In my own department, we have programs operating in 216 schools in 41 different school districts. I have yet to receive 5 cents of government funding to conduct those programs. I have taken deputy personnel, have diverted them from other responsibilities, and have relied upon private sector funding for equipment and supplies necessary to support that program. There must be an increased interaction and cooperation between enforcement agencies at all levels of government. Task forcing, sharing of intelligence, and regionalizing of efforts is mandatory if there is to be an impact on major drug dealers. Successful seizures of assets and cash of drug dealers is a means of crippling large drug organizations. We need to expand our efforts in this aspect of narcotic enforcement. The necessary additional manpower and resources needed could be offset by the revenue recovered. However, Federal agencies are having difficulty in keeping up with the demand for their services in this regard. The timely return of the seized assets would allow for their use in combatting the problem. The United States must regain control of our borders, which are now the primary point for the importation of drugs into the United States. Military personnel could play an integral part in securing our borders, as well as controlling our offshore waters and coastline. We would not hesitate for a moment to send the military to our borders if enemy troops threatened. Yet, the simple reality is that no country in the world could ever mobilize enough troops to equal the devastation created by the flow of illicit drugs across our borders. The United States must increase its pressure on source countries for the eradication of narcotic-producing crops. Where there is a lack of cooperation, we must impose diplomatic and economic sanctions against those governments. Special emphasis should be given to Mexico, where reports of official complicity in drug activity is rampant, and Colombia, where today they are considering tax amnesty for drug traffickers who have amassed fortunes estimated to be up to $60 billion U.S. dollars. As in any war, if we are to win this war against drugs, we must mobilize all of our resources and assume the offensive against the energy. Anything less than total commitment, and I can assure you the war will be lost. Mr. RANGEL. Thank you, sheriff. In order to have the Members keep their schedules, the Chair would ask that the witnesses restrict their testimony to five minutes and their entire testimony will be entered into the record. [The statement of Mr. Block appears on p. 92.] Mr. RANGEL. We welcome the testimony of District Attorney Ira Reiner of the County of Los Angeles. TESTIMONY OF IRA REINER, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Mr. REINER. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am Ira Reiner, the district attorney of Los Angeles County. In the brief time available to me, I would like to speak to three aspects of the narcotics trafficking problem in Los Angeles: First, the scope of the problem; Second, what we are doing locally; and Third, some specific things the Federal Government can and should be doing to combat the problem. I would like to note that in discovering the drug problem, the national media has pounced on the obvious with a great sense of original discovery. In fact, the national media was only reporting stories that had for years been covered in all its ugly detail by local media. But now it is becoming increasingly fashionable to take a revisionist view of drugs and drug trafficking. As soon as the scope of the problem was discovered and exposed by the national media, there was almost immediately a countermovement within the same media that the problem had been blown out of proportion, that the problem of drug abuse has been exaggerated. I would suggest that the story of drug abuse in this country only seems to be overreported because for so long it was underreported and it is important in examining this issue to understand that any suggestion that illegal and dangerous drugs have not permeated this community and this nation and threatened our society is wishful thinking by those who simply don't know the facts. I would like to note that this revisionist view is no where in evidence on this committee and that we in law enforcement are encouraged by the serious view taken by this committee of this serious national problem. The supply of narcotics, particularly cocaine, coming into California by way of an open border and through our harbors is larger than ever. A specific example: Four years ago, the price of a kilo of cocaine was around $60,000 and today the same quantity sells for less than $20,000. This dramatic reduction in price is the result of the incredible increase of supply of narcotics that has come in. To the fact of huge supply and the availability of cocaine and other drugs needs to be added another dimension. In Los Angeles County, there are over 400 street gangs with a membership of around 50,000. Los Angeles is the street gang capital of the United States and I say this, as you might surmise, with no sense of local pride. Street gangs once concerned primarily with matters of turf have now entered the narcotics market so that principal areas for narcotics dealing are controlled here in Los Angeles by street gangs. They are well armed with automatic and semiautomatic weapons and sawed-off shotguns and are highly mobile, relying on car phones and beepers to make sure that potential buyers are serviced. The Uzi machine gun is becoming the weapon of choice and becoming as commonplace as the "ghettoblaster." You can well imagine the impact of street gangs taking over a multimillion dollar drug trade. Suffice it to say that street gangs killings are now routinely a part of life in Los Angeles. What are we doing about the problem? In the district attorney's office, we have a task force concentrating on prosecution of gang members and trying to break up the gangs. We have a major narcotics enforcement program which focuses on major narcotics dealers and we have established a narcotics trafficking enforcement program which focuses on the so-called "small time" street dealer, through which most of the narcotics are marketed here. We have asked the courts to establish special narcotic courts to deal with narcotic offenders. I have invited California's urban district attorneys to a meeting on drug enforcement to consider strategy in combatting the problem. Part of what that meeting will concentrate on are recommendations to the Federal Government for action, but before we meet, there are certain things I can say with confidence that should be on our agenda. Our office has conducted extensive research into the Federal resources being utilized to combat narcotics trafficking and while we were able to obtain some information, it is incomplete and I ask that this committee obtain an audit of resources by the GAO. That way we will know exactly what the Federal Government is doing in this particular area. To us, it is unclear what the Federal Government is doing, although the distinct impression is that it is not doing enough, that there is a substantial gap between rhetoric and performance, and what is required is a major resource commitment focused on attacking the importation of drugs into this State and Nation. It is recognized that to combat narcotics trafficking, there are three levels of enforcement available: eradication, interdiction, and local arrest and prosecution. We are making efforts at the third level, but local law enforcement is merely shoveling against the tide if the Federal Government is not committed to eradication and interdiction, which is clearly within the Federal Government power and authority. With proper commitment, Federal interdiction would compliment local enforcement, and then we would begin to make a difference on the drug trade, and then on our neighborhoods and in our schools. Thank you. [The statement of Mr. Reiner appears on p. 99.] Mr. RANGEL. I thank the panel for a balanced overview on the serious nature of the drug problem and its impact on the people of Los Angeles. That is thoughtful testimony. Mr. Dixon? Mr. DIXON. I would also like to thank the panel, and ask a question of perhaps the two nonprofessional members of the panel, Reverend Jones and Ms. Cordova. In Sheriff Block's testimony, we touched upon one of the issues that Congress has been struggling with. That is basically the use of the military, interdiction problems or security. I understand the professional law enforcement officers' interest and support of that concept. What is your opinion about the military, soldiers, and border interdiction, or some other military activity related to drugs? Reverend JONES. We worked closely with Sheriff Block for a number of issues, and we have basic agreement what needs to be done at the border. UNO and SCOC might take a slightly different approach. We believe it is necessary for the military to share equipment and technology, things like radar planes, listening devices, highspeed aircraft, and we think there needs to be a build-up of effort on the border. We would prefer to see it done by those elements of the Federal Government which are already charged with that enforcement, but at present do not have things like the enforcement of Customs, DEA, Coast Guard, which ought to have the power of arrest, that we ought to take the professional law enforcement agencies of the Government and beef up their resources. More personnel, more equipment, greater technology need to be put in place at the border. Ms. CORDOVA. I think that that would be a sensible use of what we already have, instead of putting military manpower. I don't believe the manpower is that necessary to use, but the technology, of course, can be shared. Mr. DIXON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. RANGEL. Congressman Roybal? Mr. ROYBAL. I would like to ask a question of the sheriff of L.A. County with regard to his statement that most of this junk comes in by ground transportation, automobile, bus, and private cars. Now, when these cars come through the border, do they come through the actual ports of entry, or are there some secret ways that they are coming through? Mr. BLOCK. Most of the truck, bus, auto transportation comes through the established border crossing points. Mr. ROYBAL. Isn't it true that at these border crossings, there are not enough facilities to deal with the interdiction of narcotics, not enough dogs or personnel, so that each car can actually be looked into? Is that one of the problems? Mr. BLOCK. There is no question that there is a tremendous deficiency in available resources at the border crossings. I think that is an absolute given. Mr. ROYBAL. I thank you. Mr. Reiner, I am very much concerned about something I was told during a hearing we held in Hawaii. I was told in no uncertain terms that there are more narcotics grown in California, in Hawaii, and in Florida than would ever come into the United States from other sources. To what extent are narcotics grown here in California? I won't ask you about Hawaii, because I saw marijuana in Hawaii, and I have seen by air marijuana in Florida, but I have not seen it in California, am interested in learning more about this problem. Is there such a thing going on? Mr. REINER. Yes, of course, there is. Mr. ROYBAL. We ought to be dealing with our own backyard to start with. What do you recommend that we do with regard to the growing of marijuana in California? Mr. REINER. Well, I would agree partially with your statement. Obviously, something has to be done about the problem domestically. It is not a matter of first, you deal with it here and then elsewhere. This is a problem that has to be attacked on all fronts simultaneously. Yes, there has to be an effort in those parts of the State where marijuana is grown, to eradicate it, and in source countries as well. Mr. ROYBAL. Don't you think we could show the example and start eradicating in California, doing away with all this marijuana? Mr. REINER. I certainly feel we have to set an example, indeed. Mr. BLOCK. Mr. Roybal, first, almost all of this marijuana that has been grown in California, it is being grown on Federal lands in the national forests, and unfortunately, the effort that is being made to eradicate that is constantly under attack by the ecology groups, by persons who allege that that effort is destructive of the environment, when in reality, these persons who are the illegal cultivators of this marijuana have taken over Federal lands, restricted access to the general public, diverted streams to irrigate their lands, put out poisons, have used herbicides to destroy those growths that might interfere with their crops, yet the criticism goes toward the enforcement effort. I would submit that there is a resistance to use things such as paraquat in this country, and I wonder how many of you gentlemen realize that paraquat is used freely in agriculture in this country, that all of the lettuce that we eat, the fields are treated with paraquat, yet we resist using this on marijuana because of some special interest program that seems to have had significant influence on that effort. Mr. ROYBAL. Your statement is borne out by the Secretary of Agriculture, who says that the Forest Service indicates that 20 percent of the domestic marijuana is grown in the national forests, as against 5 percent 6 years ago, but that is only 20 percent. Where is the other 80 percent that is not grown in the national forests? Mr. BLOCK. In California, that number would probably be 80 percent. That is probably a national figure. The crop of northern California is almost exclusively grown in national forest land. Mr. ROYBAL. Have you any recommendations as to what action we can take as Members of Congress, or what this committee can do? Please communicate those to us. Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Levine? Mr. LEVINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to commend each of the panelists. I just have one specific question which can't be answered today, but I would like to raise it with Sheriff Block. When you concluded your testimony, you outlined the different areas that we ought to be concerned about, and it sounded like you were listing the key sections of the drug bill we just passed. |