Transcripts For CSPAN3 Border Patrol Personnel Hearing 20180118

Duty last year in texas. And now i recognize myself for opening statement. Border protection work every single day to secure our nation. Often in rugged terrain, sometimes in very remote areas, far away from the amenities of modern life. They are exposed to blistering heat of the arizona desert and brutal cold like montana. They are the driving force behind our Border Security operations. Nation is for nate they atunate this. Not smuggle drugs and dangerous individuals through our ports of entry. It is dangerous work. Made more dangerous because agents are subject to frequent assaults. Some of them have the potential to kill or cause brave bodily harm. Just a few weeks ago an agent in san diego was patrolling the border on allterrain vehicle when he was struck in the chess by a rock. Thankfully the agent released from the hospital and will recover. But this type of assault is far from an anomaly. Many other agents seriously injured by rocks thrown over the fence. On the screens to the left and right we have put up photographs of some of the gruesome injuries. We are putting up photographs. Suffered by our brave agents during these rock attacks. Unfortunately such assaults are becoming more commonplace in part because of the increase in criminal aliens attempts to cross the border who would rather resist arrest or felony reentry charge. More should be done to ensure those who assault agents are held accountable and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. It has two key missions securing the border that powers the nations economic growth. But in order to accomplish the missions it needs enough agents to make arrests, intradict drug loads, screen cargo, and move passengers through air land and sea ports of entry. Officers are at the end of the day the most important Border Security resource we have. Unfortunately they are in short supply these days. Which has created National Security and economic vulnerability this Congress Must address. It is critically under staffed and remains well below congressly mandated Staffing Levels by more than 1,000 office rs and 1900 agents. Man power is getting worse. Losing grounds and no neend in sight as we continue to lose through attrition without ability to hire any ones. The president has called for the hiring of 5,000 agents but we have to ensure it is set up for success to not only hire those in timely fashion but also to retain them in the future. U. S. Border patrol has not met mandated hiring numbers since fiscal year 2014 and losing officer in 2016. Several issues responsible. For starters it takes more than 292 days on average to hire a new officer or agent. Very few people can wait somewhere between six months to a year for a job. On top of that, officers and agents are required to pass a polygraph examination however the pass rates have not kept demand. Earlier this year the house passed my bill that would waive the polygraph for state local Law Enforcement that have already passed a polygraph examination. Federal Law Enforcement that have passed stringent Background Investigation and veterans with three consecutive years in the military held a security clear ns. These small changes will provide them with immediate relief so they are able to hire officers and agent frs a pool of qualified applicants that maintain the public trust and put their lives online on daily basis. Challenges for our officers are significant. Which is why ive called this hearing today. I think it will benefit the members of the subcommittee to receive firsthand from the line agents on the ground. I want to hear your perspectives what it will take to secure a border. Listen to your firsthand views on hiring, retention, and mobility challenges that have plagued them for the last few years and finally discuss some solutions to the increasing trend of salts on our agents. The chair recognizes Ranking Member the gentlemen from texan statement he may have. Thanks for holding the hearing and for all joined us today. Given the debate on this, thousands of Border Protection officers working on the front lines will be greatly beneficial to this subcommittee. Over the past several months, the white house and Senior Administration officials have insisted that building a border wall from coast to coast will keep our illegals drugs out. However, u. S. Coast guard officials have testified time and again that the solutions to these threats are broader than simply using barriers. This subcommittee has heard vast quantities are intradicted near central and south america. We know u. S. Coast guard and air and marine need modern assets to keep up with the flow in this zone. We have heard how drugs are smuggled into the United States in massive Cargo Containers through our land ports of entry, through the express mail and postal system, through tunnels under fences, and by all tra light aircraft and drones. We know people are smuggled and trafrnged into the United States through legitimate forms of travel, and others come here legally but over stay. Data also shows that people on the terrorist watch list along the northern border more frequently than southern border. Furthermore, the majority of these individuals present themselves at ports of entry rather than to sneak into the country. To address these threats, they rely on screening and vetting techniques, technology, in infrastructure and most importantly officers and agents. They faces serious challenges in recruiting professional workforce to accomplish mission and these challenges are get only getting worse. I have mentioned multiple timings this congress that hiring retention problems pose an unacceptable self inflicted risk. Based on its workforce staffing model, their office of Field Operations needs to deploy additional 2, 500 officers to ports of entroo i in order to meet demand and does not include more than 1,000 vague antsies still left unfilled since ts last Time Congress authorized staffing increase. This is known factual documented need. I understand that every 0 the holidays officers assigned to some of the busiest land ports of entry along our southern border were working multiple 16 hour shifts to keep um with the flow of travelers and commerce. This situation is bad for the officers and it is bad for Border Security as well as legitimate commerce and trade. Border patrol agents are under pressure to maintain vigilance and professional in the face of cartels and other criminal actors who endanger safety. Both Republican Congress would be wise to address these critical staffing and personnel needs before considering a multi billion dollar border wall. At the same time, Border Patrol agents must contend with using out moded technology and deteriorating Forward Operating basis in remote regions along our borders. Cbp has duty to treat the men and women fairly. Equip and compensate them appropriately. Man power is critical component of Border Security and i look forward to hearing from our Witnesses Today about their experiences, trends and threats they have seen on the front lines, and what they would like to see cbp do to the borders. Our members support you and efforts to secure our nations borders while ensuring the flow of legitimate trade and travel that drives our nations economy and upholding the ideals that make america great. Again, i thank the chair woman for holding todays hearing and thank our witnesses for joining us. I yield back the balance of my time. Other members of the committee are reminded they may be submitted for the reason. Pleased to be joined. Mr. Brandon jud is Border Patrol agent and the president of national Border Patrol counsel representing more than 16, 500 borderline agents brings with him nearly 20 years of experience. Mr. Judd is currently assigned in montana. Mr. Jon anfinsen border agent for 11 years in texas. Several years working in prosecutions unit in texas and certified as emt. Agent anfinsen is last year elected as National Vice president with the National Council. Mist rose maria pepp has worked for different agencies and is here from my town, tucson, arizona. Mr. Anthony reardon is leader of the largest independent sector Union Representing 150,000 federal workers, including 25,000 custom and Border Protection employees. Reardon has over 25 years of handson experience addressing the concerns of frontline employees. The witnesses full written statements will appear in the record. The chair now recognizes mr. Judd for five minutes to testify. Chair woman mcsally and filem filemon vela and distinguishing members of the committee. I would like to thank you for having us. We have a long standing relationship with you and i appreciate everything you do for our agents. My name is brandon judd and currently serve as president of the National Council where i represent approximately 16,000 Border Patrol line agents. I have 20 years of experience as Border Patrol agent and a through owe understanding of the policies affecting Border Security and id like to discuss a few issues with you today. The debate over what to do with undocumented immigrants in the United States has been raging for as long as i can remember. And the debate will continue as long as people from other countries are able to sneak across our borders, evade apprehension and dis peer in the shadows of society. In short, until the borders are secure, we will continue to have hearings such tas this and Border Security in illegal immigration will continue to be politicized and will continue to be a polarizing topic that divides liberals, moderates, and conservatives of all parties. In a recent town haul meeting, a United States senator asked a packed Conference Room of Border Patrol agents what percentage of illegal Border Crossers in their individual locations are apprehended . The answers ranged from 40 to 60 . He then asked what percentage of narcotics that are smuggled across the border are detected . The percentage went down exponentially. The senator wasnt surprised and in later private meeting asked me what the proper percentage would be to consider the border secure. My answer was that the percentage could vary from location to location, but a secure border would be achieved once it became too difficult for criminal cartels to turn a profit and the risk outweighed the reward. Unfortunately, and as we speak, we still have work to do. Illegal crossborder crime including human smuggling is a multibillion dollar industry and is controlled exclusively by organized crime within and without the United States. These criminal enterprises, cartels, are constantly evolving and adapt to our enforcement postur postures. They have come to realize we are far more reactive than pro wiace which makes it easy for them to stay one step ahead. In some cases, the cartels will expend a great deal of money and resources to dig expensive tunnels, bribe Government Employees, build elaborate compartments in vehicles and many other measures to get their contraband across the border illegally. Most of the time, however, they will use simple ingenuity that allows them to use our laws, lack of resources and prosecutorial discretion against us. Over the past year, we have seen a historic drop in the number of people entering the United States illegally. The administrations simple promise to enforce the laws was all it took to send shock waves throughout the world. Less people were entering the country illegally which meant Border Patrol agents werent being overwhelmed by sheer numbers. It became much more difficult to cross the border illegally and i believe we were putting a dent in the profits of the criminal cartels. Due to such, assaults on federal agents with a Border Security mission increased by 76 in 2017 compared to the previous year. In order to combat this issue, we must understand what i believe are the three drivers, cartel violence, criminal aliens attempting to illegally reenter the United States, and manpower. As previously stated, all of the human and narcotic trafficking along the border are controlled by drug cartels. The cartels are extremely violent and have killed an estimated 150,000 people, including Law Enforcement in mexico. I believe that the violence we are seeing is simply a spillover from the chaos on the other side of the border. The other thing is as criminal aliens attempt to reenter the United States, for obvious reasons, criminal aliens are more likely to assault Border Patrol agents and until fully prosecuted, i believe the assaults will continue. Manpower is also a huge issue. We are currently almost 2,000 agents below the congressional floor of 21,370 agents. The president has proposed the hiring of 5,000 additional agents, which we fully support. The committee has included the 5,000 additional agents in the Border Security for america act, and i want to thank the committee for doing so. However, this year, there is only a proposal to fund 500 new agents. At this rate, the agents we hire this year will be halfway to retirement before we meet the goal of an additional 5,000 new agents by 2028. In the field, manpower equals Response Time, whether it be a sensor hit or agent fighting for his life, currently we have agents covering largescale areas where the nearest backup may be more than 15 to 20 minutes away. As someone who has had to struggle to arrest a violent subject on more than one occasion, that kind of Response Time is equivalent to no response at all. I fear that the level of violence that we are seeing now may become the new normal. This is because the new primary drivers of the violence, cartels and criminal aliens, will likely get worse, not better in the years ahead. We need to focus our efforts on what we can change. This includes more manpower and ensuring that any assaults on an agent is fully prosecuted. I want to thank the committee for your time and i look forward to answering any of your questions. Thank you, mr. Judd. The chair recognizes mr. Anfenson for five minutes. Good morning, everyone. Chairman and Ranking Member, i want to thank you for inviting us and affording us the opportunity to testify this morning. I have been a Border Patrol agent for about 11 years. I have been assigned to the del rio sect ormy entire career. I spent several years working in the prosecutions unit, including two years at the u. S. Attorneys office. I want to discuss this morning the issues of retention and recruitment and how they affect Border Patrols operations in the field. As many of you know, Law Enforcement is a difficult career. The hours are long and often unpredictable. We work weekends, holidays, miss out on birthdays and anniversaries and unfortunately, sometimes see the worst in humanity. All of this takes a toll not only on us, but our families. Although there are challenges with this profession, i work with a lot of really great people who truly care about Border Security. They have become a second family and after 11 years on the job i still look forward to going to work every day. Whether we are arresting undocumented immigrants who recently crossed the border, or rescuing undocumented immigrants lost in the brush, i believe our work makes a difference to this country. However, there are aspects that present a challenge when it comes to recruitment, retention and morale. Border patrol works shift work that covers 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. We operate in some of the most unforgiving environments in the country and some agents struggle to make it to retirement with a career filled with injuries. We often work in communities that lack Quality Health care, schools and Employment Opportunities for our spouses. So i would like to first start by addressing agent retention. The Border Patrol is only as good as its employees. If we cant retain quality personnel, we will never be able to secure our border. As brian judd previously testified we are approximately 2,000 agents below the congressionally mandated floor and this deficit is largely due to the result of two issues. The first is the agent is facing a significant wave of retirement of agents who were hired in a large hiring push in the early 1990s and the second is agents just leaving the Border Patrol before they are due to retire. Currently, the Border Patrol has a 6 attrition rate, nearly twice the governmentwide federal Law Enforcement attrition rate of 3. 2 . Agents routinely transfer to other federal Law Enforcement agencies for a host of reasons. Compounding the problem is the pay disparity Border Patrol has with competing agencies. In 2014, Congress Passed the Border Patrol agent pay reform agent, which modernized the overtime system that agents had used for over 40 years and for the first time, gave agents a stable pay system. This legislation which we supported was originally revenueneutral. However, through the legislative process, the Obama Administration forced a savings cut of over 100 million per year in the final law and as a result, the average agent took a pay cut of approximately 5500. We only supported the legislation because the agency had begun limiting agents auo which began affecting monthly pay and retirement. Its our understanding it costs approximately 180,000 to recruit, hire and train one new agent. So that means with every agent we lose, taxpayers are losing 180,000. If agents were properly compensated and that compensation leads to retaining agents, it will lead the a net gain for the taxpayer. The Border Patrol cannot be successful if our attrition rate remains nearly double our sister agencies. We have to address this. The national Border Patrol council initiated discussions with the Trump Administration to eliminate this gap. I Hope Congress might be able to play a positive role in resolving this issue. On the recruitment side we face similar challenges. This committee through the Border Security for america act, supported the administrations proposal to hire 5,000 additional agents. In order to do this and account for attrition, the Border Patrol needs to hire and train approximately 2,729 new agents every year for the next five years. But to put it in perspective, in 2016, we hired, trained and employed only 485 new agents. At this hiring rate we are not able to keep up with attrition, much less add manpower. The single biggest hindrance to hiring is the polygraph. I know this is a controversial subject, but as you likely know, Border Patrol is failing approximately two out of every three applicants which is double the rate most Law Enforcement agencies see. There is clearly a problem with how we administer the polygraph. In response, last year this committee passed the antiborder corruption reauthorization act which gave the cbp the ability to waive the polygraph for certain Law Enforcement officers and military service members. We believe this is a positive step forward, but its not the only solution. The bottom line is we need to start administering the polygraph correctly and stop treating applicants like criminal suspects. Despite the support the Border Patrol has received from the current administration, our ranks are still plagued with low morale. Cbp has begun to seriously look at employee resiliency, including morale, but until we get everyone on board with the concept that employee morale is part and parcel of effective security, we will continue to lose more than we hire. Many agencies that do well with recruitment are able to provide benefits and perks which makes it a desirable place to work. Now that Law Enforcement agencies have to compete nationwide for a shrinking pool of applicants, Border Patrol las to make itself more competitive and desirable for current agents and prospective employees. We have to get a lanl handle on because the results of low morale are often not detected until years later, often when its too late to fix the situation. I thank the committee for its time this morning. Thank you. The chair now recognizes miss pepperdine for five minutes. Chairwoman, Ranking Member and members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify today. I began my career with the u. S. Border patrol in 1996. During the first half of my career i was in san diego sector and transferred to the tucson sector. I work side by side with the men and women driven to address the challenge our nation faces along the border. I would like to address three things that highlight how we can more effectively utilize our limited man power. Currently, 653 miles of 2,000 miles of southern border is fenced at a cost of nearly 7 billion since fiscal year 2007. This consists of 353 miles of primary fencing, 300 miles of vehicle fencing, 36 miles of secondary fencing behind the primary fencing, 14 miles of tertiary fencing behind the secondary fence. Fencing allows agents to maximize available man power. It is not, however, a single solution to illegal immigration and drug trafficking. Illegal immigrants and drug traffickers routinely go over, under and through existing fencing. Fencing without the man power to arrest those who penetrate it is not a prudent investment. What fencing does do is allow us to maximize our man power. Generally speaking, in areas where there is no primary fencing, it takes one agent to secure a linear mile of the border. However, in areas where there is fencing, when we can increase the range of an agent to three miles. With that said, i want to be clear about our position on fencing. Our First Priority is placing secondary fencing behind the primary fencing we already have. This can be done quickly and at a nominal cost. To put it in perspective, the 36 miles of secondary fencing already in place was constructed for 2 million per mile. Beyond secondary fencing we believe only about 300 additional miles ofprimeary miles ever fencing are needed. Effective communication is both a force multiplier and critical component of agent safety. In fiscal year 2017 congressional budget request stated that 18,000 units lack voice encryption. 25,000 units exceeded their useful life and 35,000 units cannot communicate with state and local Law Enforcement agencies. For most of my career, i have been issued a radio that often does not work in the field. The primary issue is a lack of signal coverage. If you are not within close proximity of a tower, you cannot communicate. When working in remote areas alone, without backup, an inoperable radio quickly becomes a safety issue. Many times in my career i had a visual with an agent but could not communicate and in some instances had to use my personal cell phone to communicate with other agents. That said, the council would like to thank the committee for including language in the Border Security for america act calling for future radio procurements to include lte capability. Most likely everyone in this room has a smartphone with lte capability. Right now, there are lte capable Public Safety radios that can operate on cbps Radio Communication system. If a signal is not available, you are able to switch to commercial lte provider. This capability is a quantum leap forward and will greatly improve both agent safety and effectiveness. The Border Patrol is extremely topheavy organization with far too many lawyers yers of manage. Congress has appropriated funds to double the size of the Border Patrol. Unfortunately we have not doubled the number of agents in the field. To put it in perspective, the average large size Police Department has one supervisor for every ten officers. The Border Patrol has one supervisor for every four agents. Why do we have twice as many supervisors as other large Law Enforcement agencies . Your guess is as good as mine. The reason, in my opinion, that this imbalance has been able to persist is that in headquarters, there are only about 300 agents. The real management bloat has been at the sector and station level. In some sectors we have more agents assigned than we do at headquarters. The council has long advocated that congress should force the agency to rightsize its structure to something in line with other Law Enforcement agencies. Allow me to offer another efficiency Border Patrol should definitely pursue, processing. Anyone arrested by Border Patrol is brought back to the station and processed before being turned over to i. C. E. Or voluntarily returned to their country. This includes taking biometrics, running a criminal background check for outstanding warrants and filling out the appropriate paperwork. You could have 15 to 20 of the agents bogged down processing and not active in the field. In comparison, many Police Departments have civilian employees who make considerably less than officers handle the bulk of the processing. Thank you for your time this morning. I look forward to answering any questions that you may have. Thank you, miss pepperdine. The chair recognizes mr. Reardon for nichbts. Chairwoman, Ranking Member, thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of over 25,000 front line customs and Border Protection officers, agriculture specialists and trade enforcement specialists at cbp who are stationed at 328 u. S. Air, sea and land ports of entry and at preclearance operations overseas. First, i would like to say that nteu supports the nomination of kevin mcilanin to be the next cbp commissioner. That said, there is no greater roadblock to Border Security, stopping Illicit Trafficking in people, drugs, illegal weapons and money and to ensuring legitimate trade and travel efficiency than the lack of sufficient staffing at our ports. The current cbp officer shortage is indeed staggering. There is a vacancy rate of nearly 1200 funded cbp officers at the ports and according to cbp, an additional 2500 cbp officers needed to be funded and hired in order to meet 2018 staffing needs. As of today, there is a total cbp officer Staffing Shortage of 3700. The Economic Cost of this shortage is also staggering. For every 33 additional cbp officers hired, the u. S. Can potentially gain over 1,000 private sector jobs. If congress fully supports, over 1200 Public Sector jobs could be created. It creates a significant hardship for front line employees. Both involuntary overtime and involuntary work assignments far from home disrupt cbp officers family life and destroys morale. An example of the negative impact of Staffing Shortages can be found at nogales, where cbp instituted involuntary temporary duty assignments or tdys. Starting january 7, a new round of 175 cbp officers are being sent from other ports to nogales which is critically understaffed. However, these tdys then create short staffing situations at other ports of entry. Such as the Orlando International airport, where airport officials have taken to congress their concerns with losing ten cbp officer positions to tdys. Many of you have toured the san ysidro port of entry. The screens show a typical day there. As you can see, there are 26 primary vehicle lanes with up to two booths at each lane, a total of 50 booths. Approximately 60,000 vehicles and 25,000 pedestrians apply for entry each day. Over 139,000 on a daily basis, travelers on a daily basis. In the photo insert, you can see the pedestrian crossers. Today, this port has over 200 cbp officer vacancies. By the summer of 2019, this port will expand to 32 lanes with 62 booths. Imagine working up to 16 hours a day, days on end, with no relief in sight. But neither the president s january 2017 executive order, nor the fy 2018 omnibus include any new funding even to meet todays onboard staffing needs at the ports of entry. The cbp employees i represent are frustrated that congress does not seemingly recognize that securing the ports of entry is just as vital to Border Security as is securing the borders between the ports of entry and that the ports are an economic driver of the u. S. Economy. However, mteu does have concerns with cbps decision to award a multimillion dollar contract to augment cbps hiring process. While we support increased hiring efforts, nteu believes this money could be better spent by utilizing available pay flexibilities on actual officers to incentivize new and existing cbp officers to seek vacant positions at hardtofill ports of entry. It is imperative that Congress Fund cbp officer new hires to alleviate the ongoing cbp Staffing Shortages at the ports of entry. Thank you and i am happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Now i recognize myself for five minutes for questions. First, i just want to say thanks to all of you and to those that you represent for what you do every day to keep us safe. Having been a veteran, often we are thanked for our service for wearing the military uniform. People forget there are men and women out there keeping our country safe in the capacity you all represent and what you are doing, to also keep us safe. Putting your lives on the line literally for potential death or injury in the line of duty. I want to open up with the issue of assault. Im very deeply concerned about the rise of the assaults on our agents and as you mentioned, mr. Judd, they are often out there by themselves with manpower shortages in remote areas with long distances for others to respond to help them, and they get hit with a rock, they get ambushed and they are out there on their own. Thanks for your insights as to what is driving those assaults but what can we do right now, we have men and women right now out there risking their lives on shift right now. What can we be doing and what is it the American People need to hear about whats happening with our agents and these assaults and what can we do in order to better protect them and make sure that those who assault our agents are held accountable for their violence . Your last comment is exactly what needs to be done. We have to hold those that assault our agents accountable. Unfortunately, very few of those who assault our agents are prosecuted for assault on a federal Law Enforcement officer. When we do that, we send a clear message that our laws arent going to be enforced and it incentivizes individuals to try to assault our agents in an effort to get away. Why do you think that is . I think that its the sheer numbers. If you look at how many u. S. Attorneys we have, we just dont have the resources that are necessary to prosecute the number of assaults on agents. I want to make one thing very clear. Just like people in the military, and we appreciate your military service, our agents understand what they are getting into when they put the uniform on. They understand they are going to do a dangerous job. As we have seen Border Crossers drop, our agents understand its going to be a little more violent out there because they will try to get away a little bit more. This is one thing we are willing to take on in order to secure the border. Do you think it is a band width issue or a will issue in the prosecutions . We dont have oversight of judiciary but we certainly can work with our colleagues in order to raise this issue and with the administration. Blooi believe its a band wi. I think the u. S. Attorneys want to see justice brought to those who assault our agents. They just dont have the resources to do it. Thank you. Is it safe to say, i heard you all talk about the morale issues across the board with your agencies and cbp. But do you agree that since the new administration has been in office, that morale has improved at the higher level of understanding that theres now a will and a desire to give you the tools you need to do your job, that you have been unshackled from restrictions in the past . I think again about my military experience. Sometimes you have a new commander at the highest level that changes the environment and the culture and that in and of itself boosts morale but it still takes awhile to trickle down through midlevel bureaucratic issues or equipment or everything you need to do the job. Has there been a shift and do you see that every day out there on the job . Last year, morale was probably about as low as i could get. So with the new administration showing the support they are showing, its helped but it can only do so much. Morale is hit or miss. Theres some places that have good days and bad days. I think part of the issue part of the improvement has been we have an administration that clearly supports what we do and thats been a great improvement. But theres still issues within the agency that will take awhile for us to get the agency is starting to pay more attention to morale but we are still seeing issues in the field where there are managers who feel its just not their job to be worried about that. Miss pepperdine . I notice in our sector morale is definitely at an all time low. I dont believe it has anything to do with the administration. I believe its been more of the pay reform that was spoken about earlier. Many agents, even though we had to settle for a more stable pay system which was overall better for all of us, a lot of people are upset they lost pay and are doing the same dangerous job for less money. Thank you. Anything to add to that . I think the morale for the folks in the office of Field Operations, cbp officers, remains dangerously low. I think it is really related to the staffing issues that i raised, where you have individuals who are working 16hour days, days on end. I just heard a story this morning, in fact, that in one pay period, we had a cbp officer work 73, hear my words, 73 hours of overtime. Where you have that happening and when it happens days on end, week after week, the impact on that individual in terms of that persons health, the impact on that family is and i might add, the impact on the potential for maintaining high security in the ports for our country, its a major problem. I would also offer this. In terms of the health, one of the things that really concerns me is over the last probably year and a half, maybe two years, i have heard and i get these calls late at night or whenever it happens, that there has been dra mmatic increase in the number of suicides among cbp officers. I have heard from the agency, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of Substance Abuse cases. A dramatic increase in the number of Domestic Violence cases. So what i would urge is that yes, we have to take care of staffing, yes, we have to take care of morale but part of the issue that i think has to be looked at is what are the root causes of those things, because they impact, they are part of morale, and until we start figuring out the answer to those questions and start taking care of these officers, we are going to have serious problems. Thank you. I am over my time. Before i hand it over, i just want to say, i so appreciate some of the things you have raised for the American People to hear. We will continue to be partners with you on this issue, these issues. Retention is i think a very important top issue. If you have to replace people, retaining those you have already trained and have all the experience is of the utmost importance. Additional duties are things that need to somehow be taken off the agents responsibilities and given to other support personnel. We will continue to partner with you on all these issues. I want to recognize the Ranking Member for five minutes. Thank you, congresswoman. I am going to yield five minutes to the congresswoman because she has to go to Judiciary Committee hearing but before i do that, i want to follow up on the assault issue real quickly with mr. Judd. You mentioned theres a 76 increase in assaults during the past year. Im wondering if you can put that in the context of how many assaults, how many more assaults were there this past year than before then so we can have a realtime idea the number of assaults we are talking about, and secondly, give us a sense as to whether or not the assailants, are they i couldnt figure out, are they actually being arrested and just not prosecuted, or are they getting away and not arrested . If you could kind of elaborate on both those issues. The total number of assaults in 2017 were 774. 76 of that, im no mathematician but 76 of that, i would say that it would be somewhere around 300 assaults took place in 2016. These individuals are being arrested t vast majority that assault our agents are being arrested. The vast majority just arent being prosecuted. When you think about 776 assaults on agents, 776 prosecutions is pretty overwhelming for the u. S. Attorneys office. So why dont we, after this hearing at some point during the next few weeks, feel free to come, lets meet in the office. That way we can go into that a little bit more. With that, i will go ahead and yield five minutes. Thank you so much to our chairwoman and also to our Ranking Member for yielding. Good morning and thank you so much for being here. I so appreciate the service that you are giving and the people that you represent who are working hard every day to keep our nation safe. Im from orlando, and i served as the police chief in orlando. I served 27 years at the department and five of those years, i was assigned to the Orlando International airport. I was assigned to oia during 9 11 and i would like to start by thanking you for highlighting the concerns regarding the Orlando International airport, particularly losing ten officers indefinitely for temporary duty assignments at the southwest land ports of entry. Almost three Million International passengers arrive through oia each year, and while we are thankful to have them visit our great city, we must make sure that we still provide an efficient and safe operation. That almost three million number represents an 89 increase since 2009. However, the cbp officer Staffing Levels have remained unchanged. I want you to think about that. Its remained unchanged at 89 increase. The level remained unchanged and now we are talking about sending ten very valuable and important officers to work somewhere else. Mr. Reardon, i know that that would not work for municipal Law Enforcement officers to be able to do that much with less and still maintain the same level of service that we expect again to be efficient and effective. Could you please tell me based on your experience, i feel funny even asking you this question, but is it reasonable that the same number of officers can process almost double the number of International Passengers and what would such a strain, wouldnt such a strain become worse by losing ten officers as opposed to reaching the Staffing Levels we so desperately need . Congresswoman, thank you very much for your comments and thank you for the question. I dont think its unreasonable to expect that losing ten officers in orlando, for example, is going to create a serious problem. I think its a problem that we see across the country. Where you are short, where our country and the office of Field Operations is short 3700 officers nationwide, it puts, as i had indicated previously, a strain on the system. It puts a strain on individual officers. To the point that, and i want im choosing my words carefully our officers are at a breaking point. It is not right for our country to do this to these human beings. So i think we have to get very serious. If we are going to be serious about security and i think we should be, if we are going to be serious about the economy in this country and i think we should be, we have got to get serious about getting those 3700 cbp officers hired because there is a direct relationship to the benefit of our security and a direct relationship to the benefit to our economy. To your knowledge, what staffing model does cbp use to determine port of entry staffing needs . Well, i know they have a work force staffing model in terms of its precise name or anything, im not familiar with that. I could probably get that to you. But i dont have that with me today. But it is their work force staffing model that suggests that we are 2500 short and just to be clear, we are also 1200 we have 1200 vacancies from the 2,000 officers that were funded in 2014. Thats where i get the 1200 plus the 2500 gives you the 3700. Thank you so much. I yield back. The chair now recognizes mr. Barletta for five minutes. Thank you. As you know, we have immigration laws for two basic reasons, to protect our National Security and protect american jobs. Unless and until we have complete control of our borders, it will remain impossible to fulfill this obligation and im pleased that we have a partner in the white house who is actively working towards this goal to ensure the safety and prosperity of the American People. I have dealt with this firsthand and the consequences of our federal governments failure to enforce our immigration laws. I was mayor of a city that had an illegal immigration problem. We are 2,000 miles away from our nearest southern border. I dont need to be briefed on this issue. I lived it every single day. Our population in hazelton grew by nearly 50 but the tax revenue stayed the same. It became impossible for cities like ours, small cities, to deal with the problems that come with the problem of illegal immigration such as drugs, gangs, identity theft, fraud and Everything Else that happens with it. I came down to washington in december of 2005 and asked for help. I met with the department of justice and they were great. They brought in all these experts to talk to me. At the end of the meeting, at the end of the day i got a coffee mug, a lapel pin and a pat on the back. Shortly after that, a family men with three little children, had some words with the head of the latin kings who was in the country illegally. A man who was arrested six times and let go in and sanctuary cities. He stuck a gun in between dereks eyes and killed him. I had to sit with his parents, sit with the family and explain why this man was still in the country. I had enough at that point. The federal government failed us. They werent going to do anything. I created the first law in america as a mayor to try and deal with that problem and was sued immediately by illegal aliens. So here we are, 2018, still talking about it. I have always been told that we must have compassion for the people who come here illegally but no one speaks up for the victims of these crimes. What do you see as the most effective means of deterring illegal immigration once and for all, and tell me how sanctuary cities make it more difficult to enforce our immigration laws. I was sued being a mayor who wanted to enforce our laws. Now we have over 380 mayors thumbing their nose at the federal government creating safe havens for people who are in the country illegally. I would like to hear your opinion. Well, you mentioned it, enforce the laws we have on the books. In our sector, we were the first to implement what was previously called operation streamline which meant anybody arrested crossing the border illegally in our sector went to jail for some period of time. If it was your first time, you might see a week, ten days, maybe. If you had crossed multiple times you would see more time in jail. Ultimately, i dont have the percentage but it led to a significant drop in apprehensions in our sector. That deterred at least in our area but then it just pushed it elsewhere. With the interior of the country, its gotten to a point where they feel once they pass the border they are homefree. There are no repercussions to being illegally present in the u. S. We do have laws on the books to do this. We do. Theres no reason not to enforce them but thats whats been going on. Miss pepperdine . I agree. I also believe assurance of apprehension at the border is a huge deterrent in illegal immigration. You asked about the safe havens. They definitely hurt us in the long run, not just us as agents doing our job but the American People. I would like to apologize to all the families across this country who are victims of illegal immigration. The focus is always on the illegal immigrant that comes here for a better life but there are families that have lost loved ones and here we are and i hope once and for all, we do the right thing and secure our borders and then deal with the problem on the interior. Thank you. The chair now recognizes mr. Kariya from california for five minutes. Thank you, madam chair. I just wanted to thank all the officers for the good job you do for all our citizens and also want to tell all the victims of crimes in this country those perpetrators with and without documents, we are coming after all of you. We arent going to make any distinction. Gentlemen, maam, i had a chance to tour the san ysidro border again a few months ago. We have some great officers with great attitudes, and a few of them were very proud to tell me about their big arrest, their big bust, drug bust of these big shipments. Most of the shipments, by the way, are coming through border ports of entry. Its not folks with backpacks coming across the mountains. Its folks driving across our border crossings either through vehicles, family vehicles or trucks, and i asked these folks how are you able to spot the shipments and it was interesting because without a doubt, without a beat they told me the experienced officer was the one that could look into the drivers eyes, that could look into passengers eyes and say theres something not right here, and then what they would do is bring over the police dogs, the drugsniffing dogs, and bingo, you had massive arrests because of the massive drug shipments that they could identify. Conclusion, you are absolutely right, we need more agents, more of those blue agents on the border to be able to identify the illicit drugs and other smuggling operations. You need more dogs there. They have proven to be better than any other technology that we have today. So given the limited resources that we have, where do we put our money . Do we put it on building another wall, another fence, or do we put it in more personnel and bring in more dogs and other technologies to identify these illicit shipments at border ports of entry . By the way, we also need them to make sure that commerce, good commerce, comes to and from the United States. Mexicos i think our biggest trading partner in the world. We want to create jobs, we want to make sure commerce continues to be healthy. Again, my question to all of you is if you had to prioritize investment, where would it go . Its got to be a combination of the two. Its got if you had to prioritize. You cant. Its got to be a holistic approach. A, b or c. You cant just say one is the key thats going to stop everything that we face. You have to look at everything you have three fences, i believe, in some areas . Well, i worked its a question, sir. I worked as an intel agent. I was able to analyze. I was also a k9 handler. Im not being argumentive with you. Im saying in san ysidro, do we have three fences there right now in some areas . We have double fencing which has been very effective in those areas. So when you say holistic, san ysidro is the most crossed border entry point in the world. How can we make that much more effective . Where would you invest the money . As far as ports of entry we have to yield to mr. Reardon. Thats where he works. Mr. Reardon . Congressman, thank you for the question and im more than happy to answer it. Without question, i would put the resources into our human resources. We are, as i said, short a large number of cbp officers at san ysidro. There are tdys that are required as a result which leaves other ports shortstaffed and vulnerable. Yet we are still short people in san ysidro and the impact on officers, on their health, their families, on the entire system, is dramatic. Yes, there is an economic impact. For every for every 33 officers, these are cbp numbers, for every 33 officers hired, we could expect to bring in 1,000 private sector jobs. So if we are going to take the economy seriously and we are worried about jobs, theres a primary candidate. Im running out of time. I just want to thank you for the straight answer. As a policy maker, thats all i want is good information so i can figure out how to make these decisions. Mr. Judd, absolutely right, its holistic approach, but you know, when you have a limited number of taxpayer dollars, you want to figure out where they go. I have talked to those border agents, overworked, but you know, they did a great job. Thank you very much. Thank you. Before we go to mr. Rutherford i have to step out to go to the white house for an important bipartisan meeting with the president. Just know that i will be advocating for the agents and everything you need in order to secure the border. Reasonable changes need to happen in order to make sure we keep our country and i apositively j i apologize for having to step out. Mr. Rutherford is coming into the chair. You are now recognized. Hold that thought for a second. Want your name tag . Thanks for all you do. Hold that thought here. Mr. Hurd, want to come back . Youre in charge. The chair recognizes mr. Rutherford for five minutes. Thank you, madam chair. Listen, let me say ive heard others first of all, thank you all for your service. In a very, very tough job. I know we have had other witnesses here speak to us about apprehension, securing the border and what that would look like, and really, the conversation was about you need an impediment to slow them down, whether thats a wall or electronic to detect, and you need to detect whoever is coming through, then finally, i think most critically, as mr. Reardon pointed out, then you have to have the human assets, boots on the ground, to actually apprehend those folks once they breach your impediment. Now, what the impediment requires is a wall, some electronics, whatever that might be. I know in the rio grande, good lord, they are using these static balloons, world war ii stuff. Its horrible. Yet i think its pronounced fort wachuka, they have drones and other devices that are incredibly effective. They have the big pipe, as they call it, so their communications is working great in those areas. But then when you look at these three areas, when you look at the impediment, detection and apprehension, and we talk about the physical barriers and the needs for those physical barriers and the lack of them in the rio grande valley, which is where we did a codel to the southern border. Looked like they got to fort wachuka and ran out of money. We were going from san diego east. The rio grande, they are in deep, deep need of help with the physical border. On the detection piece, when you talk about the communications, then i hear miss pepperdine talking about the lack of communications, you can actually see someone but you cant communicate with them on your radio that doesnt work, so they actually use a cell phone. Their cell phone works better than their Radio Communications. Then you get to the apprehension piece and you talk about the manpower and mr. Reardon is very well pointed out this 3700 cbp officers short, 1200 in these ports. I know, i was a sheriff for 12 years in florida, worked closely with my colleague miss demings and i can tell you, i understand the drain that that puts on your personnel and the impact it has on their efficiency. So you know, when all of that fails, in the interior in jacksonville, for example, i had to start a 287g program in my community because we had a subculture that had grown in the illegal community and not only were they violent toward citizens, as mr. Barletta pointed out, they were also violent toward each other. Incredible amounts of rape and Domestic Abuse thats going unreported because they dont want to be deported. So we started a 287g program to identify these individuals when they were in our jail so that we could deport them. I just want to make a commitment to you, and i will ask mr. Reardon because i believe the place you have to start is with the manpower. What can we do to help you, you know, we passed a bill to not require the polygraph so we can cut down on the time to hire. What else can we do, raises, i would imagine, would help. When i see 25 to 40 of their income in a year is on overtime, thats not a good thing. Thats a bad thing. Yes, it increases their salary and takehome but it also leads to all of those issues as you pointed out before, suicide, Domestic Violence and other issues. Could you please answer that . My time has run out. Certainly, congressman. Thank you very much. I will try to go quickly through this. I think one is we have already talked about the length of time to onboard staff. I think the segmented hiring process that exists creates a lot of problems. And that is sort of a subset of the hiring delays. In the past, i know it took, in the neighborhood of 16 to 18 months to onboard somebody. No one i know can wait that period of time in order to take a job. They are going to go work for the sheriff, for local Police Department or wherever. Thats important. We talked about the polygraph. The fact we have a 63 to 66 failure rate in the polygraphs, unconscionable. Something is wrong. Something should be done immediately to fix that. I know we are working on that. I think also related to the polygraph, right now if an individual is identified with a no opinion result or an inconclusive result or no opinion countermeasures finding, they have to wait an extended period of time before they can retest. They should be able to retest immediately. I think that in terms of where our officers go to train, federal Law Enforcement training center, i think its important that we expand the number of classes. I think its important that we look at the potential for having six days of training rather than five, as long as, of course, people are paid for six days. Thats an important piece. But i also think one other thing that can be done is right now, theres something known as post training. So the person goes to the center, go through all their training, then go back to their port and are in a post training period for ten months. What im hearing from my officers is thats too long. Certainly they need to go through the training, certainly they need to be prepared to work on the line, work primary, work secondary, but ten months is too long. Those are the things i would offer. Thank you, mr. Reardon. Now the distinguished gentle woman from california is recognized for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank all the witnesses for being here today. I think this is an important topic. My concern is about the timing. Were at a time where it appears that theres an effort being made to portray immigrants as violent criminals, to justify these antiimmigration actions and policies. Its also a time where we are debating dreamers and the future of u. S. Immigration policy. I think its key to hear from officers from the front lines and to learn about the dangers that we face daily so congress can work to address real Border Security threats but i think its also important to be clear about what groups we are talking about here today. The way i see this is we are really talking about the drug cartels, criminal aliens, hardened criminals who are responsible for violence at the border. Mr. Judd, would you agree with that . I would agree that we need to address the violent criminals at the border. Mr. Judd, do you support a legislative solution that puts dreamers on the pathway to citizenship . I support anything that, when we are going to talk about comprehensive immigration reform, when we talked about it in 2013, we talked about Border Security, you have to secure the border first before we look at Something Like that. Otherwise we are right back in the same situation. If we secure the border, absolutely. When you look at dreamers, the difference between dreamers as opposed to other people is there was no intent to break the law. They never had intent to break the law. They didnt come here knowingly to break the law. So they are in a little bit different situation. But the problem is that parents are able to use them to circumvent mr. Judd, im just asking you about the dreamers. My question is do you support a pathway for the dreamers . I support Border Security and then look at anything beyond that. Okay. Well, there was a video of you in february 2017 where you specifically went on to support the dreamers and you said quote, through no fault of their own, they came to this country and as you know, why would we want to sme send someone who came here when they were 1yearold back, its common sense to find a pathway for them to find a way to stay in this country, quote, when we are talking about the dreamers. Did you not say that . Yes, i did. Im not trying to be argumentative. It was a very simple question and it didnt seem like you wanted to reconfirm what you had previously said in the past. I want to talk a little bit about body cameras. Anybody on this panel, maybe you want to comment on this. I think unfortunately, our agents and officers are confronted with an uptick in violence at the border again stemming, i think, from the cartels, from violence, drug cartels, rather, and criminal aliens attempting to illegally enter. The use of bodyworn cameras is something thats been considered a best practice in Law Enforcement agencies. As we have seen, it increases accountability and transparency. In l. A. Where i represent the lapd has placed body cameras on thousands of officers. Just quickly, do you have an opinion, yes or no, down the panel, whether you think body cameras would be effective to try to put into place. I think they can be effective. The problem is we havent yet seen a camera that can handle the environment that we work in. Okay. Anybody else . We have looked at all cameras and if theres a camera that can handle our environment, absolutely. Miss pepperdine . Definitely. We dont work like most Law Enforcement. Its not the same kind of beat. Our terrain is rugged and because of that, its hard to find a camera we can utilize but i love the idea of having a camera. Mr. Reardon . Thank you, congresswoman. Currently there are some pilots going on for our folks and we are supportive of those pilots. Great. Thank you. Mr. Reardon, back in october, our committee homeland held a field hearing at the port of los angeles to talk about security at the port. You submitted a statement for the record asserting that Staffing Shortages at the seaports nationwide are especially acute. I want to thank you for doing that and thank you for your testimony here today. I was drawn by when i saw reports that the president s proposal included more money for Border Patrol agents, but really didnt include any more money for customs officers, which i believe the greatest threat from what i have learned in my committee is going to come through seaports and airports. I want to mraapplaud the work y are doing not just at the port of los angeles where i represent, the largest, busiest port by container volume, but for what your employees do to secure our ports, and im with you in believing that if we are going to put more money, they need to be to help the human assets that we have to increase morale and making sure theyre not working 73 hours of overtime which, as you state, is absolutely just unacceptable. Thank you. I yield back. Its now my pleasure to recognize the gentleman who has served his country his entire adult life. The gentleman from nebraska. You are now recognized for five minutes. Thank you very much. I want to thank all of you for helping defend our country. Mr. Judd, i think most americans agree, at least in my district, that we want to solve the problem and find a longterm solution for daca. I hear from folks in our district if you just solve the longterm issue for the daca youth here we have to do it again in three years, five years and seven years if we dont find a solution at the border and fix the border as well as our visas. I think what you are saying represents the majority of people of what im hearing in my district. One of the things that concerns me, i have only been part of this committee for about a month and had a recent hearing. I heard from the Homeland Security folks that we have captured sunni extremists trying to come through the southern border. So often when we talk about Border Security, we focus on immigration. It becomes controversial. I think we forget the fact that there are people in the middle east that know we have a porous border and are trying to come over the border. Granted, maybe out of 1,000 we are talking one or two. But one or two suicide bombers is unacceptable. I think if we put more emphasis on the al qaeda, isis threat, this will help unify the country better knowing we do have to do something more for our Border Security. I would love to have your thoughts on that, mr. Judd. Are we missing the boat on our messaging . We are. In fact, what needs to happen is cbp needs to release to the public the number of people that were catching from countries of special interest. Like right now, we are catching an awful lot of people that are claiming to be from bangladesh, but our agents believe they are from afghanistan. When they are interviewed, because we dont have those Language Skills so we have to use interpreters, they are telling us they are not from bangladesh. So what needs to happen is cbp needs to let the American Public know that this is what we are dealing with. We are not just dealing with people from the country of mexico. We are dealing with people from all over the world, including from special interest countries. Absolutely. I brought this up to the Homeland Security representatives. I i did not get a good answer why we are not telling the American People that were capturing al qaeda and isis operatives come over our border. And i think the impression im getting is they dont want to talk about how we caught them. Fair enough. We dont have to do that, but the American People deserve to know that we have had suicide bombers with that intent trying to come here, and i think that that would provide a more unifying conversation of what weve got to do at the border and why. Its not just about immigration, its about security. Now, ive only been part of this committee, again, for just a month, and ive heard a couple times now from our friends on the other side of the aisle comparing the Canadian Border with our border in the south. Could you give me your views of how these two borders compare threatwise, volume of threatwise, the volume of violence committed against our border people . Thank you. Theres no comparison of the number of illegal crossings that are taking place, whether it be on the southwest border, the northern border. The numbers are astronomical on the southwest border, and again, from countries that you would never think are coming here, but all indications show that if terrorists are going to come across the border, theyre going to use the path of least resistance, which is going to be the northern border, because we have very few agents on the northern border, and its very easy to come across. Now, were seeing on the southwest border. The problem is, is we just dont know whats crossing on the northern border because were not very effective up there, simply due to our numbers. So we need to put emphasis in both areas. We do. Okay. Now, for the remaining panelists, i wanted to ask you, as you look at the wall that were talking about putting, what is opt youve referred to it a little bit what is optimal, a 2,000mile wall or focusing in key areas . And what should the wall be like . Should you be able to look through . What would be the optimal configuration from your perspective . Well, its become pretty clear we dont need a wall from coast to the gulf. We just dont. There are some areas its just not feasible to build it. Theres a lake in my area. Were not building a wall there. And there are other spots along the river where it will be extremely difficult to build and wouldnt be feasible. So in those areas where were not building a wall, thats where the technology piece comes in, cameras, additional sensor technology, and of course, more agents. And as far as what the wall would look like, weve seen some prototypes there, but ideally, it doesnt necessarily need to be seethrough, but we need to be able to see whats happening on the other side, so maybe seethrough, but maybe use cameras. The idea is we need to see whats on the other side preparing to get past the wall so we can prepare ourselves. So if i hear you right, there are selective areas that we need to put physical security barriers in, but not the 2,000mile wall, but you think there are key areas we need to focus on . Absolutely. Okay. Mrs. Pepperdine . The wall is definitely necessary. It doesnt need to be a physical wall in some areas. You dont need a pedestrian wall. Some areas we could utilize vehicle barriers. Thats what we use in the tucson sector, at least in casagrande station. Were utilizing vehicle barriers, and thats been very effective, but we definitely in some areas do need a pedestrian wall. Thank you very much. I just want to close by thanking mr. Reardon for your comments on the economic impacts. I think you have a very valid point. And with that, chairman, i yield back. Im going to recognize myself for five minutes. First off, i appreciate the panel being here today and talking about something that a lot of people talk about but dont have any experience the way that yall do, and i would like to thank mr. Judd and mr. Anfinsen specifically for all the work youve done to educate me on this important issue. Mr. Anfinsen has taken me through cariso crane, on lakes, and ive gotten real world experience, and that experience has allowed me to come educate my colleagues that your push talk radio doesnt work in some places, your cell phone coverage doesnt work in some places, and that yalls experience is important. And so, we talked about a lot of topics today. I think everybody agrees we dont have the manpower, and we have to have the strategies in place to hit the Manpower Needs that we should be achieving. I think theres actually not much disagreement on that. My question is, and this is for all four of yall, and if you could answer short, in a short response, because i have a couple more, are the people is our manpower in the right places . We have limited manpower, but is the manpower in the right places . Mr. Judd, why dont you start us off . At times. You cant answer that question without going in depth, but id be happy to sit down with you and discuss that. John . We need more in certain areas like big ben sector, for example. I know theyre understaffed. We also have a lot of agents who spend time indoors processing or doing administrative work when they could be out in the field. Put them on the border, huh . Thats right. Mrs. Pepperdine. I definitely agree with them. We definitely have a lot of details, a lot of agents detailed out, so were not actually on the border. We definitely need to break some of those details down and bring them back. Mr. Reardon . Congressman, thank you. In addition to not having enough cbpos, we also have, in my view, too many managers. In 2003, there was a ratio of this is the 1 to 4 versus the 1 to 12 . 1 to 12 at that point in the points. Now it is 1 to 4. 6. So thats a problem. And our cbpos, too many of them are spending time doing administrative work when they could be on the front lines, and i think thats something that needs to be addressed. Maybe this next question for mr. Reardon and mr. Judd, but jon and ms. Pepperdine, i welcome your feedback. Have yall, have the unions given a suggestion or idea of a plan on an incentive, on a structure for how do you incent the right behavior, how do you make sure you have officers that are willing to go to some of these remote places, like in some places in big ben, in order to address that morale question when youre in hardship . So, having served in a few hardship places during my career with the cia, i understand the model that is created in order to incent that behavior, and it seems that within yalls ranks, we dont have that. So, mr. Judd, do you want to lead off . We have, and i think cbp is looking at addressing that issue right now. Right now we have a very good leader at the top. I think if you look at the structure within cbp and the Border Patrol, our top leader, our second and our third are absolutely fantastic, and theyre looking at these issues, and i think theyre going to address them. The committee would welcome the suggestions and the points that you do have just so that we can get familiar with that. Will do. Mr. Reardon, do you have anything else to add . I do. Thank you. You know, there are recruitment, relocation, and Retention Bonuses that are available now. I mean, the opportunity to provide those exists already. Whether theres funding or not is certainly a different matter. So, i think better utilizing those sorts of bonuses i think would be helpful, but i will also tell you that, you know, where we talk about morale, i think we need to deal, as i had indicated before, with appropriations for additional cbpos, but theres one other thing that when were looking at trying to make a career at cbp more attractive, i think it is difficult to try to go out and recruit folks, and at the same time, theyre hearing in the media the potential for federal employees, all federal employees, getting another pay freeze. That is a nonstarter. Good, loud and clear. This committee has spoken on this topic. Weve included incentives in several sections of the Border Security bill that was passed out of here. And as a former Government Employee i guess im still a Government Employee you know, i recognize the needs and the difficulties that yall go through. And so, i appreciate yall coming up here to continue to educate, and i appreciate yalls willingness to take many of our colleagues and our staff and show them the realworld examples of what yall have to go through every single day. And were going to have to continue to do that. Were going to have to continue to educate our colleagues so we can start making better decisions up here to support the important efforts that you do. Now its a pleasure to recognize my colleague from the great state of texas, mr. Vela. Youre now recognized. Thank you. Ive got a couple more questions before we break here. And in about five minutes, our leadership from both parties is going to the white house to talk about many of the issues weve discussed here today. Mr. Reardon, i think you mentioned that probably the single most important factor that you think is important to address are the 1,200 agents that were short of, and i understand that the other formula youre talking about, could be another 2,500, right . And mr. Judd, im sure that with respect to the shortage of 1,900 officers that were short of on the Border Patrol side, you know, with currently mandated funding, that you see that as critical as well. So, you know, knowing that weve got our folks on the way over there, whats the message . I mean, what can we do, given the current dialogue, to help get the 1,200 officers we need on the cbpo side and the 1,900 officers on the Border Patrol side, you know, in the next year . Weve got to look at what needs to be done to retain our employees, and theres a lot of things that need to be done. We need to change the culture within the Border Patrol. We need to look at the pay issues within the Border Patrol, and we need to make those pay issues equal across the boards. I mean, if you look at cbpo officers and you look at Border Patrol, if you look at their overtime, they get double pay for every hour that they work. A Border Patrol agent gets straight pay for every hour they work. A cbpo officer for sunday pay gets 50 , Border Patrol agent against 20 . Night differential, cbp officers can go up to 25 , bras a Border Patrol agent caps out at 10 . So we dont even have pay parody within our agencies within cbp, so you have to look at those issues. But what i would really like to see is i would like to see us secure our border so that we can deal with issues like d. R. E. A. M. Ers, like immigration reform, like those issues so that we can take care of those issues that allows us to move together, together, instead of in a partisan fashion, which has been so disruptive to this country to this point. Right, but arent you also saying that in order to do that, we need to take care of this issue of 1,900 officers that were short of, right . We do. We do. We have to retain our employees and hire those 1,900 agents. Mr. Reardon . Yes, thank you, congressman. I think there are several things. I think number one, providing appropriations for additional staffing i think is important. I think fixing the polygraph problem is something that is important. I think fixing the hiring process so that it doesnt take 16 to 18 months or even 9 months to onboard somebody. I heard i was talking to one of our officers not that long ago, and he told me, you know, it only took me about eight months to be onboarded. And i have to tell you, i found myself at that moment thinking, wow, thats really great and then when you think about it, thats crazy. It should not take that long. So, i think something has to be done to fix that as well. I also, as i just said prior, i think we have to make sure that we are better utilizing the recruitment, relocation and Retention Bonuses that are available. And i will tell you that i think oftentimes in agencies, many of the personnel folks dont fully understand how to utilize those. So i think its important that opm, or wherever they would get that training from and that understanding of how to better utilize the three rs, as theyre known, i think is also important. One last question for you, mr. Reardon. The president s budget proposed shifting the funding of cbp officers to more feebased, versus direct funding and investments for improvement at ports of entry. Whats your thoughts on that . Budget proposal. You know, i think it is important to make the appropriations available to fully fund the number of cbp officers that we need. I think to get into a situation where, you know, were basing everything on fees, or a majority on fees, is a difficult place to be. Now, thats not to say that fees arent important, because in fact, fees are important, and i would also suggest that any of the fees that are available right now, that they not be directed in other areas, that they be focused on bringing in more staffing. But you know, for me, i think its important to the extent that we can to fully fund all of our cbp officers. And the additional ones that we need. Well, thank all of you again for your time today. Id like to thank the witnesses for all yalls valuable testimony and thank the members for all of your questions. Many members of the committee will have additional questions that we will ask you to respond to in writing, if those exist. And pursuant to Committee Rule 7e, the hearing record will be held open for ten days. And without objection, the committee stands adjourned. Youre looking at a live shot where journalist Michael Wolff is getting ready to talk about his new book, fire and fury. Theres a line of people still waiting to get in. This is hosted by politics and pros, but the location for the event is at the historic synagogue in washington, d. C. Michael wolffs book examines the inner workings of the Trump Administration, and hell be joined by Jonathan Capehart of the washington post. While we wait for this event to get under way, heres a piece from this mornings washington journal. Bonnie Watson Coleman is, will you support the continuation resolution to avoid a shutdown tomorrow night . I dont have any intentions of supporting it unless we have some changes, unless we have a daca deal. Go through those specific changes that you want to see. Well, first of all, the c. H. I. P. Funding is temporary. Its for six years, and we talk about saving money. If we make it permanent, we save even more money. We dont have the Community Health centers covered in this. We are pushing out extra burdens on the hospitals that provide most care to those who are uninsured and are most in peril of being shut down, should their resources be diminished, and that affects our urban centers as well as our rural hospitals. So, those things are very important. But most important is we cant keep kicking the can down the road for two weeks. Its not healthy. We do home budgets longer than were doing a budget to keep the government up and running, and we need to settle this issue with daca. Now, we may not be able to come to a full comprehensive immigration plan in this short period of time, but we can at least deal with the hundreds of thousands of young people who know no other country as their home, and protect them so that they can continue to work, continue to go to school, and continue to live here without living in fear. What would a Government Shutdown accomplish . It would accomplish nothing. It would accomplish the hurt and the pain of those who depend upon our services, those who work for us, and it just shows that the government is not functional right now. So, republicans that have enough votes in both houses to do what it needs to do need to make sure that we are taking care of those issues and that were looking to our responsibility as governing in a little more longterm and sustainable way. Republicans would at least need some democratic votes in the senate if this continuing resolution gets that far. Do you think there are Democratic Senators who will be on board with this continuing resolution . As it is now . As it stands now . I dont know, as it stands now. I mean, i understand that even republican senator Lindsey Graham said hes voting no for it. So you know, if the majority that is in charge and the president who represents the majority is in charge and they put forth a spending plan, and they cant each get their own to support it, what does that say . So you think republicans would get the blame if the government does shut down . Well, i think republicans will be responsible for the shutdown, given the fact that theyre the majority in both houses and the presidency. Whats the path forward from here on the immigration debate . I hope its to sit down and have a discussion and even have that discussion in the presence of the president than not have him fall apart shortly thereafter. You know, we think we have a deal on things, and then we move out one day and were still okay, and the next day something happens. I think that the president has got to act like an adult. Those who are advising him have got to talk about the greatness and the importance of this above and beyond who he is and what his brand is supposed to be and to talk about this country and move forward. I think that there will be democrats and republicans who are willing to have those conversations, who want to have those conversations in the sanity. Will democrats be in a worse position to negotiate as we get closer to that march deadline for the end of the daca program . If they do what . If they vote on this spending bill without having a daca . I think that if we go four more weeks down the road. Well i think this is an important opportunity for democrats to stand up for what they believe in, and i think that to give in on this issue without having a deal on daca does weaken the position to have the moral authority on this issue. Congresswoman bonnie Watson Coleman, democrat from new jersey, with us until the top of the hour. You can join us by calling in, democrats 2027488000, republicans 2027488001 and independents 2027488002. Debbie in philadelphia, independent. Go ahead. Caller good morning, mrs. Ms. Coleman. The gentleman that was on earlier talked about how the americans love president trump, all that. This was an electoral vote, not a popular vote. Also, the democrats have a problem because their messaging is not coming across correctly. You correctly stated what the fight is, the total fight, c. H. I. P. , the health care, medicare, medicaid, Social Security being in threat, minimum wage, you know, household issues, not just daca. And the people think that youre just fighting for daca. The democrats need to step it up with your message. Youre not locked in yet. Im telling you. All right. Well, thanks for those comments, and certainly, thank you for having concern about those sort of broad Kitchen Table issues. It is not just one issue. Daca is very important because there is a threat to over 200,000 young people who know no other country but this country as their homeland. But having health care, having access to Community Health centers, having access to medicare and medicaid, wondering whats going to happen to those as a result of that terrible tax scam that was perpetrated upon americans. Were going to have to pay for the deficit that it creates, and theyre going to be looking at those programs that sustain those that are in greatest need and those that are middle class and working class families. So, i agree with you that we need to work on our messaging. I mean, democrats, certainly, have been talk being a better deal, a better deal with wages, better deal with health care, better deal with infrastructure, but we need to be able to communicate in a way that personally impacts you, that compels you to understand that what were trying do is to ensure that this country is representative of all people and that were not leaving anyone behind and that were not focused on only the 1 and making them wealther, but were concerned about the elderly, the ill, the children, the workingclass families, and the very poor families, as well as ensuring that those who have the greatest opportunity to succeed economically are given that opportunity as well. Speaking of the children, i wonder if youd agree with the president s latest tweet just a few minutes ago c. H. I. P. Should be part of a longterm solution, not a 30day or shortterm extension. Yeah, i certainly do agree with him on that. Now, he should be working with those in his party to make that happen. But you know, the president says a lot of stuff. [ applause ] so, good evening, and welcome to our biggest event so far in 2018. Im bradley graham, the coowner of politics and prose along with my wife, alyssa, and on behalf of everybody at p p and everyone here at sixth i, thank you so much for coming. January historically is a rather slow month in the book