Return to Article: DHS budget emphasizes immigration reform, border security
-
15443
Enough about ICE! I spent many years at a major East Coast airport, working with USCS Special Agents and INS officers. We did our respective jobs, mostly protected our own turf, and went home to our families (eventually) at night. Of course DHS is nonsense, of course it's wrong, but ICE is only part of the problem. Now, a young man/woman who wants to be uniformed officer has to learn the elements of four jobs for the same pay! What will we, the taxpayers get? Simple, a poorly-trained officer who cannot master the intricacies of each job for the same money! Wave the magic wand, disband DHS, or simply turn back the clock, 'cause the present time is bogus.
-
15110
Didn't you know? ICE was formed to be the new Immigration Enforcement Agency. If you want to know why ICE was formed, read the last pages of the OIG report re: merger CBP/ICE. It confirms what most of us suspected. It doesn't come out and actually say it, but it is transparently clear that the FBI was behind this maneuver. It states that there was a panel of heads of agencies that were to transfer into DHS to discuss the pros/cons of this move. They discussed pro/cons of splitting up USCS/INS and decided against it. (Everything they predicted if a split was made has occurred.)
For more than 10 years, Congress has discussed the concept of one face at the border by USCS absorbing the INS and Agriculture Inspectors. Lawmakers also wanted the INS 1811s to be a stand alone agency.
Right up until it was announced in the news otherwise, USCS was to transfer into DHS as a whole entity and absorb the INS and Agriculture Inspectors. INS 1811s were to be a stand alone agency. But, according to the OIG report other federal agencies (read FBI) objected to the USCS scenario as it would make them too large an agency with too much congressional influence. The OIG report could not determine who decided to turn the tables on us. (A newspaper article indicates it was the "gang of 5.")
Having solely INS 1811s (approx 2,000 employees) to create an agency (ICE) did not make them strong enough for a voice in Congress, so it was decided to throw FPS into the mix. Still not enough employees, so (we shoulda ducked) USCS 1811s were thrown into the mix. This had the double purpose of beefing up INS 1811s and crippling USCS voice in Congress.
It came as a total surprise to our commissioner and others on the panel. They learned of this split the night before it hit the news.
So there you have it. And, by the way, have you noticed the bill to make Air & Marine its own agency? I'm happy for them but another wrenching away the tools that enable us to perform our sworn duties when -- and there will be a when -- another 9/11 occurs.
-
14987
Without resorting to "pathetic, shameful and disgraceful," here is a reply, supported by facts:
As I have said before, legacy USCS agents brought numerous prosecutions to the table before the merger, and the prosecutions were "sexy" ones that the AUSAs liked: drugs, money, guns, kiddie porn, etc. Remember, stats and prosecutions mean funding (both budgetary and from the forfeiture fund) and, since we've seemed to have given away many of our legacy authorities, a lot of what we used to do now gets done by someone else, who get the stats and money.
Regarding illegal aliens, I never said that there's anything wrong with criminal prosecutions. But it doesn't take an 1811 GS-13 to do administrative arrests. The U.S. Marshals seem to understand this: They now have different series/different graded DUSMs doing court security, while the 1811 DUSMs do criminal fugitive investigations. Have you ever heard of a "desk audit"? If the bulk of what we end up doing turns out not to meet the job description of an 1811, I see trouble ahead from OPM.
Finally, regarding prosecuting immigration cases: An AUSA may find these cases "sexy" in Omaha, Neb., or Minot, N.D. However, in major U.S. cities like New York, Detroit, Miami and Los Angeles, where politicians bend over backwards for immigrant rights and benefits (they have to if they want a constituency), AUSAs are often reluctant to tackle a criminal immigration case unless its really (emphasis) "sexy" (e.g. human trafficking), at which point the FBI butts in and claim that the case is one of "involuntary servitude," and that they should have jurisdiction. And, as for legacy USCS being "superior, have you ever seen the FBI not get what they have asked for from the AUSAs?
But, if you talk about USCS and INS investigations being merged as allegedly nonsensical, you're also talking about an administration that wants to hand over port security to a Middle Eastern country with known ties to the 9/11 hijackers. In other words, little of what is being done in the name of "homeland security" seems to make much sense at all, does it?
-
14980
Apparently you haven't read any details of the Homeland Security Act nor have you read the IG report recommending the merger of ICE and CBP. Congress did not dissolve Customs -- it abolished the INS. (Again, read the Homeland Security Act.) Have you ever heard of the "Gang of Five" -- the group that was actually responsible for the destruction of Customs, among many other blunders, contrary to the Homeland Security Act and undertaken in secrecy from both Congress and even Cabinet officials? Probably not. Something to think about.
-
14979
Congress did not abolish the U.S. Customs Service. The legislation creating the Department of Homeland Security called for Customs to come over intact, like the Secret Service and the Coast Guard. The decision to merge Customs and INS into ICE and CBP came from some bureaucratic nitwits in the White House, not from Congress.
That being said, you are obviously very thin-skinned, and resentful of those of us from the former Customs Service. If you have to ask what benefit Customs provided, you obviously didn't study American history. As far as us being "superior," those are your words, not ours. Most of the responses posted here and in other forums by myself and other legacy Customs agents point out the idiocy of the merger, from a practical and case point of view. I'm sorry if you take that as an attack on you and other former INS agents, because that's not what we're about. Although I can't speak for everyone, most of us know that immigration work is frustrating, hard, thankless and unappreciated, which is why we chose not to join INS. Just because we are pointing out the fallacy of ICE, doesn't mean that we don't appreciate what you do. At the same time, don't knock us for what we do, because it is also important to this nation. If ICE is in fact nothing more than an "INS force multiplier," as you say, that is truly a tragedy for this country, because it means that we are giving up enforcing other laws that Customs traditionally investigated. Can't you see the logic in that?
Unfortunately, Customs and INS were both sacrificed on the altar of 9/11, to the great delight of the FBI, which can now blame ICE for the next terrorist attacks. At least we now have one thing in common, namely, belonging to an agency that was set up to take the fall for the next visit from Al Qaeda.
-
14970
Since all of you legacy Customs employees are so brilliant, let's try an existential exercise. If Congress dissolved the legacy Customs Service and merged the investigators into ICE with all those hideously unqualified legacy INS 1811s, and now is forcing legacy Customs agents to do legacy INS work, and if ICE is the new INS . . . wait for it, wait for it . . . what benefit did legacy Customs provide? I mean, if you were so superior to, and let's be clear here, legacy Customs employees don't just think they were superior to legacy INS agents, they believe they were and are superior to FBI agents, DEA agents, ATF agents, basically everyone in the federal government; but, if you were so superior in general, and so valued by the Congress and American public, why would you be paired with these woefully incapable, or should I say, pathetic, shameful, disgraceful, legacy INS agents?
Something to think about -- also, you all should read Jack Welch's book. And think about how he used to discuss an employee's career with him/her by saying, "Maybe you're not in the right line of work."
-
14939
ICE too, My concern is that too much time is being wasted complaining about ICE and CBP while complex legal situations and investigations are being fouled up due to confusing lines of responsibility and lack of expertise caused by the current organization.
A major component of the ICE mission is immigration work but you, yourself, expressed a form of disdain for immigration. Maybe immigration work is not as flashy as customs. We deal with "dirty little people" as one former ICE manager called immigration violators and not things like counterfeit NFL jerseys and Lord of the Ring swords.
I don't care what you call the agencies. I don't care what title you use or if you're in a uniform or business casual. I'm concerned about the safety of the citizens in this country and I do not feel this organization is the best it can be.
Do I think we should go back to the "old" ways? No. Do I think our managers should pull their heads out of the sand and do something to resolve the obvious problems? Yes. Maybe, most importantly, all of us -- the workers -- should stop our bickering about who was the better 1811 or whose former agency was more professional or what color uniform we should wear and do our jobs! That means no more former USCS agents complaining about immigration work (if you ask me, one undocumented alien does more criminal and financial harm than a truck load of counterfeit Lord of the Rings swords). That means no more former INS agents complaining about USCS computer programs.
I do believe that having specialist was a better system. I joined INS because I wanted to work with people. Most INS agents I know felt the same. Most USCS agents I have known admit that they prefer to work with "stuff." Cargo, dope, tons of this or grosses of that. The two different attitudes caused us to go certain directions and be successful in our respective fields.
Can I deal with "stuff"? Yes. Can you deal with a rental truck full of undocumented foriegn nationals who do not speak English and may be from Mexico or may be from Iran? I hope so.
I hope that future agents can overcome our shortcomings -- past, present and future. I will continue to work and fight to give them the best chance possible to be successful.
-
14931
Almost all cases have a nexus between customs and immigration law? Simply put, you could link the cases of almost any federal agency to immigration law just as easily as you can supposedly link Customs cases to immigration law. According to that line of thought, we should just have one giant federal agency merging Customs, INS, FBI, DEA, Secret Service, ATF, Commerce, State Department, Indian Affairs, EPA, and even Land Management. It is extremely deceptive to represent that customs cases somehow link to immigration law in ways that the cases of other federal agencies don't.
As far as the need to look ahead and not behind, that attitude assumes (wrongfully) that what lies ahead is an improvement over that which is behind us. Unfortunately, the opposite is true. We could merge the Department of Justice with the Girl Scouts and then tell them to shut up, look ahead and not behind. The reorganization of Customs and INS under DHS amounted in a regression. It was a giant step backward from the way things used to be. And our current organization is much less equipped to move ahead than our organization prior to DHS. We need to look to where we can improve, to where we can fix this heap of trash. And sadly, in this case that means looking behind.
-
14918
Dear ICE too:
I read your comments and almost fell off of my chair. To say that most of the cases you've seen have both an immigration and customs nexus is disingenuous, and misses the point. Sure, many who violate "customs" laws such as narcotics smuggling, money laundering, and export violations may be here illegally, and thus violate immigration laws as well. However, in 26 years, I have never seen any such defendant indicted by any U.S. Attorney's office for the immigration violations, when they are charged with more serious criminal violations that carry much more substantial penalties. About the only thing done is a detainer, so that when the defendant gets out of jail (or rarely, is acquitted), they get deported. No need to merge Customs and INS to accomplish that!
Regarding the new agents, I feel sorry for them, for they are getting inadequate training in both fields, making them generalists instead of specialists. This is no way to develop the investigators of tomorrow, who will face increasingly sophisticated criminal organizations. This is a disservice to them, and to our nation. As for solutions to this mess, numerous constructive suggestions have been posted in this forum since the merger, by agents and officers who actually know how to do these jobs. Unfortunately, they have been universally ignored by those in a position to make the changes that are so critically needed at DHS, ICE, and CBP, namely, agency management, the president, and Congress.
-
14905
So what is it that is attempting to be done? Go back to the way things were?? Do you really think that is going to happen? Almost all the cases brought to my attention have a nexus between customs law and immigration law. Export law violations are almost always tied to individuals who can be tied into immigration violations and narcotics trafficking as well. Copyright violations ditto, and money laundering are related to narcotics, MS-13, et al. I agree we need to fine-tune our agency but wishing for the days of old instead of finding ways to utilize the unique missions of each of the former Agencies benefits no one. The back-stabbing and circling the wagons isn't going to get it done and makes our hard working people look bad to the public and fellow agencies. We need to looking ahead and not behind. Many offices are doing this and having success. The new agents coming into the field have no dog in this fight and are finding ways of getting the job done.
-
14902
As a government employee for the past 22 years, I have worked as a Border Patrol Agent, a Criminal Investigator and currently back with USBP management. I have had the opportunity to work with Customs Inspectors, Patrol Officers (CPO) and Criminal Investigators. I have a great deal of respect for both INS and Customs.
My question to those involved in this post and to our government is this: Instead of arguing about a merger of ICE and CBP, why not argue for the reinstatement of Customs and (hopefully an improved) INS as separate and independent agencies under the DHS.
Both agencies conduct highly specialized functions, which actually, to anyone with any background in the enforcement of such laws, do not cross over, or merge particularly well. USCS does a wonderful job dealing with "things" crossing the border. INS (Border Patrol and Investigations) did a wonderful job dealing with large numbers of people. Any first year psychology major will tell you that the mindset that allows a person to be good with "things" does not always work well with people and vice versa. Also, the laws in each respective field are extremely complex and detailed. Does the government truly believe that we are safer with a bunch of "generalists" running the show or would the public prefer that specialist in each field be dealing with these matters?
The arbitrary division placed between ICE and CBP of "border" verses "interior" enforcement was obviously created by someone who has no concept of the ebb and flow of materials and people across the border and across the country. This division of responsibilities and merger of agencies should never have been considered viable by anyone with field law enforcement experience in USCS or INS.
If DHS wanted better control of the border and a more direct chain of command, the answer would have been to pull INS out of DOJ and USCS out of Treasury and place both, intact, under DHS. Give the people with expertise regarding dealing with "things" the responsibility and ability to do their job and the people with expertise on people crossing the border the responsibility and ability to deal with people.
-
14869
Once again, another person who assumes that anyone who speaks out against ICE is a do-nothing employee who spends all of his/her work time complaining. That seems to be the attitude of all those who have accepted the ICE disaster: "If you are a valuable worker, then you'll shut your mouth and take it. If you have a problem, then you must be a good-for-nothing." Many of the hardest working employees I know are the ones who are actually doing the most talking. These people are contributing on two fronts: 1) they bust their humps on the job, and 2) they make an effort to correct this wrong, unlike all of those who keep their mouths shut. If this situation is ever corrected, it will be on the backs of all of us who have spoken up and made the effort. The rest of those who sat back and did nothing don't deserve to work in a better agency, because they've done nothing except help to foster this disaster.
-
14833
Finally someone who knows what the mission of ICE is. Please share it with the rest of us.
-
14826
What is the mission of ICE? If you find out, please let the rest of us know, because all I'm seeing is immigration, immigration and still more immigration cases. Where are narcotics, money laundering, weapons, strategic, IPR, fraud, and other traditional Customs investigative responsibilities today? If you don't believe me, look at the press releases on the ICE Website, and count how many pertain to each type of investigative authority. And as for the "tools" you mention, yes, I've heard of them, and they are mostly in Washington!
-
14825
To "Dedicated:"
"Come to grips . . . "? With what? This disaster? Even though I wanted no part of this merger, and consider it a huge mistake like many others do, including most fellow agents, outside experts, former leaders, members of the media and Congress, and the DHS Inspector General, I still work just as hard now as I did before. However, I must take exception to your comments. Don't dare tell me not to exercise my First Amendment rights to speak out against injustice, incompetence and just sheer waste. If you think that things are just fine with this abortion of an agency, go on living in Fantasyland with the rest of the Kool-Aid drinkers who bought into this mess. By your logic, we might as well merge the IRS with the FBI, or Postal Inspectors with Navy SEALS, for they have about as little in common as did Customs and INS investigators. And how in heck does anyone justify putting FPS into ICE?
Many of us who retain the capacity to think for ourselves see things differently, and we will continue to speak out, in order to try to bring attention to what's wrong (and there's a lot) to the chaos at ICE. We do this not because we are living in the past, but to hopefully change things for the better in the future. If our so-called leaders had only taken the time to truly examine this issue before acting as they did, we wouldn't be in the mess we are all in today.
-
14816
Again there are too many ICE Agents and Officers who have yet come to grips with the reality that ICE is where we are now. Instead of complaining about how great things were back in the day we need to move ahead or get left behind. Were things different before the merger? Of course. Did the merger give us more tools to use in the furtherance of our mission? Obviously. It seems that many of those who are complaining about how things aren't as good as they were haven't made an effort to learn what the mission of ICE is and then taken advantage of, and yes, put forth effort to learn what they need to do to get the mission accomplished. There is a real simple answer to those who do not wish to move ahead but would rather lament what was, get another job! Oh wait that might require having to learn something new and get out of your comfort zone, but we aren't getting paid good money to take the easy way out.
-
14800
Maybe many of them are "great workers," but once they settle here, and have 7 or 8 kids, on a minimum wage job, then what? The family will have to go on food stamps and other government assistance, and who is going to pay for their health care? The taxpayers, that's who. Then when the kids grow up, do you think they'll want to work the same type of unskilled labor type of jobs their fathers had? No, so they'll join gangs or else have kids themselves and go on welfare. Although there are exceptions to this scenario, many of the poorly educated, unskilled immigrants and their families follow this road, which is not good for them, or for the United States. If you don't believe me, go see for yourselves -- it's true, and it's getting worse daily! The solution is to control the borders, punish those who break the law, and take back control of our country. Otherwise, the growing tidal wave of humanity seeking to come here will soon overwhelm us, and this country will be changed forever, and not for the better.
-
14711
I started my career as a border patrol agent in 1980 and worked my way up to a Special Agent and now have been a supervisory Special Agent for 12 years. I had a conversation with an individual the other day from a NGO regarding the undocumented workers. He said "one thing you can say about them is that they are good workers"! I had to agree with him, but with the caveat that the reason they are good workers is because they are hungry!!!! The problem with the statement that they are doing jobs that Americans won't do is that Americans have become soft and weak with all of the social programs. Why should I go out and work in a back breaking job when I can apply and get assistance from our government. Talk to someone who lived through the Depression and they will tell you a different story. They couldn't find work no matter what kind and when they did find work guess what -- they were damn good workers. Do you know why? It was because they were hungry!!! What a great country we have become when people can sit home all day long and watch Judge Judy and then wait for their check from the government. Put those to work that can work and you'll see them doing the jobs that Americans won't do.
May God continue to bless these United States.
1811
-
14701
I'm glad to see that ICE will see an almost 22 percent budget increase in FY 2007. However, here's the real question:
Of that 22 percent, how much will go to DRO, and how much will go to Investigations? I'm afraid, given that DRO is a very (emphasis) money-intensive endeavor, that at least 2/3 of that money is going to go that way, while the remainder is going to go to OI. While any money is better than no money, I'm afraid it is not nearly enough to even begin undoing the damage from almost three years of budgetary neglect.
Every day, in my SAC office, we are told that there is no money whatsoever: for hiring, for investigative travel, for investigative support, nothing. In fact, my office just recently announced the loss of almost 20 percent of its agent FTE positions, including supervisory slots (so much for upward mobility in ICE!). Therefore, as a consequence, we are consolidating groups and starting to combine similar programs or eliminate program areas entirely (e.g. financial groups with a specific focus, such as BMPE).
If Ms. Myers likes the recent publicity she's been getting with the tunnel discovery and the weapons seizure, she'd best realize that DRO is not the one responsible for that; OI is. If OI continues to be neglected in terms of funding and the things that go with it, OI cannot go much further in the way of successes, and it's those successes (or lack thereof) that will determine if Ms. Myers stays or goes at the end of her recess appointment.
Pathetic, Shameful and Disgraceful.
-
14693
The proposed DHS budget calls for an increase of 21 percent ($817 million) for ICE, for a total budget of $4.7 billion for fiscal year 2007, up from $3.8 billion in fiscal year 2006. However, upon closer examination, looking at where this money is going merely confirms that ICE is the new INS. The bulk is going to the Secure Border Initiative, which means $541 million in additional funding for detention and removal operations, and "increased interior enforcement," which includes "worksite enforcement." There is also an increase of $ 29 million for the Federal Protective Service (FPS), which for some unexplained reason was put into ICE, and still remains here. Finally, "the request reflects adjustments to the base budget of nearly $262 million that, among other things, support annualization of prior year initiatives and inflationary costs," according to Ms. Julie Myers, our new recess-appointed leader.
Totally lacking here is any mention of money laundering, narcotics smuggling, munitions and high technology smuggling, or any other traditional Customs investigations. This only proves that the only reason Customs agents were drafted into ICE was to provide additional manpower to support immigration enforcement, to the detriment of the missions formerly performed by the U.S. Customs Service Office of Investigations. Like the telegrams our fathers and grandfathers received from Uncle Sam, that began, "Greetings," we have been drafted without our consent or any say in the matter at all, to become agents of ICE, the new INS. What a shame, and what a disgrace!
-
14661
If there are so many "jobs that Americans won't do" then why don't we do away with unemployment and welfare benefits, since it is clear (at least to the President) that those who are not working are doing so by choice.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 8
Emergency Response
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
DECEMBER 15
What Healthcare Reform Means for Federal Managers: Roadblocks to Management and Oversight
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.