SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1 TOP OF DOC
50–491 CC
1998
COLOMBIAN HEROIN CRISIS
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
JUNE 24, 1998
Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations
COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York, Chairman
WILLIAM GOODLING, Pennsylvania
JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa
HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska
CHRISTOPHER SMITH, New Jersey
DAN BURTON, Indiana
ELTON GALLEGLY, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida
CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina
DANA ROHRABACHER, California
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
PETER T. KING, New York
JAY KIM, California
STEVEN J. CHABOT, Ohio
MARSHALL ''MARK'' SANFORD, South Carolina
MATT SALMON, Arizona
AMO HOUGHTON, New York
TOM CAMPBELL, California
JON FOX, Pennsylvania
JOHN McHUGH, New York
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
ROY BLUNT, Missouri
KEVIN BRADY, Texas
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
LEE HAMILTON, Indiana
SAM GEJDENSON, Connecticut
TOM LANTOS, California
Page 3 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
HOWARD BERMAN, California
GARY ACKERMAN, New York
ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa
MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ, California
DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
ROBERT ANDREWS, New Jersey
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia
ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida
PAT DANNER, Missouri
EARL HILLIARD, Alabama
BRAD SHERMAN, California
ROBERT WEXLER, Florida
STEVE ROTHMAN, New Jersey
BOB CLEMENT, Tennessee
BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
JIM DAVIS, Florida
LOIS CAPPS, California
RICHARD J. GARON, Chief of Staff
MICHAEL H. VAN DUSEN, Democratic Chief of Staff
JOHN MACKEY, Investigative Counsel
CHARMAINE V. HOUSEMAN, Staff Associate
C O N T E N T S
Page 4 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
WITNESSES
Mr. Thomas J. Kneir, Deputy Assistant Director of the Criminal Investigation Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
Mr. Donnie Marshall, Acting Deputy Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
Mrs. Bonni G. Tischler, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Investigation, U.S. Customs Service
APPENDIX
Prepared statements:
The Honorable Benjamin A. Gilman
The Honorable Robert Menendez
Mr. Thomas J. Kneir
Mr. Donnie Marshall
Mrs. Bonni G. Tischler
Additional material submitted for the record:
U.S. Customs Service Concealment Report
Letter from the Honorable Barbara Larkin, Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs
Chart displaying origin of opium
Chart displaying heroin seizures in the United States
Chart displaying increase in Mexican heroin use
Chart displaying American seizures of Colombian heroin
Los Angeles Times article of June 1, 1998, ''Case Links Russian Sub, Colombian Drugs'' by Mark Fineman
UPI article of April 20, 1998, ''Colombian Drug Smugglers Sentenced''
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chart and data displaying age-specific first-time heroin use
Questions submitted for the record by Hon. Benjamin A. Gilman and answered by DEA
COLOMBIAN HEROIN CRISIS
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 24, 1998
House of Representatives,
Committee on International Relations,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Benjamin A. Gilman (chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Chairman GILMAN. Our hearing will come to order.
Today our Committee holds another in a series of hearings on the Administration's Colombian antidrug policy, and today we will be focusing on a growing threat from Colombian heroin. We will hear from our front-line Federal law enforcement officials facing the onslaught of a new heroin crisis.
I might add that, at the moment, we have two important conferences going on, a Republican Conference and a Democratic Conference, where our Members are engaged, as well as three mark-ups in different committees. So I think our Members will be coming in and out as best they can, with a very crowded schedule. As you near the end of a working period just before a recess, work doubles up a little bit around here.
We now have historic levels of heroin use among teenagers ages 12 through 17. In one recent year, it was estimated that there were 141,000 new heroin users.
Heroin-related emergency room admissions in 1996 were up over 46 percent over 1992 levels. It is evident that we have a growing heroin problem. Along our East Coast especially, the problem initiates in Colombia.
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Returning from a recent visit to South America that included Colombia, our Codel stopped in Miami. We were met there with our front-line Federal law enforcement agencies, the DEA and Customs, who were working at the Port of Miami. These experienced, hard-working U.S. anti-narcotics officers used terms like ''alarming'' and ''frightening'' to describe the threat of our Nation from the increasing amounts of Colombian heroin which they are fighting to stop each and every day.
During our trip, we met a DEA agent who had previously been assigned to Orlando. He told us that Colombian heroin was responsible for 35 heroin overdoses in a 2-year period just in Orlando alone.
The latest DEA data from drug seizures and street buys indicates that Colombian heroin now accounts for 52 percent of the U.S. supply.
In some cases, the purity of this Colombian heroin may exceed 80 percent, a level far higher than the single-digit purity levels of the 1960's and the 1970's. Our FBI points out that, because of this high purity level, younger users begin by inhaling or smoking the drug, which they believe enables them to avoid the risk of AIDS from needles. Regrettably, this often proves not to be true. Many do turn to needles because injections deliver a stronger dose directly into their bloodstream.
Along the East Coast and in some cities, Colombian heroin has become a new drug of choice. Colombian drug dealers are shifting more cocaine to Europe and to Africa, where they often get a higher price, while they target the United States with ever more pure and very addictive heroin. This heroin can be profitably shipped in smaller quantities that are much harder to detect than cocaine.
Colonel Gallego, head of the Colombian National Police Antidrug Unit, informed the media earlier this year, and I quote, ''The National Police doesn't have the right aviation equipment to press ahead with operations at heights above 2,000 meters''—that is 6,600 feet—''where poppy plantations are to be found.''
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Because of this, he went on to say, ''Smuggling of that highly dangerous drug will likely increase.''
Our State Department has been asleep at the switch and the gears for changing to meet the new threat from the opium poppy in the Colombian Andes are stalled. Regrettably, most of the State Department focus has been on coca eradication in Colombia.
On Sunday, Colombia, South America's oldest democracy, we are pleased to learn, elected a new President who declared that, and I quote, ''Change has won the day.'' And we hope it is going to be a significant change.
The election heralds an opportunity for Colombia and the Administration to abandon their old excuses and their former finger pointing. Both must exercise the political will and commit the resources and equipment necessary to deal with the deadly challenge that illicit drugs pose to both our nations.
Today, we are going to receive vivid firsthand evidence from the ports of U.S. entry and from the streets of our Nation concerning the impact that our failed Colombian drug policy and the deadly incoming heroin has had on our communities, and especially on our youth. We have with us today the front-line Federal law enforcement agencies that must fight this scourge, and the dirty and corrosive money, along with the violent crime and other destruction it breeds and fuels. And we owe them a lot.
We have with us today Thomas J. Kneir, Deputy Assistant Director of the Criminal Investigations Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Thank you for joining us today.
Mr. KNEIR. Thank you.
Chairman GILMAN. And Mr. Donnie Marshall, Acting Deputy Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration. Thank you for being with us, Mr. Marshall.
And Ms. Bonni Tischler, Assistant Commissioner for the Office of Investigation, U.S. Customs Service.
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We thank you, too, for joining us.
We have an excellent panel. I will ask our panelists to please proceed. You may summarize your statement or put your whole statement in the record, whichever you deem appropriate.
STATEMENT OF THOMAS J. KNEIR, DEPUTY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION DIVISION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Mr. KNEIR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would wish that my full statement be admitted in the record, and I would like to summarize.
Chairman GILMAN. Without objection. We appreciate your summarizing.
Mr. KNEIR. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before this Committee today to discuss the increasing threat of the trafficking of heroin. As you are aware, on May 14th of this year, Director Freeh traveled to Colombia to demonstrate the Bureau's commitment to maintain a partnership in the fight against drug trafficking. Key government and law enforcement officials in Colombia remain committed to this fight.
The Colombian drug cartels pose a significant threat to the safety of the United States, not only due to the abuse of drugs by U.S. citizens but also from the violence associated with drug distribution. The threat of drug trafficking will not decrease as long as Colombian drug cartels continue to increase their production of heroin and maintain their production of cocaine.
The dramatic increase in the use of South American heroin is primarily due to the growth of Colombian opium production over the last decade, the increase in the quality and quantity of Colombian heroin and the aggressive tactics to create new outlets and customers of heroin. Of particular concern for law enforcement is the combination of high purity and low prices contributing to increased heroin use.
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
While the majority of heroin users are in their thirties and inject heroin, the high purity levels allow young users to begin by inhaling the drug. According to a 1998 ONDCP study, the number of 8th graders using heroin equals or exceeds the use in the 10th and 12th grades.
South American and Mexican heroin production more than doubled between 1993 and 1995 and leveled off to about six metric tons per year. Last year, western hemisphere heroin production accounted for slightly less than 3 percent of the global production.
While only a small portion of the world's opium supply comes from Colombia, it accounts for a disproportionate share of heroin sold in the United States. This is primarily due to its price, quality and availability. The purity of heroin has surpassed the Asian and Mexican varieties in many Northeastern cities, reaching levels up to 80 to 90 percent pure. The increase in purity allows the drug to be injected nasally, snorted, or by methods other than injection. This destigmatizes the use of heroin among middle- and upper-class income users who normally are wary of needles, the traditional method used by the hard-core users.
Northeastern cities, Puerto Rico and Miami, serve as the major importation and distribution centers of South American heroin. In these areas, Colombian heroin can sell for up to four times that of the comparable amount that cocaine sells for in New York. This gives the Colombian traffickers the ability to realize a substantial profit from a smaller quantity of drugs.
Unlike cocaine, which is often shipped in multiton loads, heroin is often smuggled into the United States one kilogram at a time. This small, yet steady, flow accounts for the majority of Colombian heroin smuggled into the United States.
Colombian heroin traffickers are seizing the Asian heroin market in the Northeast by undercutting the price of Asian heroin. The reduced cost of production and transportation allows the Colombians to sell a comparable amount of heroin for significantly less.
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
As demand for South American heroin increases, the already established cocaine cartels and poly drug organizations will constitute a greater threat because of the unlimited resources and the sophisticated and established transportation organizations.
Eradication of the opium poppy in South America seems to be the logical point of attack in order to curb the increasing flow of Colombian heroin into the growing northeastern market. However, as we have seen with cocaine, the Colombian Government has had limited success in effectively combatting major drug trafficking organizations within their own country, although they have had some success against the Cali and Medellin cartels.
Colombian core-level drug trafficking organizations promote corruption via a combination of intimidation and violence, as well as substantial monetary support, to preferred political candidates which directly influences the ability of the Colombian Government to effectively fight the drug war. When leaders of Colombian criminal enterprises are incarcerated, they continue to operate their businesses from prison, due to the preferential treatment they receive.
In February, 1997, a new Colombian money laundering law went into effect that provides for the seizure of illegal drug trafficking proceeds retroactive to the commission of the crime. The DAS and the Colombian National Police have collaborated to seize more than 300 real and personal properties belonging to slain drug trafficker Jose Santacruz Londono and his associates.
There is a lengthy forfeiture process which follows any seizure. Therefore, it is unknown whether this new law will serve as a deterrent.
The FBI's investigative strategy concerning South American heroin targets are—we target the entire drug organization and all of its criminal enterprises, including the transportation, distribution and money laundering operations. These investigations target organizations that operate primarily in the Northeast, specifically in New York, Newark, Philadelphia, Boston and Hartford and the surrounding areas and in the gateway cities of Miami and San Juan. Many of these investigations are done jointly with our counterparts at DEA and U.S. Customs.
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The use of sophisticated investigative techniques, such as court-authorized wiretaps and long-term undercover operations targeting the command and control elements of these groups, has proven to be the most successful.
In one of our New York investigations, Operation Rumrunner, this targeted a poly drug organization which used ''swallowers'' to smuggle heroin into New York airports as well as large quantities of cocaine hidden in produce. At the conclusion of this investigation, seven drug traffickers were arrested, approximately 3 kilos of heroin and over 750 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In November, 1995, out of another undercover operation, Operation Money Trap, 15.5 kilograms of Colombian heroin was seized in Miami in an airplane coming up from Colombia.
In Philadelphia, we have experienced an increase in the number of Colombian heroin investigations. This is a most significant change in the Philadelphia heroin trade, in the past 4 years, of the emergence of the Colombians as bulk distributors and the Dominicans as being the midlevel street managers and heroin traffickers.
The FBI currently maintains one Resolution Six position in Bogota. The supervisory special agent assigned to this position facilitates FBI drug investigation matters in Colombia, under the direction of the DEA Country Attache and Chief of Mission. This agent also serves to coordinate and deconflict FBI and DEA investigative matters in Colombia. This DEA/FBI relationship under Resolution Six has proven to be a very effective way to both coordinate and deconflict.
Finally, the FBI continues to investigate the global increase in criminal organizations following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Specifically, we are concerned about new criminal alliances between emerging criminal organizations and Colombian drug cartels. However, despite press allegations that Russian-organized crime members are smuggling weapons in to Colombia and other South American narcotraffickers, there is currently no reliable information to support this allegation.
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Thank you.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Kneir.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kneir appears in the appendix.]
Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Marshall of our DEA.
STATEMENT OF DONNIE MARSHALL, ACTING DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION
Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me today to discuss the heroin trafficking into the United States and the organized criminal groups that are responsible for its manufacture and sale.
I have submitted a complete statement for the record, and I would like to summarize that.
Chairman GILMAN. Without objection.
Mr. MARSHALL. First, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and your Committee on behalf of all of the men and women of DEA for your continued support of our international and domestic drug enforcement efforts.
Heroin is, to me, a very frightening and insidious drug that very quickly addicts those who have used it, even though they have only used it a few times. Heroin has ravaged our inner cities and has taken the lives of musicians like John Coltrane and Billie Holliday, Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin.
Today, heroin abuse is not restricted to the inner city poor or the Hollywood elite. But probably the single greatest reason for the recent emergence of heroin, the popularity of heroin, is the development of what we refer to as ''heroin chic'' by members of the entertainment and fashion industries. And heroin abuse now has spread in our country. Students, middle-class teenagers and young adults, in places like Orlando, Florida, and Plano, Texas, have fallen prey to heroin.
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Historically, the first major influx of heroin into the United States occurred between 1967 and 1971 through the well-known ''French Connection'' organizations. At that time, aggressive law enforcement actions against major trafficking organizations, combined with a total ban on opium production or poppy cultivation in Turkey, substantially reduced the supply of Turkish heroin to the U.S. market.
By the 1980's, heroin produced in Mexico dominated the U.S. heroin market on the West Coast, and heroin produced in Southwest Asia and in the Golden Triangle of Southeast Asia shared the rest of the U.S. market.
Today, we are seeing even further changes from that pattern. The United States is seeing increasing heroin availability from South America now. In 1995, according to DEA's Heroin Signature Program, South America for the first time was the predominant source of heroin seized in the United States, accounting for 62 percent of the total. And recently released results from the same source for 1996 showed that heroin produced in Colombia represents 52 percent of the heroin seized and analyzed in the United States.
So this makes Colombian heroin or South American heroin the predominant source area for the second year in a row now.
U.S. estimates, as Mr. Kneir has referred to, placed Colombia heroin production capability at about 6 metric tons in 1997, and virtually all of that South American heroin is grown and manufactured in Colombia.
The Colombian traffickers, to compensate for their recent or late entry into the heroin market, have provided very high-quality heroin to a very highly competitive U.S. market. They have offered cut rate prices, sometimes as low as $90,000 per kilogram, about half the going rate for Southeast Asian or Southwest Asian heroin. They have allowed customers to take wholesale quantity on consignment, and we have even seen reports that Colombian cocaine traffickers have forced wholesale customers to accept quantities of heroin with their cocaine as a condition of doing business.
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The heroin trade in Colombia is controlled today predominantly by numerous independent traffickers. The most significant of these traffickers are based in Ibaque, Medellin, Bogota and Pereira, Colombia. They use many different smuggling methods, including false-sided luggage and internal body carriers to transport heroin into the United States, and they do smuggle it in predominantly through the ports of San Juan, Miami and New York City.
The Colombian traffickers now almost totally dominate the East Coast heroin market, which is based in New York, and this was traditionally supplied by Southeast Asian traffickers.
Investigations conducted in 1996 and 1997 revealed that the Colombians were also employing couriers from a variety of nationalities, including Nigerian organizations, to ship heroin into the United States. The Colombian heroin traffickers vary their modes of operation by sending couriers through other countries, such as Venezuela and Central American countries, in an effort to disguise the country of origin.
A recent investigation revealed yet another variation used by Colombian heroin traffickers, when it uncovered almost 1 1/2 kilograms of heroin concealed in the heels of 17 pairs of ladies' shoes shipped to Pompano Beach, Florida.
Colombian traffickers, when they got into the heroin business, lacked connections to midlevel wholesalers and retailers in the urban heroin trade, and they moved very quickly to resolve that problem by enlisting Dominican gangs on the East Coast who had already established retail outlets. They used their connections with those Dominican trafficking groups to bridge their gap into the retail and street level markets. As a result, the Dominican traffickers now are moving into many, many towns in the Northeast, some with populations as small as 60,000 to 70,000.
I saw, as an illustration of that very recently, in early June, an article in one of the Philadelphia newspapers that was reporting on the heroin problem in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, not exactly a place that you would think of as having a heroin problem.
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
DEA and the Hartford, Connecticut, Police Department recently arrested 40 members of a Dominican trafficking group who were responsible for the sale of thousands of heroin bags which had been brought in from New York City.
I believe, and I think most of my colleagues here in law enforcement believe, that the most effective way of dealing with organized crime is to target the leadership of the trafficking organizations; and we do that, as Mr. Kneir has referred to, by attacking their command and control systems. DEA is focusing its resources predominantly against the communications network of the Colombian cell managers who oversee distribution of heroin into the United States, and simultaneously we have targeted the cartels' operatives, their surrogates, from the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico.
Inside Colombia, the country team, DEA and the FBI pursue predominantly a flow reduction strategy focusing on key transportation routes and coca eradication to keep cocaine from leaving the source zone of southeast Colombia. And in the area of heroin, we also concentrate on a flow reduction strategy.
DEA and the Colombian National Police have joined together in operating a heroin task force, which consists of a five-man intelligence unit and a dedicated prosecutor who support operations and investigations against major heroin trafficking organizations.
DEA has increased our domestic resources to combat heroin trafficking production and distribution in the United States. As a part of our fiscal year 1996 budget, we received an additional 30 special agent positions and $3.9 million which went into augmenting our domestic heroin enforcement programs.
In fiscal year 1998, we received a total of 120 positions, which included 24 special agents and approximately $10 million, again for domestic heroin initiatives.
Finally, in 1999 fiscal year, our budget request includes an additional 95 special agents and another $12.9 million to continue our implementation of our 5-year strategy against heroin.
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
On the international front, as you know, we received a source country initiative which consists of $22.8 million and 75 special agents, and we targeted a good part of that initiative against international trafficking in South America, the Caribbean, including operations in Puerto Rico.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, heroin unfortunately remains readily available to traffickers and addicts in all major metropolitan areas in the United States. Sophisticated organized crime syndicates, such as those based in Mexico and Colombia, offer several different potential sources of supply which complicates, quite honestly, the challenges facing law enforcement.
But I believe very strongly that working with the FBI, Customs and our State and local and international police counterparts, I believe that we can ultimately be successful, particularly against the new heroin trafficking groups in Colombia, by focusing our eradication efforts on the opium poppy and the source zone; by identifying and building prosecutable cases on leaders of the organizations, both in Colombia and against their command and control infrastructure in the United States; by attacking vulnerable points along the seamless continuum of the heroin trade from cultivation to wholesale outlets to retail level sales operating all along the East Coast. And I believe through employing these methods we can bring to justice all of those criminals—most of those criminals, who control the trade of sending this poison to our children and young adults.
Again, thank you for providing me with this opportunity; and I would be happy to take any questions at the appropriate time.
Chairman GILMAN. Well, we thank you, Mr. Marshall, for your testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Marshall appears in the appendix.]
Chairman GILMAN. We now will go to Ms. Tischler, who is Assistant Commissioner for the Office of Investigation, the U.S. Customs Service.
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. Tischler, you may give your full testimony or summarize, whichever you deem appropriate.
STATEMENT OF BONNI G. TISCHLER, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR THE OFFICE OF INVESTIGATION, U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE
Ms. TISCHLER. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, thank you for affording me the opportunity to address the Committee on one of the most serious developing problems facing the U.S. Customs and our drug law enforcement counterparts, increased trafficking in heroin.
What follows is a short summary of my written statement which I have already submitted for the record.
Chairman GILMAN. Without objection, the full statement will be made a part of the record. Please proceed.
Ms. TISCHLER. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to take 2 seconds to thank you on behalf of our special agents for your recent kind comments on behalf of their work on Operation Casablanca.
Chairman GILMAN. Please convey to them our respect for the courageous work they have been doing, the effective work they have been doing, along our borders.
Ms. TISCHLER. Thank you, sir.
Heroin, particularly from Colombia, continues to pose a serious and deadly threat to the American public. Customs' seizures of heroin directly from Colombia have gone from four pounds in fiscal year 1990 to more than a 1,050 pounds in fiscal year 1997. Customs' mandate is to protect our borders and dismantle and disrupt drug smuggling organizations. We must use the combined efforts of intelligence, interdiction and investigations to respond to this threat.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So what is the threat anyway? Currently, the No. 1 heroin threat to the United States is heroin coming from South America, specifically Colombia. During fiscal year 1997, approximately 1,900 pounds of heroin from South America were seized by Customs, representing 78 percent of all heroin seized by us.
Our seizure and investigative activities suggest that the New York metropolitan area continues to be the most significant heroin destination and distribution center in the United States. During fiscal year 1997, in the New York-New Jersey area, Customs seized 916 pounds of heroin. South Florida seized 871 pounds of heroin during that same time period, with much of this going to the New York area. Jointly, seizures at these two ports of entry make up 74 percent of all heroin seized by U.S. Customs during fiscal year 1997.
It appears that the heroin threat posed by Colombian heroin may continue to increase. We are now making relatively small seizures of heroin via couriers through our major ports of entry. For example, for fiscal year 1997, U.S. Customs' heroin seizures from couriers accounted for approximately 60 percent of all heroin seized by us.
The fact that Colombian heroin trafficking groups are utilizing drug couriers and mail parcels for relatively small shipments of heroin poses a great challenge to the Customs service in our ability to marshal the necessary forces to properly interdict and investigate each of the heroin seizures at our ports of entry.
At JFK International Airport, for example, Customs inspectors seized 485 pounds of Colombian heroin just during the first half of fiscal year 1998. To process just the couriers at JFK, it required the use of the JFK medical facility because they inserted heroin in their body cavities or ingested pellets of heroin; involved approximately 7,200 staff hours and $600,000 in expenses. And these figures represent the staff hours and expense incurred after the initial border search is conducted.
To complement the excellent work being done by the inspectors at JFK, Customs' Office of Investigations has 33 special agents, 14 State and local officers, 7 first-line supervisors and 2 second-line supervisors assigned to the heroin problem. The agents and officers are trained and directed to conduct multiagency, multijurisdictional investigations to dismantle and disrupt drug trafficking organizations. This is accomplished through the use of various investigative techniques, such as controlled deliveries, electronic and other surveillance and by linking couriers into conspiracy and historical investigations.
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So what are we doing? During fiscal year 1997, approximately 3,000 pounds of heroin was seized by Federal drug law enforcement agencies. Customs' seizures accounted for more than 2,400 pounds, or 80 percent, of that figure. During the first 6 months of fiscal year 1998, Customs seized 1,751 pounds of heroin, a 44 percent increase from the same timeframe last fiscal year.
While Customs works closely with DEA and the FBI on various multijurisdictional, multiagency investigations, there remains a need for all law enforcement and intelligence community agencies to reinvigorate our foreign intelligence efforts. Customs and other agencies need a greater foreign intelligence to effectively interdict heroin and investigate smuggling and related money laundering organizations. A more coordinated collection effort would permit us to improve our targeting capabilities for interdiction at our ports of entry and complement our investigative efforts.
In closing, let me just say that Customs will continue to address the threat of Colombian heroin and all trafficking and contraband across our borders by using a three-pronged intelligence, interdiction and investigative approach. We will also continue our strategy of multiagency and multijurisdictional investigations.
Thank you for your interest and support.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Tischler appears in the appendix.]
Ms. TISCHLER. Mr. Chairman, we have also taken the liberty of bringing along some pictorial examples of concealments resulting from seizures. The pictures to your right on the easel, for instance, and this booklet which we have supplied your staff, which we are also submitting for the record, sir——
Chairman GILMAN. Without objection, we will consider your concealment procedure report for inclusion in the record.
[The report appears in the appendix.]
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman GILMAN. Do you want to explain your chart there for our Committee?
Ms. TISCHLER. Yes, sir. The x-ray picture that you see before you is an x-ray just as if we caught Mr. Marshall here coming through and thought he might have ingested some type of contraband, and after numerous questions and other sorting factors, we will ask him if he will give permission for his x-ray to be taken. And that x-ray shows a number of pellets of heroin, in fact, concealed in a real live person.
Chairman GILMAN. Good-looking profile, Mr. Marshall.
Ms. TISCHLER. It makes him look skinnier, don't you think?
The picture just underneath to the left actually are pellets of cocaine that we brought along because we don't have any recent ones of heroin, but it is exactly the same. So these are the types of pellets that Mr. Kneir and Mr. Marshall referred to in some of their investigative activities.
And the last picture actually is a close up of a broken balloon with heroin inserted into it. This is the kind of thing that they, in fact, swallow.
Chairman GILMAN. As a matter of fact, the ingestion of these drugs has caused some fatalities, has it not, in the past?
Ms. TISCHLER. Yes, sir, both with heroin and cocaine. Heroin death is a lot gentler because they kind of nod off and then they succumb to it, but if they have broken balloons with cocaine on the inside it is a very violent, seizure-ridden death.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Ms. Tischler.
Now we will proceed with the questioning, and I will call on my colleagues in the order in which they arrived.
It is amazing for us to see the recent shift to South American heroin away from the traditional and strong Asian source for U.S. heroin based on recent DEA seizure data. What do the panelists attribute this amazing shift to, especially since there is so much more Burmese heroin available from Southeast Asia? How do you attribute this shift? Mr. Kneir.
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. KNEIR. Well, first of all, they have cut the price so the users can buy the product at a much lower price, and the purity level is up. So, you know, it is almost a situation where if you can buy a product cheaper and it is better, certainly you would think that the users would shift to this type of product.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you. Any other panelists wish to comment on that?
Mr. MARSHALL. Yes. Mr. Chairman, I concur with what Mr. Kneir has said. I mean, the Colombian heroin trafficking organizations have, quite simply, aggressively marketed their product here. They have offered these cut-rate prices. There were reports that they sometimes tied a sale of cocaine to a concurrent sale of heroin as a condition of continuing to supply cocaine. They have cut the price. They have offered a higher purity. And I believe that there was perhaps a preexisting condition that gave them the opportunity to move into this arena, and this relates to your observation that there is still plenty of opium production in Burma.
But back in late 1994, DEA and Thai authorities and authorities from a number of other countries conducted an operation called Tiger Trap, and Tiger Trap was quite simply an effort to capitalize on existing indictments in the United States of the major command and control figures of the heroin trafficking organizations coming out of Southeast Asia.
We indicted a total of—I believe it was 10 of those command and control figures. We have returned a number of those back to the United States for prosecution. They have been convicted. They have been incarcerated. That resulted in a kind of a dissolution of the Shan United Army. And the Burmese even arrested and have under house arrest the former head of the Shan United Army, Khun Sa. And I believe that the disruptive effect that that operation had on the Southeast Asian trafficking organizations created really the opportunity for the Colombians to move into it, and then they have taken advantage of that by very aggressively marketing their product.
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Marshall, in the early 1990's your administrator indicated that Colombian drug traffickers were giving away free heroin samples. Did that help boost up the demand?
Mr. MARSHALL. Absolutely, along with requiring the purchase of heroin as a condition of selling cocaine. Certainly it would boost the demand because, as we have heard from some of the other testimony, a lot of people start out using heroin by inhaling it and/or smoking it and believing it will not be quite as addictive that way. And by avoiding the needle, that attracts new users that wouldn't otherwise use it because of the needle. And then, ultimately, the end result is the same, they become addicted; and, obviously, that creates the demand for the product.
Chairman GILMAN. Let me ask the panelists: Colonel Gallego, head of the CNP's antidrug unit in Colombia, told Reuters in May, 1998, and I quote, ''The National Police doesn't have the right aviation equipment to press ahead with operation at heights above 2,000 meters, or 6,600 feet, where poppy plantations are found.'' And then he went on to say, ''In these conditions it is not possible to reduce the supply of heroin and smuggling of that highly dangerous drug will likely increase.''
Do you agree with Colonel Gallego's estimate, what he says?
Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, I am not an aviation expert, so I don't really know if they have the right equipment there or not. I understand that there has been some dialog about that and perhaps there is a change of equipment in the future.
But, yes, I do agree with his assessment that eradication of the poppy is essential to solving the problem. With the amount of cultivation that is in Colombia, I believe we have an opportunity to have a major impact on that opium cultivation if we conduct an aggressive eradication program. And if we do that, along with the other programs that DEA, FBI and Customs undertake to attack the continuum at all points where it is vulnerable, the command and control, the communications, the smuggling people, the money laundering people, if we use that all in combination with the eradication, I think that we have a chance of impacting this. And eradication certainly is a key, if not the key, to solving the problem.
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman GILMAN. Well, let me ask all of the panelists, there has been some debate about the fact that since we haven't been able to reduce the supply in the past or reduce it effectively, that we ought to just concentrate on reducing demand. We heard quite a bit about that in meeting with our Mexican parliamentarians this past weekend who want to focus on demand. What are your thoughts about how we balance reduction of supply and reduction of demand? Mr. Kneir.
Mr. KNEIR. Certainly, demand has to be part of the equation. This country is the biggest user of illegal narcotics in the world. Eradication has to be part of the equation. Investigations have to be part of the equation. Stopping the drugs at the ports has to be part of the equation.
I don't think that you can just do one thing without doing all of them. I think it has to be a very concerted effort on all levels. And certainly the demand is key to this. The drug traffickers are fairly good at going around our beef-up on the southwest border, and they start using the Caribbean. If we beef up the Caribbean, again, it will start coming in some other place. So, yes, demand has to be part of that equation.
Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Marshall.
Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, I agree that demand has to be an essential part of the equation. I think we saw that some aggressive demand reduction programs have worked in this country. I think that, you know, perhaps tobacco and perhaps the drunk driving education campaigns would be examples of how demand reduction works and how publicity—you know, maybe public awareness works. But that cannot be the only solution.
Demand reduction programs are a long-term solution. It is going to take a number of years, perhaps a decade, for those things to really take hold. And then they do take hold, you have to continue hammering that message away because you have constantly a new population of potential drug users coming through the population.
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
And, in the meantime, you have the supply side, where you have a lot of, frankly, very mean and vicious and ruthless criminals that are preying on weak countries. They are preying on weak people in our society, and these people are vicious, evil people. And if they weren't conducting these kinds of crimes they would be involved in some other crimes. They are just totally amoral, vicious, ruthless people and we have to attack that side of the equation as well, if for no other reason to remove as many of these evil people from the society as we possibly can. So I believe it has to be a combination.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you.
Ms. Tischler.
Ms. TISCHLER. It is tough coming in third behind my learned colleagues to my left, but I have to comment that we have all been in this business a long time and nobody will not tell you that demand reduction would be the best way to go. However, whether it is now or 20 years from now, there will always be people who are inclined to these types of evils, as Mr. Marshall points out.
For myself, I think it absolutely has to be a marriage of convenience with both sides of the problem, the demand side for sure, but unless the narcotics are interdicted or investigations go forward to dismantle the organizations, they will continue to bring narcotics in and they will continue to prey on the weak. And so, consequently, I don't think you can ignore one side of the equation for the other.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you very much.
Mr. Clement.
Mr. CLEMENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It is great to have all of you here. I tell you, when I think about drugs and drug lords and drug cartels and how devastating it has been to so many people, not only in the United States but worldwide, it hurts; and, you know, I want to do everything we possibly can, as a government and the public and the private sector, to rid ourselves of a very cruel hoax that truly is played on so many people.
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I know you have talked about—and I know our focus today is on the Colombian heroin. And I was wondering, would you describe it as purer, cheaper and stronger than the Asian heroin that was coming in to the United States?
Mr. MARSHALL. Yes, Congressman, I think it is really all of the above. It is, as we referred to, stronger. I have some current purities statistics here, and these are taken from law enforcement seizures, but, in 1997, the purity of South American heroin at the kilogram, which is the wholesale level, was running in the neighborhood of 82 percent; at the retail level, it was running in the neighborhood of 53 percent. Mexican heroin by contrast was 37 percent at the wholesale level and 25 percent at the retail level. So it certainly is a lot more pure than most of the other heroins on the market.
And the Colombians in their marketing strategies have actually offered it at lower prices, in some cases half of what the price of others are, like Southeast Asia or Southwest Asia.
Now whether that will continue once they get their market totally established or not, I really don't know. But it is a combination of aggressive marketing, higher purity, and lower price.
Mr. CLEMENT. Let me ask you this. I have noticed that the other countries in South America seem to have awakened and said, what has happened in Colombia could happen to them, where the drug cartels could have an upper hand even over government. Have you experienced that?
And then also, why Colombia? Why did it happen in Colombia, where it didn't happen in other places?
Mr. MARSHALL. I think, with regard to the first part of your question, yes, I think that there is an increased awareness in a lot of these other South American countries, if not most of them. We are seeing some effective programs, and we are seeing a willingness in most cases to work with U.S. authorities and to work with the countries, with each other, in a regional approach.
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
And as far as the second half of your question, I am not sure I am quite good enough a historian to say why Colombia. Part of it would be its strategic location at the northern tip of South America and the southern part of the Caribbean and kind of a focal point or choke point for cocaine coming through the source countries. Another might very well be that there are elements in the Colombian society—the Colombians are very bright, intelligent, astute people and some of their criminal element have been smart enough and aggressive enough to insert themselves into the trade.
Beyond that, historically, I am sure that you could get a professor from Georgetown University to give you a better answer on that one.
Mr. CLEMENT. I wanted to ask you also about the Asian drugs that were—heroin and all, that were coming into the United States. Now it is Colombian heroin versus the Asian heroin. Now are these Asians just rolling over dead and not really fighting back to keep their so-called share of the market? Or are the Asians shifting their focus to other countries and other contexts?
Mr. MARSHALL. That has been a question that has concerned me for a couple of years now, since we have been seeing the decrease in the availability of Southeast Asia heroin. We know for a fact that the poppy cultivation has not decreased in that part of the world, so I think it is reasonable to believe that the heroin production has not decreased as well.
Frankly, we don't have a total picture on where the Southeast Asia heroin is going, but there are indications that perhaps it is destined for other user markets. We know that some of it is going into Canada, some little bit of it is still coming into the United States. We believe that a big part of it is actually consumed in Asia, perhaps in the form of smoking opium and more in the form of heroin as well. And we speculate that perhaps they are sending it to other markets, trying to expand in other markets in the world, or create new markets in the world.
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
But it is something that we are following very closely to try to get better intelligence on.
Mr. CLEMENT. You mentioned awhile ago about intelligence information. The United States shared intelligence information with Burma and Thailand and some other countries, and you got some action. Now we also do that, or don't we, in South America? And what has been the response?
Mr. MARSHALL. In my experience—I have been involved in international operations off and on and in South American operations off and on for almost 20 years, and I know that our successes in Southeast Asia came very slowly. In Southeast Asia, there was a time when the law enforcement authorities there were not as effective as they are today. DEA and the U.S. Government and in some instances Customs and recently the FBI have invested a great deal of effort in working with countries around the world to try to develop their capabilities.
In the case of Thailand, for instance, it took us 20 years to really help the authorities there develop into a really effective anti-narcotic force. In Colombia, frankly, it was a slow process, and there was a time in Colombia when those agencies were not as effective, when there was more corruption by our standards than there is today.
And we stayed with those countries and we went in and we identified honest people in those societies—and there are honest people in virtually all societies, and it is our job to go in there and to try to identify those people, work with them and build from the ground up, help them build their own capabilities.
And then we saw that happen in Thailand and Colombia, and we are hopeful that—those are two notable success stories, and we are hopeful that we can capitalize on that same approach in many, many other parts of the world.
Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired. Thank you.
Mr. Ballenger.
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BALLENGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Somebody has to approach the supply viewpoint. For those of us who live in this country, it doesn't appear that there is a great deal of effort to curb drug use through law enforcement. I mean, you read about the basketball players that get slapped on their hands and told ''30 days, 60 days, if you are clean you can come back and play basketball''. But nobody goes to jail.
Has there ever been—I guess I am asking Mr. Kneir this. Of course, I don't know what the Federal law is, but has there ever been an effort to approach prominent people that are using drugs? My guess is if you go out on the street here in Washington and you find these poor kids that we arrest all the time for trying to sell drugs, they are selling it to somebody! It wouldn't take a great deal of effort for somebody to look and see who they are selling to and arrest them. And maybe it would be a very slow effort, but if prominent socialites, athletes, actors, doctors and lawyers were arrested and actually put in jail for it, it might have some positive effect. Any effort like that ever been made?
Mr. KNEIR. That may work for a deterrent effect or a big publicity splash, but I don't think that we can arrest our way out of the drug problem.
Mr. BALLENGER. No, no, no, I am talking about the splash itself. If there is a war on drugs, then somebody is breaking the Federal law. What is the law for the use of heroin, or those caught with using heroin?
Mr. KNEIR. Possession, felony.
Mr. BALLENGER. I mean, what's the penalty? Excuse me.
Mr. MARSHALL. Congressman, we actually—we focus most of our efforts, frankly, on the sale and the organized trafficking, and I have to confess I don't know the penalties for simple possession at the Federal level. Most of those possession laws are enforced at the State and local level.
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BALLENGER. I will back off.
Mr. KNEIR. Just yesterday, we arrested an NBA player on a narcotics charge, a center for the Atlanta Hawks.
Mr. BALLENGER. Did it make the news media, I hope?
Mr. KNEIR. I am sure it did in Atlanta.
Mr. BALLENGER. If it makes the newspapers, somebody is going to stop or at least think about it before they start using it.
You mentioned helicopters and the news media. I have the letter from the Department of State here recognizing that the impasse between the government and Congress has been worked out now we are going to move. Is it generally agreeable between all of you that the idea of using the helicopters for eradication basically but moving troops as well, is a good method?
I guess, Mr. Marshall, you are more likely in the front lines down there and can address it.
Mr. MARSHALL. I will try to address your question, Congressman. And, actually, that eradication program falls under the auspices of the international narcotics law enforcement under the Department of State, but we work very, very closely with them.
It is my understanding that the actual eradication itself, the actual application of the spray, the herbicide, is done by fixed-wing aircraft; and, currently, in Colombia they are Turbo Thrush aircraft, I believe. It is my understanding that the helicopters are used more to provide security, to move troops, as protection for the fixed-wing aircraft.
And I think that both the fixed-wing herbicide applicators as well as the helicopters for security are absolutely essential. Because in Colombia, I mean, you have insurgent groups, you have the traffickers themselves who are very violent, and it is very common for those thrushes to get shot at and sometimes even, particularly in the poppy eradication, they are on the sides of hills and often they are being shot at from above, believe it or not, from higher levels of the mountainside.
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So, yes, I believe that is really the only way that you can accomplish it. I don't think you could ever accomplish it from the ground or manually.
Mr. BALLENGER. So, basically, you would say, even though you are not individually involved in it, it is pretty well assured that that is the proper way to go?
Mr. MARSHALL. Yes, sir, I believe that is an essential element in the total plan.
Mr. BALLENGER. Would either one of you care to comment along those lines as to the helicopter situation and its usage?
Ms. TISCHLER. In our experience, because we have Blackhawks and we do use them, although not in South America, Blackhawks—helicopters in general are limited to certain chores, and I believe they are really—not just in terms of some protection but they are going to move people around and move them into areas that they can't get to in a fixed-wing. So from that perspective, helicopters are actually essential; and Blackhawks are the heavy-duty movers of people in the helicopter world.
So if they are planning on picking up a load of troops and moving them over to valley A because DEA has got some stuff going on over there and they have got to get troops over there, it is absolutely an essential tool.
Mr. BALLENGER. I have an FBI statement here that eradication of the opium poppy in South America seems to be the logical point of attack in order to curb the increasing flow of Colombian heroin into the growing Northeastern market. Any comment on that?
Mr. KNEIR. If the helicopters help to fight this at the source, then that is what they need. It is a lot easier to eradicate it rather than once it gets into the transportation and distribution networks, which is how we usually do our cases.
Mr. BALLENGER. And did——
Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired, but go ahead.
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BALLENGER. I was going to ask Mr. Marshall one more time. Through the many travels I have had in Central America and South America, leaders have been begging for DEA agents. Nicaragua has been begging us to please send somebody to its eastern coast. Have you finally been able to get the DEA agents into that area to help them with their fight against drugs?
Mr. MARSHALL. I believe, Congressman, that we have established an office now in Nicaragua. I will look at our records and submit that for the record.
I know that we used those 75 positions to go to the source countries and the key transit zones, and I can't specifically answer Nicaragua but I will get you that answer later.
Mr. BALLENGER. Thank you, sir.
[The information below was supplied following the hearing.]
Currently there are two DEA special agents stationed in Managua, Nicaragua.
Mr. BALLENGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Ballenger. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Rothman.
Mr. ROTHMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all for coming and for your testimony.
Is the seizure of illegal drugs coming into the United States, as someone pointed out, a zero sum game in the sense that if we vote resources to seizing cocaine, are we then limited in the resources we can devote to seizing heroin coming in?
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. KNEIR. We try to work an organization which may bring in cocaine and heroin and try to wrap up the command and control. These cases are worked mostly jointly with Customs and DEA. We work them as organizations, not as, you know, let's take the heroin or let's take the cocaine.
Mr. ROTHMAN. I want to throw a slow one down the middle for you guys. Has the threat of drugs that you are responsible for intercepting increased the same amount as your budget over the last 5 years, more or less? Or the same?
Mr. MARSHALL. Well, I am not sure that that is really a slow one right down the middle, because it is hard to quantify.
First of all, it is hard to quantify the amount of drug use, the amount of drug abuse in the United States. We know that there are indicators that it is on the rise, particularly among, I believe it was Mr. Kneir that pointed out, among 8th graders and 12th graders. We know that demand is rising.
And to give you an example of how difficult it is to gauge the amount of demand in relation to the amount of drugs entering the country, take heroin, for instance, which is the subject of today. We know the production capability, more or less. I mean, there are limitations to the reliability of our numbers, but more or less we know how much is being produced in the world. We know how many heroin addicts there are and how many heroin users that are maybe not yet addicted. We know more or less. Again, there are limitations.
What we don't know is, in all cases, the pattern of abuse. Because the pattern of abuse varies. And the reason that is so important is because, in order to know the volume of heroin that they would demand, you have to know what the purity is that they are using. You have to know how often they are using it, that sort of stuff.
Now—so that gives you an idea of the problems we are gauging on the demand in drug abuse.
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. ROTHMAN. Here is my—another way to do this—express my question. You know, if—in reading your testimony, which I have, you indicate that these heroin traffickers have become sophisticated and maybe even more sophisticated and flexible and mobile than the cocaine traffickers. And that to get these folks to the medical facilities, you waste hours there.
It is like, you know, when I was a mayor of a city, the cops would complain that they would have to go to court with the guys, the bad guys, and lose time on the street.
Do we need to devote more Federal resources to your efforts and would it have a marked impact on the flow into the United States?
And I ask my Republican colleagues to hear me out.
Because if, in fact, you could use more resources, my understanding is that you are a discretionary spending item, and so when there are cuts made across the board or the pressure is placed on discretionary spending in our budget, it is going to come out of programs like this. And while they say it is great to put money back in the pockets of our American taxpayers, I am certain that if you told the American taxpayers that for pennies per year, per taxpayer, we would enable our law enforcement and drug interdiction agents to do their job, to stop the flow of these drugs from coming into America, they would, to the American taxpayer, say, right on, spend my pennies per year from my income tax on this amount.
Mr. KNEIR. Let me just try to answer that by—I think the answer is, yes, we do need some assistance.
One of the big areas that we need assistance—our successful investigations are by court-authorized wiretaps, and that has probably been one of the most successful tools that we have had against all organized crime over the years.
When we talk about the sophistication of the drug trafficking organizations, they have extensive budgets to get encrypted types of communications; and unless we can stay up on this issue and be able to get the court-authorized wiretaps, it will certainly give them the upper hand.
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. ROTHMAN. Yes. Just in conclusion, I want to say that my comment, my remarks addressed to my Republican colleagues are made with affection and respect.
Mr. BALLENGER. Would the gentleman yield?
I got a letter here from the State Department, Congressman Gilman and a few other people who have worked very diligently with the State Department, that states they finally reached an agreement on the helicopter issue. I think these gentlemen and ladies recognize this as the major way to eradicate drugs.
Let me just read one paragraph: ''And as a result of this agreement, we will move forward with the reprogramming notice and provide an additional $13 million to our Colombian country program and $23 million to our Bolivian country program.''
Mr. ROTHMAN. If I may just reclaim my time.
Mr. BALLENGER. Yes. But I think it is at work.
Mr. ROTHMAN. I think it is great, but certainly the agents here in the States to intercept those materials that weren't destroyed by those helicopters is important. The bad guys bringing this stuff over will require greater personnel on our part here to address that. Where we have across-the-board budget cuts for these things, it is going to have a negative effect. So I would ask my colleagues on the other side to address the costs in our drug interdiction efforts when you have these across-the-board tax cuts.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. BALLENGER. One more. We did add 75 DEA agents to the budget last year.
Mr. ROTHMAN. OK. If that is enough, then I am happy. If it is not enough, then we should do more.
Mr. BALLENGER. We are going to keep working at it, obviously.
Chairman GILMAN. And if the gentleman will yield further, I am certain that many of us in this Committee, as well as our drug task force, will work together to try to make certain that appropriate enforcement officials have the wherewithal to do the job.
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, if I may, if you three were in charge, I would be happy. That would be enough for me. I haven't been given any of that power.
Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
Ms. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I thank the panelists for their excellent presentations.
I have two issues that I would like to discuss further with you. The first one deals with Russia, and the second one with seizures in Miami.
We have been hearing, on the first issue about Russians, some press reports about Colombian cocaine being found in the former Soviet Union, and more and more arms from the former Soviet Union are making their way to Colombia. Are we witnessing a new crime alliance based on drugs for guns?
And, related to that, is this part of what we have been hearing about the increasing role of the Russian Mafia involved in the drug trade which then will, obviously, find its way, unfortunately, to the United States? We have been hearing reports that there are more Russians spotted in Colombia with cash and drugs, like I said, in Russia, from Colombia. What is going on here? Is this a trend? Is this just a fluke or are these press reports exaggerated?
Mr. KNEIR. We have seen Russian organized crime figures in connection with Colombians. We are seeing some Colombian cocaine showing up in Russia.
We tried and we checked with our colleagues in the intelligence community to try to check this out. We are not seeing arms for cocaine. And we don't believe that there is any credibility to that story right now.
But, yes, is the Russian organized crime getting more involved in the drug business? And one of the source countries is Colombia. Yes, we are seeing that.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Any other witnesses who would like to answer?
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. MARSHALL. Yes. I concur with that. We are seeing the Russians becoming involved with the Colombian cocaine traffickers. We are not seeing, to the best of my knowledge, any direct exchange of drugs for arms. We are seeing perhaps a little bit of Russian or the newly independent state organized crime involvement in the United States, but it is not a significant factor in the drug traffic, and at the present time I think that it probably is a significant factor in Europe and the former Soviet Union. But it is a situation that we are keeping our eye on.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you.
I had the opportunity of touring the facilities of the U.S. Customs Service in Miami a few weeks ago and was very impressed with the organization. Of course, to a person, they told me, we wish we had better equipment. The drug runners have faster boats, better equipped planes. We are really fighting a losing war down there.
For a while, the drugs were going into another place, as you have said, but once again it seems like Miami is the entry point, back to the battle days of the cocaine cowboys of the 1980's.
If you had a best estimate of how much cocaine, how much heroin we are able to seize in the port of Miami, would you say that we are—we have heard that it was only like 2 percent that we are able to stop there in south Florida. Would you say that that is about accurate?
Ms. TISCHLER. You know, everything fell apart after I left there, ma'am.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. We know that. We miss you. We want you back. But they are doing as good a job. You know it is not the able female leadership that you provided. We miss you, but they are struggling along with that.
Ms. TISCHLER. Let me say this. I have also been very conservative about estimates, whether we say we catch 10 percent or 50 percent, 100 percent or 2 percent.
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I might point out that ONDCP says that the consumption rate for heroin in the United States is 12 metric tons. If we seized 871 pounds of heroin in Miami last year at the airport—I am really bad on math, but I took the liberty of extrapolating—that means that 43,000 pounds of heroin must be coming into the United States, which we know exceeds the estimates for ONDCP for usage.
I will say this, that the amount of heroin coming through the Miami airport has increased just within the last 5 years to astronomical proportions for them. They are running neck and neck with JFK. From a Customs perspective, they are doing everything to seize the heroin. Dogs are out in force. We are experimenting with new technologies. If you want to think of them as electronic sniffers, that is the type of thing they are using down there.
I saw the 2 percent figure, and I wondered who could have possibly have said that, because I don't think we have enough empirical data to actually support any percentage at the moment, unless my DEA colleague would like to add to this.
But, basically, we take our seizure results and compare it to their projections, and I just can't go with that 2 percent figure.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. OK. Well, I hope so. That would be great.
Mr. MARSHALL. I could perhaps comment a little further on that.
We have heard the estimate, I believe, of a production capability in Colombia of 6 tons of heroin—yes, that is correct, 6 tons of heroin—but the formula that is used for that is really an inexact formula. The way that we have figured that is on the basis of the way it is being done in other parts of the world, because we don't have a full understanding of the Colombian method and the Colombian chemistry yet.
But in other parts of the world, it is something like 10 kilograms of heroin base to make one of heroin hydrochloride. And if you go on that 10-to-1 figure, that is where the 6 tons come from.
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We are beginning to be told, though, that the ratio might actually be 20-to-1, because of less effective laboratory methods. And if that is the accurate thing, then that number could be as low as 3 metric tons. So if you take the kind of mid-range and if you go on the assumption that there might be somewhere between 8,000 and 10,000 pounds of Colombian cocaine coming into the United States—I have one report that says that Customs has seized 1,100 pounds of heroin in the first 9 months of this year, and that would be far more than 2 percent.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. That would be great. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, just one final note. We are optimistic that with the new leadership, the new President in Colombia, we will be fostering even greater communication, greater cooperation, between our law enforcement officials in trying to stem this terrible growing tide of heroin and cocaine into our country.
We have to recognize the full scope of the problem. We are the consumer, and they are the producers. We have to work together, and we pray with the new Colombian leadership we will foster those positive relationships.
Thank you so much.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. I think we all share that optimism for the new leader in Colombia.
I will now start a second round of questions and try to be brief.
Let me address the panelists, all panelists. If you were to eradicate all the coca leaf in Colombia, at best we might be able to eliminate about 20 percent of the cocaine. But if we got all the smaller and much more concentrated opium crop in Colombia, which is all turned into heroin headed for our Nation, wouldn't that end this Colombian heroin crisis in the Northeast?
Mr. MARSHALL. This morning, I just talked to Larry Lyons, the DEA country attache in Colombia, and Larry tells me that—he explained a little bit to me about the nature of the opium poppy crops, and it was really kind of an education. And I didn't understand it quite this well until I talked to Larry this morning, but I am told there is something like 200 hectares under cultivation, and they can produce something like 3 crops per year. So that makes a total——
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman GILMAN. This is poppy?
Mr. MARSHALL. Yes, sir. And that makes a total in the aggregate of, say, 6,600 hectares under cultivation now.
Now, Mr. Lyons tells me that there is a 90-day period from planting the poppies—which, by the way, it does have to be planted, and it has to be cultivated—a 90-day period from the planting until harvesting of the opium gum.
He believes if you undertook a massive eradication program and tried to eliminate virtually all of the cultivation that you could find, then you don't have to do anything for another 90 days. Then if you can come along 90 days later and do that same massive thing that—basically, that if you undertook that type of a program for 1 to 2 years, that would cut off their income from heroin sales in the United States. And then, ultimately, that you could probably have a serious severe impact on the trade that way.
Chairman GILMAN. Let me ask you, too, the head of the Colombian equivalent of our FBI, the DAS, told our Committee staff recently that the Colombian traffickers have shifted more and more cocaine to Europe and Africa, while they send their heroin to our own Nation. Is that accurate?
Mr. MARSHALL. I am sorry. I thought you directed that at Mr. Kneir.
Mr. KNEIR. Certainly, the price of cocaine in Europe is much greater. It would make business sense to start shifting it to Europe versus into the United States.
Chairman GILMAN. Well, have we made a corresponding shift to fight this new Colombian heroin menace?
Mr. MARSHALL. Yes. Congressman, I believe we have, and I have described some of the initiatives that DEA has put forth in our budget plans. We have a 5-year strategy to combat it, and I believe that while we haven't completely made the shift, I believe that we are in the process of establishing that shift, and I think that will be done over the next couple of budget years.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman GILMAN. Have Customs and the FBI made a corresponding shift?
Mr. KNEIR. Yes. We have addressed a number of these cases in the Northeast, taken out the command and control, working them jointly with DEA and Customs.
Chairman GILMAN. Ms. Tischler.
Ms. TISCHLER. What we have done is we have a computer system located in what I call the cabinet, the combined agency border interdiction system. Basically, that handles information and was directed originally toward West African smuggling of heroin. What we have done is expand that to include the Colombian groups, in fact, that are responsible for smuggling the heroin into the United States at the moment.
I can also say this—and I didn't get a chance to answer Congressman Rothman's question on the issue of how we seize things at the border. You know, our inspectors look for contraband, whether it is marijuana, heroin or cocaine. So we don't give up one for the other. And what they are developing now, our inspectors, are more methods to, in fact, detect heroin coming in.
I wouldn't call it a shift, because we look at groups that, in fact, smuggle in and then the commodity is an extra—just a plus for us.
Chairman GILMAN. Would it be more cheaper and more effective, much better to fight Colombian heroin before it gets into the stream of commerce, since it doesn't require large labs or large amounts of precursor chemicals and since it is being smuggled one kilo at a time, often by swallowers which the dogs can't detect? Would it be much more effective then for us to fight it before it gets into the stream of distribution?
Ms. TISCHLER. You know, two things. One, the dogs do sniff out heroin and cocaine that have been digested by swallowers, and I will leave that to your imagination. But I think any time you get closer to the source it is a cheaper issue unless it is an astronomical amount of money that it takes to eradicate it.
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In the best of all worlds, catching it in Colombia or Peru or wherever either heroin or poppies or the cocoa plant is grown is the optimal. But we look at it, as we have talked to you before, about the fact that it is an integration of technique. And until they actually go in and eradicate, we have to keep on doing what we are doing.
But, hypothetically, if we went in there and wiped out all the poppies in Colombia, there wouldn't be anything for us to interdict in terms of heroin coming into the States for sure.
Is it cheaper? I don't know.
Mr. KNEIR. Certainly, it is easier. Once it gets into the transportation routes and the distribution routes—these cases, unfortunately, take time to investigate and take prosecutors' time, take the courts' time. If we could fight it, you know, at the source, it would be better.
Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Marshall, GAO reported earlier this year that the DEA believed the State Department's overemphasis on coca eradication to the detriment of opium reduction in Colombia was hurting the overall fight against heroin and taking down more cocaine labs. Has that balance changed at all?
Mr. MARSHALL. I believe that that balance is in the process of changing, sir. The country team strategy does call for eradication of the opium poppy as a part of their strategy. They have had some problems down there with the helicopters, the Hughies, I believe, being down because of some type of air-worthiness issue that grounded those helicopters worldwide. And I believe that they recognize that as an essential element; and they are committed now, I believe, with the new helicopters going in there—I am told that they are committed to restoring that balance.
And so I have to say that, yes, I believe that problem has been solved.
Chairman GILMAN. The change has already taken place?
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. MARSHALL. No, sir. I believe the change is in the process of taking place.
Chairman GILMAN. How long will that be?
Mr. MARSHALL. And I believe the agreement to get the other helicopters down there is a part of that process.
Chairman GILMAN. How long before do you think that change would take place?
Mr. MARSHALL. I believe they are going to be delivering a couple of those, two or three of those, helicopters this fiscal year and more next fiscal year. So I would hope that we could phase it in very soon.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you.
Mr. Clement.
Mr. CLEMENT. So if I hear what you are saying, the greatest threat now to the United States is more the Colombian heroin than the Colombian cocaine? Would you say that?
Mr. MARSHALL. From my perspective, Congressman, it is difficult to say that one drug threat is greater than another. We have certainly a tremendous threat from cocaine. We have certainly a tremendous threat from methamphetamine. I mean, it is—some of the methamphetamine stories that I hear are just absolutely frightening, just as the heroin stories are. So to say that it is a worse problem than cocaine, I am not sure I would go quite that far. But certainly it is the type of drug that is very addictive. It is the type of drug that is very insidious. It is expanding its user population in the United States right now. So I would say that, because of the growing nature of the heroin problem, it is one of the most serious threats that we face right now.
Mr. CLEMENT. I noticed in that GAO report last May, referring to Southeast Asia and Burma, they seem to imply that most of the heroin was coming from that part of the world and into the United States. But are you all refuting that today from the GAO report?
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. MARSHALL. When was that report, Congressman?
Mr. CLEMENT. Last May.
Mr. MARSHALL. That is not what we are seeing today. We are seeing predominantly the Colombian heroin coming in to the States; and we, in fact, are even looking, consciously looking, for the Southeast Asia heroin. And, to my knowledge, it only dominates the market in maybe one or two U.S. cities. We are just not seeing much of it.
Mr. CLEMENT. Well, all three of you looking into a crystal ball, what can we expect, going into the 21st century, when it comes to drugs?
You know, when I was growing up, you know, they didn't really have drugs; and right after my generation then it sort of set in. And a lot of people thought it was a fad, that, you know, experimental and nothing would come from it, and yet it truly has grabbed our society. What can we expect in the future?
Mr. KNEIR. I think unless we have a very concerted effort on drug demand reduction, to keep up the investigations; and to try to eradicate the drugs at the source, that we will see a rise in drug usage in this country.
Mr. MARSHALL. I agree with that, Congressman. I think that we have to have a concentrated demand reduction program. We have to combine that with aggressive law enforcement. And, by the way, I believe that law enforcement in this country is cooperating better than ever and getting more effective than ever; and if we maintain our focus on both sides of the equation, I think that we will make progress. If we take our eye off the ball, I think that more and more bad news is in store for us.
Mr. CLEMENT. Ms. Tischler.
Ms. TISCHLER. I would just like to add I think that the heroin threat at the moment is sort of indicative of what could happen in the future. The heroin threat, as we knew it in the thirties, forties, fifties, were artists or individuals who were blue collar who used the drug. And really through the great work of DEA over the years, we thought we pretty well had it licked. And they used to say as many people became addicted to heroin as died. So, consequently, it was a pretty static population of drug using.
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
But I just came out of Florida, as I was joking about with Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen, and the bottom line is that heroin usage in Florida, in Miami, in Fort Lauderdale, in South Beach specifically, has expanded to the youth, and that is a major deviation course for heroin. It is with the yuppies. It is with the kids that frequent the clubs down there.
Before I left the State, locals were telling me that heroin deaths, in terms of the morgue keeping count of overdoses, had really gone off the scale for them.
So here is a drug that was beaten into submission, more or less, that is making a very strong comeback in a totally different portion of society.
So I think, not to reiterate what Mr. Marshall and Mr. Kneir have said, because they are absolutely right on, this marriage of law enforcement and demand reduction has got to take us past the year 2000 and eliminate those people—or the ability of the traffickers to prey on our young especially, because I think that is where they are establishing their markets.
Mr. CLEMENT. Thank you.
Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Ballenger.
Mr. BALLENGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, Ms. Tischler, I was in Mexico with the Chairman this past weekend. In spite of all the hell we caught from the Mexican news media, I think you all did a wonderful job. I hope you will continue it.
I have been to Venezuela and Colombia, and it appears that everybody there knows these two brothers that live in Aruba that launder all the money down there. Is there any way we can invite them up to the United States to visit some of our houses of ill repute and maybe arrest them?
Mr. KNEIR. The Mansours have been extradited back to Puerto Rico and will stand trial in Puerto Rico on money laundering charges.
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BALLENGER. Oh, congratulations. How long ago was that?
Mr. KNEIR. Two and a half months ago.
Mr. BALLENGER. Whoever did it, let me thank you profusely.
When we were in Colombia, the chief of police told us that there was a likelihood that maybe the narcotraffickers were better armed than the police were. Is there any way that we might be able to control the arms going into Colombia for the narcotraffickers?
Mr. KNEIR. You know, I had the—maybe the misfortune of working on the Iran-Contra investigation with Walsh, and there is a big arms market out there. Arms were not a problem to get, whether it was high-powered arms or rifles.
Mr. BALLENGER. Right.
Mr. KNEIR. I don't know how you absolutely do that.
Mr. BALLENGER. We were looking at the helicopters in Colombia, and not only were they in terrible shape but they were all old, Vietnam War helicopters. Thank goodness they have figured a way to rebuild those things. Their equipment (including guns) were also Vietnam War era. They showed us some films, where the guns hang up. I mean, they are old. Everything is worn. They are fighting a war where the enemy is equipped with the best weapons money can buy, and they are using our Vietnam leftovers. So I am glad to see there has finally been a decision to do something about it.
Let me ask you a question, and I am just asking for your personal opinion. As you know, there are a group of people in this country that are pushing legalization of drugs. I just would like to have an opinion from each of you as to the effect that legalization of drugs might have, in your opinion, pure and simple, not a government opinion or anything.
Mr. MARSHALL. Well, I will take a stab at that.
As a parent, first of all, and as a law enforcement professional second, I think that legalization of any drugs would be the absolute worst thing that we could see in this country. I think that we have seen the social costs in terms of insurance, in terms of health care, in terms of loss of productivity to society, those costs associated with drugs that are already legal in our society now.
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
And when you look at cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, things of that sort, much more potential for destruction of individuals, much more potential for harmful effect on society. So, to me, it just doesn't make sense to legalize something that is going to be far worse than, say, alcohol, for instance, in its social costs and health costs.
With regard to marijuana, which a lot of people, I think, look at as maybe the gateway to legalization—and speaking of gateway, I think that marijuana is a gateway to the use of hard drugs, much as tobacco and alcohol are a gateway to the use of other drugs. And to me when you look at the availability of marijuana, when you look at the segment of our society that is using marijuana—younger people, students, adolescents in their formative years, people who have bright futures ahead of them otherwise but through getting involved in this gateway drug maybe go on to become not quite as productive citizens as they should, or even a drain on society—I think that you could make the argument that marijuana is one of the most harmful drugs in our society.
So I would oppose steadfastly any legalization of any more drugs.
Mr. BALLENGER. Would you respond, Mr. Kneir?
Mr. KNEIR. I would have to agree totally with Mr. Marshall, both as a parent and as a law enforcement official. It is a terrible idea.
Mr. BALLENGER. Ms. Tischler.
Ms. TISCHLER. Well, I am not a parent, but I have to tell you that our future is our children, and anything that might damage that is absolutely and should be abhorrent to this society. So I think that Mr. Marshall very eloquently described all three of our feelings and probably all of the rest of the professional law enforcement world, who have, in fact, dealt with narcotics in any way, shape or form.
Mr. BALLENGER. Are you legally bound so you can't say that to the news media? Nobody on TV ever asked you to say that? I would love to have some kind of rebuttal to the newspapers that have come out advertising what a wonderful idea it would be to legalize drugs.
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. MARSHALL. Congressman, there is certainly no prohibition from us speaking that, and many of us in the law enforcement community do speak those opinions publicly. There is just so much of that debate that, you know, a few of us can't respond to each and every single time that that argument is put forward.
Mr. BALLENGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Ballenger.
I want to thank our panelists for their outstanding testimony, and please convey to your respective law enforcement people how much we respect what they are doing out on the front lines, day in and day out.
Before we wind up, can you just comment on how effective the law enforcement efforts are of General Serrano's anti-drug counternarcotics group?
Mr. MARSHALL. I suppose DEA probably has maybe a longer experience in Colombia and with the Colombian National Police than the FBI or Customs, but I would like to give them the opportunity to comment as well.
I think that the Colombian National Police, under General Serrano, has been nothing short of heroic. They have lost a lot of people to the traffickers over the years. They have faced substantial obstacles to effective law enforcement in their own country. They have faced the financing and the wealth and the power and the influence of the traffickers. They have lost a number of men and women, far more than we in law enforcement in the United States have lost in that same period of time, and yet they have persevered and dismantled the Medellin cartel almost totally.
They have had a tremendous effect on the Cali cartel to the point that they have changed their methods of operation to the point that competitive splinter groups are springing up in Colombia, and I think that speaks volumes about the dedication and the heroism of General Serrano and his people and perhaps more importantly the courage and leadership of General Serrano himself.
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you. Any other comments? Mr. Kneir.
Mr. KNEIR. In preparing for my testimony today, I read some figures where in the last 10 years 3,200 Colombian law enforcement officials have been killed. If you think about the courage that it takes to fight the drug war in Colombia and what personal sacrifice they have gone through, I think the General has done a tremendous job and faces some very steep obstacles.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you. And Ms. Tischler.
Ms. TISCHLER. I can only add that their cooperation in terms of the Casablanca Operation was outstanding.
Chairman GILMAN. Thank you. And the Casablanca Operation itself was outstanding.
Allow me to note that we have present two of General Serrano's cadre who are here today observing, Captain Buitrago and Major Segura. Thank you for joining us today.
And, with that, I thank our panelists once again; and our Committee hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Insert "The Official Committee record contains additional material here."