Homeland Security Focus Areas

Border Security

U.S. Department of Homeland Security press release, 22 July:
Department of Homeland Security Proposes Regulations to Improve Cargo Security

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, an agency of the Department of Homeland Security, today announced the publication of proposed regulations to obtain advance information concerning shipments of goods to the U.S. These proposed regulations implement Section 343(a) of the Trade Act of 2002. The proposed regulations represent another step in the Department of Homeland Security's ongoing efforts to build smarter and more secure borders. The proposed regulations require advance information, in electronic format, on cargo destined to and from the United States for each mode of transportation: air, truck, rail, and sea.
"These security measures developed by Customs and Border Protection are important to the protection of America and the American people," said Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge. "Advance cargo information is essential to not only preventing instruments of terrorism from being shipped into this country, but also to speed the flow of legitimate cargo across our borders."
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will run the cargo data through an automated targeting system that is linked to various law enforcement databases, and thus the proposed regulations will enable CBP to do a better job of identifying shipments that pose a potential terrorist risk. Today, many shipments e.g., by commercial trucks, are admitted into the U.S. without this automated targeting taking place because CBP receives cargo data in paper format upon arrival to the United States. As a consequence, the process for assessing the risks associated with these shipments cannot be done prior to arrival at the border and thus makes movement across the border slower and less efficient. The Trade Act provided the Department of Homeland Security with the authority to change these antiquated, paper-driven processes for cargo crossing our borders.
"Information is the key to improving many of our border and transportation security systems," said Asa Hutchinson, Undersecretary for Border and Transportation Security. "This rule will help provide better information earlier in the process to help our officers do an even better job of targeting at risk cargo."
The proposed regulations were developed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection with significant input from the trade community and the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA). In the proposed regulations, CBP carefully considered, and in many cases adopted, recommendations from the trade. The proposed regulations also closely track a similar proposal by CCRA.
"These regulations will permit us to risk manage far more effectively for the terrorist threat. That's what building smart borders is all about," said CBP Commissioner Robert C. Bonner. "The proposed regulations are the result of a careful and considered effort to strike the appropriate balance between security and trade facilitation."
The following are the proposed timelines for each transportation mode;
Proposals for Imports:
Air & Courier - 4 hours prior to arrival in U.S., or "wheels up" from certain nearby areas
Rail - 2 hours prior to arrival in the U.S.
Vessel - 24 hours prior to landing at foreign port
Truck - FAST: 30 minutes prior to arrival in U.S.; Non-FAST: 1 hour prior to arrival in the U.S.
Proposals for Exports:
Air & Courier - 2 hours prior to departure from the U.S.
Rail - 4 hours prior to attachment of engine before going to a foreign area
Vessel - 24 hours prior to departure from the last U.S. port
Truck - 2 hours prior to border crossing
The full text of the proposed regulations is available on the Customs and Border Protection Web site at www.cbp.gov.
The public has 30 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register to submit their comments to CBP on the proposals.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection is a new agency within the Department of Homeland Security that unifies U.S. Customs, Immigration and Agriculture inspectors and the Border Patrol.

DHS Official Sheds Light on Use of UAVs to Patrol U.S. Southern Border

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will soon conduct demonstration exercises using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) along the U.S.' southern border, the Pentagon's Defense Link reported on 14 July. Speaking at a UAV demonstration event co-sponsored by the Navy and the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, Deputy Homeland Security Secretary, and former Navy Secretary, Gordon England said he had requested that the Pentagon deploy UAVs with DHS agencies along the U.S. southern border to allow DHS personnel to "gain some experience, some background, some hands on with the technology. This is the first step for us as we move into this new area of UAV technology." DHS' Border and Transportation Directorate spokesman Dennis Murphy told CQ Homeland Security, "I don't have a specific time line [on the UAV training exercises] but we're aggressively moving forward with looking at this as a possibility," adding, "We would use [the UAV's] for surveillance purposes...We want to gain some experience and certainly the military are the experts."

ANALYSIS: England's comments are the latest from DHS endorsing the use of UAV's for homeland security applications. DHS Secretary Tom Ridge said in May that the department plans to have a pilot program in place by the end of the year," Aerospace Daily reported. In June DHS' Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Robert Bonner endorsed the plan saying he expected a pilot "in the near term." Several key lawmakers have also backed the use of UAVs in homeland security, including Senator John Warner (R-Virginia), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. That support is mainly due to the success of UAVs in military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. A Naval Air Systems Command official attending the UAV demonstration where England spoke, said, "When we held this [event] the last time in July 2001, the emphasis was on data and pictures. Now the Predator [UAV] is armed and flying missions. The Defense Department is sinking serious money in [UAVs], and all sorts of other uses are being considered for these platforms," Defense Link reported. Another reason UAVs enjoy this kind of support is cost. "These [systems] are very economical. They are getting easier to fly and require fewer people and pieces of equipment to operate, said Clark Butner of the Naval Air Systems Command, calling the cost of one UAV system "digit dust."

July 16, 2003
Agencies quizzed on management of terror suspects
By Roxanne Yaghoubi, CongressDaily

At a hearing Tuesday, members of the Senate Judiciary Immigration and Border Security Subcommittee asked why, almost two years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, federal agencies were allowing terrorism suspects to enter and stay in the United States.
Immigration and Border Security Subcommittee Chairman Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., expressed concern that information about suspected terrorists was not being shared quickly and effectively between agencies, a fear that arose from a June 18 GAO report (03-798 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03798.pdf).
GAO official Jess Ford testified that the report had found 240 visas had been revoked because of terrorism concerns since the attacks, but the Immigration and Naturalization Services often was not notified immediately of the revocation. In 43 cases, the agency was not notified at all.
Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., asked why the average notification time was 12 days, joking that he did not know of any e-mails that took that long to arrive. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., agreed and asked why, if businesses could share vital information quickly all the time, government agencies could not.
Michael Dougherty, director of operations in the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the Homeland Security Department, expressed hope that the reorganization of the INS in the Homeland Security Department would help with communication and notification between agencies.
Besides expressing concern that the agencies were not equipped or prepared to communicate with one another, subcommittee members wondered what obstacles kept these agencies from expelling a suspected terrorist from the country.
In trying to expel such terrorists, officials make a distinction between suspects who entered the country without a valid visa and those whose visas were not revoked until after they entered.
Ford explained that there are significant legal challenges to expelling those in the latter category, because no matter what their legal status, suspects are still entitled to due process.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said, "We must make sure our enemies cannot thread the cracks in the system."

From the "Congressional Quarterly Homeland Security Daily," 16 July:

State Department Visa Program Still a Mess, Auditor Says

The State Department’s visa program is still broken, a General Accounting Office auditor told the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship Tuesday. Jess T. Ford, director of GAO’s International Affairs and Trade Division, said the department needs new policies and increased interagency coordination in order to improve the process for issuing visas to foreign visitors. Those recommendations echoed the conclusions of an October 2002 GAO report on the visa process, which found the State Department lacked clear policies on how consular officers should balance national security concerns with legitimate travel requests when issuing visas. Ford also referred to a June 2003 report which recommended that the State Department’s visa revocation process need to be strengthened. - Anjali Cordeiro

Read the GAO Report

From the "Congressional Quarterly Homeland Security Daily," 15 July:

Curbs on Foreign ID Cards Pushed by House Republicans

Widely accepted identification cards issued to foreign visitors by their consulates in the United States - mostly from Latin America - are susceptible to fraud and abuse and could pose a threat to homeland security, high-ranking House Republicans warn. Mexican consular IDs are accepted by 13 states as valid for a driver’s license. But in a July 8 letter to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Christopher Cox, R-Calif., and House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., R-Wis., said identification cards issued by the Mexican consulate are neither reliable nor secure and that, according to the FBI, pose a criminal and terrorist threat. According to the FBI the cards can be used for a variety of crimes - from money laundering to check fraud - the letter said. The lawmakers urged Ridge to “act decisively in response to the homeland security concerns associated with domestic acceptance of consular identification cards.” - Anjali Cordeiro

From the "Congressional Quarterly Homeland Security Daily," 14 July:

Labor Department Tasked with Refugee Childcare

Sorting out which federal agency will take care of the estimated 5,000 unaccompanied children that are likely to be picked up in 2004 along the U.S. border provides one example of the upheaval the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) opened in the appropriations process. Pre-DHS, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, then part of the Justice Department, was responsible for caring for unaccompanied minors, using funds provided through the Commerce, Justice and State appropriation. Now, the Department of Labor’s Office of Refugee Assistance has the job. The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies proposed giving the refugee office $34.2 million for the “care and placement of unaccompanied alien minors.” - Jim McGee

Remarks by Under Secretary Asa Hutchinson on the Launch of the US-VISIT Program
For Immediate Release
May 19, 2003
* Remarks as Prepared *

At the Department of Homeland Security - my responsibility centers on the borders of the United States. What we do at our borders impacts our security, our economy and our relationship with the international community.
For that reason, I am grateful for this opportunity to talk about the future of our borders at CSIS. Your scholarly and bipartisan approach is the right mix for border policy discussions
At the turn of the last century, the heart of America was defined by Emma Lazarus's inspiring words affixed to the Statue of Liberty: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
A century later, the yearning has not changed---nor has America's heart. As last week's tragedy in Texas reminds us, people still risk their lives for the freedom and opportunity America offers. In that case, 18 immigrants died in a suffocating tractor-trailer. Five of the nine suspects are in custody. Our hearts and prayers go out to those men and women who were so cruelly and criminally abandoned by their smugglers.
Immigrants still search for the American Dream. And when they find it, all Americans benefit.
That is because immigrants don't just contribute to our country, they help define our character and they help defend our freedoms. It was Irving Berlin, a Russian/Jewish immigrant who wrote, "God Bless America." And we could not watch "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," if not for Frank Capra, an Italian-American who rode in steerage to America at age six.
President Bush was right when he said immigrants "make our nation more, not less, American."
Of course, immigrant soldiers also defend our freedoms. And I am proud that our Department has granted citizenship, in some cases posthumously, to several in that war.
We should remember that immigrants and naturalized citizens make up about five percent of our armed forces
Marine Lance Corporal Jose Gutierrez, a citizen of Guatemala and resident of California died in Iraq, a family member said, "He wanted to give back to a nation that gave him so much."
Truly, immigrants have contributed greatly to our nation
Today, however, we face new and unprecedented dangers. Some who cross our borders do not yearn to breathe free - they yearn to destroy freedom. They do not seek a better life -- but an opportunity to weaken America and to take innocent lives.
On September 11th, 2001, nineteen terrorists took advantage of our welcoming nature … and took the lives of 3,000 of our fellow citizens - and, I might add, citizens from other nations, too. Many of the 19 hijackers had violated the terms of their visa -- and nearly all had incomplete or incorrect application forms.
It should be noted that one of the hijackers, Hani Hanjour, had violated the terms of his student visa, not showing up to school as required. Another, Mohammed Atta, had overstayed his visa on a previous occasion, and violated his current tourist visa by taking flying lessons. Both could have been stopped by an effective US VISIT system.
Our immigration policies must recognize and reflect this new reality. Congress has directed us to improve the system and make it work. The Department of Homeland Security has a unique opportunity to fulfill that mission. It's never been more important that we do so.
Earlier this month, Secretary Ridge announced that the Department of Homeland Security would meet the deadline given to us by Congress to install an entry-exit system at America's airports and seaports by year's end. This will be done through our US VISIT program.
Today I am pleased to lay out more of the details as to how we will accomplish that goal, and how our US VISIT system will fit into the comprehensive border information system necessary to give America a 21st Century "smart border" -- one that speeds through legitimate trade and travel, but stops terrorists in their tracks.
First, let's look at the system that is needed. Information will be the cornerstone of this effort. Actually, it's always been that way. In 1819, one of America's first immigration laws was passed, requiring that ships' captains provide a list of all passengers brought in on their voyage.
But in the 21st Century, border security can no longer be just a coastline, or a line on the ground between two nations. It's also a line of information in a computer, telling us who is in this country, for how long, and for what reason. We are hiring 1,700 new inspectors and hundreds of Border Patrol Agents.
In the 21st Century, it is not enough to place inspectors at our ports of entry to monitor the flow of goods and people. We must also have a "virtual border" that operates far beyond the land border of the United States.
Under US VISIT, we will eventually have information on our visitors -- collected at our consular officers far from our borders -- that will confirm identity, measure security risks and assess the legitimacy of travel of visitors to the U.S.
For people who require visas, those visas will use biometric features that will enable us to identify the visitors when they arrive at an airport or seaport and to access the information about that visitor. This information will be available at our ports of entry as well as throughout our entire immigration enforcement system.
Through this "virtual border," we will know who violates our entry requirements, who overstays or violates the terms of their stay, and who should be welcome again.
In addition, the DHS will, for the first time, oversee the visa issuance process. We'll be responsible for maintaining its integrity, working through and with the consular offices of the U.S. State Department. This unity of border and visa responsibilities will allow for a better flow of information and a coordinated response to immigration violations.
We will also work with State to encourage Visa Waiver countries to use tamper-proof passports that include biometric identifiers as soon as possible -- and to consider security needs first when issuing them.
In fact, Visa Waiver countries are required to use biometrics by 10-26-04 - under Congressional mandate.
As a result, we'll be able to require proof of identification from foreign national visitors to the U.S. We'll do so through a minimum of two biometric identifiers - initially, fingerprints and photographs; later, as the technology is perfected, additional forms such as facial recognition or iris scans may be used as well.
Let me add, biometric technology is not new. More than six million Border Crossing Cards for frequent crossers have been issued in the last five years, each with two fingerprints and a digital photograph embedded on the back.
In fact, a recent pilot program to decode the cards resulted in the capture of 250 impostors trying to cheat the system. We will make sure that the right equipment and training is in place to make it work on a large scale.
The business community knows all about biometrics too, and they've been working long and hard on solutions. As we build US VISIT, we realize that the best solutions will not come from DC, but from entrepreneurs. We cannot secure our borders without the initiative and expertise of the private sector.
And I'm pleased to say that we will work with industry to issue an RFP by no later than this fall.
This is the overall picture - let me explain how the first phase of US VISIT will work.
By January 1st of next year, if a foreign visitor flies into Dulles or JFK or LAX or another international airport or arrives at a U.S. seaport - the visitor's travel documents will be scanned. Then, once a photo and fingerprint are taken, the person will then be checked against lists of those who should be denied entry for any reason - terrorist connections, criminal violations, or past visa violations.
The information requested will include immigrant and citizenship status; nationality; the country of residence; and the person's address while in the United States. Incomplete information will no longer be good enough.
In 99.9 percent of the cases, the visitor will simply be wished a good day and sent on their way. But with that small percentage of "hits," our country will be made much safer, and our immigration system will be given a foundation of integrity that has been lacking for too long.
When that visitor departs, we will verify his or her identity and capture their departure information. This tells the Department of Homeland Security if that person entered legally may have stayed illegally as the 9/11 terrorists did. Currently, there is no way to know when or even if our visitors leave - but under US VISIT, that will change.
US VISIT will not be a static system, but a dynamic one, able to track changes in immigration status and make updates and adjustments accordingly.
For example, if a foreign visitor enters on a 90-day tourist visa but must stay for an emergency medical reaon, the system should track it.
Congress has appropriated nearly $400 million for this year alone to establish it at our airports and seaports.
Our next question is to establish it at the major land ports of entry. We are communicating with Congress and aggressively building our capability to meet the challenge.
Our next challenge is this: how do you handle the massive amount of information that will be generated? That is my next announcement.
The Department of Homeland Security is establishing a new capability within ICE, our Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement -- an Office of Compliance. This team of compliance officers will review US VISIT information on visa violations, analyze it and refer appropriate leads to our field enforcement units for investigation.
As information increases, the Office of Compliance must grow the capability to track the cases and refer them, when appropriate, for investigation.
All of this information will become part of a foreign visitor's ongoing travel record, so their correct information can follow them wherever they go.
The information will be made available to inspectors, agents, consular officials and others with a true need to know.
Law enforcement will also have access to the information, but only for strictly defined and limited purposes.
Let me assure you: our Department's Privacy Officer, Nuala O'Connor Kelly, will closely monitor the effort to safeguard people's information from misuse.
US VISIT is just the latest step in the DHS's "Information Modernization." In a very brief time, under the leadership of Secretary Ridge, we are making great progress in capturing and sharing information across the entire landscape of homeland security - from border and transportation security to critical infrastructure protection to emergency response.
The common denominator here is integration - making sure our systems, technology and people are not limited by unnecessary barriers.
Information is worth very little if it's stuck in an agency "stovepipe" or trapped in a maze of outdated technology, where the right people cannot get to it in time to make a difference. US VISIT will coordinate our border information and our enforcement and compliance efforts.
Take, for instance, SEVIS [Student and Exchange Visitor Information System]. SEVIS was designed to let university officials electronically update us on changes in the status of their international students.
It's a powerful tool for combating fraud. To date, nearly 3,000 "no-show" students have been reported to ICE, allowing us to determine whether they have violated the law or pose a security risk. Most do not, of course, but the point is, we cannot rely on guesswork anymore.
Now, some may argue that we're asking for too much information. They may worry that it could intimidate some people and create a chilling effect on immigration.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
We're not here to play "gotcha." We would prefer to see the law obeyed rather than to punish violators. In fact, our compliance officers will be out in the field, helping foreign students and universities learn the rules.
We've also invited experts from science and academia to help us speed up the visa approval process for foreign scholars and teachers who clearly pose no threat. We welcome students, visitors and business travelers.
Ladies and gentlemen, good information does not threaten immigration. Quite the contrary. The more certain we are about someone's status, the less likely we are to make a mistake that would jeopardize their status - or our safety.
Securing our borders often comes down to making a decision on the spot, using the best information at hand. The more we are able to identify people and assess them based on their individual traits, the less dependent we are on broad, general categories such as national origin. That makes the system fairer for everyone.
Last week, an al Qaeda leader wrote an e-mail promising a new "guerrilla war" against Saudi Arabia and the United States. "The list of assassinations, the raid teams and the martyr operation squads are ready," he wrote, "the caches of weapons, ammunition, explosives and bombs are plentiful -- and the authorities cannot uncover them."
One day later, an attack in Saudi Arabia killed 34 people, including eight Americans.
The war on terrorism will not end quickly. It will take a sustained national and international effort. But we are ready, not intimidated, and US VISIT will be an important tool. We now have an opportunity to learn from past failures. We must not miss this chance.
In his campaign, President Bush said, "New Americans are not to be feared as strangers; they are to be welcomed as neighbors."
US VISIT will replace fear with knowledge, protecting Americans while keeping, to borrow again from Emma Lazarus, our "lamp lifted [high] beside the Golden Door."
Thank you.

Canadian Border Fortified with 375 New Border Agents

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Robert Bonner announced on 2 July that an additional 375 border patrol agents will be "strategically and permanently assigned" to the U.S. border with Canada to help secure the United States from terrorists infiltration. The announcement brings the number of border patrol agents to approximately 1,000 along the United States' northern border, compared with more than 10,000 agents along the border with Mexico, according to Canada's National Post. The 375 agents will, in fact, be pulled from the southern border to supplement security at the northern border, which has nearly tripled in size since 11 September, the Post reported. "We were clearly understaffed on the northern border," Bonner said. "This is an important step in increasing security along our northern border and is necessary given the continuing threat of terrorism."

ANALYSIS: Increasing the number of border security agents is not the only measure the CBP is considering to protect the northern border. Officials have discussed the use of unmanned aerial drones to patrol uninhabited areas of the border as well as using seismic sensors to detect illegal cross-border movement, the National Post reported. But in a report released in June by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), author Deborah Meyers said that while both Canada and the United States have improved cooperation to secure the border, priority should be given to "invisible measures" like intelligence sharing and overseas screening of potential travelers to the U.S. and Canada. The report, "Does Smarter Lead to Safer," recommended that Canada, the United States, and Mexico hold regular trilateral migratory meetings, monitor trends at borders by using inspections or passenger analysis database, and develop a long term North America integration plan.

Border patrol to add staff
BY TAMARA AUDI
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
July 3, 2003

The U.S. Border Patrol will add 1,000 patrol agents to the border with Canada to help keep out terrorists, weapons, drugs and illegal immigrants, the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection announced Wednesday.
Many of those agents will be assigned to Michigan's border with Canada, often described by government officials as crucial to homeland security because of its proximity to major Canadian cities, large Arab immigrant communities and the busiest international commercial crossing in the north.
Border Patrol officials declined to say exactly how many new agents would be assigned to Detroit or other areas of the country, citing national security. But Detroit was assigned more agents than expected, and the boost will be the biggest staffing increase since Sept. 11, 2001, Detroit border officials said Wednesday.
"It's great news for the Detroit sector," said Stan Rosas, assistant chief patrol agent in the sector, which covers all of Michigan and parts of Ohio. Agents have complained of understaffing and said border stations were sometimes left empty.
"We'll have more managers to help manage the troops and more troops out in the field for them to manage," Rosas said. "It's good for everybody."
"We were clearly understaffed on the northern border," said the bureau's commissioner, Robert Bonner. "This is an important step in increasing security along our northern border and is necessary given the continuing threat of terrorism."
Most of the Border Patrol's more than 10,000 agents are assigned to the southwestern border.
About 375 veteran agents will be shifted -- on a voluntary basis -- from current assignments along the southwestern border to the northern border by the end of this year, said spokesman Mario Villarreal.
New officers in the Detroit sector will mostly be assigned to waterways to help break up immigrant smuggling rings from Canada. Summer is the busy season for smugglers because the weather is nice, and there's more activity on the water.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

State Department Puts Foreign Students and Professors First in Line for Visa Interviews
By MICHAEL ARNONE
Washington

Under pressure from college advocacy groups, the U.S. Department of State has told its overseas consular offices to schedule students, professors, and researchers first in interviews that are part of antiterrorism screenings of nearly all visa applicants.
Copies of the notice were sent by telegram on June 3 by Janice L. Jacobs, deputy assistant secretary for visa services. The message tells all diplomatic and consular posts to "give priority to students and exchange visitors in the professor, student, and research-scholar categories."
The telegram, which the State Department did not publicize, modifies a May message that required almost all foreigners seeking visas -- millions of people -- to have in-person interviews with consular officials before getting approval for the documents. The program scrutinizes foreign visitors more closely in the hopes of weeding out potential terrorists. All consular offices must begin following the rule by August 1.
In a related matter, Science magazine reported Tuesday on its Web site that foreign researchers who work for the U.S. government or who are financed by federal grants will no longer face visa delays when they try to return to the United States after trips abroad. "Under the new procedure, American consulates can fast-track applications for returning visas by those who have received a U.S. visa or otherwise cleared an interagency security review within the past year," Science reported. The change will not apply to researchers and students who are not supported by the federal government, the Web site said.
College groups applauded the news of the June telegram. The State Department has "listened to the concerns that the higher-education community has expressed," Nils Hasselmo, president of the Association of American Universities, said on Wednesday.
His association, a collection of elite research institutions, was among four advocacy groups that sent a letter last month to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell seeking the postponement of the May rule. The other groups were the American Council on Education, the Council of Graduate Schools, and the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.
College officials are afraid that the requirement will lead to increased delays that will keep students and scholars from arriving on campuses in time for the fall term. By requiring so many people to have interviews, "we were afraid that our people would just get lost in the queue," said Victor C. Johnson, associate executive director of NAFSA: Association of International Educators.
Reports are already circulating of foreign students and scholars who cannot obtain visa interviews before they are due on their campuses, Mr. Johnson said. He and other college officials fear that the delays will discourage foreign students and scholars from coming to American institutions to study, teach, or do research.
In the most recent telegram, Ms. Jacobs also said that a "small number" of consulates already report waiting times for interviews of four weeks or more.
But, Ms. Jacobs wrote, "The department is sensitive to the potential impact on our nation's academic and research institutions if students are not able to begin their courses of study." She also praised consulates that have already put students and scholars at the head of the line for visa interviews.
The college associations are willing to work with Congress and President Bush, said Mr. Hasselmo, to help the State Department get more money and personnel to handle the increased workload.
In the meantime, international-student officers at colleges are relieved at the news. Katherine S. Bellows, assistant dean and director of international programs at Georgetown University, said she is "very, very grateful" for the new policy. "It demonstrates," she said, "that the government is actually doing things to acknowledge the importance of international education."

July 1, 2003

Report says Justice Department's antiterror dragnet haphazard

By Siobhan Gorman, National Journal

An Egyptian man who ran a Middle Eastern pastry shop was at home in his Paterson, N.J., apartment in late September 2001 when his roommate, a lawful U.S. resident, came home with an agent of the Immigration and Naturalization Service in tow.

The INS agent had run into the roommate on the street and asked for identification. When the roommate brought the agent home to show him his ID, the agent questioned the Egyptian man, too, discovered that his student visa had long since expired, and arrested him. The Egyptian ended up leaving this country voluntarily.

In many ways, the Egyptian is typical of the people now publicly known to have been swept up by the federal government's antiterrorism dragnet after the 9/11 attacks. In the most comprehensive study to date of "the September 11 detainees," a report released June 26 by the Migration Policy Institute profiles 406 of the roughly 894 people arrested and held in custody. The nonpartisan think tank's report casts serious doubt on the value of that Justice Department roundup.

Taken together, the sagas of the 406 detainees depict a largely haphazard approach to rooting out the terrorists in our midst. While the post-9/11 sweep did enhance the enforcement of immigration laws somewhat, it was not the most effective way to marshal the nation's limited terrorist-hunting resources, the report argues.

"The authorities basically picked up people upon whom they stumbled," explains Demetrios G. Papademetriou, a co-director of MPI. "This does not reflect a systematic way of trying to identify individuals who might be of concern to the U.S. and going after them."

A former government official familiar with the inner workings of the post-9/11 detention program agreed: "From my vantage point, there was no organized, thought-out approach. There was an awful lot of catch-as-catch-can." He added, "Going forward, I think the notion that we'd use this technique again if we have another attack is probably pretty ill-advised."

Yet that is exactly what Doris Meissner, who was INS commissioner during the Clinton administration, fears is happening. She says that more-recent Justice Department policies, including special registration requirements for foreign visitors from 26 predominantly Muslim countries, follow what she calls the same flawed, throw-it-up-and-see-what-sticks logic. Meissner is now a senior fellow at MPI and co-authored the report.

Nearly one-third of the detainees in MPI's study were rounded up on the basis of terrorism tips from the public. And those tips, Meissner says, apparently tended to be rooted in fear rather than fact. "There was a real shoddiness in the handling of those tips," she contends.

The MPI report draws on interviews with detainees and their lawyers as well as on media accounts. Although the study does not purport to represent a scientific sampling, it is based on information about 45 percent of the 894 detainees. (Of the 894 detainees, just 15 percent were held on criminal charges. Eighty-five percent were held on immigration charges.) Many of MPI's findings are consistent with those of the Justice Department inspector general, whose report earlier this month focused on 119 detainees.

The MPI report helps flesh out demographic details revealed by the inspector general's report. MPI found that Pakistan ranked first as the detainees' country of origin and was followed by Egypt. Ninety percent of the MPI detainees were from an Arab and/or Muslim country. And at least 91 percent were male.

While the majority of detainees-58 percent-were between 20 and 40 years old, about 4 percent were younger and 15 percent were older. (The ages of the rest are unknown to MPI.)

According to MPI's statistics, 12 percent were lawful permanent U.S. residents or U.S. citizens, and an additional 23 percent were lawful visitors. Predictably, given that many of the detainees were targeted for detention because they were illegal aliens, the largest proportion-at least 46 percent-were here illegally. The status of the others in unknown.

In the MPI report's accounts of various detainees' experiences, stories abound of arrests based on apparently groundless tips. For example, FBI agents visited the store of a lawful permanent U.S. resident from Sudan who sells African goods. The visit was prompted by an anonymous allegation of suspicious activities. The man had been in this country for six years and had been granted political asylum. Questioning him, the agents found a discrepancy between the date of birth on his driver's license and that in his Social Security records. His driver's license had the month and day of his birth transposed. His lawyer apparently made that mistake when filing for asylum.

The Sudanese man was detained for five days and then released without being told why he had been held. His lawyer asked for an explanation, got no reply, and then filed a Freedom of Information Act request. It produced an arrest warrant the Sudanese man's lawyer says he never received. That warrant was dated December 26, 2001-a month after the man's release.

Much has been made of Attorney General John D. Ashcroft's statement that his department makes "no apologies" for its detention policy. Department spokesman Mark Corallo says the public outcry would have been enormous if federal agents had encountered an illegal alien, failed to detain him, and then later discovered he was a terrorist. "We do act in an overabundance of caution," he adds. "We don't have a choice."

Still, there are no solid numbers-at least none publicly available-on how many would-be terrorists were caught by the sweep. According to the Justice Department, only one of the 762 immigration-law violators-Zacarias Moussaoui, who was actually detained three weeks before 9/11-counts as a terrorist. But, Corallo says, "dozens" of the 132 people who faced criminal charges were charged with terrorism-related offenses. MPI's Papademetriou complained that until Justice provides more information about the seriousness of the charges it filed, calculating the worth of the detention program is virtually impossible.

Four detainees MPI profiled eventually had terrorism-related charges brought against them. One has been convicted. Two others were acquitted of having ties to terrorism. Charges against the fourth were dropped. All four of them came to the attention of the authorities as a result of an antiterrorism investigation, not through a wholesale roundup of Arab immigrants.

The government's most recent claims of success in the war on terrorism-the arrests of an Ohio truck driver suspected of plotting to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge and of a Qatari student accused of being an enemy combatant-were likewise the products of traditional criminal investigative work.

Defending its immigration detentions, the Justice Department says that "many" people-Corallo declined to be more specific-suspected of posing a terrorist threat were deported. "Getting and apprehending them and removing them from the country certainly sends a message to the terrorists that we are watching," he says. "We are not going to let the terrorists exploit our free society."

At a June 25 congressional hearing, the FBI Washington field office's acting assistant director, Michael E. Rolince, described the terrorist ties of two detainees originally arrested for breaking immigration laws: One had traveled overnight with two of the 9/11 hijackers; the name of another had been used by Qaeda members in Germany to obtain U.S. visas.

If the daily cost of the post-9/11 detentions was comparable to that of other incarcerations, the sweep probably cost taxpayers about $4 million, not counting the salaries of the more than 7,000 federal agents involved. MPI officials think the government could have gotten more for its money.

Meissner contends that immigration laws are a useful weapon in the war on terrorism only to the extent that immigration officers-from consular officials abroad to inspectors at the borders-have accurate information about whom to keep out. She argues strongly for a focus on improving and merging the multitude of terrorism "watch" lists. "That continues not to get the attention and the urgency that it requires," she says. "Meanwhile, we've had all these big fanfare programs that are snapping up a lot of resources."

Still, watch lists have limitations. As the 9/11 attacks demonstrated, terrorists with "clean" records can easily slip through immigration controls.

The real solution, says former INS Commissioner James Ziglar, who served in the Bush administration until last December, is for federal law enforcement to foster better ties to the Arab and Muslim communities in this country. He says their residents are the best eyes and ears the government could hope for. "The way you're going to be most effective is to have much better human intelligence," Ziglar says, adding that FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III "has shown tremendous leadership in trying to achieve this."

But the FBI appears to have missed significant opportunities to build good relations with Arab communities. On the morning of October 19, 2001, the New York City police banged on the door of a 34-year-old man who is a citizen of Jordan and Russia. They were following up on a tip to an FBI hot line and arrested him on immigration charges. The man, who is married to a U.S. citizen and has two children, came to this country from Canada by car in 1999 and wasn't questioned at the border. After being detained in 2001, he agreed to leave this country. His family is moving with him to Jordan.

A month after the arrest, the man's attorney received a call from an FBI agent who told him, "I can't believe we picked him up.... I wouldn't have done it." The agent added, "He might be useful to us.... He speaks three languages.... He's clean. We checked him out." But now his eyes and ears will no longer be in this country.

CQ HOMELAND SECURITY - BORDER SECURITY
June 27, 2003 - 5:13 p.m.
Coast Guard Readies Armed Choppers for Counterterror Missions
By Jeremy Torobin, CQ Staff Writer

The Coast Guard wants to post armed helicopters at major ports to provide an airborne rapid-response to terrorist attacks.
The Coast Guard's Helicopter Interdiction Tactical Squadron (HITRON) has eight armed MH-68 choppers, which can reach 140 nautical miles per hour, based in Jacksonville, Fla.
HITRON - which bills itself as the "first, and only, law enforcement unit trained and authorized" to use force from the air - was developed for drug interdiction operations.
It uses the MH-68 and other aircraft to stop drug-laden, high-speed boats - known as "go-fasts" - in the Caribbean and off the Pacific U.S. Coast, sometimes by firing into the boats' engine blocks to disable them.
But earlier this year, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge asked HITRON to develop airborne use-of-force tactics for counterterrorism missions.
"The use of Coast Guard HITRON for armed patrols will increase the level of security in our ports, provide an additional layer of defense, ensure continued safe flow of commerce and deter possible acts of terrorism in our nation's key ports," Ridge said this spring.
However, the helicopters' counterterrorism mission still is in its infancy, partly because of a shortage of money and partly because the Coast Guard has not determined whether the MH-68 is the best model for large-scale deployment.
"We're nowhere near saying, 'let's roll this thing out and have helicopters in every major port,'" a Coast Guard aviation forces unit official said Friday.

From the "Congressional Quarterly Homeland Security Daily," 25 June

White House Backs Bonner to Run New Visa-Tracking System

The White House has weighed in on who should run a new visitor-tracking system. The U.S. Visitor and Immigration Status Indication Technology, or U.S. VISIT, system now resides in the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, helmed by Michael J. Garcia. Last week the chief of staff for Robert C. Bonner, chief of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, denied that his boss was lobbying Congress to put the system under his division's authority. But in a statement of administration policy tucked into the House fiscal 2004 Homeland Security spending bill (HR 2555), the White House said the appropriate place for the program, and its funding, "is the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, as requested in the president's budget." -Jeremy Torobin

Foreign terrorists still can evade fingerprint checks
June 22, 2003
BY CURT ANDERSON , Chicago Sun Times

WASHINGTON--Foreign terrorists and criminals could continue to slip across U.S. borders undetected because a project to combine FBI and immigration fingerprint records is running two years behind schedule, a Justice Department report says.
Until the project is finished, immigration, FBI and other law enforcement agencies will not be able to simultaneously check fingerprint records and some foreigners ''who should be detained will not be,'' said the report Friday by Glenn A. Fine, the Justice Department's inspector general.
''The slow progress of the integration project represents an unacceptable risk to public safety and national security,'' Fine wrote.
The delays are particularly troubling, the report said, because interim changes have led to fingerprint matches of 4,820 foreigners suspected of or wanted for criminal offenses since January 2002. Of those, 50 were being sought for murder.
FBI Director Robert Mueller, asked Friday about the report at a National Press Club appearance, said it is difficult to merge separate systems and come up with common ways to enter information.
''There are always problems you have in ensuring compatibility. We are working through that now,'' Mueller said.
The project, begun in 1999, is not expected to be finished until at least 2009, about two years later than originally thought. An initial, less comprehensive version was to have come online this spring, but is also delayed until at least December.
One reason is that after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, resources and manpower were diverted to build a stricter border entry and exit registration system.
Even so, the report concluded that the Justice Department had not come up with a new schedule for completing the work and hadn't adequately planned for the takeover of immigration duties by the new Department of Homeland Security.
Justice officials, the report said, now face ''a major challenge'' in attempting to run the project between the two agencies. The agency ''must act aggressively to prevent further delays,'' the report added.
As of this April, the immigration database included about 152,200 ''wants and warrants'' fingerprints records for likely foreigners, which refer to people believed to be neither U.S. citizens nor legal residents being sought on outstanding serious felonies or misdemeanors.
There were a total of 331,700 fingerprint records in the combined database, far short of the ultimate goal of merging 40 million FBI fingerprint records with 4 million held by immigration officials so they can be accessed by a range of federal, state and local agencies, the report found.
In a written response, Paul Corts, assistant attorney general for administration, said the project is being done ''as expeditiously as possible'' and rejected implications that it has been in limbo. He said software for the project has been vastly improved, for example.
''Significant progress has been made,'' Corts said.

The Washington Times

House panel probes Mexican ID cards
By Audrey Hudson
Published June 20, 2003

A congressional panel is investigating the widespread distribution of Mexican identification cards used by legal and illegal immigrants, citing national security concerns and the card's questionable reliability.
Rep. John Hostettler, chairman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, border security and claims yesterday said they will also explore whether the Mexican government lobbied local governments to accept the cards and whether they violated national sovereignty.
"Many have questioned why a country that expends so much money and energy to protect its borders would go to so much effort to make it easier for aliens illegally in the U.S. to remain here," said Mr. Hostettler, Indiana Republican.
Rep. Elton Gallegly, California Republican, called the photo-identification cards a "tremendous opportunity for terrorists."
Supporters say the card, issued by the Mexican government, allows immigrants to open bank accounts and keep money secure.
Critics say the cards amount to a back-door amnesty for illegal aliens.
Marti Dinerstein, president of Immigration Matters, said Mexico's strategy is to win acceptance for the identification card through a grass-roots lobbying campaign at the local level, which has "borne fruit."
The matricula consular cards are accepted by more than a dozen states, including New Mexico, Georgia, Texas, California, Illinois, Florida, Michigan, Washington, Missouri, Nevada and South Carolina. More than 100 banks and financial institutions also recognize the cards for opening checking and savings accounts.
Some illegal aliens consider the card a "badge of protection" to hide lawbreaking activity back home in Mexico, and also use it to obtain driver's licenses in the United States, Miss Dinerstein said.
"All illegal aliens prize a license because it is the most widely accepted identity document in America," she said.
The Mexican Embassy said its 47 consulates in the United States are lobbying or contacting local governments urging the card's acceptance.
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, Texas Democrat and ranking member, suggested the panel took a racist edge by focusing on immigrants from Mexico. The card may also soon be offered by Nicaragua, Honduras, Poland, Peru and El Salvador.
Mrs. Lee said she was "a little sensitive to the tone of some of the witnesses in this room ... for referring to, over and over, Mexico, Mexico, Mexico."
Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, an Illinois Democrat and the only panel member who testified in favor of the cards, agreed.
"It seems we want to harp, and harp, and harp on one country," Mr. Gutierrez said.
"It's nothing new. If this were the 1920s, we would be talking Italians," or in another time period, "the menace of the Irish."
Italian and Irish immigrants came to this country as legal immigrants, said Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican, noting that the panel is concerned about the cards being used by illegal aliens.
"We don't mean to be offensive, but about half of the illegal aliens are coming from Mexico, and that's just a fact," Mr. Smith said.
Colorado state Sen. John Andrews, a Republican and that state's Senate president, testified on his state's recent successful efforts to ban the card's acceptance.
"Such documents have a negative impact on the rule of law, because they provide a shortcut for individuals who have entered this country in disobedience to our laws, to gain, the identical status and benefits as individuals who took the trouble to obey our laws," Mr. Andrews said. "That's wrong."
The cards cost $29 and can be obtained with a birth certificate, photo ID and proof of residence, such as a phone bill, at any consular office.
Democratic supporters said the cards are secure, tamper-proof and can't be duplicated, but Mr. Hostettler said the subcommittee has received reports that aliens are being arrested carrying multiple consular cards bearing their photos but different names.

June 18, 2003

Border agency merger already paying dividends, official says

By Jason Peckenpaugh and William New

The merger of four federal border agencies into the new Bureau of Customs and Border Protection has already tightened security along the U.S. border, an official guiding the reorganization said Wednesday.

Andrew Maner, chief of staff and director of the transition management office at the new agency, said the border reorganization paid dividends during Operation Liberty Shield, the Homeland Security Department's effort to protect the U.S. from terrorism during the war in Iraq.

"I can't tell you as a manager how powerful it was, during Liberty Shield, to be able to put out one piece of guidance telling them how to manage the border," he said at a Washington briefing held by Equity International, Inc., a Washington-based business development firm.

Created to handle inspection chores along the border, the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection includes elements from the old Immigration and Naturalization Service, Customs Service, Border Patrol, and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. On March 1, officials unified the chain of command at these agencies, a management shift that has improved security on the ground, Maner said.

For example, a single official now heads inspections at all airports and ports of entry, and all bureau inspectors now carry pocket-sized radiation detectors, he said. Border officials also have combined their processes for targeting suspicious cargo, according to Maner. He added that inspectors in the field have not resisted combining their operations.

"We haven't solved the [different] uniform problem yet, but these people are working together, and they don't need bureaucrats from Washington to tell them to work together."

The agency now is examining how to manage the different payroll and travel systems that its employees use, according to Maner. "It is safe to say we are looking at how our people are paid and what travel system they are on as we move them into our bureau," he said Wednesday. Janet Hale, undersecretary for management at the Homeland Security Department, is designing the department's approach to administrative support systems.

Maner said reorganization planners have tried to avoid disrupting field operations. "We're going to handle this merger so our operating offices can continue to do their jobs," he said. He added that while former Customs Commissioner Robert Bonner leads the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, the agency should not be viewed as an expansion of Customs. "This isn't a Customs takeover, this is a brand new agency."

Brian Goebel, counselor and senior policy adviser at the bureau, said at the event that a rule requiring 24-hour pre-shipping notification of the contents of sea-bound containers heading to the United States is being considered for extension to all other modes of transportation. The rule requires that advance information be sent to Customs officials via electronic manifest.

Goebel outlined several needs of the bureau. They include advanced information on people and goods arriving in the United States, sophisticated and automated targeting tools and databases, and programs for distinguishing high- and low-risk shipments.

Maner said the department is "trying to do away with the myth" that customs inspects only 2 percent of shipments. "Customs inspects 100 percent of the high-risk cargo," he said.

Other needs Goebel mentioned include detection equipment, well-trained inspectional workforce, and improved information flowing from intelligence and law enforcement. He also said a U.S.-Canada program for speeding pre-cleared trucks across the border is being looked at for the Mexican border as well.

Brought to you by GovExec.com

Report: Suspected terrorists with revoked visas may still be in U.S.
From Mike M. Ahlers, CNN Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (CNN) --An estimated 30 people whose visas were revoked following the September 11, 2001, attacks because of suspicions they might be terrorists may still remain in the United States, according to a draft of a new congressional report.
That report also said that while the government has formal procedures for keeping suspicious people out of the country, it relies on informal, faulty procedures for tracking down visitors whose visas are revoked after they have arrived.
Between September 11, 2001, and the end of 2002, the State Department revoked visas for 240 people who had entered the United States because of concerns they were terrorists, according to the report by the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress.
"At least 30 individuals whose visas were revoked on terrorism grounds... may still remain," the report said.
The report does not name the individuals, nor does it account for the other 210 people. It says only that the number is based on an analysis of data received in mid-May from the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
Additional information received since then "could show that the number of persons is higher or lower than 30," it says.
The House Subcommittee on National Security is to hold a hearing on the report Wednesday.
The report faults communications between the State Department, the FBI and the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which was recently absorbed into the new Department of Homeland Security.
Part of the problem, the agencies told congressional investigators, was the scarcity of revocations on terrorism grounds after a person had already entered the country. "This relatively small number resulted in (government agencies) operating in an informal manner," the report says.
But the lack of comprehensive, written policies and procedures "may have contributed to systemic weaknesses... that increase the possibility of a suspected terrorist entering or remaining in the United States," the report says.
FBI and INS officials told congressional investigators they did not routinely attempt to locate or investigate people whose visas were revoked on terrorism grounds. In some cases, they said, that is because they were not notified about the change in status. The FBI claimed in other cases that the State Department did not alert them that persons with revoked visas could be "possible terrorists."
And the INS said it failed to pursue the matter because revocation, by itself, is not grounds for removal. Even if the agency could locate the person, the report said, it would be challenging to remove them unless they were in violation of their immigration status, or they could prove a terrorist affiliation.
"Without sufficient evidence linking the alien to any terrorist related activities the INS cannot institute removal proceedings based on that charge," the report says.
The INS mailed visa approval notices for Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi, identified as the two pilots who crashed planes into the World Trade Center on September 11. They applied to change their visa status from visitor to student a year before the attack, and both received approval before the deadly terror attacks.
The draft GAO report lists a series of recommendations to the Department of Homeland Security to insure that appropriate agencies are notified about visa changes and appropriate actions are taken. Among them:
• Develop policies and procedures to ensure that nofitication of visa revocations for suspected terrorists is transmitted from the State Department to immigration and investigation units in a timely manner.
• Develop a policy on actions that agencies should take to locate individuals whose visas have been revoked for terrorism concerns
• Determine if any persons with visas revoked on terrorism grounds are in the United States and if so, whether they pose a security threat

CQ HOMELAND SECURITY - BORDER SECURITY
June 16, 2003 - 7:10 p.m.
Troubled Visa Program Hits Another Snag
By Jeremy Torobin, CQ Staff Writer

Most lawmakers agree on the need to keep better track of the millions of foreign visitors who come into the United States every year.
But last week, the Homeland Security Department's ambitious and controversial new project to imbed biometric identifiers in visas for certain foreigners ran into what could be just the first in a series of funding potholes.
Starting at the end of this year, at air and seaports serving international arrivals, the so-called U.S. Visitor and Immigration Status Indication Technology, or U.S. VISIT, should be able to read fingerprints and photographs from data imbedded in visas issued to citizens of all but about 30 industrialized nations. Like a subway system fare card, the new visas is designed to help U.S. authorities track the entry and exit of visa-holding visitors.
But on Thursday, the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee cut the Bush administration's $480 million request for U.S. VISIT by a whopping 27 percent in the fiscal 2004 budget, leaving $350 million.
Although last Thursday's markup was held behind closed doors, Rep. Harold Rogers, the Kentucky Republican who chairs the panel, said in a statement that the cut was "necessary" because DHS still had not spent $375 million in previously appropriated funds for the project and has been "very slow" in giving the subcommittee a spending plan.
"This project is a top priority but it is imperative that we not rush into its development and deployment without appropriate planning and oversight," Rogers said.
It's not the first time the entry-exit tracking project has run into trouble with Congress.
Last fall, Senate appropriators briefly cut $165 million from the administration's $362 million fiscal 2003 request for the program after the former Immigration and Naturalization Service reprogrammed money earmarked for the entry-exit system to fund other initiatives that Congress didn't explicitly approve, such as a program to register male visitors from 25 countries considered terrorist havens.
Conferees on the fiscal 2003 omnibus spending bill eventually restored the full funding request.
Information Gap
More recently, a General Accounting Office investigation found that DHS had not provided Congress with information it was required to give appropriators before using any of the fiscal 2002 money Congress set aside for the project.
GAO said a DHS report recently submitted to Congress did not include a system security plan or privacy impact assessment. The agency also failed to provide a sufficient outline of the system's expected capabilities and benefits, when they might be achieved and at what cost, and how the government intends to manage acquisitions to meet the commitments.
Michael J. Garcia, who runs the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, responded to GAO by saying the criticism ignores the fact that several policy decisions about the system's operation are still pending, such as whether biometrics will be required of all arriving visitors instead of just visa holders, as well as how exit controls would work.
In any case, congressional deadlines dictate that an entry-exit system be in place in air and sea ports of entry by the end of this year, and at the nation's 50 busiest border crossings by the end of 2004.
Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has promised that DHS will meet those deadlines. The system is supposed to be up and running at land border crossings by the end of 2005.
However, it is unclear to what extent U.S. VISIT will use biometrics when it is launched in air and sea ports of entry.
For one thing, DHS has already said the system initially will likely use fingerprints and photographs but not more sophisticated iris scans or facial-recognition technology.
A request for a proposal to develop the biometric technology behind the program, which DHS Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson has promised the department will issue by this fall, already is a year late. And some observers, including former INS Commissioner James Ziglar, estimate that it would cost billions - and take up to four years - to launch an effective system.

Mexico's ID card gains more acceptance in states, cities

By Audrey Hudson
Published June 14, 2003

The Mexican government is convincing hundreds of local government and police departments across the United States to accept its identification cards used by legal and illegal aliens, which critics say amounts to a backdoor amnesty for illegal aliens.
The cards are accepted by more than 800 police departments in 13 states, according to Miguel Manterrubio, spokesman for the Mexican Embassy in Washington. Published reports indicate more than 400 cities now consider the Matricula Consular cards proper identification, including Montgomery County, which began recognizing them last month.
Acceptance of the cards means police, cities and private companies typically responsible for turning illegal residents over to federal authorities are relenting. Supporters say the card allows immigrants to open bank accounts to keep money secure and helps prevent crime because the aliens are not afraid to seek police help.
The Mexican Embassy denies its 47 consulate offices in the United States are lobbying or contacting cities and counties directly urging them to accept the "matricula," which means "to register" in Spanish.
"It's a process in which they share information. ... I would not say we contact them," said Mr. Manterrubio.
"What the consulate does is share information. We explain why we consider it a secure document, and if they share that opinion it is a secure document they accept it as identification," said Mr. Manterrubio.
By appealing to the local government level, the Mexican government is "undermining" the federal government, which has jurisdiction over authorizing identification cards of foreigners and is "absolutely unacceptable," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican and author of federal legislation to end acceptance of the cards by banks.
"How many ... immigration systems are we running in this country for crying out loud?" said Mr. Tancredo.
The Mexican Embassy did not follow through on its offer to share the list of cities or states that officially accept the cards. However, a partial list compiled by The Washington Times shows the cards are accepted by some cities and counties in New Mexico, Georgia, Texas, California, Illinois, Florida, Michigan, Washington, Missouri, Nevada and South Carolina.
The cards are also accepted by more than 70 banks including Bank of America, Bank One, and Citibank.
Colorado recently outlawed use of the card already approved by many cities there, and legislation to restrict the card has been introduced in the Arizona and Iowa state legislatures. The card has been rejected in New York, and critics of the card in Utah are also lobbying for legislation banning it.
Critics of the card say it is intended to circumvent Congress, which since September 11 has been reluctant to grant amnesty to the estimated 9 million immigrants living in the United States. Half are Mexican. They also say the only people using these cards are illegal aliens, because legal immigrants already have valid ID such as their green card or state-issued driver's license.
Mr. Tancredo said Mexican consulates actively lobbied Colorado cities to approve the cards.
"That is exactly what is going on and has been going on. They are not bashful about it," said Mr. Tancredo, who is sponsoring legislation to end acceptance of the cards by banks,
Colorado state Sen. John Andrews, co-sponsor of the bill outlawing the card and Senate president, said state officials believe some lobbying pressure was coming directly from the government in Mexico.
"I'm outraged at lobbying activity by foreign diplomats of any kind from any country. That is absolutely an inappropriate role for them," said Mr. Andrews.
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies said the lobbying effort is "pretty sophisticated, comprehensive, and organized."
"This is not just one guy in charge, this is run from Mexico City as part of a concentrated, deliberate effort," said Mr. Krikorian.
Dan McCrea, South Miami city commissioner, agrees cities are not the proper authority and opposed the card that did not win commission approval in June.
"We're a local government and it's quite beyond our bailiwick," Mr. McCrea said.
The South Miami City Commission, Mr. McCrea said, was "certainly lobbied" by the consulate in Florida. A spokeswoman for Montgomery County, however, said they were not lobbied and took the initiative upon themselves to approve the cards for valid proof of identify and residence.
Spokeswoman Sue Tucker said the county viewed it as their role to also encourage other Latin American countries to issue the cards to citizens living in the United States. Montgomery County also accepts Guatemalan identity cards.
Nicaragua, Honduras, Poland, Peru, and El Salvador are now looking to issue cards in the United States for their citizens.
In addition to proof of residence, local governments have accepted the identification to apply for library cards, marriage licenses, and some social services.
Mr. Andrews said Denver may continue dispensing city services including welfare to card holders.
"Denver may defy the new law and essentially dare the state to sue them, but I very much hope that scofflaw approach does not win out," said Mr. Andrews.
News reports indicate that Mexican nationals are flocking to apply for the cards at special events held by the consulate offices. The cards cost $29 and can be obtained with a birth certificate, photo ID and proof of residence such as a phone bill.
The Fort Worth Star-Telegram said hundreds of people began to arrive at 4 a.m. June 11 to receive the cards at an event at the Rose Marine Theater. About 500 were processed that day and the consulate scheduled another processing day for June 26.
Migrants in Miami-Dade County started lining up at 2 a.m. on May 30 and 1,000 cards were issued. That's about half of what Mexican officials expected to issue, down from 2,000 during an event last year.
A mobile consulate unit moved through the state of North Carolina in May issuing the cards at stops in Hilton Head, Greenville, Columbia, and Charlotte.
Mexico has opened new consulate offices in the last year in Indianapolis, Kansas City, Mo., and Las Vegas. Opponents of a new office in Raleigh, N.C., protested that office on September 11, 2002, saying its sole existence was to issue the Matricula Consular cards.
Dan Stein, executive director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), called the card a "document designed to help people break the law."
"They're trying to get through the back door what they can't get through the front door, and that's de facto amnesty," Mr. Stein said.
The Mexican government was openly lobbying local governments that have "knuckled under" pressure until recently, said Craig Nelson, executive director of Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement.
"There are a growing number of cities putting this on hold until further study. The headlong rush we saw a year ago is gone," Mr. Nelson said.
Commissioners in Kalamazoo, Mich., voted unanimously June 2 to delay action on approving the cards, according to the Western Herald, which said "the city was petitioned to accept the cards by the Mexican Consulate of Detroit."

From the "Congressional Quarterly Homeland Security Daily," 12 June:

Five of Immigration's 10 Most Wanted in Custody

The Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement has nabbed five of its 10 most wanted criminal aliens, the agency said Wednesday. Last month, the bureau unveiled a list of aliens with criminal records who had been ordered deported but who never left the country. It said it will spend $10 million this year to train teams of agents to round up its most wanted. The five "criminal aliens" taken into custody since the launch of the "Top 10" list had convictions ranging from manslaughter to child molestation to fire arms violations. None of the aliens on the Top 10 list are suspected terrorists. BICE agents eventually will work with the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection and other agencies, such as the Social Security Administration, IRS and the U.S. Marshals Service, to track and find criminal aliens, the bureau said. The five aliens now in custody will be replaced on the "Top 10" list by five more criminal alien fugitives. -Jeremy Torobin

From the Intellibridge "Homeland Security Monitor," 10 June:

GAO: DHS Needs to Improve U.S. Visit System

A 9 June General Accounting Office (GAO) report found that the Department of Homeland Security has not sufficiently planned for the implementation of the U.S. Visitor and Immigration Status Indication Technology System (VISIT). Specifically, GAO said that the department's "expenditure plan and associated system acquisition documentation and plans for the [formerly called] entry exit system partially meet the legislative conditions imposed by the Congress." VISIT is a DHS program designed to track the flow of foreign nationals into and out of the country. GCN.com also reported that the system can provide information on foreign visitor's visas while in the U.S. Before the government will provide funding, the program must be reviewed by both Senate and House Appropriations Committees, in addition to the GAO review. The GAO report noted that it met its responsibility by reviewing the tracking system, but indicated that "key issues related to understanding and implementing system requirements, such as developing a system security plan and assessing system impact on the privacy of individuals, remain to be addressed."

ANALYSIS: While GCN.com reported that the DHS has made efforts to respond to the GAO's criticism, the department also contends that the report failed to take other factors into account, including that the system complies with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) requirements, the DHS's obligation of supplemental appropriations to pay for the system, and the necessity of GAO approval to begin implementing the plan. The DHS did not respond to a GCN.com inquiry regarding how it intends to modify VISIT. It is unlikely that the plan will move forward without a stronger endorsement from the GAO. "Without sufficiently detailed information on systems plans and progress, the Congress will be impeded in its efforts to oversee the system," the GAO report concluded.

June 9, 2003

Plan for new entry-exit system falls short, report says

By Tom Shoop
tshoop@govexec.com

The plan to create a new entry-exit system to collect information about foreigners who visit the United States lacks key information, such as what the system will cost and how immigration officials at the Homeland Security Department will manage the acquisition process, according to a new General Accounting Office report.

The report (GAO-03-563), said the preliminary plan for the entry-exit system shows it is being designed to meet functional and performance standards set by Congress. But the plan "does not adequately disclose material information about the system, such as what system capabilities and benefits are to be delivered, by when, and at what cost," GAO found.

GAO also said immigration officials have yet to meet Office of Management and Budget requirements to develop a security plan and assess the system's impact on individuals' privacy.

In 2002, more than 440 million people entered the United States at about 300 land, air and sea ports of entry. Congress first required the Immigration and Naturalization Service to begin developing an entry-exit system to track such visitors in 1996. In 2001, the USA PATRIOT Act required that the system rely on biometrics-such as fingerprints, eye shapes and voice patterns-and be capable of interfacing with systems of other law enforcement agencies. Earlier this year, the entry-exit system was renamed the U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indication Technology (U.S. VISIT) system.

In a response to GAO's report, Michael Garcia, head of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement at Homeland Security, said GAO's conclusion that immigration officials did not provide sufficient information about the system "fails to consider that the lack of specific detail is attributable to a number of policy decisions that are pending, all of which directly impact the features of the system."

Such pending issues, Garcia said, include whether biometric information will be captured for all people entering and exiting the United States, whether official documents will be required of all visitors, and whether exit control procedures will be based on law enforcement interviews and biographic information about visitors, or rely on biometrics and direct observations to determine that people actually leave the country.

The GAO report said such uncertainties should have been noted in the plan itself, and "notwithstanding these undecided policy matters, the plan could still have provided more detailed information, such as addressing how the acquisition was to be managed."

Brought to you by GovExec.com

CQ HOMELAND SECURITY - BORDERS

June 6, 2003 - 7:21 p.m.
Band on the Run: Coast Guard Angles to Retrieve Radar Spectrum Government Auctioned Off
By Jeremy Torobin, CQ Staff Writer

Hundreds of foreign-flagged ships arrive in U.S. ports every week with cargo, crews and passengers preceded only by advance manifests mandated by government rules.
But ever since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Washington has been trying to find a way to track every move these ships make as they approach U.S. shores. The problem is there's no technology up and running to do it.
Now, a small Atlanta-area telecommunications company is playing a big role in determining how long it will be before the Coast Guard can spot and monitor foreign ships that could menace coastal cities or even nuclear power plants.
MariTEL, Inc., a VHF wireless marine telecom provider, paid $6.8 million for nine spectrum licenses, including bandwidth space the Coast Guard figures it needs to set up the tracking system.
That was in 1998, before most government officials had thought much about the possibility of foreign terrorists smuggling a nuclear bomb in a cargo container or ramming a hijacked cruise ship into an oil refinery or military port. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) auctioned off most of the government's marine operator frequencies.
In the deal MariTEL struck with the FCC, said CEO Dan Smith, the company was required to provide the Coast Guard with some narrowband frequency space free of charge. Now the government wants more spectrum back, Smith said, and MariTEL is in weekly negotiations with the Coast Guard to determine how to provide more, and for how much money.
"As the mission is expanded, the Coast Guard will need more frequency than what was required by the FCC," Smith said. "We're working with them literally every week to resolve these issues."
In December, the Bush administration pushed the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to adopt a rule requiring most commercial ship owners to install transponder equipment by the end of next year that would enable the Coast Guard to track their vessels when they came within 20 to 25 miles of U.S. coastlines.
But the Coast Guard did not have the equipment in place to read the ships' signals, and now it is turning to MariTEL to buy back or lease the bandwidth sold at a government auction five years ago.
Access to the bandwidth is crucial to the Coast Guard's ability to launch its so-called Automatic Identification System (AIS), which would work like a short-range air traffic control system, with radar sweeps from a shoreside network of towers that could pick up the transponder signatures of incoming ships.
The Shipping News
The Coast Guard initially planned to use the AIS as a traffic control tool, much like the FAA tracks aircraft. But concerns about the vulnerability of U.S. ports and waterways have led the agency and some lawmakers to view it as an important line of defense against terrorism.
The IMO rule and language in last year's port security law accelerated the need to resolve the frequency issue, since the Coast Guard has made very little progress and received very little funding to develop its own network.
"Either they get a lot of money and get their own system, or they get an agreement with [MariTEL] and get access to some of their frequencies, or we're going to be sitting around waiting," a Democratic Senate aide who worked on the port security law said in an interview.
The issue came up on Tuesday during a House Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation hearing.
Addressing Coast Guard Commandant Thomas H. Collins, Democratic Rep. Peter A. DeFazio of Oregon asked "if we might have to buy [spectrum] from a private company to protect the national security of the United States?"
Collins simply said he was "not conversant" on the matter but promised DeFazio a "detailed" response.
Lt. Christian Lee, an official in one of the Coast Guard's congressional liaison offices, said Thursday that the agency is "working with the FCC and MariTEL to resolve the issue and drafting a formal response to Rep. DeFazio's question from the hearing."
MariTEL's Smith would not say how much money the company is seeking from the Coast Guard for its bandwidth space.
Regardless, without commercial network access, the Senate aide said, the Coast Guard would need five or six years and more than $100 million to build its own shoreside infrastructure for the system.
"MariTEL has the equipment right now, so it's just a contractual issue," he said.
Nukes Too Close for Comfort
The government has established security zones around key ports and infrastructure, restricting most vessels' access to those waterways.
However, "The reason we wanted to have AIS was so we would know right away if something was getting too close to a nuclear facility," the aide said.
Sen. Ernest F. Hollings, D-S.C., lead sponsor of the port security law, tried unsuccessfully to include $57 million for the AIS-related equipment in the wartime supplemental spending law signed in April.
While that's barely half of what Coast Guard officials estimate they would need to install their own equipment for the system, the fiscal 2004 budget request includes only $1 million for AIS, and that's just for research and development.
"The ships will have a capacity to transmit [by the end of next year], so we wanted the Coast Guard to be positioned, not in 2007 or 2009, to start evaluating the moves," the Senate aide said.
Some maritime industry insiders, however, aren't sure the AIS system is all it's cracked up to be.
A nonprofit group of marine operators called Maritime Information Services of North America (MISNA) is instead pushing for a cheaper system that would use satellite communications and existing onboard equipment, such as global marine distress signals.
According to Ed Page, a former Coast Guard captain of the Port of Los Angeles-Long Beach who is now MISNA's vice president, that approach would enable the Coast Guard to track ships in the open ocean for "the cost of a latte a day."
The AIS might be able to receive information more rapidly, but it "only covers 20-30 miles offshore and it's not available today," Page said.
Also, he argued, the cheaper approach is more secure, since data can be encrypted for limited access, whereas any mariner with a transponder could read AIS data.
"If you're driving an LNG [liquefied natural gas] tanker, do you want everybody to know that you're out there?" asked Bill Bennett, a former Coast Guard communications specialist who works with Page at the Marine Exchange of Alaska. "That's the inherent problem with AIS."

CQ HOMELAND SECURITY - COURTS AND JUSTICE

June 2, 2003 - 8:32 p.m.
Harsh Internal Report on Justice Detentions Gets Mixed Reception
By Jim McGee, CQ Staff Writer

When a new Justice Department inspector general's report disclosed Monday that many Middle Eastern immigrants mistakenly detained as suspected terrorists after the 9/11 attacks were held in "unduly harsh" confinement conditions, the reaction on Capitol Hill showed how intensely partisan the debate over civil liberties has become in the U.S. Congress.
"The Inspector General's report reveals that following September 11th, the Department of Justice scrupulously followed the law, while aggressively protecting innocent Americans from future terrorist attacks," said a statement by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.
Not so, contended Sen. Russell D. Feingold, the liberal Democrat from Wisconsin, who said the report by Inspector General Glenn Fine provides "serious, specific, and comprehensive findings about the Department's failure to protect the due process, access to counsel, and other rights of individuals detained on immigration violations."
Fine's staff has spent months on the investigation, focusing on how the post- 9/11 detainees were treated in three facilities in New York and New Jersey where more than 60 percent of the over 750 detainees were arrested.
"While our review recognized the enormous challenges and difficult circumstances confronting the Department in responding to the terrorist attacks, we found significant problems in the way the detainees were handled," the inspector general wrote.
The precursor to harsh treatment of a detainee, the report said, was an initial FBI declaration that a detainee was of "high interest" in the post 9/11 criminal investigation, code-named PENTBOMB.
At the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan, high interest detainees were held in cells where two light bulbs burned constantly, the report said, and "the evidence indicates a pattern of physical and verbal abuse by some correction officers."
From the beginning, Justice Department officials established a "no bond" policy for the detainees and imposed a "communications blackout" on their legal status and whereabouts.
After several weeks, said the report, the detainees were placed in a special "witness security" status that interfered with their ability to speak with attorneys, Fine said.
When lawyers or family members asked whether a detainees was incarcerated at the facility, Bureau of Prison officials "frequently" denied that the detainee was being held at the center "when, in fact, the opposite was true," the report said.
Held without Counsel
Other unofficial practices contributed to the isolation and pressure placed on hundreds of immigrants who were eventually cleared of any involvement in the 9/11 attacks or terrorism.
Some detainees were held more than a month before they were shown the charges against them.
"This delay affected the detainees' ability to understand why they were being held, obtain legal counsel, and request a bond hearing," Fine said.
On the assumption that the FBI would clear or implicate the detainees in a reasonable amount of time, department officials unilaterally held detainees until the FBI approved their release, though no one put the policy in writing.
Despite assigning an estimated 7,000 agents to the 9/11 investigations, the clearance process was slow, taking an average of 80 days for the FBI to release one of the 762 detainees from suspicion.
"The result was that detainees remained in custody - many in extremely restrictive conditions of confinement - for weeks and months with no clearance investigations being conducted," Fine said in a summary of his report.
Fine said a second group of about 400 detainees, who were held at a facility in Passaic, N.J. received better treatment, such as placement in the general population of detainees.
During the weeks immediately following the 9/11 attacks, Attorney General John Ashcroft repeatedly referred to the detainees as "suspected terrorists" and contended that their arrests had successfully disrupted planned terrorist plots.
Fine's report provides little support for Ashcroft's claims, but the report did note that all of the detainees were eventually found to have violated some immigration provision-an outcome Sen. Hatch found reassuring.
"Notably, the Inspector General recognized that the Department of Justice had acted lawfully in detaining illegal aliens, within and beyond the 90-day time limit for detentions, while investigating whether the illegal aliens had ties to the September 11 attacks, or to terrorism generally," Hatch said.
In the text of the report, however, Fine stressed that the broad brush association with terrorism was a key source of trouble.
"We do not criticize the decision to require FBI clearance of aliens to ensure they had no connection to the September 11 attacks or terrorism in general," he said.
"However, we criticize the indiscriminate and haphazard manner in which the labels of 'high interest,' 'of interest,' or 'of undetermined interest' were applied to many aliens who had no connection to terrorism."
Focus Only on Immigrants
Fine's inquiry focused only on immigration detainees. Other suspects were held as material witnesses, or charged with state or federal criminal violations.
At least two other categories of arrests add to the number of persons detained in the frenzied aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. Recently, the Justice Department said that "fewer than 50" persons were incarcerated as material witnesses in the 9/11 criminal investigation. An unknown number of other suspects were arrested on state or federal charges.
Follow-up sweeps add to the difficulty of determining the total number of persons detained or arrested as part of the Justice Department's counterterrorism operations.
In November, 2002, the Justice Department announced that 1,182 persons had been detained. Attorneys representing immigrant groups said recently that all told, nearly 3,000 immigrants were detained, 1,110 arrested under a program to find immigrants who had absconded after deportation orders, and 1,850 were taken into custody during the registration program.
Civil liberties groups who have pressed for an accounting from the department on its treatment of the immigrants received Fine's report as new evidence of the Bush administration's disregard of due process.
"Immigrants weren't the enemy," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement Monday. "But, the war on terror quickly became a war on immigrants.
"The Inspector General's findings confirm our long-held view that civil liberties and the rights of immigrants were trampled in the aftermath of 9/11."
The Justice Department took an entirely different view of the report.
"The Justice Department believes that the Inspector General report is fully consistent with what courts have ruled over and over - that our actions are fully within the law and necessary to protect the American people," said Justice Public Affairs Director Barbara Comstock.
"Our policy is to use all legal tools available to protect innocent Americans from terrorist attacks. We make no apologies for finding every legal way possible to protect the American public from further terrorist attacks."

May 30, 2003
New border security system raises cost-benefit concerns
By Siobhan Gorman, National Journal

A mammoth border-security program is the next big thing-at least the next big planned thing-on the horizon at the Department of Homeland Security. Dubbed U.S. VISIT, the program will attempt to track the arrival and departure of those foreign visitors who are required to have visas. But actually accomplishing that deceptively simple-sounding task will almost certainly be far more difficult and expensive than the Bush administration has let on. And the security payoff may be minimal.
How much safer will U.S. VISIT make the nation? "Truthfully, probably not a whole lot safer," says former Immigration and Naturalization Service Commissioner James Ziglar, who left office last December before his agency was broken in two and folded into the new department. "If the idea is that this is going to stop terrorists from coming into the country, it's not going to accomplish that-although it may have some beneficial deterrent effect," he predicts.
Short for U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indication Technology, U.S. VISIT will involve taking visitors' fingerprints and photographs and checking that information and their names against a computerized list of known terrorists and lawbreakers. The program will also give the department a way to know which foreign visitors have overstayed the terms of their visas. (Visitors from 27 countries are not required to have visas; they will not be tracked.)
Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has promised that the U.S. VISIT system will be up and running at every U.S. airport and seaport by the end of 2003 and at the 50 busiest border crossings by the end of 2004. According to department sources, Ridge is frustrated that his department doesn't have much to show for its work thus far, and so he has zeroed in on making U.S. VISIT a tangible accomplishment.
Already, U.S. VISIT is running so far behind that Ridge's deadline might be impossible to meet. A tug-of-war between competing factions within the department has slowed the initiative. The program is supposed to be run by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which is headed by Michael Garcia and is responsible for enforcing immigration laws. But Robert Bonner, who oversees the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection and thus is responsible for policing the nation's borders, has been lobbying Congress to shift the program to his division. Also slowing the project is what insiders describe as "turmoil" inside Garcia's shop. Garcia is a former federal prosecutor whose hard-nosed approach has upset many of his service-oriented underlings.
As Ridge presses to get U.S. VISIT on track, he's likely to run low on cash-fast. Ridge is planning to spend $380 million on the program this year and hopes to secure $480 million for 2004. And he recently told a Senate panel that he thinks this money is sufficient. But when Ziglar, who spent two decades on Wall Street, tallied the cost of launching a fully functioning entry-exit tracking system, he came up with a price tag of $10 billion and an implementation time frame of three to four years.
The undersecretary for border and transportation security, Asa Hutchinson, said last week that a functioning U.S. VISIT program could have drawn the government's attention to two of the 19 hijackers in the 9/11 attacks because one, Hani Hanjour, didn't show up for school, and another, Mohamed Atta, had stayed beyond the limits of his visa on a previous occasion. But Ziglar fears that terrorists will easily be able to evade U.S. VISIT's security net. "If they're clever, we're not going to know that they're bad guys," he says. "The chances are that they're going to live within the terms of their visa, and they're going to still do their damage while they're in compliance with the law." What U.S. VISIT will improve, Ziglar continues, is the enforcement of immigration laws. (When Congress first mandated an entry-exit tracking system in 1996, the measure was intended to stem the tide of illegal immigration. That system was never fully funded.)
Once U.S. VISIT begins checking visitors against the department's list of known bad guys, the project's usefulness will depend in large measure on the quality and comprehensiveness of that list. The quality controls on the data being fed into federal information banks, especially those at border-control agencies, have been notoriously poor. Studies, for example, repeatedly criticized the accuracy and timeliness of the databases used by the Immigration and Naturalization Service. As recently as February, a report by the Justice Department's inspector general noted, "The INS has serious and continuing problems with data reliability."
Calling the INS's data "a major problem over many years," a former inspector general of the Justice Department, Michael Bromwich, said in a recent interview, "Data quality is the key to having any system like this work properly.... If the quality of inputs [is] lousy, the quality of outputs is unreliable."
The General Accounting Office noted recently that nine federal agencies have compiled a total of 12 watch lists of known or suspected terrorists and other criminals-a network that it branded "overly complex, unnecessarily inefficient, and potentially ineffective."
And fingerprints might not be much more helpful to the U.S. VISIT program than names will be. According to Hutchinson, a foreigner being tracked will be asked to supply two fingerprints at a border checkpoint before being sent on his or her way. The fingerprint database that U.S. VISIT will be able to tap into instantly was designed to ensnare illegal immigrants already wanted by authorities. To instead run fingerprints through the FBI's vast database of criminal and terrorist suspects would take hours, not moments. Besides, some criminals on the FBI's list could slip through the U.S. VISIT system anyway, because U.S. VISIT will use only two fingerprints while the FBI uses a 10-print system.
U.S. VISIT will face a number of practical implementation issues as well. Currently, there's nothing to prevent a foreign visitor from officially checking out of this country but then never actually boarding a plane. The U.S. VISIT system will have to find a way to ensure that foreigners are held in a secure location so they cannot slip away after going through the exit system.
At the land borders, the department can create an exit system in one of two ways. It can build new facilities, which will involve acquiring land, creating more car lanes, hiring more people, and installing new equipment. And these border crossings would need two lines-one to leave the United States and the other to, say, enter Canada. "You've doubled the problem at the border," Ziglar says.
The other option is to cajole Mexico and Canada into doing the exit controls for us-perhaps even pay them to do that. But one Canadian official warns, "Our computer system is not designed to talk to [the U.S.] computer system."
Once the Department of Homeland Security learns which foreign visitors have failed to depart on time, it will face the problem of locating them. (At the moment, some 3.2 million foreigners are in this country on expired visas.) Hutchinson recently announced the establishment of an Office of Compliance, which will coordinate information on who has stayed too long with tips about where enforcement officers might be able to find them.
Also, visa violators won't be allowed back in at a later time. However, former INS General Counsel David Martin contends, "Compiling a list doesn't do much." If the Homeland Security Department is serious about enforcing immigration laws, he says, it should start by tracking down known violators. In December 2001, the INS launched a program to round up 314,000 foreigners who had fled from deportation orders. Some 2,200 have been found and deported. The foreign-student tracking program that began in January has identified more than 2,000 who did not show up for school. But the department has not tallied how many have been apprehended.
Immigration officials have a less-than-stellar record when it comes to finding lawbreakers, and it's not clear how the new compliance team would change that. A recent Justice Department inspector general's report found that the INS was able to kick out just 13 percent of foreigners who had not been detained after being issued final deportation orders. The INS successfully deported just 6 percent of those undetained foreigners who came from countries declared to be state sponsors of terrorism. And a recent GAO study found the INS's procedures inadequate for tracking down foreign U.S. residents who might have knowledge helpful to terrorism investigations.
Still, says Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, U.S. VISIT is a step toward making the nation safer. "It's one tool in what needs to be