Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2011

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to introduce a bill on an issue that is very important to me and many of my colleagues here in the Senate. I have long been a passionate supporter of some of the most vulnerable members of our society, especially the thousands of our Nation's foster youth. Currently, there are over 420,000 children living in foster care. Each one of these foster youth deserves a safe, loving and permanent home. But, each year, these children face a declining number of foster homes, and must also deal with the widespread negative misperceptions attached to the foster care system. Many of them have to cope with parents that struggle with substance abuse problems. Parental substance abuse is one of the leading, if not the primary, reasons forcing children into the foster care system.

According to the Congressional Research Service, in a nationally representative study, caseworkers investigating allegations of abuse or neglect noted active drug abuse by the 37 percent of the primary caregivers from whom children were removed to out-of-home care. The same report also noted active alcohol abuse among 29 percent of the primary caregivers from whom children were removed. The percentage of children who remain in care due to issues related to substance abuse is believed to be even larger because, among other reasons, accessing and successfully completing treatment services is often time consuming and children may not be able to safely return to their homes until treatment is successfully completed. An additional troubling statistic comes from a 2005 report by the RAND Corporation, which revealed that more than 300,000 children entered the foster-care system due to methamphetamine abuse.

I would like to take a moment to share a story about one foster youth who is currently serving as an intern in my Washington, DC office thanks to the Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute. Her name is Taatianna and her story is a reminder of the challenges that many foster youth face.

When Taatianna turned three, she opened the front door of her home to a caseworker who removed her and her two siblings from their home. Taatianna was placed in the foster care system at very young age because of her parent's substance abuse. She has lived many years with shame and guilt, believing she was responsible for splitting apart her family. However, she now knows that drug and alcohol were the reasons she was neglected and forced into foster care. Fortunately, Taatianna and her siblings were able to live together and be raised by their biological grandmother, Ruby, in Relative Kinship Care. Ruby played the role of mom, dad, and grandma to these three children. While growing up, Taatianna and her siblings faced emotional and mental anxieties, trying hard not to succumb to the curse of substance abuse addiction that ran in their family. But more importantly, the kids longed to be with their mom and dad again, hoping they could get clean, hold a job, and be a family. Taatianna's mother struggled, and continues to struggle with, addiction.

Drugs and alcohol have torn this family apart, and have destroyed any sense of normalcy or permanency they so desperately yearned for. Taatianna witnessed first-hand the traumatic effects of substance abuse in both her parents and many other family members. Taatianna, and many other foster youth in this country, could be helped if parents were treated or had better access to treatment for their substance abuse problems.

Foster care shouldn't be a destination. It should be a temporary detour for children while their parents are treated and are ready to be parents.

So, today, on behalf of many youth in foster care, I introduce the Partners for Stable Families and Foster Youth Affected by Methamphetamine or Other Substance Abuse Act. This bill will reauthorize the Regional Partnership Grants that were created in 2006 as part of the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Act. The passage of this legislation was a tremendous step forward

in our efforts to help the youth in the foster care system. The funds from these grants address a variety of challenges that are barriers to optimal family outcomes. The mission of the Regional Partnership Grants is to improve the safety, permanency, and well-being of children who are in an out-of-home placement or are at-risk of such placement because of a parent or caretaker's abuse of methamphetamine or another substance.

In September 2007, following the authorization of the Regional Partnership Grants, the Department of Health and Human Services awarded multiyear grants to 53 regional partnerships representing 29 states and 6 tribes. The first round of grants supported the creation or expansion of family treatment drug courts, improvement of system-wide collaboration, expanded access to comprehensive family centered treatment, use of evidence-based practice approaches such as motivational enhancement therapy, parent advocates, and recovery management approaches to drug treatment monitoring. The groups receiving these grants were split almost evenly between the public and private sectors, and they represent a great example of how both can assist the many youth and families that are a part of the foster care system.

Allow me an opportunity to tell you about the grantees in my home state of Iowa.

One grantee, Upper Des Moines Opportunity Inc., is undertaking the Parent Partner Program in 9 counties in rural Northwest Iowa. This program primarily assists individuals addicted to meth, and is unique because parents are matched to Parent Partners who serve as mentors, assisting clients to navigate the child welfare and substance abuse systems. The goal of these Parent Partners is to support and mentor parents who have trouble keeping their families together and are at risk of incarceration or permanently losing custody of their children. This program is more personal than stand alone drug treatment programs because Parent Partners have been through the same situations. One outcome is that clients are developing a trusting relationship with professionals in the child welfare and substance abuse systems; thereby increasing their chances for success and becoming more engaged in substance abuse treatment and recovery. The Parent Partner understands the client's situation, allowing them to bond and build trust with the goal of regaining custody of their children more quickly. The Parent Partners serve as the critical link between the Department of Human Services, the parent, and other experts.

Another grantee, the Parents and Children Together, PACT, is a family drug court initiative implementing a community based approach to substance abuse treatment. The program supports the family to remain the primary permanency option for their children. PACT is a partnership of the courts, the state child welfare agency, the Iowa Department of Public Health, and five community pilot sites with the State Court taking the lead. Through this program, family treatment courts were implemented in each pilot site. The program is focused on increasing the safety, permanency and well-being of children by addressing the substance abuse treatment programming and service gaps through a community collaborative planning approach. The partnership has worked hard over the years to establish family drug courts in their pilot sites that support families as they navigate the foster care system and substance abuse treatment. With the knowledge they are gaining on what works and what doesn't, they have provided two family treatment court forums for other interested community court led teams. They presently serve 6 sites and have 6 other court led teams that are interested in learning more.

According to a forthcoming report from the Administration on Children, Youth, and Families, over 8,000 adults and 12,000 children have been served by the Regional Partnership Grants. Bryan Samuels, the Commissioner of the Administration, has said that children are discharged from foster care at a faster rate because of the grants and that families are more likely to be reunited within 12 months and are more likely to stay that way after 12 months.

The efforts to help at-risk youth must continue. We know that substance abuse issues will continue to push kids into foster care. In Iowa alone, from 2005-2009, the Iowa Department of Human Services classified 5,330 children victims of abuse due to the presence of an illegal drug in their body. Meth continues to be a huge concern. In fact, meth lab incidents in Iowa have dropped dramatically since their peak in 2004, but have risen in each of the past three years. The resurgence in meth lab incidents coincides with a rise in drug-related prison admissions, meth treatment admissions, and child abuse cases.

In my original version of the Regional Partnership Grants in 2006, I envisioned $40 million per year to be available for grants to improve the outcomes of those affected by meth or other substance abuse. Unfortunately this amount was reduced during conference committee negotiations. In the bill I am introducing today, I am again calling for the amount to be set at $40 million per year. This will allow new grantees to start programs while giving short two-year extensions to existing grantees. The goal is to encourage new collaborations throughout the country, while giving time to existing collaborations to institute best practices and educate other entities about what works and what does not.

The reauthorization of the Regional Partnership Grants will also include several measures aimed at improving the original legislation. The bill will allow more dollars to be available for activities and collaborative efforts by instituting a 5 percent administrative fee cap on the amount that can be retained by the Administration on Children, Youth, and Families for technical assistance or contract services. Finally, the bill will require more evaluation of regional partnerships, and require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to evaluate the new grantees and issue a report on the best practices implemented by their programs no later than December 1, 2012, with a follow-up report due in 2017. These reports will prove useful in efforts to improve our foster-care system.

The improvement of the lives of families and youth that are involved in the foster care system is one of the most important issue I have undertaken in the U.S. Senate. The Regional Partnership Grants have not only helped youth in search of permanent, loving families, but have brought back together families that were torn apart by substance abuse. As a founder and co-chair of the Senate Caucus on Foster Youth, I have been a witness to the many successes that have occurred thanks to our support of these children and young adults; however, I am also still painfully aware of the amount of work that remains. We can take another significant step forward in this area by passing the Partners for Stable Families and Foster Youth Affected by Methamphetamine or Other Substance Abuse Act and reauthorizing the Regional Partnership Grants.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4119) to reduce the trafficking of drugs and to prevent human smuggling across the Southwest Border by deterring the construction and use of border tunnels, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 4119, as amended, currently under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, H.R. 4119, the Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2012, strengthens current law and prohibits the construction, use, and financing of unauthorized tunnels across the U.S. border.

I thank the sponsors of this legislation, Mr. Reyes of Texas and Mr. Quayle of Arizona, for their work on this bipartisan, bicameral bill.

Similar legislation passed the Senate by unanimous consent in January.

This legislation establishes the penalty for conspiracy or attempt to use, construct, or finance a cross-border tunnel. It also identifies the construction, financing, or use of a cross-border tunnel as a predicate offense for a charge of money laundering and for an application for judicial authorization to intercept wire, oral, or electronic communications. H.R. 4119 also allows the criminal forfeiture of property that enters the United States through a cross- border tunnel.

Reports of drug-smuggling tunnels have increased, particularly in the past 10 years. Drug traffickers have ramped up their use of underground smuggling in light of increased border security, either real or perceived. Mexican drug-trafficking organizations have used tunnels as a smuggling method since at least 1990.

A majority of cross-border tunnels continue to be found in California and Arizona. These tunnels range in sophistication from a simple 16- inch pipe to well-engineered tunnels equipped with electricity, ventilation, and rails. Ownership of the tunnels is often attributed to the Mexican drug cartels.

To find cross-border tunnels, U.S. agents use devices that range from ground-penetrating radar to seismic sensors. Despite these efforts, drug smugglers continue to build the tunnels.

In November 2011, Federal law enforcement agents shut down two sophisticated tunnels that led from an area near Tijuana's airport to an industrial park in the U.S. About 49 tons of marijuana were seized.

Drug traffickers are also skilled at setting up front companies to rent space in busy warehouse districts in the United States. Mining engineers and architects are employed to construct the tunnel and bore directly into the foundation of the front company's rented warehouse.

The Drug Enforcement Administration describes marijuana as ``the top revenue generator for Mexican drug trafficking organizations--a cash crop that finances corruption and the carnage of violence year after year.'' The profits from marijuana trafficking finance the drug cartels' other drug enterprises, which include the construction and use of cross-border tunnels.

Border tunnels are an unfortunate testament to the ingenuity and determination of the Mexican drug cartels. It is time for Congress to enhance law enforcement's ability to fight transnational organized crime and the drug cartels' construction of cross-border tunnels. This bill reaffirms our determination to bring an end to cross-border tunnels.

When Congress enacted the border-tunnel statute in 2007, it omitted the changes contained in this bill. H.R. 4119 simply corrects this to ensure that investigators are equipped with the ability to locate and shut down these tunnels and hold these dangerous criminals accountable.

I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, and we are prepared to close.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I just wanted to say, we were hoping that the other author, the other cosponsor of this bill, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Quayle), would be here. Unfortunately, he was detained. His flight was delayed from Arizona to Washington, D.C.

But in his absence, I just want to thank him for his work on this bill and for all of his efforts to reduce the amount of cross-border drug smuggling and thereby protect the lives of individuals in Arizona and all Americans. He has done great work on this particular piece of legislation. We all appreciate those efforts.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I submit the following exchange of letters regarding H.R. 4119.

May 15, 2012.

Hon. Lamar Smith,

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, Rayburn House Office

Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Smith,

On March 21, 2012, the Committee on the Judiciary reported

H.R. 4119, the Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2012, as

amended, favorably to the House. The Committee on Ways and

Means received an additional referral on the bill as a result

of section 5(b) dealing with civil asset forfeiture, which

falls within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and

Means. As a result of your Committee's agreement to remove

section 5(b) of the bill, I agree to discharge the Committee

on Ways and Means from further consideration of the bill so

that a suspension version, incorporating the amendments to

which we have agreed, may proceed expeditiously to the House

Floor.

The Committee on Ways and Means takes this action with our

mutual understanding that, by foregoing consideration of H.R.

4119 at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over the

subject matter contained in section 5(b) in this or similar

legislation, and that our Committee will be appropriately

consulted and involved if that provision moves forward in any

legislation so that we may address any issues that arise and

fall within our Rule X jurisdiction. Our Committee also

reserves the right to seek appointment of an appropriate

number of conferees to any House-Senate conference involving

this provision, and requests your support for any such

request.

Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter

confirming this understanding, and would ask that a copy of

our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the

Congressional Record during floor consideration thereof.

Sincerely,

Dave Camp,

Chairman.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I am pleased today to join with Senator Portman to introduce the bipartisan Second Reauthorization Act. This bill builds on recent successes and takes important new steps to ensure that people coming out of prison have the opportunity to turn their lives around, rather than returning to a life of crime. That saves taxpayer money and makes us all safer.

This important legislation improves Federal reentry policy and authorizes assistance to collaborations between state and local corrections agencies, nonprofits, educational institutions, service providers, and families to ensure that offenders released into society have the resources and support they need to become contributing members of the community. The reauthorization bill builds on the success of the Second Chance Act by continuing, improving, and consolidating its programs.

Four years ago, I joined with then-Senators Biden, Specter, and Brownback as an original cosponsor of the Second Chance Act, and I was pleased to help move that legislation through the Senate. The Senate recognized the value of the Second Chance Act when, after a great deal of work and compromise, the bill passed unanimously. I hope this reauthorization bill receives the same bipartisan support.

In the past few decades, Congress and the states have passed new criminal laws creating more and longer sentences for more crimes. As a result, this country sends even more people to prison every year, costing millions and millions of dollars. There are currently over 2 million people in jail or prison, and more than 13 million people spend some time in jail or prison each year. Most of these people will at some point return to our communities.

Last July, I chaired a hearing on the Second Chance Act, and the Committee heard about the great strides many states are making with innovative prisoner reentry programs. Commissioner Andrew Pallito from the Vermont Department of Corrections testified and shared with us his experience with reentry programs in Vermont. The Vermont Department of Corrections and many others in Vermont have strongly supported the Second Chance Act, which gives me confidence that it represents an important step in making our country safer.

The Second Chance Act authorized grants for key reentry programs and required that these programs demonstrate measurable positive results, including a reduction in recidivism. Preliminary studies show that these programs are already working well.

The reauthorization bill that we propose today improves, consolidates and reauthorizes the state and local government grant programs created by the Second Chance Act. It is intended to ensure that funding is available for planning and implementation of key reentry projects so that evidence-based methodology is employed to ensure meaningful reductions in recidivism rates. It is designed to ensure that all states have the opportunity to develop and benefit from these important programs.

The bill also consolidates several programs that were underutilized into one grant program with multiple purposes. This will ensure that Federal dollars are effectively spent on programs that link probation with swift and certain enforcement, like the very successful HOPE program in Hawaii.

The Second Chance Act authorized research into educational methods used in prisons and jails. This reauthorization bill asks the Attorney General to review that research and establish best practices for prison education. It then reallocates the authorized funds previously used for research into a grant program to implement these best practices in prisons and jails. The bill also adds nonprofit organizations as eligible grant recipients for programs promoting family-based substance abuse treatment.

This legislation makes modest improvements to Federal reentry policy that have the added benefit of reducing Bureau of Prison costs. It continues the successful Elderly and Family Reunification for Certain Non Violent Offenders Pilot Program and modestly expands the pool of inmates eligible to apply for the program. More than 60 inmates have now participated in this program, and not a single one has reoffended.

The bill also creates an incentive for inmates to participate in rigorous recidivism reduction programming by awarding a credit of up 60 days per year toward completion of their sentence for participation in such programs. The incentive is modeled on that currently awarded for successful participation in residential drug abuse treatment programs.

Finally, the Second Chance Reauthorization Act promotes accountability by requiring periodic audits of grantees to ensure that Federal dollars are responsibly spent. Grantees with problematic audits will not be eligible for funding in future years.

As a former prosecutor, I believe strongly in securing tough and appropriate prison sentences for people who break our laws. But it is also important that we do everything we can to ensure that when these people get out of prison, they enter our communities as productive members of society, so we can start to reverse the dangerous cycle of recidivism and violence. The Second Chance Reauthorization Act will help break this cycle.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to ask my colleagues for their support of H.R. 4119, the Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2012.

I also would like to express my appreciation and thank my cosponsors, Congressman Quayle, who I understand is on his way here and we anticipate that he will be speaking on this, Congressman Chairman Dreier, and Congressman Thompson. I would, in particular, like to thank my good friend and colleague from Texas, Chairman Smith, for his support in bringing this legislation to the floor. I also would like to thank Senator Feinstein and Senator Kyl for their work on a bipartisan, bicameral piece of legislation on the Senate side, which is S. 1236, the companion to the Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2012.

The Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2012 strengthens the 2006 Border Tunnel Prevention Act, which made it a crime to construct or finance an unauthorized tunnel or subterranean passage across an international border.

This bill seeks to provide law enforcement officials with enhanced investigative tools and additional options for prosecuting crimes related to the construction and financing of cross-border tunnels.

The Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2012 would criminalize the attempt or conspiracy to use, construct, or finance a cross-border tunnel and also permits the forfeiture of bulk cash and merchandise smuggled into the United States through these illicit passageways.

Thanks to the collaborative efforts of the Obama administration, Congress, Federal, State, local, and tribal law enforcement organizations, as well as ordinary Americans, the Southwest border is more secure than at any point in our Nation's history. Over the past several years, the Federal Government has dedicated unprecedented levels of personnel, technology, and resources towards border security. As a result, apprehensions today are down, and seizures of drugs, guns, and cash are up. Border cities are among the safest in the country, including El Paso, which for the second year is the safest city in America with a population of over half a million people.

While the strengthening of security along the Southwest border has produced impressive results, it has also led those who want to harm our country to seek new ways to undermine our efforts. Enhancing the security of our borders on land, air, and sea has literally pushed drug cartels and transnational criminal organizations underground as they try to smuggle illicit drugs and people and other types of contraband, as my good friend and colleague from Puerto Rico mentioned, to include the potential for terrorists and weapons of mass destruction being smuggled into the United States.

Over the last decade, drug cartels and transnational criminal organizations have been increasing both the use and complexity of cross-border tunnels. As was said earlier, approximately 154 tunnels have been discovered between Mexico and the United States since the 1990s, and more than 90 percent of those tunnels have been detected in this past decade. These cross-border tunnels are becoming more and more complex.

I've got a picture to show, and I know that the chairman was mentioning the complexity of the construction. One such tunnel is the one that was discovered in November of 2011. It was over 600 yards long, and you can see, it's got a rail system built in. It's got sophisticated lighting, and even a system to introduce fresh air into the tunnel.

No longer are these crude, handmade tunnels. These are sophisticated, well-engineered, and well-financed projects. So that is why it is imperative that this legislation be passed. We must give law enforcement officials the tools that they need to combat this growing threat to our national security and stop the flow of illicit drugs and other contraband into the United States.

Accordingly, I am proud to be the author of this, along with Congressman Quayle, and I urge all my colleagues in Congress to pass this vital piece of bipartisan legislation so that we can move forward with helping to defeat the drug cartels and the transnational criminal organizations and, further, continue the path towards really securing our borders and protecting our communities.

So with that, let me end by thanking, again, Chairman Smith and my good friend and colleague from Puerto Rico and urging my colleagues to support this critical and vital piece of legislation.

Madam Speaker, the possibility of terrorists or weapons of mass destruction being transported through border tunnels is frightening. The possibility of narcotics or trafficking victims being transported through tunnels is disturbing. And I have real concerns about tunnels being used for run-of-the-mill illegal immigration and to smuggle goods or merchandise.

But these things are already illegal. And the penalty for doing any of these things through a tunnel is already double what it would be if the unlawful activity had not made use of a tunnel.

When this bill, H.R. 4119, was in the Judiciary Committee, I commented on what I saw as the redundancies in the bill. We already have laws against constructing or financing a tunnel between the United States and another country. The penalty for violating the law is a fine and up to 20 years in prison. And we have laws against knowing, or recklessly disregarding, that land you own or lease is being used by someone else who is building a tunnel, The penalty for that is a fine and up to 10 years in prison.

H.R. adds attempts to the crimes already available to address border tunnels. Yet, I wonder how many cases there have been where a prosecutor was unable to prosecute someone for attempting to construct a tunnel under the current border tunnel law but would be able to under H.R. 4119? For U.S. prosecutorial jurisdiction, the tunnel would have to be started on the U.S. side and not yet have crossed the border into Mexico to be an attempted border tunnel, because if it has already crossed the border, it IS a border tunnel, so you don't need an attempt law. But even before such an attempt is started, and certainly after it is started, it is already a conspiracy to build a border tunnel, which is already covered by current law.

We have had no hearings in the House on these issues, so it is not clear what information we are operating on in developing this bill. The Department of Homeland Security reports that 154 border tunnels or attempted border tunnels have been found since 1990. Laura Duffy, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of California, stated in testimony before the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control on June 15, 2011, that all of the tunnels discovered thus far were started in Mexico. So if it takes crossing the border to be a border tunnel, and all of them are started in Mexico, the ``attempt'' provision of H.R. 4119 does not seem like a very useful tool in addressing border tunnels. Conspiracy laws, which already exist, would seem to be of better use. And if existing conspiracy charges are not enough of a prosecutorial incentive, it would seem you would want to wait until the tunnel is actually being used so you can really rack up the penalties for drugs, goods or people smuggling which allows a doubling of penalties.

Duffy also stated in her testimony that in prosecuting tunnel-related crimes, the Department of Justice uses the range of drug charges under Title 21 because the drug charges carry ``stiff mandatory minimum sentences and sometimes enable prosecutors to use `career offender' sentencing enhancements.'' When you start doubling such drug penalties under the provisions of the current border tunnel law, you can easily get into sentences of many decades.

In addition to adding attempt and increasing the penalty for conspiracy, H.R. 4119 adds provisions for wire tap, forfeiture, and money laundering, which should always be done carefully, in my view. These are extraordinary government powers that were created and authorized to be used in extraordinary cases and circumstances, not to address ordinary crime. We have come to routinely add these authorities to deal with the crime du jour, further cluttering up an already bloated federal code with multiple, superfluous ways to charge every crime. There are no U.S. restrictions on the use of wiretaps outside the U.S. Since the tunnels are seemingly always started in Mexico, it is not clear what wiretap authorizations add to the investigative process.

We should not be decorating the criminal code with more and more pages. We ought to be simplifying the code. While I do think border tunnels are a serious problem, I believe we already have adequate laws with very harsh penalties to deal with the problem.