[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]







                 FORCE MULTIPLIERS: EXAMINING THE NEED 
                  FOR ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO DISRUPT 
                   TRANSNATIONAL CRIME AT THE BORDER 
                               AND BEYOND

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY,
                    THE BORDER, AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS

                                 of the

                         COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
                           AND ACCOUNTABILITY

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             MARCH 8, 2023

                               __________

                            Serial No. 118-5

                               __________

  Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability


                       Available on: govinfo.gov 
                         oversight.house.gov or 
                             docs.house.gov 
                             
                             _________
                              
                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
                 
51-472 PDF               WASHINGTON : 2023 
			                                 
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             
               COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

                    JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman

Jim Jordan, Ohio                     Jamie Raskin, Maryland, Ranking 
Mike Turner, Ohio                        Minority Member
Paul Gosar, Arizona                  Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of 
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina            Columbia
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin            Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Gary Palmer, Alabama                 Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia
Clay Higgins, Louisiana              Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
Pete Sessions, Texas                 Ro Khanna, California
Andy Biggs, Arizona                  Kweisi Mfume, Maryland
Nancy Mace, South Carolina           Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York
Jake LaTurner, Kansas                Katie Porter, California
Pat Fallon, Texas                    Cori Bush, Missouri
Byron Donalds, Florida               Shontel Brown, Ohio
Kelly Armstrong, North Dakota        Jimmy Gomez, California
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania            Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
William Timmons, South Carolina      Robert Garcia, California
Tim Burchett, Tennessee              Maxwell Frost, Florida
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia      Becca Balint, Vermont
Lisa McClain, Michigan               Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
Lauren Boebert, Colorado             Greg Casar, Texas
Russell Fry, South Carolina          Jasmine Crockett, Texas
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida           Dan Goldman, New York
Chuck Edwards, North Carolina        Jared Moskowitz, Florida
Nick Langworthy, New York
Eric Burlison, Missouri

                       Mark Marin, Staff Director
       Jessica Donlon, Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel
             Kaity Wolfe, Senior Professional Staff Member
         Grayson Westmoreland, Senior Professional Staff Member
                Jake Gilluly, Professional Staff Member
      Mallory Cogar, Deputy Director of Operations and Chief Clerk

                      Contact Number: 202-225-5074

                  Julie Tagen, Minority Staff Director
                      Contact Number: 202-225-5051
                                 ------                                

   Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs

                  Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin, Chairman
Paul Gosar, Arizona                  Robert Garcia, California, Ranking 
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina            Minority Member
Clay Higgins, Louisiana              Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Pete Sessions, Texas                 Dan Goldman, New York
Andy Biggs, Arizona                  Jared Moskowitz, Florida
Nancy Mace, South Carolina           Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York
Jake LaTurner, Kansas                Katie Porter, California
Pat Fallon, Texas                    Cori Bush, Missouri
Kelly Armstrong, North Dakota        Maxwell Frost, Florida
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania  






















                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on March 8, 2023....................................     1

                               Witnesses

Mr. Anthony Salisbury, Deputy Executive Associate Director, 
  Homeland 
  Security Investigations, U.S. Immigration and Customs 
  Enforcement
Oral Statement...................................................     5

Ms. Diane Sabatino, Deputy Executive Assistant Commissioner, 
  Office of Field Operations, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol
Oral Statement...................................................     6

 Opening statements and the prepared statements for the witnesses 
  are available in the U.S. House of Representatives Repository 
  at: docs.house.gov.

                           Index of Documents

                              ----------                              

  * Article, Fox News, ``Brutal Killing of California Family a 
  `Clear Message' from The Cartel''; submitted by Rep. Gosar.

  * Witness Testimony from May 22, 2019 Committee on Oversight 
  and Reform hearing, ACLU; submitted by Rep. Ocasio-Cortez.

  * Article, The Washington Post, ``Amazon Met With ICE Officials 
  Over Facial-Recognition System That Could Identify 
  Immigrants''; submitted by Rep. Ocasio-Cortez.

The documents listed above are available at: docs.house.gov. 

 
                 FORCE MULTIPLIERS: EXAMINING THE NEED 
                  FOR ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO DISRUPT 
                   TRANSNATIONAL CRIME AT THE BORDER 
                               AND BEYOND 

                              ----------                              


                        Wednesday, March 8, 2023

                        House of Representatives

               Committee on Oversight and Accountability

                   Subcommittee on National Security,
                    the Border, and Foreign Affairs

                                           Washington, D.C.

    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 
2247, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Glenn Grothman 
(Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
    Present: Representatives Grothman, Comer, Gosar, Higgins, 
Sessions, Biggs, Mace, LaTurner, Fallon, Armstrong, Garcia, 
Lynch, Goldman, Ocasio-Cortez, Frost, Crockett, and Porter.
    Mr. Grothman. The Subcommittee will come to order. Everyone 
welcome.
    Without objection, the Chair may declare a recess at any 
time.
    I am going to recognize myself for the purpose of making an 
opening statement.
    Good morning, and welcome to the Subcommittee on National 
Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs, our first hearing of 
118th Congress, so a little bit of history here today. I want 
to thank all our Members who are here today as we continue to 
conduct our oversight of the Nation's southern border. Today we 
are examining the technology being used by the Department of 
Homeland Security to disrupt transnational criminal 
organizations and protect our border, focusing today on our 
ports of entry. I want to thank our witnesses for being here 
today to testify on behalf of the Department.
    In 2022, U.S. Customs and Border Protection seized 656,000 
pounds of illegal drugs, including 155,000 pounds of marijuana 
and 175,000 pounds of methamphetamine. CBP also seized 14,700 
pounds of illicit fentanyl. The lethal dose of that fentanyl is 
only 2 milligrams or the amount that fits on the tip of a 
pencil. This means CBP seized enough of the drug to kill 3.3 
billion people. Unfortunately, the Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention reported in the 12-month period ending January 
2022--so, that is a year old, we are going to get bigger 
numbers sadly soon--more than 107,000 Americans died due to 
drug overdose with at least 70 percent of those resulting from 
fentanyl trafficked across our southern border. Make no 
mistake, we have a crisis at our southern border and in our 
communities with this many people dying, which is why we chose 
this topic for the first hearing the Subcommittee is going to 
have.
    We are going to have an opportunity to examine the 
technology and resources that work to keep our Nation safe at 
the border points of entry. And between points of entry, we 
have both the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Homeland 
Security Investigations, and CBP's Office of Field Operations 
are both here to combat transnational criminal activity, and I 
am pleased to see they are both represented here today.
    Emerging technologies, such as illicit substance detection 
devices, facial recognition technology, or something as simple 
as canine units, help protect the U.S. from threats coming into 
our country. In particular, I would like to highlight the work 
of CBP's canine units. CBP's canine program works to detect 
explosives, controlled substances, large amounts of currency 
which may be heading south, and even illegal agricultural 
products. The work of these canines and the use of other force 
multiplier technologies and resources allow our agents to 
perform their jobs in a safer and more efficient manner. When I 
visited the border and points of entry, I am consistently told 
by CBP officers that the canine units are one of the most 
valuable resources in their disposal. We are going to learn a 
little bit more about them today.
    Finally, I am interested in hearing more from the witnesses 
regarding about their experience utilizing force multiplier 
technology. There have been reports that some of these 
resources are not used effectively because of personnel issues. 
Identifying patterns in which resources are not used 
effectively or properly is also important for this Subcommittee 
to examine as we work to identify policy gaps. A hundred and 
seven thousand deaths is too much.
    I am increasingly concerned regarding reports that as 
record-breaking numbers of migrants cross our border, CBP 
officers and Border Patrol agents are spending more time 
processing paperwork for release or parole than actually 
patrolling and protecting our borders. We must also keep in 
mind that any given technology is only effective as the 
manpower available to respond. A sensor doesn't make an arrest 
or prosecute a case. It takes good quality law enforcement 
personnel.
    Today, I intend to explore these issues to examine where 
reforms can be tailored to provide the maximum return on 
investment. After this hearing, I hope we will be able to 
identify the most vital technologies and resources utilized at 
the border and at points of entry that allow border agents to 
be successful. I also hope we can examine the need for the 
efficient use of personnel and resources to protect our 
national security from those wishing to impose harm to our 
country. Thank you again to each of our witnesses for 
participating today, and I look forward to your testimony.
    Now I would like to recognize my Ranking Member Garcia for 
the purpose of making his opening statement.
    Mr. Garcia. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I also 
look forward to working with you and the entire Subcommittee on 
an incredibly important topic to our country. I also want to 
thank our witnesses for being here this morning. I think we can 
all agree that all of us here care about a safe and secure 
border. We all care about stopping human trafficking. We all 
care about the fentanyl crisis, prosecuting traffickers, and 
using every tool available to us to shut down cartels. I also 
hope that we care about the humanity of migrants who are 
crossing the border, oftentimes out of desperation or out of 
suffering in their home countries.
    We look forward to having a Customs and Border Protection 
team here, of course. They are also going to be demonstrating, 
I believe, some canine animal security techniques, which we 
look forward to seeing. And I want to thank Mr. Sabatino and 
Director Salisbury for being here today and for your service to 
our country. Thank you very much.
    Now, in November 2021, President Biden and congressional 
Democrats passed an infrastructure bill, I believe with the 
support of only a few Republicans, that included $430 million 
to expand Customs and Border Protection for facilities and to 
improve screening capabilities at our ports of entry. In the 
2023 appropriations package, I believe also with the support of 
just some Republicans, Democrats also provided another $130 
million to Customs and Border Patrol to hire additional workers 
at our ports of entry and to invest in more innovative and 
efficient technologies to speed up our border entries. I want 
to mention this, because I think it is important to remind 
folks that we are all here committed to national security and, 
of course, to border security.
    I also hope that this hearing helps us better understand 
the technologies that we use to disrupt cartels, secure our 
ports, and facilitate commerce. We look forward to learning how 
Congress can help provide and deploy resources effectively to 
make our country safer and, of course, is a goal that, of 
course, the Biden Administration shares. I am also particularly 
interested in this issue because I represent the Port of Long 
Beach and our seaports in California. The Port of Long Beach is 
the second largest container port in the United s, combined 
with the Port of Los Angeles, our sister port. They earn $5 
billion a year in custom revenues to aid in our economy across 
the country.
    Our ports also impact 2.6 million jobs throughout the U.S. 
and are linked directly to work force development across the 
Nation. So, it is a very important issue for us as well in 
California. We all know that ports are important engine of 
commerce for this country. We oftentimes talk about what is 
happening at the southern border, but we also know that ports 
are an important part of the work that you all do, and so, we 
thank you for that work.
    Now, it is the Federal Government's job to foster commerce 
and ensure that goods drive our national economy safely and 
quickly. Throughout our experience, particularly with the 
pandemic, we have seen how bottlenecks actually impact the 
economy very dramatically. So, we want to strive between not 
only security, but also commerce, and how we find that balance 
is really important. It is really critical that we strive to 
screen all vehicles and cargo for dangerous drugs, contraband 
and threats and do so efficiently. And that includes our ports 
of entry, and that includes our ports across America.
    Now, we know that Mexico is our second largest trading 
partner with billions of dollars in goods and services and 
hundreds of thousands of people that come into our country 
every single day between our two countries. One study found 
actually that a 10-minute reduction in wait times for each 
commercial vehicle at the border could generate hundreds of 
millions of dollars of additional revenue each year for the 
American economy, with benefits extending to non-border states 
as well.
    Now I know some people like to fantasize about sealing the 
border, or shutting down our asylum system, or invading Mexico, 
as I believe our full Committee Chairman actually mentioned on 
Fox News last night, but we know that those are not reasonable. 
They are not feasible, and they are not smart. We should be 
making every effort to streamline our border crossing process. 
We should make it easier and safer for commerce and immigrants 
alike. This goal means bolstering our ability to have actual 
lawful immigration and to address the root causes of migration 
in regions across the Western Hemisphere. This hearing offers 
us an opportunity to understand how we can further the Biden 
Administration's work to secure our border and disrupt cartels 
by using canines, technology, and other innovations at the 
greatest extent possible.
    Now, I am an immigrant myself, and so, I am very honored to 
be on this Subcommittee. I look forward to talking about the 
immigrant experience as we move forward throughout the next few 
months and the years ahead. I also think we should make one 
thing also very clear that our problems that we have today are 
not solved just by border security or a wall. We have to have 
an orderly process, have legal pathway to citizenship, a focus 
on technology, and certainly ensure that we have immigration 
system that is fair and humane for all. We want to welcome 
hardworking immigrants into our communities. We want to ensure 
that folks pay taxes, work hard, and have actually a pathway to 
citizenship, one that we can all benefit from. We have always 
been a Nation of immigrants. We cannot stop people from wanting 
to come here to build better life for themselves and their 
future.
    I look forward to productive opportunity to engage with our 
witnesses today. I want to thank you again for your service and 
for being here, and, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. First of all, I am pleased to 
introduce our two witnesses here today who have a combined 47-
plus years in Federal law enforcement. Anthony Salisbury began 
his Federal law enforcement career as a deputy United States 
marshal and later joined the former United s Customs Service in 
2001. He currently serves as the acting deputy executive 
associate director for homeland security investigations and has 
extensive experience countering transnational criminal 
organizations. And Diane Sabatino began her Federal law 
enforcement career in 1998 as an immigration inspector. In July 
2020, she was appointed to be the deputy assistant commissioner 
of office field operations for the U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection, and as deputy assistant commissioner, she oversees 
over 25,000 CBP officers at 330 U.S. points of entry.
    Now pursuant to Committee Rule 9(a), the witnesses will 
please stand and raise their right hands.
    Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are about 
to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 
truth, so help you God?
    [A chorus of ayes.]
    Mr. Grothman. Let the record show that the witnesses all 
answered in the affirmative.
    We appreciate you being here today. Let me remind the 
witnesses that we have read your written statements and will 
appear in full in the hearing record. Please limit your oral 
arguments to five minutes. As a reminder, please press the 
button on the microphone in front of you so that I and Members 
can hear you. When you begin to speak, the light in front of 
you will turn green. After four minutes, the light will turn 
yellow. When the red light comes on, your five minutes have 
expired.
    I recognize Mr. Salisbury to begin his opening statement.

  STATEMENT OF ANTHONY SALISBURY, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ASSOCIATE 
 DIRECTOR, HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS, U.S. IMMIGRATION 
                    AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT

    Mr. Salisbury. Chairman Grothman, Ranking Member Garcia, 
and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee on National 
Security, the Border, Foreign Affairs, thank you for the 
opportunity to appear before you to discuss Homeland Security 
Investigations' efforts disrupting and dismantling 
transnational criminal organizations. My testimony today will 
focus on HSI's efforts to disrupt transnational crime at the 
border and beyond. I will also discuss HSI's focus to stop 
deadly drugs from making it to the streets of the United s and 
its efforts to deny TCOs the illicit proceeds and access to 
darknet vendors that fuel their operations.
    Criminal organizations in the 21st century do not limit 
themselves to a single crime. These organizations have evolved 
beyond just narcotic smuggling and are now involved in the 
associated crimes of weapons trafficking, human trafficking, 
human smuggling, money laundering, and others, all of which HSI 
investigates. These criminal organizations also use technology 
to disguise their illicit enterprises. To this end, HSI's 
investigative efforts must be technologically savvy and broad 
in scope to fully identify and dismantle these enterprises.
    HSI combats TCOs by using its unique and broad 
investigative authorities to enforce over 400 Federal laws to 
investigate a myriad of crimes and target TCOs from multiple 
investigative angles. This includes attacking TCOs' abilities 
to procure U.S. origin firearms and the illicit proceeds that 
motivate their crimes. Simply put, HSI attacks the entire 
illicit network. HSI is the premier law enforcement agency best 
positioned to attack the cartels and TCOs at each phase of the 
supply chain to exact maximum damage and have cascading effects 
against illicit networks.
    HSI's international presence is a key facet of its approach 
to counter transnational organized crime. The largest 
international investigative presence of all DHS components, HSI 
comprises hundreds of HSI special agents strategically assigned 
to 93 offices in 56 countries. These efforts enable HSI and its 
partners to prevent dangerous narcotics and other illicit goods 
from reaching our borders and stop illicit southbound flows of 
illegally derived currency and weapons. The effectiveness of 
our international counter narcotics efforts is greatly enhanced 
by HSI's Transnational Criminal Investigative Unit, or TCIU, 
Program. TCIUs are composed of vetted foreign law enforcement 
officials and prosecutors who lead some of HSI's most 
significant extra territorial investigations and prosecutions 
targeting TCOs.
    HSI established 12 TCIUs around the world, including in 
Mexico, made up of officers and prosecutors from Mexico's 
attorney general's office. Mexican cartels operate on an 
industrial scale when procuring precursor chemicals from abroad 
used in the production of fentanyl and other drugs. One way HSI 
is attacking the illicit narcotics supply chain is through 
Operation Hydra. HSI's Operation Hydra, an intelligence-based 
counter narcotics operation designed to identify the precursor 
supply chain of TCOs involved in the production of illicit 
drugs, is central to HSI's current counter supply chain 
efforts.
    Operation Hydra's methodology blends traditional 
investigative and analytic techniques with interagency 
collaboration, industry partnership, and computer-based 
analytic tools to identify, disrupt, and dismantle TCO chemical 
supply. In the last two years, Operation Hydra is credited with 
seizing or disrupting the delivery of approximately 1 million 
kilograms of precursor and dual-use chemicals destined for use 
by narcotics production labs in Mexico. Moreover, since 
October, HSI seized over 1,200 pill presses and component parts 
used to make fentanyl and other drugs as part of HSI's counter 
opioid strategy. The interdiction of these shipments plays a 
key role in disrupting the TCO's ability to produce a finished 
product before it even gets to our borders.
    Domestically, HSI's Border Enforcement Security Task 
Forces, or BEST, represent one of the Agency's premier tools 
for turning border seizures into TCO-toppling investigations. 
The primary mission of the BEST is to combat existing and 
emerging TCOs by employing the full range of Federal, state, 
local, tribal, and international law enforcement resources. 
There are currently 86 BESTs, comprised of nearly 1,000 law 
enforcement officers and personnel representing more than 200 
agencies and national guard units. In addition to the BEST, 
each of HSI's 253 offices located in all 50 states and multiple 
U.S. territories dedicates assets to combat TCOs. As CBP 
deploys new technology at the southwest border ports of entry, 
it will likely increase the number of CBP-origin seizures. As a 
result, HSI will need additional staffing to support the 
investigations and prosecutions of port of entry seizures to 
conduct the complex investigations which dismantle TCO threats 
to the homeland.
    Thank you again for your opportunity to appear before you 
and for your continued support of HSI and our enduring efforts 
to dismantle transnational criminal organizations throughout 
the world. I look forward to your questions.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. Ms. Sabatino?

    STATEMENT OF DIANE SABATINO, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 
  COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF FIELD OPERATIONS, U.S. CUSTOMS AND 
                       BORDER PROTECTION

    Ms. Sabatino. Chairman Grothman, Ranking Member Garcia, and 
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the 
opportunity to appear today to discuss CBP's efforts to combat 
the dynamic threat of transnational criminal organizations and 
prevent the entry of dangerous illicit drugs, including 
fentanyl, to our Nation's ports of entry. I am proud to 
represent the more than 30,000 dedicated frontline personnel of 
the Office of Field Operations who work tirelessly every day to 
protect our border, our homeland, and our communities. I 
appreciate this Committee's focus on force multipliers and the 
opportunities to amplify the capabilities of the work force at 
our ports of entry, our most valuable and prevalent resource in 
the Office of Field Operations.
    As you are aware, the reach and influence of transnational 
criminal organizations, or TCOs, continues to expand across our 
borders. And TCOs have sophisticated and well-funded networks 
and continually adjust their criminal operations to circumvent 
detection and interdiction by law enforcement. For example, 
TCOs continue to produce and smuggle drugs like synthetic 
opioids, including fentanyl, that can be concealed and 
transported in smaller quantities. And most illicit fentanyl is 
synthesized in Mexico, and like other illicit drugs, including 
cocaine and methamphetamine, large volumes are encountered and 
seized at our southwest border ports of entry. It is brought in 
by privately-owned vehicles, concealed within commercial 
vehicles, and even on pedestrian travelers. And although much 
less frequently now, we also encounter fentanyl and other 
synthetic opioids in international mail and express consignment 
shipments. nationwide, CBP seizures of fentanyl continue to 
increase, and, specifically, the Office of Field Operations 
seized nearly 12,000 pounds of fentanyl in Fiscal Year 2022, an 
increase of 31 percent over Fiscal Year 2021 and 200 percent 
over Fiscal Year 2020. And so far, this fiscal year, we are on 
track to surpass last year's total fentanyl seizures by the 
middle of spring.
    Each and every seizure is absolutely critical. Seizures 
remove dangerous drugs from illicit supply chains, deny TCOs 
the valuable profits, but also give us critical opportunities 
to conduct post-seizure analysis with the ultimate goal of 
identifying criminal organizations and illicit supply chains, 
and we partner with HSI in support of these investigations and 
prosecutions that they pursue. But we certainly don't wait for 
illegal drugs to arrive at our ports of entry. We use 
aggressive and multi-layered enforcement approach that 
leverages advanced information, analytics, intelligence, 
sophisticated detection and scientific laboratory capabilities, 
and strong partnerships to combat transnational threats while 
also facilitating the high volume of lawful travel and trade.
    Our National Targeting Center and our local port analytical 
units use advance information and law enforcement intelligence 
records to identify suspect high-risk shipments, cargo, and 
travelers before they reach our borders. And our highly skilled 
frontline personnel use their law enforcement expertise, 
experience, and all of the available information and technology 
to prevent the entry of dangerous drugs and people. All CBP 
operational environments have sophisticated detection 
technology, including non-intrusive inspection systems, 
commonly called NII, that reliably and quickly detect the 
presence of suspect illegal narcotics.
    And canine operations also provide invaluable detection 
capabilities, and our training program maintains the largest 
and most diverse law enforcement canine training program in the 
country. And CBP was the first law enforcement agency back in 
2017 to develop a discipline to detect fentanyl with canine 
units. And today all Office of Field Operations concealed human 
and narcotic detection canine teams have completed training to 
include the odor of fentanyl and fentanyl analogs and are 
currently scoping missions to support other countries with 
developing this capability.
    Beyond detection and interdiction, CBP officers use various 
field-testing devices and work with onsite and remote 
scientists to also rapidly screen and identify suspected 
controlled substances, and our partnerships are absolutely 
critical. We work closely with our law enforcement partners, 
certainly starting with Homeland Security Investigations, to 
share information and collaborate in joint enforcement 
operations to identify, target, and disrupt illicit drug 
activity. It is this collaborative approach that leads to 
investigations, prosecutions, and ultimately the dismantling of 
TCO networks and operations. We are going to continue to 
prioritize and dedicate resources to counter TCOs and disrupt 
the flow of illicit drugs across our borders.
    So, thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I 
look forward to your questions.
    Ms. Sabatino. And, Chairman, at this time, I have the 
privilege of introducing Mr. Thomas Salvati. He is a CBP canine 
instructor, and one of our incredibly valuable canine team, CBP 
officer, Stephanie Salas, and her partner Villy, and the team 
again, one of our most valuable resources in the field in the 
interdiction of narcotics deployed to ports of entry across the 
country. And like all OFO canine teams, Officer Salas and Villy 
are trained in concealed human and narcotics detection, 
including fentanyl, and will be providing a brief demonstration 
of their skills.
    Mr. Salvati. Good afternoon, everybody.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you.
    [Demonstration.]
    Mr. Salvati. My name is Tom Salvati. I am the canine 
trainer for JFK port of entry. We will just give you guys a 
small demonstration of what our canines do on a regular basis. 
So, a lot of times our dogs are cross-designated, so it will be 
all different environments, but we are very successful in mail 
facility. So, in just a minute, a mail operation for the day.
    So, whenever there is a lineup, this particular box here 
has the odor of fentanyl in it. There are about 35 grams of 
pure fentanyl. You will see the dog come in. Officer Salas will 
walk in here. Villy is a pedestrian dog, stray dog, so she will 
come in and search everybody in here and then the box when she 
sees the box.
    So, this will be the box here. I hope you guys can see, and 
it is in a metal concealment with the fentanyl in the metal 
concealment there, so it is all contained. I will get Officer 
Salas.
    [Audio malfunction in the hearing room.] We train on a 
regular basis
    [Audio malfunction in the hearing room.]
    Ms. Salas.
    [Audio malfunction in the hearing room.]
    Mr. Salvati.
    [Audio malfunction in the hearing room.]
    Mr. Grothman. I would just like to ask you one question 
just so the Committee knows, and I want you to comment on it. 
One of the times when I was down on the border and one of the 
reasons I wanted you to bring the dogs in here is we saw a dog 
sniff out fentanyl that was in a gas tank. And I thought it was 
incredibly impressive given, you know, if you have a gas tank, 
that is, you know, it smells like gas, it is such a strong 
thing, you wouldn't be able to think you could detect anything. 
But I wonder if you could just comment a little on the 
capability of a dog sniffing out something even when you put it 
in something like a gas tank full of gasoline. We would figure 
there is no way in the world anybody would be able to detect 
that if you hit it there. Could you kind of comment on how 
people try to----
    Mr. Salvati. The canines know
    [Audio malfunction in the hearing room.]
    Mr. Grothman. OK. Thank you very much. I appreciate you 
guys stopping in and very impressive. Caution the rest of the 
Members of the panel, it is not always this fun. OK. Thank you. 
OK. And I will now recognize myself for five minutes for 
questions. First of all, for Mr. Salisbury.
    We know that tens of thousands of Americans are dying every 
year from fentanyl, the vast majority of which is coming from 
the cartels across the southern border. Can you describe how 
transnational criminal organizations have adapted in recent 
years to exploit vulnerabilities in our border strategy and 
what HSI is doing through its investigations and prosecutions 
to stay a step ahead and make some traction in actually 
disrupting their activities?
    Mr. Salisbury. Thank you for the question. So, when we talk 
about transnational criminal organizations, they constantly 
evolve. They constantly try to exploit the vulnerabilities they 
identify. And so, HSI as the second largest Federal law 
enforcement agency in the U.S. Government charged with 
addressing the TCO threat coming across our border, obviously 
we try to develop the partnerships.
    A couple of things that we do. First of all, as we try to 
push these crimes further away from the U.S. border, we try to 
develop relationships downrange with foreign governments. As we 
do that, we try to develop the TCIUs. HSI's ultimate goal is to 
push these crimes further and further away from the U.S. border 
and our communities. So, that requires the robust relationships 
overseas working with the Department and the host nations that 
I described in my opening statement.
    Additionally, we look to identify the money flows and the 
gaps that the cartels utilize to come across the border. So, we 
use that ability from our legacy customs days in Treasury and 
our legacy immigration days to identify how these cartels will 
attack the vulnerabilities that I identified. Money, certainly, 
as you see cartels today, there is a shift toward cyber. There 
is a shift toward cryptocurrency. They are certainly trying to 
hide and invent new ways to smuggle goods into this country. 
Every day is different. Every day we identify new means and 
methods, and that is our job to identify and dismantle these 
cartels through a plethora of means. We have task forces on the 
border, and we exercise all our authorities to attack the 
cartels at every angle from money, merchandise, and people.
    Mr. Grothman. OK. Thank you. Ms. Sabatino, this question is 
for you. How are canine units integrated into overall security 
apparatus and points of entry, and what role do they play in 
the larger context of border security?
    Ms. Sabatino. Thank you for the question, Chairman. Our 
canine assets are one of a number of tools that we employ at 
our ports of entry to interdict narcotics, an absolutely 
critical tool. Certainly, you know, in the deployment of that, 
we are looking at risk associated with, you know, data that we 
have, the number of seizures and by environment to where we are 
seeing the volume coming through. They are integrated in teams. 
They rove in pre-primary operations, they rove in our cargo 
operations, and, again, work special operations with our CBP 
officers.
    Mr. Grothman. OK. For either one of you, how will a 
combination of enhancing technological resources and other 
force multipliers work to disrupt cross-border crime and start 
to get the crisis we see at our southern border, where the 
cartels are running rampant and bringing in daily narcotics, 
under control?
    Ms. Sabatino. I will start. CBP is currently fostering a 
whole-of-government approach to combating the flow of fentanyl, 
and our efforts start certainly with our primary DHS partner, 
Homeland Security Investigations. But we are also working 
closely with DEA, the Department of Justice, DOD, the 
intelligence community, to name a few, to increase efforts to 
commercially disrupt the fentanyl supply chains themselves. I 
mentioned earlier leveraging through our National Targeting 
Center advanced information in our port analytical units, and 
sharing and collaborating with our partners, and making sure 
that we all have visibility on the information, on the threat 
of the narcotics coming through. Sorry, sir.
    Mr. Grothman. No, go ahead.
    Ms. Sabatino. OK. But we are also designating a single 
point of contact within the National Targeting Center to enable 
a holistic approach to planning to tackle the fentanyl threats, 
operationalizing all things fentanyl through one cell in our 
organization, and partnering also with the industry to ensure 
that they are aware of what the illicit supply chains are, how 
their lawful supply chains can be corrupted or compromised by 
transnational criminal organizations. And we are also aligning 
our expansion and enhancement of NII technology at our ports of 
entry, and certainly appreciate the investments that Congress 
has made in supporting our Non-Intrusive Inspection Technology 
Program with significant deployments across the southwest 
border over the next two-and-half years.
    Mr. Grothman. OK. Could you give me exactly what your plans 
are? Are there plans to expand the canine units, and how many 
do you have now, and how many do you think you are going to end 
up with, say, two years from now under current plan?
    Ms. Sabatino. Our last increase in canine teams was in 
2019. We currently have 712 positions allocated, and that 
includes 59 supervisory level positions. Actively on board, we 
have 488 canine teams that are deployed to our ports of entry 
and 114 expected to complete training and be deployed this 
year. That will leave us with about 51 vacancies, and our goal 
is to fill those vacancies in the upcoming Fiscal Year and to 
complete training by the end of this Fiscal Year to beginning 
of the next fiscal year.
    Mr. Grothman. OK. I will cutoff my questions now at five 
minutes. I just do want to make one comment. It was stated that 
we have to find a way for people to get here legally or become 
citizens legally. Last year, we had over a million people sworn 
in as new citizens. That was the most we have had since 2006, 
so it is not like nobody can figure out how to get here 
legally. There are a million people here coming in legally.
    OK. Now I recognize my Ranking Member, Mr. Garcia, for his 
five minutes. Mr. Garcia.
    Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to again 
thank our witnesses for your service and for your testimony, 
and I just want to begin by just establishing some facts. I 
know we are going to have a lot of great questions here from 
the Committee. Director Salisbury and Commissioner Sabatino, 
thank you both. I know you are both a professional career, 
national security--career servants, public servants, and I just 
want to thank you for that service.
    I know it has also been mentioned by some on this 
Committee, so I want to clear it up. Have either of you ever 
received an order to stand down directly from the White House 
or stop enforcing the laws that you are tasked to enforce?
    Ms. Sabatino. No.
    Mr. Salisbury. No, not for HSI, sir.
    Mr. Garcia. Thank you very much to both of you. I say that 
because of course you have heard this claim over and over 
again, that somehow the border is open, that we are not 
enforcing our laws, and that we are directing our career law 
enforcement officials to not follow our laws at the border.
    I want to return to a point that was raised in the opening 
remarks. I know millions of American jobs, workers, and 
families, as we know, rely on the commerce that flows in and 
out of our borders every single day and at our ports of entry, 
especially at our southern ports of entries. In 2021, American 
goods and services traded with Mexico totaled more than $725 
billion, making Mexico our second largest trading partner. And 
in that same year, American exports of goods and services to 
Mexico supported an estimated 1.1 million jobs in our country. 
So, we obviously need to be smart about how we manage our ports 
of entry, how we achieve security. And we also have to ensure 
that our inspections are done quickly and efficiently.
    Now, given the jobs and, of course, the commerce that is at 
stake with Mexico and our other partners, efficient ports of 
entry should, of course, be a bipartisan issue. Playing 
politics at the border have devastating effects on the American 
people and our economy, and we have seen that recently. We 
probably just remember just recently when Governor Greg Abbott 
from Texas ordered state troopers to conduct unnecessary 
examinations of commercial vehicles coming from Mexico. That 
obviously was a political stunt. That action alone cost us $9 
billion in GDP here in the U.S., and those are the types of 
stunts at the border that do not work and certainly are causing 
harm to our relationship, not just with Mexico, but also with 
all of our trading partners.
    I want to thank you both for your work and particularly 
want to focus especially on how important it is to process our 
ports of entry efficiently and to ensure that they are secure. 
I want to start with Commissioner Sabatino. Can you just 
briefly explain how processing effective screening at our ports 
of entry not only makes us safer, but promotes commerce in our 
American economy?
    Ms. Sabatino. Thank you for the question, Ranking Member. 
Certainly, and we strive to utilize technology and innovation 
to streamline our operations at ports of entry and have 
undertaken significant efforts to automate as many processes as 
possible. It is really important for us to give our CBP 
officers, our agriculture specialists, all our frontline 
personnel, the tools that they need to effectively do their 
job. In order to do that, we need to remove administrative 
burdens from them, and by doing that, we go paperless, we go 
automated, we go touchless in our environment.
    So, technologies such as non-intrusive technology, force 
multipliers like canines, but also using facial biometric 
comparison technology in our passenger environments, the 
implementation, that goes across air, land, and sea. You know, 
in our land border environment, the modernization of truck 
manifest, again receiving advanced data in advance of the 
arrival of cargo shipments that, you know, we see in the air 
and maritime environment, that was much more automated 
previously with the deployment of the truck manifest 
deployment.
    Mr. Garcia. And, Commissioner, also on that point, can you 
also talk about sea ports of entry?
    Ms. Sabatino. Yes.
    Mr. Garcia. Because I think oftentimes, we spend a lot of 
time talking about the southern border, which is obviously very 
important, but our sea ports are an incredible part of our 
national economy. And could you also mention our sea ports of 
entry and what is happening there?
    Ms. Sabatino. The most significant percentage of volume in 
terms of value of imports comes through our maritime ports of 
entry, again, and it cuts across all of our environments, in 
automating, going paperless, leveraging opportunities for 
submission of paperwork. The Vessel Entrance and Clearance 
Program is one of them where we are deploying a resource in the 
automated commercial environment to allow a carrier to submit 
electronically data that we used to require paper packages for, 
saving a million hours for CBP and countless hours for the 
trade as well as gas, you know, resources and expenditure. So, 
we look at efficiencies in terms of removing administrative 
burdens, again, giving our officers and frontline personnel the 
opportunity to do what they do best.
    Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Commissioner. I think to your point, 
I think it is important to note that there is so much commerce, 
in fact, a larger impact to our economy what is happening 
through our seaports as ports of entry, which we rarely focus 
on, which is an incredibly important piece of our national 
economy. So, I want to thank you for the technology you are 
putting in place. I hope that this Committee and the full 
Committee can also focus on the bigger picture of what is 
happening at our ports of entry, and including seaports as part 
of that conversation is really critical. So, thank you, and, 
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. I will next call on Congressman 
Gosar from Arizona.
    Mr. Gosar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just last week, four 
Americans crossed the border in Northern Mexico for a medical 
procedure. All four of them were shot at and kidnapped. Two of 
them died. The White House made sure to let us know that 
``these sorts of attacks are unacceptable.'' Well, that is just 
great, but if these attacks are really unacceptable, we should 
have a protocol in place to avoid them. We can't stop American 
citizens from making decisions to cross the border into Mexico, 
but what we can do is to keep the violence down in Mexico out 
of the United States. We have a name for that kind of protocol. 
It is called ``border security.''
    As long as you don't have a real southern border with a 
real wall, and real-enough agents, and the right technology 
necessary to properly police it, we might as well call what 
just happened down in Northern Mexico a domestic terror 
incident. Until America has real, distinct, and adequately 
defended borders that clearly signal to both citizens and 
foreigners where our Nation ends and the unrestricted cartel-
dominated war zone begins, the Mexico cartels problem is our 
cartel problem. And every drop of American blood, every sex 
trafficking victim, every fentanyl overdose is on the Biden 
Administration's hands until they get serious about border 
security, close the gaps, and use every available means to 
protect Americans from the hell coming across our southern 
border.
    I think it is worth getting to the bottom at how exactly 
the Biden Administration has gotten soft on the border and how 
their policies have emboldened the cartel-style-like executions 
occurring across this country. Yes, Americans deserve to know 
why the border crisis isn't just at the border anymore. It is 
coming to your town, even Mayberry.
    I would like to submit for the record January 19, 2023, 
article from Fox News entitled, ``Brutal Killing of a 
California Family a Clear Message From the Cartel. Sheriff 
Warns: `They Were Targeted'.''
    Mr. Grothman. Without objection, so ordered.
    Mr. Gosar. For both witnesses, do the illegal aliens you 
encounter have connections to the cartels?
    Mr. Salisbury. So, from HSI's perspective, we identify all 
types of cartel activity. As you stated, the cartels' reach is 
far and wide into the United States. So, as we --
    Mr. Gosar. Nobody crosses without the cartels, right?
    Mr. Salisbury. So, what we do know is that the cartels will 
hold the pathways into the country, for sure.
    Mr. Gosar. So, there is a connection. Ma'am?
    Ms. Sabatino. I think to say that we absolutely have seen 
the exploitation of migrants coming up into the U.S. through 
the southern border, vulnerable to the transnational criminal 
organizations. I think distinct from in between the ports of 
entry, at the ports of entry, I can't say definitively that the 
TCOs are involved in every single arrival to our ports of entry 
because there are more commercial means to get there.
    Mr. Gosar. Got you. So, 6 million illegal aliens have 
entered the U.S. during the Biden Administration. Compare that 
to 647,000 illegal alien encounters in President Trump's last 
Fiscal Year in office. How has the surge of illegal aliens 
affected your jobs, to be kind of concise, please?
    Ms. Sabatino. Certainly, at ports of entry we have looked 
for ways to streamline and be as efficient as possible because 
at ports, again, the admissibility processing of individuals is 
just one part of the operation.
    Mr. Gosar. So, it is more of a secretarial duty than there 
is actual enforcement, right?
    Ms. Sabatino. With respect to, I am sorry?
    Mr. Gosar. Processing. You are to facilitate processing.
    Ms. Sabatino. No, I am talking about, like, the legitimate 
travel and trade of individuals is also a significant 
responsibility of ours, but the processing of individuals 
includes interviews by our CBP officers at the front line to 
identify and further identify threats to the U.S.
    Mr. Salisbury. So, from HSI's perspective, the more goods, 
the more people coming across, our criminal investigations are 
on a razor's edge. So, we have to identify the needle in that 
proverbial haystack to try to find razor focus criminal 
investigation. So, as more people come across the border, same 
as more goods, it gives the cartels more ability to hide. It 
gives these illicit networks more ability to hide. So, we do 
need to increase our efforts to basically sort through the 
extra volume of both personnel and/or if a merchandise flow 
increases as well. So yes, it would increase what HSI needs to 
look at in order to find the razor focused criminal 
investigations and criminal activity.
    Mr. Gosar. In Fiscal Year 2022, CBP seized 656,000 pounds 
of illegal drugs to include 14,700 pounds of fentanyl, the 
majority by weight, at ports of entry. Now they are actually 
adding atrazine, you know, making it a drug that cannot be used 
with narcan to reverse it. Are you seeing that activity from 
the cartels in regards to increasing illegal transport?
    Ms. Sabatino. I would have to get back to you, sir, on that 
specific narcotic. I don't have information on that right now.
    Mr. Gosar. It is a horse sedative that doesn't allow Narcan 
to actually work when somebody overdoses.
    Ms. Sabatino. Understood. We will take that for followup.
    Mr. Salisbury. We certainly heard some intelligence and 
some source information. To answer your question more broadly, 
the cartels will adjust, adapt. As I said in my opening, you 
know, it was HSI's very successful operations attacking the 
precursors. As we attack the precursors, we see the cartel 
shift to try to get different analogs that will get them what 
they need to make their final product. So, it is a constant 
shifting game of cat and mouse, so they will shift the analogs 
and the precursors needed as HSI attacks those routes and other 
precursors.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. Mr. Goldman from New York.
    Mr. Goldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very happy to 
hear that my colleague from Arizona is concerned about domestic 
terrorism. Unfortunately, his colleagues in the majority on the 
Homeland Security Committee last week rejected an amendment by 
the Democrats to add domestic terrorism to the oversight plan, 
so hopefully, Mr. Gosar can speak to his colleagues about that.
    The fentanyl crisis is real, and it has been growing for a 
long time. It has affected just about every community around 
the country. But it is disingenuous and counterproductive for 
the majority to try to mislead the public by making this a 
partisan issue as they did last week when they brought a 
witness in front of the Homeland Security Committee to bash 
President Biden's response at the border because her sons had 
tragically died from fentanyl. Unfortunately, for them and for 
her, the children were killed in July 2020, during the Trump 
presidency. So, I hope that we can start to move past the 
partisanship and address this real problem that we have. And I 
lean on my 10 years of experience as a Federal prosecutor where 
I worked very closely with all sorts of law enforcement, 
including both of your agencies, and I thank you very much for 
all of your work.
    It is clear that the Mexican cartels and other 
transnational criminal organizations have expanded their power 
and criminal activity in recent years and have certainly preyed 
on the opioid crisis. Director Salisbury, can you talk a little 
bit about how the Mexican cartels have evolved over the last 10 
years or so?
    Mr. Salisbury. Yes, I can. So, as you see, the cartels will 
look at anything and any mechanism they can to make money, 
mostly off narcotics. So, we have actually seen this history 
lesson before when we see methamphetamine. Traditionally, when 
I first started law enforcement in the late 90's, 
methamphetamine was predominantly manufactured in the United 
States. We saw the Mexican cartels basically take over the 
stronghold of it, bring in precursors from China, India. And 
they basically took over the manufacturing process and pumped 
it into the United States at such massive amounts that it 
basically stopped the domestic supply of methamphetamine.
    So, the cartels now have this cheap option with fentanyl, 
very profitable, same thing. They are basically reinventing 
what they did in the past. They are getting in the precursors. 
They are bringing in the ability to manufacture this and use 
their routes into the United States to pump this across the 
border. So, the cartels are always looking for new lanes, 
avenues to exploit and they see dollar signs with fentanyl. It 
is cheap to make. The precursors are currently available from 
China, and as they pump it in, they are going to be licking 
their lips on how much money they are going to make.
    It is important to know, as we talk to our foreign 
partners, right now it is predominantly a U.S. issue. A lot of 
our other partners in Europe haven't quite seen the issue. So, 
we do have a chance here to kind of stop the spread of fentanyl 
from around the world as we deal with the opioid epidemic on 
our own soil.
    Mr. Goldman. You mentioned in your opening statement, I 
believe, that guns travel south over the border from the United 
States to Mexico, to the cartels, while the fentanyl travels 
north. Are we essentially exporting our guns from the United 
States to Mexico in return for them sending fentanyl?
    Mr. Salisbury. So, what I can tell you in regards to 
weapons trafficking, it is a major priority for HSI. HSI does 
recognize that the United States is a source country for 
weapons, with criminal organizations sending weapons southbound 
not only to Mexico. We see it going to the Caribbean, South 
America, and to Europe, so we certainly see the weapon flows 
getting into the hands of the criminals. It is a major priority 
for HSI to stop this illicit southbound flow of weapons to 
getting in the hands to fuel the violence. Without the weapons, 
the cartels don't have as much teeth. They can't scare. They 
can't intimidate. They can't kill. So, weapons are a key 
component of any criminal organization, and certainly weapons 
from the United States, which is a key priority for HSI and our 
partners at CBP, to stop the illegal southbound flow of 
weapons.
    Mr. Goldman. You had mentioned some of the international 
partners. I am curious how you view the cooperation that you 
have gotten from the Mexican Government over the past several 
years?
    Mr. Salisbury. So, I was previously assigned to Mexico in 
2010 to about 2012-2013, and also now. So again, through our 
international operations office, we do have foreign-vetted 
units. The Mexicans have provided that through the embassy. We 
have cooperation. It ebbs and flows with higher-level political 
issues that arise, but at our level, working relationship, we 
do share joint investigative binational investigations with our 
vetted unit with Mexico.
    Mr. Goldman. And then my last question is, can you describe 
a little bit the additional capacity and authorities that you 
have received from the Biden Administration to attack the 
cartels and fentanyl crisis over the past couple of years?
    Mr. Salisbury. So, in order to attack the TCOs, we have 
most of the authorities we already need. HSI is a new agency 
under the Department Homeland Security at 20 years old, but we 
come from Customs, legacy Customs. Our authorities are old, 
going back to the creation of the United States of America. So, 
we have authorities. The biggest authority that we are still 
looking for and there is ongoing discussions is right now, of 
all the cross-border crimes we investigate, Title 21 is gifted 
to us in a limited agreement through DOJ. So, Title 21 is the 
narcotics charges for the United States, so right now we don't 
have that standalone authority. There are ongoing conversations 
both at senior department and within Congress on getting us 
Title 21 authority.
    Outside of that, you know, personnel is always the issue. 
There is a lot of cross-border crimes. We can get spread thin, 
but the men and women of HSI are out there every day working 
with our partners to pursue these cross-border crimes.
    Mr. Goldman. Thank you very much. I yield back, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Mr. Grothman. Mr. Higgins from Louisiana.
    Mr. Higgins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank our witnesses 
for being here today.
    Commissioner Sabatino, could you step through, for the 
record, your chain of command above, ma'am, beginning with 
President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas and coming down through 
your chain of command? Can you identify the chain of command 
above you?
    Ms. Sabatino. Yes, certainly beginning with the President 
down to Secretary Mayorkas, to our Acting Commissioner Troy 
Miller, to my direct leadership, which is Executive Assistant 
Commissioner Pete Flores.
    Mr. Higgins. So, you are two positions and chain of command 
removed from Secretary Mayorkas? Just to clarify for the record 
based on what you just said.
    Ms. Sabatino. At least two removed, and that essentially is 
our chain of command, yes.
    Mr. Higgins. Is there more?
    Ms. Sabatino. No.
    Mr. Higgins. So, you are two positions and a chain of 
command removed from Secretary Mayorkas? I am just asking for 
clarification.
    Ms. Sabatino. Yes.
    Mr. Higgins. OK. Ma'am, thank you for your service. As a 
Thin Blue Line brother, I very much appreciate the work that 
you do to help secure our Nation. In the course of your 
command, did you have ongoing conversations, communications, 
emails, maybe text messages, with your chain of command up, 
obviously?
    Ms. Sabatino. I would say my primary communications with 
Executive Assistant Commissioner Flores, on occasion I will be 
acting for him and engage with the acting commissioner.
    Mr. Higgins. OK. Thank you for that clarification. Do you 
have direct communications by telephone or email, texts with 
Secretary Mayorkas?
    Ms. Sabatino. I don't recall having direct communication 
with him one-on-one. Certainly, I have participated in meetings 
where he has been present.
    Mr. Higgins. When you said, ``participated in meetings,'' 
would those be in-person or virtual?
    Ms. Sabatino. I believe they have all been virtual.
    Mr. Higgins. They have been virtual. Again, thank you for 
that clarification. So, you do recall interactions with 
Secretary Mayorkas, directly in virtual communications, and 
yourself and at your level of chain across DHS will be present, 
how many people will be on it, commonly, in a virtual 
communication with Secretary Mayorkas who is leading the 
meeting?
    Ms. Sabatino. Yes, I think that could range from five to 
six, seven people to large groups.
    Mr. Higgins. There you go. Just give us a picture there. 
So, you have had, during the course of your service, over the 
last couple of years, would you say a handful of direct 
communications wherein Secretary Mayorkas was leading that 
meeting?
    Ms. Sabatino. At least a handful.
    Mr. Higgins. At least a handful. And they were all virtual, 
ma'am?
    Ms. Sabatino. I believe so, yes.
    Mr. Higgins. OK. Thank you for that. That is interesting. 
Madam, regarding vessels and vehicles screened at the ports of 
entry, I have observed operations many, many times in my trips 
to the border, and I am always impressed by the professionalism 
and the focus of the men and women that work in long shifts. 
Many of them will work in doubles. They work in two eight-hour 
shifts. Is this common under your chain that you have your men 
and women working in two eight-hour shifts?
    Ms. Sabatino. We actually have a pilot currently in place 
to limit only to volunteers to work eight-hour overtime shifts 
on top of their current tour of duty they are assigned to.
    Mr. Higgins. The normal eight-hour shift. So, you do have 
men and women under your command working 16 hours a day? My 
understanding is they work five days. Is that correct?
    Ms. Sabatino. Yes, and that is why I think there is a 
discrepancy in that we do have alternate work schedules. Some 
normal tours of duty could be 10-hour shifts, they could be 12-
hour shifts, but depending on what the work schedule is and 
alternate days off.
    Mr. Higgins. Thank you for that clarification. Regarding 
vehicles and vessels that are screened, just to clarify for the 
American people, my final question, a vehicle coming through a 
port of entry is screened with technology, electronic screening 
that we won't go into the details of, but it is essentially 
viewed with technology by men and women under your command. 
That is the initial screening for vehicle, is that correct?
    Ms. Sabatino. We currently scan in personal vehicles one 
percent to two percent coming across the southwest border. With 
the deployment of technology over the next two-and-a-half 
years, we expect to increase that to 40 percent.
    Mr. Higgins. And of the vehicles and vessels that are 
screened with technology, some are pulled aside for secondary 
search by actual agents and usually dogs, correct?
    Ms. Sabatino. Yes, they could be referred for a variety of 
reasons.
    Mr. Higgins. And in that secondary search, is that where 
you make your drug seizures?
    Ms. Sabatino. It could be something that is identified 
right on a primary, depending on the concealment, but it also 
could be secondary NII screening that could identify anomalies 
in a search done in our secondary areas.
    Mr. Higgins. And you had stated that the percentage of 
secondary screening was what? Let me let you state that.
    Ms. Sabatino. So, for passenger vehicles, it is currently 
one percent to two percent.
    Mr. Higgins. One percent to two percent.
    Ms. Sabatino. And for commercial vehicles, it is 15 percent 
to 17 percent, with an increase to about 70 percent with the 
deployment of new technology.
    Mr. Higgins. Thank you. Mr. Chairman my time has expired. I 
yield.
    Mr. Grothman. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez from New York.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I thank the Chairman for recognizing me. 
You know, there is a lot that is currently being unfolded with 
the Biden Administration with respect to certain border 
policies. And, Ms. Sabatino or Mr. Salisbury, I understand you 
both are not in the policymaking aspect of it, so I won't harp 
on that element of things. But, Ms. Sabatino, you had raised a 
little bit earlier today about some of the technologies that 
are currently being deployed at the border and included the 
deployment of facial recognition technology. And I will be 
candid, this is something that has been of extraordinary 
concern to us here in the Committee. What we are seeing in 
prior hearings, and we have held quite a few hearings on this, 
is the internal and baked-in biases within facial recognition 
algorithms in certain technologies.
    But let me take a step back. Ms. Sabatino, are you aware of 
the Trump Administration's previous policy of metering?
    Ms. Sabatino. We refer to queue management to ensure the, 
you know, manageable throughput of the flow of traffic at our 
ports of entry.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. And under the Trump Administration, or, 
you know, just in general, that goal was to really, essentially 
cap and limit the number of asylees seeking protection under, 
you know, inciting these capacity restraints. But rather than 
eliminating the practice that clearly violates international 
and domestic law, people are free to seek asylum at our border. 
I am very concerned that the Biden Administration is moving 
this online with the CBP One app. Ms. Sabatino, migrants and 
asylum-seekers at the border have to use the app to request 
asylum, correct?
    Ms. Sabatino. We do see migrants that haven't necessarily 
used the app that we will process at ports of entry. But what 
the CBP One application does, it puts it in the hands, removing 
intermediaries and potentially limiting exploitation by TCOs of 
the migrants themselves, but allows for the efficient and 
effective processing by CBP officers.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you. Ms. Sabatino, you know, and I 
want to cite a little bit about some of the previous work the 
Committee has done and introduce witness testimony from the 
ACLU during the May 22, 2019, oversight hearing, titled, 
``Facial Recognition Technology: Its Impact on Our Civil Rights 
and Civil Liberties,'' and that articulates the dangers of the 
technology in government use. In this Committee, we have gone 
through great lengths to prove that facial comparison and 
recognition technology is racially discriminatory. And we have 
done this on a bipartisan basis, and we found in 2019 that 
Amazon's algorithms misidentified the gender of darker-skinned 
women in about 30 percent of their tests.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Additionally, this technology, and I 
would also like to submit to the record documentation from The 
Washington Post that Amazon had met with ICE officials over its 
facial recognition systems that could identify immigrants. And 
what we saw therein was that that technology incorrectly 
matched the faces of 28 Members of Congress with those of 
people who were arrested for crimes elsewhere in the United 
States. In the summer, the American Civil Liberties also 
conducted that study. And then on top of that, what we are 
starting to see now is early reporting from the CBP One app 
that migrants from Africa and Haiti are reportedly 
demonstrating much more difficulty in using the facial 
recognition app deployed by CBP One.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. My concern is that while we already have 
quite a few folks using the CBP One app, the Administration 
seems to be signaling with this proposed rule change that they 
are going to try to make that the primary mode of this. And I 
am very concerned about the implementation of that exacerbating 
through technology racial inequities that already exist in our 
system. Once the app is fully implemented, can asylum seekers 
who lack a smartphone or internet access and, therefore, cannot 
schedule an appointment through CBP One be turned back when 
they present themselves at a point of entry should the proposed 
rule be enacted?
    Ms. Sabatino. I certainly would like the opportunity to 
give you a full, comprehensive briefing on our biometric facial 
comparison technology because it is the algorithm that we use 
that is distinguished from other algorithms. That is high 
performing, and we have some very significant statistics and 
technical high-match rates with respect to countries of 
citizenship.
    The issues with the CBP One app that were noted based on 
the data and the analysis that we did, it was not the facial 
biometric comparison. It was the liveness detection that was 
determining is this a real person. And that liveness detection 
issue, which has been resolved because now we have limited it 
to one individual per unit or group family units, you know, 
more specifically, but that certainly was, you know, a capacity 
issue with the liveness detection, and that is where the data 
errors were coming from. We saw significant decrease in those 
data errors once we made it possible for just a primary and a 
group to do the liveness detection. It certainly cut down on 
the bandwidth for the liveness app.
    But in terms of the biometric facial comparison because we 
don't track ethnicity, we look at technical match rates based 
on countries of citizenship. And certainly, for an example, a 
couple of different regions, Middle Eastern countries, 99.6 
percent match rates, African countries, 99.5 percent match 
rates, North American countries, 98.9 percent technical match 
rates, and there are others. But I think looking at the 
holistic program that we use, and certainly offer a more 
fulsome briefing specifically on the business use cases we 
have. And I think, you know, making the distinction, we use the 
biometric facial comparison at a time and a place when an 
individual is normally expected to present themselves for 
identity verification, and we do not conduct surveillance with 
the facial biometric technology.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. And do you know if----
    Mr. Grothman. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you.
    Mr. Grothman. Congressman Biggs from Arizona.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Sabatino, when you 
talked about the number of canine units that you have, were 
those the canine units that are in OFO or the entire CBP?
    Ms. Sabatino. These are specific to the Office of Field 
Operations.
    Mr. Biggs. How many canine units are in CBP, if you know?
    Ms. Sabatino. I don't have that number, sir. I can get back 
to you on that.
    Mr. Biggs. You guys use dogs very effectively. I mean, I 
have seen lots of demonstrations been done. In San Ysidro--I 
was with the Chair, and we saw the gas. That was fascinating, 
but they don't have anywhere near the same number of canine 
units in CBP to deal with between ports of entry, do they?
    Ms. Sabatino. I would have to defer to my colleagues on the 
Border Patrol, sir.
    Mr. Biggs. You know it is true. OK. See, density meters, 
density readers, you guys have those at the ports of entries, 
right?
    Ms. Sabatino. We do employ a number of small handheld 
technology at----
    Mr. Biggs. I have seen them at Mariposa, as well as in San 
Ysidro, and as well as in other ports of entry as well. In 
other words, you have great equipment at the ports of entry 
that are essentially a force multiplier, right?
    Ms. Sabatino. Yes, absolutely, we have a number of 
equipment.
    Mr. Biggs. We don't have those same tools between the ports 
of entry because we don't see the same type of border crosser 
between the ports of entry, right?
    Ms. Sabatino. You know, sir, I can speak to what happens at 
the ports of entry.
    Mr. Biggs. OK. Very good.
    Ms. Sabatino. The technology there.
    Mr. Biggs. Very good. Do any of your officers ever provide 
parole to those who illegally enter the country through ports 
of entry?
    Ms. Sabatino. We have certainly----
    Mr. Biggs. Three hundred sixty thousand people got paroled 
last year. How many came through ports of entry?
    Ms. Sabatino. I would have to get the breakdown of that 
number. I can share with you certainly the last four months of 
encountered that we had.
    Mr. Biggs. What is that? How many got paroled?
    Ms. Sabatino. Through our programs? I apologize, sir.
    Mr. Biggs. While you are looking, I am going to go to Mr. 
Salisbury. Mr. Salisbury, HSI is embedded into ICE, correct?
    Mr. Salisbury. Yes, we are directed under ICE.
    Mr. Biggs. Right. You guys don't remove individuals who 
have deportation orders. Is that correct? That is not HSI's 
responsibility?
    Mr. Salisbury. That is correct. HSI is a criminal 
enforcement arm.
    Mr. Biggs. Right. So, ICE, when the director said and the 
President said we are going to have 100-day moratorium on 
deportations even though you have 1.2 million people who had 
due process and deportation orders, that would be a countermand 
to the law. But you guys didn't receive that because that is 
not what you do.
    Mr. Salisbury. Homeland Security Investigations is only 
focused on----
    Mr. Biggs. Yes, you don't do that, so you didn't receive 
that order to violate the law. You didn't receive that, right?
    Mr. Salisbury. HSI solely proceeds with----
    Mr. Biggs. So, you didn't receive that order?
    Mr. Salisbury. Correct.
    Mr. Biggs. There. It is that simple. Back to you, ma'am, 
Ms. Sabatino.
    Ms. Sabatino. Apologies, sir. So, for the last four months 
in October, we saw 26,505; November, 27,651; December, 30,428; 
and January, 28,155.
    Mr. Biggs. So, averaging between 26,000 and 30,000 roughly 
for the last four months, 360,000 last year. CBP One is going 
to provide to four nations ostensibly up to 360,000 additional 
parolees through ports of entry. Secretary Mayorkas, who is in 
both of your direct chain of command, has testified before 
Congress that parole is to be granted on a single individual 
case-by-case basis. I have read the law. That is what it says. 
The granting 30,000 a month, is that a single, case-by-case 
basis?
    Ms. Sabatino. Well, I think we do evaluate, and our CBP 
officers interview all of these individuals that come across, 
and there are certainly----
    Mr. Biggs. So, prior to the Biden Administration, there had 
never been more than two dozen or so parolees, parole grants in 
a year.
    Ms. Sabatino. I would have to go back and----
    Mr. Biggs. No, I am telling you. That is the fact. That is 
the testimony we have had previously, multiple hearings.
    Ms. Sabatino. I think depending on the circumstances, there 
could certainly be more examples where parole has been 
utilized.
    Mr. Biggs. More than two dozen in a year?
    Ms. Sabatino. Yes.
    Mr. Biggs. OK. I would love to see that because our 
testimony that we have received repeatedly is that about two 
dozen have been kind of the high, normally about 12 to 15, very 
individualized basis. This Administration, however, is now 
going up to 300,000. That sounds pretty generic to me. That 
doesn't sound like an individual case-by-case basis.
    So, when we look at force multipliers, if you really want 
to get to the force multiplier, and this doesn't go to you, Mr. 
Salisbury or maybe even you, Ms. Sabatino, because you guys, 
you said you didn't receive these, but I think the parole issue 
is a problem. How about enforcing the law, you enforce the law? 
That is your best force multiplier. That would include things 
like removals of 1.2, now up to about 1.5 million people who 
have had due process and removal orders. With that, I yield 
back.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. Mr. Frost of Florida.
    Mr. Frost. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to start 
with a reality check from my colleagues for people watching 
back at home, that the individuals most responsible for 
smuggling fentanyl across our borders are not migrants. In 
fact, in prior years, American citizens have accounted for more 
than 86 percent. The statistics has been thrown around a lot. 
It looks like it is not sticking for everybody. Eighty-six 
percent of fentanyl tracking convictions at the border have 
been U.S. citizens, not foreign nationals, not undocumented 
immigrants and not asylum seekers--Americans. And, Dr. 
Salisbury, have you seen any evidence that the expansion of 
legal pathways for immigration would bring more fentanyl into 
this country?
    Mr. Salisbury. Current legal pathways or pending?
    Mr. Frost. Current legal pathways.
    Mr. Salisbury. So, no. HSI looks to identify any and all 
pathways that get exploited, so no, we have not----
    Mr. Frost. So, the answer is no?
    Mr. Salisbury. Correct.
    Mr. Frost. OK. Thank you. Thank you. And instead of 
shutting down our asylum system, like some folks on this panel 
have, you know, suggested and people are suggesting, we have to 
strengthen the way that we process most vulnerable populations 
seeking help, which is right, at our border.
    In 2020, CBP rolled out the CBP One phone app in an attempt 
to streamline border processing, and I am just going to kind of 
continue on the line that Ms. Ocasio-Cortez was talking about. 
The CBP One app has been plagued with racial bias concerns and 
other issues that have hindered legitimate applications, 
migrants, and asylum seekers. The app also requires migrants to 
have a smartphone, to have strong cell service, to have a Wi-Fi 
signal, and it has been called by some people the asylum ticket 
master because of the high rates of failure and difficulty for 
folks to obtain an appointment.
    This is something that really concerns me, especially as a 
former ACLU staffer, thinking about people's civil rights, 
civil liberties, and the ability for people to seek asylum at 
the border no matter what the color of their skin is. And like 
it was stated before, we are still receiving information, 
anecdotes, stories, photos from NGO's at the border that are 
saying the darker your skin color is, the more difficult it is 
for you to use this app and be processed in a timely matter.
    Commissioner Sabatino, what is CBP doing to make the app 
more equitable and accessible? I know you said that it has been 
handled and it is being worked on, but we are still receiving 
these anecdotes. We are still receiving these stories from 
NGO's. What are you all doing to remedy this?
    Ms. Sabatino. Now certainly looking and evaluating all of 
the data that we have available to us, and again, what we saw 
with respect to the data errors wasn't related to the biometric 
facial matching. It was liveness detection, and it was a 
capacity issue. And over the last several weeks, we have made 
that enhancement, limiting the number of people required in a 
group to do that liveness detection, which has significantly 
cut down on those data errors.
    You know, with respect to the populations that we are 
seeing for the Title 42 exceptions, you know, we can say that 
the predominant population has been Venezuelans, followed by 
Haitians. We have also seen a significant increase since the 
enhancements to the app of family units or groups traveling to 
the border. I personally had the opportunity to speak to 
several NGO's in South Texas that were highlighting these 
challenges that were relayed to us, and again, we are 
continually evaluating the performance of the application.
    Mr. Frost. Yes. With Title 42 expiring in May, do you know 
whether CBP is exploring other technologies or process to 
streamline the border process because from what we have heard, 
it is moving toward everything being on the app.
    Ms. Sabatino. And the goal for us with leveraging the 
application, again, this is to limit the data entry and the 
administrative burdens on CBP officers and make it a more 
streamlined process to ensure that they have the time to do 
what they need to do and talk to----
    Mr. Frost. And I think it being a streamlined process is 
important for everyone, but what we are seeing, again, from 
NGO's, the photos or stories we are getting is that it is not 
streamlined for people who have darker skin. Commissioner 
Sabatino, how is CBP addressing the technological bias against 
people with darker skin tones with the CBP One app?
    Ms. Sabatino. I think certainly working with our partners 
south of the border, directly with the NGO's, as well as, you 
know, our partners in the Government of Mexico on ways to 
support and streamline and enhance bandwidth, we do see that, 
you know, not to say every single individual has a phone, but 
it is very prevalent that individuals have access to at least a 
smartphone that we have encountered, you know, in the 
operations.
    Mr. Frost. Thank you.
    Ms. Sabatino. But the bandwidth issues do fall in Mexico, 
and we are working with them.
    Mr. Frost. Thank you. Thank you. I am also concerned about 
individual privacy as OFO implements the technology of facial 
recognition at airports, corporations, airlines having access 
to the data bases. And what we are seeing is that they are not 
necessarily complying with restrictions on the retention of 
that, of this facial recognition information for commercial 
use. Commissioner Sabatino, what steps has CBP taken to ensure 
that its external parties don't exploit and misuse traveler 
photos and information?
    Ms. Sabatino. We have published a number of privacy impact 
assessments. We are trying to be as transparent as possible as 
to what is done with the data, how is it used, how is it 
transferred, how is it stored, and those are publicly available 
on the DHS website. But also, as part of a GAO recommendation 
going back several years, we do conduct audits, but our 
partners don't have access to our data base. Our airline 
partners, they simply take a photo, it goes behind the CBP 
firewall and is matched to a photo that is in a preexisting 
gallery based on the advanced passenger information that we 
have. And that photo was templatized. It can't be reverse-
engineered or exploited, but we do audits of our partners to 
ensure that they aren't retaining that photo. But there is no 
biographic information also attached to those photos, and 
certainly offer again a more fulsome briefing on the biometric 
comparison program.
    Mr. Frost. Thank you. I yield back.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. Pat Fallon from Texas.
    Mr. Fallon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and congratulations.
    [Audio malfunction in the hearing room.]
    Ms. Sabatino. Yes.
    Mr. Fallon.
    [Audio malfunction in the hearing room.]
    Mr. Salisbury. Yes.
    Mr. Fallon. And I fully agree with
    [Audio malfunction in the hearing room.] Thank you. It only 
passed 33 to 26. Five Democrats voted for it, all 28 
Republicans voted for it, but 26 Democrats didn't agree with 
that statement, which is remarkable. That is why we took great 
care in crafting it to ensure that it was just pretty much that 
statement. And it is a simple one, and I am glad that you both 
agree because I do as well. And is it also true, Commissioner 
Sabatino, that when migrants transit through Mexico, that the 
cartels like to charge, I don't know, for lack of a better 
term, maybe a transit fee they are charging these migrants.
    Ms. Sabatino. We have absolutely seen instances where the 
migrants are being targeted by criminal organizations or moved 
by criminal organizations and exploited for money.
    Mr. Fallon. And it is a pretty good sum of money, too. It 
is in the low thousands?
    Ms. Sabatino. The costs range, but we have seen substantial 
sums.
    Mr. Fallon. And before this Administration, had we ever had 
a month where we saw more than 200,000 encounters with migrants 
at the border?
    Ms. Sabatino. I don't have the information to validate 
that, sir.
    Mr. Fallon. And fortunately, we did look it up, and it had 
never happened before. And yet, we had 10 months in a row under 
this Administration where we had 200,000 illegal border 
crossings or greater. Which leads me to believe that if you 
have that many more folks that are crossing the border 
illegally, and the cartels are charging them a tax or a fee, 
that is making the cartels stronger than they have ever been 
because from what we have ascertained, it is hard to say 
exactly, but the narcotic trafficking alone is about $25 
billion a year, what the cartels are making, and an additional 
$12 billion now with all the illegal migrant taxes that they 
are hacking on, which is making them stronger, which is making, 
unfortunately, Mexico a de facto narco state.
    And then so I, you know, I firmly believe that open borders 
and an immoral border for the folks that live north of it and 
the folks who live south of it. So, in Fiscal Year 2022 alone, 
we had 98 individuals on the Terrorist Screening Data base that 
were apprehended at the southern border. Already in Fiscal Year 
2023, we have seen 53 folks that were on the same watch list 
that have been apprehended. In May 2022, an Iraqi native was 
arrested in connection with an alleged plot to assassinate 
former President George W. Bush. The man was linked to both 
Rasheed Daesh, and he was said to regularly be conducting 
surveillance on President Bush's home and offices, and planned 
to smuggle terrorists into the United States through the 
southern border. This is what happens when you have a very 
porous border. This is one of several examples that highlight 
the consequence of vulnerabilities that we have at our southern 
border.
    In March 2022, the commander of USNORTHCOM stated before 
the U.S. Senate that, ``Most of the GRU members in the world 
are in Mexico at the moment''--those are Russian intelligence 
personnel--and they keep a close eye on their opportunities for 
influence in the United States. In Fiscal Year 2022, CBP 
encountered 36,271 illegal aliens from Russia, which is 
startling. Since the beginning of the new fiscal year, there 
have been 21,234 Russian illegals encountered by CBP. At the 
southwest border specifically, there were over 21,000 
encounters with the Russian nationals. Last year and about the 
same amount through January already. So, as you know, most 
illegals don't carry any documents and records, so it is hard 
to ascertain who they are. In most cases, officers must rely on 
whatever the alien tells them to include what country they are 
from. Finding cracks in that story would require a good 
interview, which takes time and resources.
    So, for Commissioner Sabatino and Director Salisbury, if a 
person that has never been to the United States is arrested 
while entering illegally, what is the likelihood that the 
records check our officers run will reveal the person's real 
identity and provide any criminal background from the other 
nations?
    Ms. Sabatino. Certainly at ports of entry employing all the 
tools that we have, you know, our records checks, our system 
verifications are one tool that we use, the highly trained CBP 
officers skilled in interview techniques for individuals who 
are referred to secondary who don't present documents. But 
there are a variety of different types of documents that people 
potentially have in their possession that are identity 
documents, but aren't necessarily travel documents. But also, 
for individuals, again, collaboration and information sharing 
with our foreign partners is also absolutely critical for us to 
further identify individuals that show up at our ports of 
entry. So, it is a myriad of tools that we use, you know, 
including our ability to look at technology that they have and 
media exploitation as well.
    Mr. Fallon. OK.
    Mr. Salisbury. The same thing. Sir, with our 
investigations, we are aware and leading and working with the 
entire U.S. Government on organizations that are and willingly 
trying to bring dangerous individuals into United States. So, 
our ability to identify them and who they are among the masses 
of migrants trying to get in is critically important in HSI. We 
do employ technology and relationships in foreign governments, 
as well as utilizing biometrics and relationships with the 
intelligence community to basically try to identify these 
organizations and stop them from bringing anybody for nefarious 
purposes in the United States.
    Mr. Fallon. OK. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. Ms. Crockett from Texas.
    Ms. Crockett. Thank you so much. I have just got a couple 
of questions. No. 1, seemingly my colleagues from the other 
side of the aisle have decided that migrants are somehow 
synonymous with cartels in the drug trade. Is that something 
that you can agree with, that migrants are synonymous with the 
cartel in the drug trade? Each of you.
    Ms. Sabatino. I will take it first. I think certainly 
migrants, the vast majority are potentially vulnerable to 
exploitation by cartels.
    Mr. Salisbury. I would concur with that. The migrant 
community can be exploited by cartels and other nefarious 
actors, correct.
    Ms. Crockett. Thank you. Additionally, we have heard a lot 
of talk about seemingly open borders under President Biden. And 
there is almost an insinuation that the cartels are somehow in 
cahoots with Democrats, and that is the reason that things 
like, you know, more fentanyl is coming across the border. I 
would imagine that both of you agree with me that there is no 
evidence that there is any agreement with the Administration to 
allow for nefarious actors from cartels to get their drugs 
across the border, correct?
    Ms. Sabatino. I would agree with that.
    Mr. Salisbury. I would agree with that also.
    Ms. Crockett. OK. Finally, before I move on to Texas, we 
talked about the fact that you seemingly have implemented a lot 
of different tools in dealing with cartels. And I think one of 
the things that my colleagues don't understand is the level of 
sophistication that these cartels have. Seemingly they believe 
if you get more dogs, then that is going to resolve all the 
issues that we have with the drug trade. Would you agree with 
me that it is important to employ every single tool that you 
can find, including technology, because as you do one thing, 
the cartel advances and they change, and they are basically a 
moving target at times because this is what criminal 
enterprises do?
    Ms. Sabatino. I agree that it is a comprehensive whole-of-
government issue: technology, canines, our personnel, which are 
our most valuable resource--all critical tools. Certainly 
advanced information, partnerships with our other government, 
you know, law enforcement partners, as well as international 
partnerships, all play a role.
    Ms. Crockett. You just mentioned something that really 
matters a lot to me. You mentioned international partners. For 
some reason, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
continue to insinuate that immigration is just a U.S. issue. 
But you would agree with me that it does take partners being in 
communication about what is going on and their help in 
enforcing and making sure that some of these people never even 
make it to our border, correct?
    Ms. Sabatino. Yes, and certainly agree with Director 
Salisbury in highlighting, you know, identifying pathways.
    Mr. Salisbury. Yes. No, essentially, without our foreign 
relationships, our ability to combat TCOs would be very one-
dimensional and domestically based. And certainly, HSI's goal 
is to work with the partners, the foreign partners, make them 
better and push these crimes and criminal activities further 
away from our own borders.
    Ms. Crockett. OK. And finally, my colleague from Texas 
brought up some Texas things. Let's talk about when we get a 
Republican policy on immigration. We have talked about Governor 
Abbott, who is a failure on so many accounts in my book, but 
let's talk about what happened when he decided that he was 
going to employ his enhanced security tactics. I don't know how 
many of you remember this. We don't have Fox News on here, but 
we do have CNN as well as the Texas Tribune and exactly what 
they said about that.
    We know that in the midst of the pandemic, we were having 
supply chain issues, unfortunately, whatever policy that our 
Republican Governor decided to employ. Instead, what it did was 
it cost us hundreds of millions of dollars and literally 
rotting food. So, my question to you is, I know that you are 
not policy wonks, and I applaud you for not having to do the 
policy side of things. But right now, what we are dealing with 
is one team that is arguing that the borders are somehow open, 
seemingly because of Democratic policies, regardless as to 
whether or not they specifically said that that is what they 
are insinuating. And it is my understanding that you all work 
hard every single day, whether there is a Democrat that is in 
control or whether there is a Republican.
    And so, my question to you, my final question has to do 
with Operation Lone Star and Governor Abbott. If we were to 
employ similar tactics to what was employed during this time, 
do you believe that this would be more helpful or less helpful 
to the U.S. American people?
    Ms. Sabatino. You know, with respect to ports of entry, 
they are economic engines, and it is really important for us to 
be able to be effective and efficient in managing the flow of 
traffic through our ports of entry. And, you know, solutions, 
you know, that result in impeding commerce can be incredibly 
challenging for the economy. But we are always working with our 
partners to find ways to work together to ensure, you know, 
that we are enforcing, you know, the, you know, counter 
narcotics, counterterrorism missions, while at the same time 
making sure that we are not putting up impediments to that 
lawful throughput of travel and trade.
    Ms. Crockett. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Grothman. Mr. LaTurner of Kansas.
    Mr. LaTurner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Sabatino and Ms. 
Salisbury, I appreciate you both taking time to be here, and 
thank you for your dedication to securing America's borders and 
protecting our communities. This past November, Secretary 
Mayorkas told me in a hearing on the Homeland Security 
Committee that he believes our southern border is secure. I 
have been to the border multiple times, and I can tell you that 
the Secretary's claim could not be farther from the truth. Over 
1 million illegal immigrants have already crossed our southern 
border this fiscal year, and we are only five months in. This 
worsening national security and humanitarian crisis is 
unsustainable. A country that can't secure its borders is not a 
country at all.
    Mexican cartels and other criminal organizations are taking 
advantage of President Biden's lack of action. Record amounts 
of fentanyl is being smuggled across our wide-open border and 
into our communities. Roughly 300 Americans are dying every day 
of fentanyl overdoses. That is 1 death every 8.5 minutes. This 
deadly drug is killing more young adults than car crashes and 
suicides. My home state continues to be impacted by the 
fentanyl epidemic. Over the past few years, Kansas has seen a 
73-percent increase in fentanyl-related overdoses, one of the 
highest increases in America.
    Earlier this year in January, a 15-year-old freshman at 
Lansing High School named Nicholas Cruz Burris acquired what he 
thought was a Percocet pill from a drug dealer soliciting him 
over Snapchat. The next morning, his mother, Rhonda, went to 
wake him for school, only to find him dead in his bed. This is 
a picture of Nicholas, 15 years old, and this is happening to 
young people all across this country. The time for action was 
yesterday. Our Federal Government is failing at a core 
constitutional duty, enforcing commonplace border security, and 
safeguarding our citizens. We can and must do better, and 
families like that of Nicholas Burris demand it of us.
    Mr. Sabatino, would you agree that the vast majority of 
fentanyl coming into this country is being made by precursor 
chemicals primarily from China, manufactured by drug cartels in 
Mexico, and then smuggled into the United States both through 
and in between ports of entry?
    Ms. Sabatino. That is what we see with about 84 percent 
interdicted at ports of entry.
    Mr. LaTurner. Fentanyl has sadly become the leading cause 
of death for Americans between the ages of 18 and 45. Last 
year, Customs and Border Patrol seized approximately 14,700 
pounds of fentanyl. The DEA considers just two milligrams of 
fentanyl to be potentially a lethal dose. So, the work of your 
Agency has likely prevented millions of deaths. I commend you 
for your collective efforts, but as we have seen, despite the 
valiant work of CBP, the drug is still flowing into our 
country. Of the force multipliers that CBP's disposal, is there 
one you find most effective at combating fentanyl explicitly?
    Ms. Sabatino. Again, we have to leverage-integrated tools, 
but our partnerships and the collaborative approaches to 
identifying these illicit supply chains is critical. We can't 
wait for these things to come to our ports of entry. We are not 
going to seize our way out, you know, of interdicting 
narcotics. We have to develop those partnerships. And again, 
going back to the great partnership we have with Homeland 
Security Investigations, and, again, establishing a cell to 
focus on all things fentanyl is a priority for us.
    Mr. LaTurner. Mr. Salisbury, can you please elaborate upon 
how Homeland Security Investigations acts in concert with Joint 
Terrorism Task Force factions within the DOJ and FBI?
    Mr. Salisbury. Yes, thank you for that question. So, HSI is 
the largest investigative arm of the Department of Homeland 
Security partners with the FBI and the JTTF, the Joint 
Terrorism Task Force. We are currently, next to the FBI, the 
largest participating member on the JTTF of criminal 
investigators. So, we supply information. We utilize our 
authorities in support of national security investigations with 
the JTTF, working in concert every day with DOJ and the other 
partnerships on the JTTF.
    Mr. LaTurner. It has been reported that in 2021, 86 percent 
of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force disruptions of 
terrorist activity were achieved with significant HSI 
involvement. Can you describe what significant HSI involvement 
means?
    Mr. Salisbury. Yes. So, going back to HSI's unique 
authorities and investigative skill sets, you may have national 
security risks, but it may be not able to be proved. A lot of 
national security risks may be involved in counter-
proliferation investigations, export violations, money 
laundering, all of which HSI excels at. So, HSI will employ 
every investigative priority under its mandate to explore all 
these criminal organizations and take them apart for whatever 
criminal activities they may be currently proceeding with.
    Mr. LaTurner. Again, thank you both for being here. I yield 
back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Grothman. OK. All the way from Massachusetts, Mr. 
Lynch.
    Mr. Lynch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me congratulate the 
Chairman and the Ranking Member for the new responsibilities, 
and I want to thank the witnesses for their willing to help the 
Committee with its work. Mr. Salisbury and Ms. Sabatino, I, 
along with Mr. LaTurner and other Members on this Committee, 
have gone to the border many, many times, as well as to 
Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, to try to figure out and 
better understand the push factors and the influence of cartels 
on what is happening on the border because, as you have said, 
Ms. Sabatino, you know, we don't want to be confronting this at 
our border. We would like to act behind those countries from 
which a lot of these migrants are coming from.
    In the past, we have had a good cooperative relationship 
with those countries--Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador. Is that 
still the case today? I know that in the past we have had a 
special task force in the Guatemalan Highlands, which was 
somewhat of a less-governed area, and we had a good special 
forces team there working in that area on drug interdiction and 
keeping tabs on the cartels. Is that still going on, or is 
that----
    Mr. Salisbury. So, yes HSI maintains great relationships in 
all those countries. We certainly look to develop relationships 
with the State Department post in host country, and we also 
develop vetted units with the foreign law enforcement officials 
in order to further our cases. So yes, all those relationships 
continue to be robust. They are constantly developing, and we 
are constantly looking at better ways to partner with our 
foreign partners.
    Mr. Lynch. OK.
    Ms. Sabatino. I think with respect to CBP, certainly we 
support capacity-building efforts in a number of different 
countries, including in South and Central America. We also have 
deployments of, you know, individuals through our Container 
Security Initiative, you know, in key port locations where they 
support operations and get to see shipments before they come to 
the United States.
    Mr. Lynch. Let me followup on that. Commissioner Sabatino, 
you previously testified that nearly 14 million cargo 
containers arrive at our land ports of entry every year, and 
those containers are in addition to the millions of pedestrian 
and passenger vehicles that cross into the United States on an 
annual basis. Our security at the southern border depends on 
the resources that we are willing to dedicate to our ports and 
to your men and women. To this end, you know, I, in the past, 
have supported the omnibus appropriations bill that was enacted 
under the previous administration, providing $6.4 billion for 
Customs and Border Patrol security operations. That was a 24-
percent increase from the previous year. So, given the millions 
of inspections that CBP generally conducts, it is critical that 
they optimize their resources to both facilitate commerce and 
bolster border security.
    Commissioner, how would additional funding for technology 
investments that have been raised earlier in the hearing 
increase the number of vehicles that CBP's Office of Field 
Operations can scan for drugs or other contraband?
    Ms. Sabatino. Thank you for the question. Certainly, our 
non-intrusive inspection technology, in 2019, we received $564 
million for technology to deploy to the southwest border to 
increase scan rates, the mentioned POVs, from 1 percent to 2 
percent, to about 40 percent, and commercial vehicles for about 
15 percent to 17 percent, to about 70 percent. We greatly 
appreciate what was given to us in Fiscal Year 2023: $177 
million for ONS, just over $15 million for outbound, $10 
million for the development of artificial intelligence and 
machine learning, which is also going to be critical.
    As the number of scans that we do goes up, we are not going 
to be able to staff that with officers--we wouldn't have a 
footprint to get everyone in the room to look at those and 
adjudicate those scans. So, that is going to be critical work 
for us over the next year. We did receive about $45 million for 
deployment civil works, the installation of that technology 
over the upcoming fiscal year, and another $18 million for the 
technology that is going into the Gordie Howe Bridge on the 
northern border.
    Mr. Lynch. OK. My time has just about expired. Thank you 
both for your good work. Thank you for your willingness to come 
before the Committee and help us with our work. Thank you. I 
yield back.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. Ms. Mace from South Carolina.
    Ms. Mace. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank you 
both for being with us today. And I know you are getting a lot 
of different questions from a lot of different angles, and I 
appreciate the time and effort you have done to prepare for 
this hearing today. You have one of the most important jobs in 
the country, both from a national security standpoint and the 
integrity of our immigration system.
    Every town is a border town. I am from South Carolina, but 
two years ago, we had a member of MS-13 gang in Beaufort 
County. I don't know what the hell he was doing there. We have 
had fentanyl overdoses. We have had law enforcement, you know, 
get exposed to that and be hospitalized, and we have seen what 
the millions of illegals in the cartels have done coming across 
our country and how it has affected every community across the 
Nation.
    I am interested to hear from both of you today on some of 
the tech things that have been mentioned, technology. We had a 
hearing early on in this session about the Border Patrol and 
technology, and one of the things mentioned was that they have 
more needs for technology. But I just wanted to ask both of you 
if you could just speak a little more broadly about the 
effectiveness of the biometrics technology that you are using. 
I would like to hear just a little more about how effective it 
is in tracking individuals who may pose a security risk or, you 
know, coming through ports of entry.
    Mr. Salisbury. Yes. So, obviously technology does play a 
key part of what HSI is trying to do. We are looking to find 
and identify more leads more efficiently. As we generate 
investigations, we generate a large volume of information, some 
of it is good, some of it is bad. So, technology, like data 
analytics out of our innovation lab, key--they focus agents in 
the right areas.
    In reference to biometrics, we found biometrics being very 
useful, particularly in human smuggling investigations, where, 
again, the smuggling organizations are focused on bringing in 
illicit actors, nefarious individuals into the United States. 
So, partnering with the intelligence community and the 
Department of Defense, yes, biometrics has been a key part.
    Ms. Mace. One quick question on that because I only have 
five minutes.
    Mr. Salisbury. Yes.
    Ms. Mace. But are the biometrics, are they used both on 
legal citizens coming across the ports of entry and those who 
are crossing over illegally? Is it both?
    Mr. Salisbury. So, from HSI's perspective, we use it on a 
razor focus. If it is focused toward a criminal investigation, 
so it could be both, depending on the nature and the makeup of 
the criminal organization we are looking at.
    Ms. Sabatino. Certainly, since the implementation of our 
biometrics facial comparison program, starting back in 2016, we 
have encountered over 1,700 imposters. Primarily it was about 
just over 1,600 of those who were identified at our southwest 
border ports of entry. So, we have facial biometrics deployed 
in our air environment, our maritime environment, cruise 
passenger, and our pedestrian land border environment. A focus 
of ours over the next year is going to be to get the right 
technology in place to incorporate that. The program has 
simplified arrival into the vehicle environment in our land 
border, challenged by finding technology that can capture 
usable images that we can use for the facial biometric matching 
program. So, it really is removing an administrative burden, 
and a part of the streamlined process, you know, at our ports 
of entry, take officers away from those administrative burdens. 
You know, give them the tools that they need and let them do 
what they do best, which is to talk to people to determine 
intent, and interview people.
    Ms. Mace. And then what are each of your Agencies doing and 
working on the security and privacy of biometric data that is 
collected? What sort of steps are taken to protect that 
information and data?
    Ms. Sabatino. And certainly, going back to the 
implementation of U.S. visit back in 2004, we have been taking 
fingerprints and photographs of in-scope, you know, foreign 
nationals dating back to that time certainly with the advantage 
of facial biometrics. And it really goes back to the 2002 
legislation that was passed, requiring us to biometrically 
confirm the entry and exit of individuals coming in and out of 
the United States at our ports of entry.
    It has been a long endeavor in that. We received that 
mission in 2013, testing multiple modalities, iris, 
fingerprints, and photos, and we landed with photos because 
everyone knows how to take a picture. Everyone knows how to 
take a selfie. It is not intimidating. And it is the most 
streamlined process for us to do without creating major 
disruptions in the infrastructure investments for outbound air 
passenger.
    Ms. Mace. And I have got 30 seconds left, and either of you 
can answer this speed round, but what is next? What do you need 
from Congress to do more, better, faster, more efficiently?
    Ms. Sabatino. I think certainly the opportunity to brief on 
the full biometrics program, the technology, the continued 
support that we have for the non-intrusive inspection 
technology, also looking to make investments in intelligence 
resources for intel research specialists who can operationalize 
information, put the jigsaw puzzle of intel together to provide 
to our analytical units at our ports to target, you know, more 
effectively.
    Mr. Salisbury. Certainly, as we increase our investigative 
capabilities and our technology capabilities, it is going to 
require more agents to back that up, so technology is great. It 
allows agents to be focused. But we do need to followup with 
that in order to make criminal investigations. So, technology 
will never replace the men and women actually pursuing what the 
technology uncovers, so we will inevitably need more agents on 
the field working these investigations.
    Ms. Mace. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. Mr. Sessions from Texas.
    Mr. Sessions. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and my 
thanks to both of you for your service, not only to the 
country, but your continued diligence to making sure that the 
American people have soundness in those that represent us in 
key decisionmaking roles.
    I think you knew before you came up here that we have two 
sides of the story that will be told up here, and there is 
certainly a feeling that Republicans accuse Democrats of being 
soft on immigration and soft on criminals. I am one of those 
that makes that conversation because I believe that what is 
happening at our border, what is happening in our cities, what 
is happening across this country, supports that viewpoint. We 
have people arrested all over the country, thousands of pieces 
of fentanyl and other lethal items, and the person, when 
arrested, gets out without bail. They just release them. We are 
concerned about this.
    I would like for you to be able to leave here today knowing 
that there are people want and expect you to do your job to 
capture these people, to keep them away from America, to send 
them back, to use the necessary resources that would include 
bio identifications and other markers, pictures that would be 
necessary to protecting us. We need this. And I recognize the 
Democratic Party, including our President, are completely 
against the tools that are necessary to protecting our 
children.
    I am getting ready to be a grandfather within the year. I 
am worried about our children. I am worried about our schools. 
I am worried about the places of influence and these drug 
cartels that have marketing force all across this country now. 
There are people that don't understand that there are people 
who get away. Those that got away many times have huge 
backpacks on them. I have been to Fort Huachuca. I have watched 
just east of there, packs of people coming by. And so, a couple 
hours from real-life people who are with the Border Patrol who 
had interdicted those people, but they sooner or later caught 
them as they got closer to the highway. They found backpacks 
full of drugs. There is a reason why they didn't want to be 
caught.
    So, I would like for you, as you leave today, to recognize 
that we up on the Hill have two sides of the story, and yet we 
can't get away from the narrative that millions of people are 
impacted by drug cartels. Their long reach into communities is 
no longer just the largest cities in this country. They are 
rural, and they are across many, many, many states. This is a 
huge problem, and it won't get better because we are allowing 
not just tens of thousands but millions of people to come here. 
And we are inviting them by the President of the United States, 
by the Secretary of Homeland Security who refuses to even 
acknowledge the issue and the problem that we have.
    Being from Waco, Texas, it is easy for me to look up and to 
see law enforcement that is diligent about catching people, 
holding them accountable, judges who will put them in their 
proper place. I would like for you to take, in the minute I 
have got left, and talk to me about U.S. attorneys across the 
border and about your relationship to have put these criminals 
in jail and to detain them, either one of you.
    Mr. Salisbury. So, the U.S. attorney's offices' 
relationship with HSI is critical. Otherwise, we are 
investigating, wasting a lot of taxpayer money and energies 
without getting prosecutions, so our relationships on our 
priorities seem strong across the board. All our criminal 
matters that HSI pursues, we have great relationships with DOJ, 
high level relationships. Certainly, we have----
    Mr. Sessions. And the effectiveness of these U.S. 
attorneys?
    Mr. Salisbury. So, the effectiveness of the U.S. attorneys 
pushing the HSI priorities in the criminal investigations, we 
have a great relationship, and those investigations are moving 
forward. And over 20,000----
    Mr. Sessions. So, you feel successful?
    Mr. Salisbury. I feel we need to do more given what we are 
doing. We always strive to do more. I think the men and women 
of HSI would recognize that we are doing everything we can, and 
we want to do more so, yes, sir.
    Mr. Sessions. Sure. I have seen throughout my career--my 
father was U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas, 
chief judge for the Western District of Texas, an FBI director 
for the United States of America. And during that period of 
time, he, like you, devoted himself to trying to keep this 
country safe. I hope you will leave today, dust each other off, 
and thank each other with a pat on the back for your service to 
a great Nation. Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time. Thank you 
very much.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you very much, Mr. Sessions, and I am 
going to call upon Mr. Garcia, if he wants to make a closing 
statement.
    Mr. Garcia. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Of course, I 
want to thank our witnesses again today, and I want to 
highlight something that has been mentioned a few times, and 
that is that our ports of entry are really engines of commerce 
and are places where our economy is succeeding in the U.S. 
because of the work that you are all doing and because of the 
commerce that is happening across our ports of entry.
    We also know that we want to improve the economy, improve 
our ports of entry. We really got to focus also on a safe and 
secure process for processing commerce, and I think that is 
something that we are all obviously interested in on this 
Committee, and clearly both of you are as well. Border security 
is also about ensuring that our economy is strong and that we 
are also providing an orderly process. It is something that the 
Administration is working on and something I know that all of 
us are committed to as well.
    And, while I should not need to remind everyone, just as an 
important reminder for everyone here, but every single 
Republican that is a part of this Subcommittee actually voted 
against funding for Custom Border Patrol's efforts at the 
border just recently. And so, there has been a lot of concern 
about the border, a lot of concern about how we are going to 
support the work you are all doing, but the Republicans that 
have been asking you questions today actually all voted against 
that funding.
    They voted against $230 million against technology, against 
funding to improve operations between our ports of entry. That 
happened in the appropriations package just recently. They also 
voted against $60 million for more personnel for CBP and $70 
million for non-intrusive inspection technology at the ports of 
entry that was also part of the appropriations package. They 
also voted against $430 million in funding to build out ports 
of entry with non-invasive inspection technology to detect 
illegal narcotics and fentanyl coming into our country.
    So, as we hear a lot about, I am taking on fentanyl and 
supporting all of you, every Member of the Subcommittee 
actually voted against all of that. That, of course, was in the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, so I think it is 
important for us to be serious about border security. And House 
Democrats are, and I want to thank you again for your 
testimony. And, Mr. Chairman, with that, I yield back.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. I just want to make a few comments 
on the comments before we leave today. First of all, I will 
emphasize one more time, it has been said part of our problem 
is that it is difficult for people to become citizens legally 
and that is why we have a problem at the border. I will remind 
people that last year we had a million people sworn in as 
citizens legally, the highest since 2006. I don't think anybody 
could say it is impossible to become a citizen the old-
fashioned legal way. I try not to be a partisan person, but 
since President Biden has taken office, we have gone from 
having 20,000 to 238,000 people in a month come across our 
border, and which some people would say illegally. When you go 
up by a factor of more than 11 to 1, it is hard not to be 
incredibly critical of the Biden Administration.
    I think that is also the reason why we have low morale at 
the border, and when people imply that somehow the Border 
Patrol are not ordered to do their job, the problem or the 
frustration for them, and morale is low, and I have been on the 
border seven or eight times, is that when so many Border Patrol 
agents are processing people asking for asylum and being let in 
here, they don't have time to guard the border. And that is why 
I think we have so many people streaming across the border 
between points of entry is because the Border Patrol, which 
should be guarding those areas, is too busy doing paperwork as 
the result of decisions made by the Biden Administration.
    I will try to be bipartisan here in my criticisms. I wish 
President Trump had appointed Steve Miller to be in charge of 
the border policies earlier. I think he made a big mistake in 
waiting so long for that to happen. I will also point out that 
something has been made of it. Most of the fentanyl is found at 
points of entry. I think one of the reasons, and the Border 
Patrol will tell you this as well, one of the reasons they get 
more fentanyl at the points of entry is because they aren't 
catching it, hardly at all, between the points of entry because 
they are busy doing paperwork. And if they had enough people to 
guard the other areas, they would get a lot more fentanyl there 
as well. I think further evidence of where this Administration 
stands, and I think Representative Biggs did a good job 
pointing this out, not a halt, entire halt, but way less 
deportations than we have had in the past, which shows where 
the heart of the Biden Administration is.
    I also point out that, you know, it is considered an insult 
to interpose the cartels with immigrants coming here. The vast 
majority of immigrants who come here off our southwestern 
border are having to pay the cartels to come here. So, in 
addition to other problems resulting from too many people 
crossing the southern border, we are enriching the cartels. 
Every time you are down there, they tell me, a Mexican 5,000 
bucks, somebody from India 20,000 bucks, but the cartels are 
getting very enriched with the current policy.
    I would like to thank you guys for bringing in the dogs. 
Obviously, I am a fan of dogs. That is one of the reasons we 
had these hearings, and hopefully the publicity we got for dogs 
will result in more dogs being available for you and other 
agencies in the upcoming budget and perhaps earlier. I mean, 
one of the things that frustrates me about this, I guess 
108,000 people are dying every year of illegal drug overdoses. 
I don't think this Administration, or this Congress has done 
enough. I mean, it is just a number, it is just a statistic, 
but it is such a huge statistic. I don't think the average 
American realizes, you know, how great that is.
    My talking point is, it is twice the number of people who 
died in the Vietnam War over 12 years, every year. And if that 
many people were being died in murders, man, they would be 
screaming for doubling the police forces of this country, 
screaming for more people in prison, but instead, there seems 
to be a total lack of urgency when so many young people are 
dying of these illegal drug overdoses. And I hope that in the 
future Congress and state legislators don't let their dislike 
for putting more people in corrections stand in the way of 
stopping this huge amount of death that we are having from the 
illegal drugs.
    Something has been said about our relations with countries 
in Central America. I think, well, first of all, if you go to 
the border, your Border Patrol will tell people that the people 
coming here are not necessarily coming here out of desperation. 
Whether they look at the fact they all seem to have cellphones, 
or the clothes they are wearing, or insofar as they find out 
what their occupations are, the Border Patrol will tell you, 
this is not poor people coming out of desperation. It is just 
that things are best in America. And I think the best thing we 
can do for other countries is educate them on freedom, value of 
the free market, and that prosperity does not come from a big 
government. And I think, unfortunately, too many other 
countries around the world haven't got the message.
    But in any event, thank you for being here. You did a 
wonderful job. We will check you off at an A, and we are done. 
Thanks.
    [Whereupon, at 11:57 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                 [all]