Newhouse to Mayorkas: “How can you justify this?”

Today, Rep. Dan Newhouse (WA-04) questioned Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on his annual budget request and failure to secure the southern border of the United States in a House Appropriations Committee hearing. 

Watch Rep. Newhouse’s remarks HERE or read remarks as prepared below:

“Thank you, Chairman Joyce, and Ranking Member Cuellar. Secretary Mayorkas, thank you for being here to discuss the Administration’s Budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2025.

I could ask about the crisis at our Southern Border that is both a humanitarian crisis—migrants of all ages from around the world making a perilous journey to the border—and a national security crisis—people being released en masse into the country daily, a record number of individuals encountered who are in the Terrorist Screening Dataset, and local jurisdictions not honoring DHS detainer requests and releasing dangerous criminals back onto the streets— but…

I would like to discuss the fentanyl crisis that is raging throughout the United States. Fentanyl flooding across the Southwest border does not stay in border communities; it spreads throughout the country to destroy lives, families, and communities.

This is such a serious issue for my constituents that I brought together members of law enforcement, addiction treatment groups, medical professionals, and community leaders, in addition to members of municipal and tribal government to launch the Central Washington Fentanyl Task Force to develop an all-hands-on-deck approach to combat this crisis and collaboratively reduce the effect this drug has on our region.

Your testimony notes that “the Department has stopped more illicit fentanyl and arrested more individuals for fentanyl-related crimes in the last two fiscal years than in the previous five years combined.” This is equally admirable and disturbing.

The men and women of CBP and ICE do extraordinary work on the front line and beyond to execute their mission of protecting the homeland. However, as Border Patrol agents are pulled off the front line to process then release the majority of illegal migrants into the United States, the cartels have shifted their tactics to exploit the vulnerabilities those personnel shortfalls have created.

Your testimony also notes that the FY 2025 budget request includes critical investments in the fight against fentanyl, specifically, investments in Non-Intrusive Inspection Technology. Yet, when I reviewed the budget justifications for CBP’s Non-Intrusive Inspection Systems Program, it says “the FY 2025 budget does not provide procurement funding for this investment” although it does request level funding for operations and support.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I did not see the roughly $300 million that is allegedly needed to install the scanners used to detect drugs and other contraband that have been purchased and are sitting in a warehouse collecting dust while you and I are sitting here.

The only investment I saw is $10.5 million within the Science and Technology Directorate for R&D to improve detection – nothing that stops the fentanyl making it across our borders and into our communities right now.

When I visited the border in February, one of your own border patrol agents told me directly, “we don’t control the border, the cartels control the border—they control who comes across and when.”

A local resident also told me that neighbors don’t even bother to lock their doors anymore because the smugglers and illegal migrants simply break into their home to steal what they need—in fact, some residents leave clothing and consumables on their patio in hopes of deterring another break-in.

The fentanyl epidemic is fueled through the Southwest Border. How can—better yet—why do you justify this?

Are you working with Mexican authorities to: 1) stop fentanyl precursors from entering Mexico and 2) prevent waves of migrants from physically rushing the border? What are the specific and tangible actions?

While it is true that most of the fentanyl seized by CBP is intercepted at official ports of entry, this is because those facilities are equipped for that very purpose. Agents operating at checkpoints and between the ports do not have the benefit of such infrastructure.

What specific investments does your budget make to catch the hundreds, likely thousands, of pounds of fentanyl and fentanyl-lace drugs that slip past the front line undetected?

How are agents that should be conducting highway patrols or – for example – operating a main check point that is currently closed due to staffing shortages and the required burden to process illegal migrants, how are they specifically supported in your budget proposal?

Every farmer and agriculture stakeholder I meet with brings up the same most important topic: farm labor. Our rural communities are struggling, and family farms are disappearing because it is no longer economically feasible for them to survive.

By statute, your Department and the Department of Labor administer the H-2A agricultural guest worker program. Based on recent DOL rulemakings that farmers across the country are burdened with, that Department appears to either not understand or care about the agricultural industry.

I, however, would like to believe you understand the importance of healthy foods grown in the United States which aligns with your department’s guiding principles and responsibility to “Preserve and Uphold the Nation’s Prosperity and Economic Security.”

Yes or No: Do you believe that the ability of a nation to feed itself is inherently more secure than a nation that relies on imports to feed its citizens?

Earlier this year USCIS finalized a new rule that would increase the costs to employers using the H-2A agricultural guest worker program, among other programs.

While I understand the purpose and utility of fee-based programs and the need to update based on increased costs, the rule as finalized is overly burdensome and costly to America’s agricultural producers.

Not only did the general filing fee increase, but a $600 asylum program fee was added requiring agricultural employers to pay for a program they receive no benefit from.

Additionally, instead of just filling one form for all of their workers, the final rule caps the number of employees that can be listed on each form at 25 workers. There is no added benefit for this policy and only serves to increase paperwork burdens and costs to agricultural employers.

Now that the rule has gone into effect as of last week, we have some actual costs associated with this rule – which far exceed the amount USCIS indicated of a “well under 26% increase”.

Do you expect producers to absorb this cost or pass them along to the consumer?

If producers are expected to absorb these costs, how do you expect them to stay in business?

If they are no longer in business, how do you and the Biden Administration plan to protect our food security when the majority of the food served on our tables is imported from other countries?”

Rep. Newhouse is a member of the House Appropriations Committee and serves on the Agriculture, Energy and Water, and Homeland Security subcommittees.

To watch the full hearing, click here.

 

###