the enforcement of our nation's immigration laws. i am thank the commitment for your support.

i would be pleased to answer any questions. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. i appreciate the opportunity to represent the views of the drug enforcement administration on this issue regarding the rise of criminality in mexican cartels and their implications for u.s. national security. >> please pull your mighty little closer. >> as a lead agency, we are keenly aware of the critical requirement to break the power and impunity of transnational crime groups such as mexican cartels. these groups and a supply enormous quantities of drugs to our country with adverse consequences in terms of addiction, lost productivity, and social costs, but left unchecked, they threaten regional stability because they undermine respect the rule of

law, diminish public confidence, and promote lawlessness through violence and corruption. the good news is that together we are highly committed with mexican partners and their the generous support of congress, we are bringing unprecedented pressure against the cartels and helping fortified mexico's criminal-justice system to ensure that these gains can be sustained over time. the drug trade in mexico has been a ride with violence for decades. intentionally gruesome violence and kidnapping, torture, and murder have remained at elevated levels since president calderon initiative his program to break the power of the cartels. i believe that it distributed some of the photos that demonstrate the extent of that brutality. >> i would ask consent of the would be placed in the record but not shown, because they are

a little issue -- too gruesome for public view. >> they have been a spectacular violence despite the fact that all past and san diego are among some the safest cities in mexico. drug-related killings and mexico have escalated from 1200 in 2006 to more than 6200 in 2008. jennifer six months of this year, there have been 3600 -- during the first clause of this year, there have been 36 under. 3600. law officials are being targeted by the cartels. in an effort intended to break the will of the government to mexico to confront these criminals, the mutilated and decapitated bodies of the victims are frequently left with signs warning of even greater violence.

even if this carnage can be confined to mexican territory, it has adverse consequence to u.s. national purity. there is justifiable concern that the violence plenty mexico will spill across our border and have any more pronounced effect on americans. the u.s. enter agency has attended to distinguish before the criminal on criminal violence that has always been assisted with the decade and a new phenomenon of violence against mexican officials and institutions. we have defined spillover violence to until delivered attacks by the cartels and u.s. government personnel weather in the u.s. and mexico, innocent civilians in the u.s., including our embassies. we have not yet seen a significant level of spillover violence. however, as you have heard, we must and are building a contingency plan for the worst- case scenario.

i would reemphasize that even a combined to mexico, the drug- related violence seriously undermines respect for the rule of law and a great confidence in mexican institutions by extension. they have serious national security implications here at home as well as adverse consequences in central america and beyond. we continue to work in cooperation with the federal, state, local, and foreign counterparts to address these threats. the organizational attack strategy is an attempt to systematically destroy up and dismantling the command and control elements of this criminal syndicates. he to the strategy sharing information and ordination through the operations division. in mexico, we have the largest u.s. law enforcement presence and our partnership with the administration and melting -- is mounting a sustained attack.

it impact the ability these cartels to exercise influence and further destabilize the region. while these collaborative operations are intended to break the power of the cartels come in the short term, the also exacerbate the violence and mass -- in mexico. and like to address a concern that is highlighted by a the gao. as someone who began my career with u.s. customs service, i want to underscore the importance of cooperation in law-enforcement and dea's unwavering support for the recently signed agreement between dea and i.c.e. this agreement is the most

efficient and effective way to promote interagency coordination. the agreement addresses the concerns of both agencies without the need for legislative action by allowing an unlimited number of agents and strengthens information sharing and ordination protocol. i thank you for the opportunity to testify and stand ready to answer questions. >> thank you very much. mr. hoover? >> thank you. i am william hoover, and deputy director for the poor of paul and explosives. -- bureau of alcohol and explosives. i want to discuss ongoing roles in districting firearms from being illegally traffic in the united states into mexico and working to reduce the violence along the border. for over 30 years, atf has been

predicting a communities from criminal organizations by safeguarding them from the illegal use of firearms and explosives. we are responsible for both regulating the fire arms and enforcing the criminal laws relating to those commodities. atf has experience and commitment to investigate and disrupted groups and individuals to obtain guns in the u.s. and italy traffic them into mexico in facilitation of the director. this is used to combat fire arms trafficking along the u.s. borders and to route our nation. we know we do not fight this battle alone. as we come atf hosted a violent crime and trafficking summit in albuquerque, new mexico and it was monumental in establishing a partnership between atf and i.c.e.

a memorandum of understanding was signed, establishing how we will still firearm trafficking. it establishes a notification process that each agency will follow will conducting these investigations. the strategy for disrupting the flow far to mexico their project gun runner has referred over 882 cases for prosecution those cases include 415 for firearms trafficking, which involve 1135 defendants and 13,000 firearms. atf has said that 90% of the firearms seized in mexico and traced come from the united states. the report those published on june of 2009 concurred with their findings. we of the status of the greatest amount of fire arms originated out of the selfless border. -- south was border.

there also reap -- getting firearms mother states. mexican officials have seen an increase in the number of explosive devices used in these violent attacks. they are trying to identify determine where these devices and opponents become part of the region. there are 148 agents dedicated to dealing with a firearm trafficking and 69th investigators responsible for conducting regulatory inspections of licensed gun dealers. we recently sent over 100 additional personnel to the houston field division to support our efforts against the trafficking of fire arms to mexico. atf has received a total of $25 million in new funding in 2009 and in fiscal year 20104 prada

gun runner. as a single agency that regulates them, atf has the authority to inspect and examine the records and inventory of licensees. we will revoke the license of those that are implicit and firearms trafficking. we use revelatory authority to review the records. a key component of 80 of's strategy is to curtail fire our strategy and trace firearms seized in both countries. our analysis of this that it can reveal trends and networks, showing where the fans are being purchased and who is purchasing them. let me share an example. 80 a's analysis of the trees that at least a man living in a u.s. city willing to three

different crime scenes and mexico. further investigation uncovered a huge departure of a fourth virus recovered at another crime scene in mexico. he purchased over 100 guns and seven additional firearms within a short time span using nine different ffl to should is as sorcerous -- distributors as sources. he learned that he was manufacturing guns and his home. he sold over 100 guns alone to an individual who was suspected of being linked to a cartel. leader being pursued in charges are pending. i would like to mention atf's operational presence at the center located in el paso, texas. we operate what is known as the atf gun desk.

we identify and analyze all firearms and explosives related data collected from law enforcement and open source. this would include mexican military and also u.s. law enforcement asset operating on both sides of the border. we will continue their efforts along the southwest border and will harvest are partnerships -- harness our partnerships and will continue to work with ms. can officials to obtain more information to better understand the flow firearms from our country into theirs. on behalf of the men and women ofatf, i thank you for your staff for your support of our work. reading it to me to fight violent crime -- tweaking and need to fight violent crime in our cities and on the border. >> thank you. >>