Jeff Bingaman United States Senator from New Mexico

It is a pleasure to be here with you at the Border Trade Alliance’s conference on border policy.   As a senator from a border state, I know the importance of these issues and I appreciate the work you are doing in border communities.  Your knowledge and expertise regarding how border issues impact our country, both in terms of our economic prosperity and our national security, is very helpful. 

I’ve been asked to discuss my thoughts on some of the issues Congress is working on that involve the border.   One issue that is getting a lot of attention from both the Congress and the Obama Administration is the ongoing violence in Mexico and the impact it is having on the southern border region.

Since President Calderon began aggressively confronting drug trafficking organizations, there have been over 10,000 deaths throughout Mexico—this is truly a staggering number of lost lives.   Most of these casualties are a result of turf battles between warring cartels and confrontations with law enforcement, but journalists, human rights workers, and innocent civilians have also been killed.  

While this violence has largely remained in Mexico, the instability and fear created by this violence has also affected communities in the United States.   The U.S.-Mexico border region is a vibrant area, and the ties between the countries run deep on both sides of the border.  Strong family bonds unite our communities, and bilateral tourism, trade, and business ventures connect our economies. 

The strength of the U.S.-Mexico relationship, and the recognition that this problem can only be solved through a sustained partnership, provides us with an opportunity to tackle this issue in a bilateral and cooperative manner.  I believe that this matter is finally getting the attention it deserves and I am glad that both governments are forcefully working to address drug-related criminal activity.  The Government of Mexico has taken unprecedented steps in directly confronting the drug cartels, and the Obama Administration has made this issue a top priority and begun to chart a new course in the way we approach border security.

I would like to take a moment to discuss this new security framework and the implications it has for border communities and the trade sector.

We all know that transnational drug-related criminal activity is not a new phenomenon.  Over the years, we have allocated billions of dollars to: aid countries such as Columbia and Mexico in fighting drug production and distribution networks; enhance our ability to interdict narcotics being smuggled into the country; identify drug proceeds being laundered through the financial sector; and to help local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies in combating drug crimes.

So what do I mean when I refer to a “new” security framework?  I believe that there are several significant gaps in the way we have tried to eliminate these criminal organizations. 

First, we have focused our efforts on interdicting drugs coming into the country, but we haven’t paid enough attention to seizing the guns leaving the United States that provide the cartels with the tools they need violently maintain their trafficking operations. 

Over 90 percent of the weapons used by cartels in Mexico come from the United States.   Just last week it was reported that two men were arrested in El Paso for trying to buy $2 million worth of weapons to be smuggled into Mexico—including over 600 assault rifles, shotguns, handguns, silences, and even 40 mm grenade launchers.  While I am very pleased that these weapons never got to their intended destination, the unfortunate reality is that most of the weapons being sought by cartels are still getting through.

Second, we have made strides in reducing the ability of drug organizations to transmit and launder their drug proceeds through the financial sector, but we have done very little to prevent them from simply driving over the southern border with their drug profits hidden in a car or suitcase. 

One million dollars only weighs about 37 pounds and takes up three square feet of space, which makes it pretty easy to smuggle money over the border.  In 2008, we only seized about $10 million of the estimated $15 to $20 billion being smuggled back into Mexico through our ports of entry.

And finally, we have provided substantial amounts of foreign aid to disrupt the production and transportation of narcotics, but we haven’t focused enough on reducing the domestic demand for drugs that is the financial driving force behind the drug trade.  In a survey conducted from 2005 to 2006 by the Department of Health and Human Services, a little over 8 percent of the U.S. population 12 or older reported using illicit drugs in the last month. A comprehensive strategy can’t just focus on the enforcement side; it is critical that we also expand access to treatment services and do more to prevent people from becoming addicted to drugs. 

In order to effectively disrupt the operations of drug trafficking organizations, it is essential that we enhance our Nation’s outbound inspection efforts and provide greater emphasis on demand reduction.

Our security posture along our northern and southern borders has been predominately geared toward preventing contraband, illegal immigrants, and terrorists from coming into the country.  The focus has been on increasing resources dedicated to inbound inspections with little attention paid to who or what is leaving our country.  Frankly, this is a very simplistic approach to addressing the threats we face. 

The reality is that the border is a very dynamic area, and we need to take a comprehensive approach that recognizes the transnational operations of criminal enterprises.  At our Nation’s ports of entry we routinely check for narcotics hidden on people and in vehicles, but we rarely check for guns and currency being smuggled out of the country.

While it is obviously important to do everything we can to prevent drugs from entering the country, if we want to effectively disrupt these criminal enterprises we can’t just focus on the final product.  We must also step up efforts to disarm the criminal networks and deprive them of the drug proceeds that fuel their operations.  As long as these drug gangs have easy access to high-powered weaponry and billions of dollars in drug proceeds, it will be incredibly difficult to stop them. 

To this end, I believe it is essential that the new Administration’s border security strategy provide the appropriate emphasis on both inbound and outbound inspection efforts.  From a practical standpoint, this means that we need to significantly increase the number of agents assigned to outbound inspection duties, deploy non-intrusive inspection technology at ports of entry, and increase the number of canine teams dedicated to searching for smuggled firearms and bulk cash. 

I believe that the Obama Administration is moving in the right direction, and I’ve very pleased that this approach is gaining broad bipartisan support in Congress.  However, I also recognize that stepping up outbound inspections may have some unintended consequence that we must also address.

It is often difficult to balance border security requirements with our need to keep our borders conducive to trade and accessible to tourist and other visitors.  But there are some concrete steps we can take to minimize the impact of outbound enhancements on commercial activity and border residents.

First, there is the issue of how ports of entry are currently designed.  Since our security efforts have been mostly focused on inbound inspections, our port infrastructure isn’t constructed in the best manner to accommodate outbound inspections.  I’ve been working to ensure that as we upgrade our Nation’s ports of entry that GSA and DHS build sufficient inspection lanes and booths to handle outbound pedestrian and commercial traffic. 

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has indicated that our Nation’s port infrastructure needs approximately $5 billion in upgrades.  The recently-enacted economic stimulus package included $720 million toward this end, but it is clear that more funding will need to be allocated.  The process of renewing our border infrastructure gives us the opportunity to redesign our ports in a manner that better reflects our security needs and facilitates lawful cross-border traffic. 

Second, there is the issue of staffing.  As DHS increases the number of staff assigned to outbound inspection duties, we must ensure that the overall staffing levels at the ports of entry are sufficient to handle both inbound and outbound traffic.  We don’t want to create delays that will adversely impact trade and people living in the border region that frequently travel to and from Mexico.

Third, we must deploy our resources in a more comprehensive manner to ensure that both the southern and northern borders have sufficient staffing, infrastructure, and technology.  Since we are working with finite resources, there will always be a certain degree of tension between the more active and less active sectors along the southern border, and between the northern border and the southern border. 

We don’t want to get ourselves in a situation where we are increasing outbound inspections in some areas but causing delays at other ports because we are simply shifting around an inadequate number of inspectors.

Some have argued that we could avoid all of these problems by just increasing inbound inspections at Mexican ports of entry.  This is occurring, and Mexican authorities are deploying additional personnel and equipment to search for weapons and currency.  However, if there are resources deployed on both sides of the border we will be much more effective.  In addition, if the estimates are correct that $15 to $20 billion is being smuggled through our southern ports each year, it makes sense for the United States to do everything it can to confiscate this money and use it to tackle the various challenges our Nation faces.  One option would be to use the money we are seizing for port improvements.

The southwest border is often portrayed in the national news as the “Wild West” and there has been speculation about Mexico becoming a failed state.  This type of hyperbola isn’t grounded in reality.

Although the violence in Mexico is a serious problem, and we do need to take steps to address it and ensure it doesn’t spill over the border, it is also important to recognize that U.S. border communities remain safe places to live, visit, and conduct business.   For example, despite the fact that there were over 1,800 drug-related deaths in Ciudad Juarez last year, the city of El Paso is ranked as the second safest large city in the United States. 

In addition, business opportunities continue to expand in the region.  In February, a Taiwanese electronics manufacture opened a new facility about 12 miles west of Juarez by the Mexican port of entry San Jerónimo.  The plant, which is located across from a large industrial park in New Mexico, will employ approximately 5,000 workers by the end of the year and is expected to eventually increase to a workforce of about 20,000. 

New developments such as this one are creating jobs on both sides of the border and providing new opportunities for growth in the region. We are also continuing to see an expansion in bilateral trade between the U.S. and Mexico, with the total value of trade reaching $369 billion in 2008—this represents an increase of about $21 billion over the previous year.

There are some very real challenges we face along the southern border, but there is also much to be optimistic about.

Once again, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today and I wish you well with the remainder of your conference. 

Thank you.