Second, it gives the FBI its first significant antidrug role by requiring that the new agency draw on the FBI's expertise in combating organized crime's major role in drug trafficking. These two provisions are consistent with my own reorganization bill, S. 942, introduced February 21 and cosponsored by nine Senators, which would have centralized drug law enforcement efforts into a single Justice Department agency-the FBI. I am satisfied that proper implementation of the President's plan assures a major drug enforcement role for the FBI.

As the President said in his reorganization message to Congress: "I intend to see that the resources of the FBI are fully committed to assist in supporting the new Drug Enforcement Administration."

DRUG ENFORCEMENT PROBLEMS

It is not my intention to dwell on the BNDD-Customs dispute at these hearings because no legislative purpose would be served inasmuch as the proposed plan ends the dispute by uniting the disputing agencies.

Also, such an inquiry could only exacerbate the strained relationship between the two agencies at a time of transition when BNDD and Customs agents should be encouraged to make peace between themselves so as to strengthen their war on drug traffickers.

Rather, the subcommittee should focus on law enforcement issues that still must be considered either because they are not specifically covered by the reorganization plan or because the plan allows considerable discretion as to how they will be resolved. The basic issues, as I see them, are:

Is Federal drug enforcement most effective in stemming the flow of heroin by targeting at the high-, middle-, or low-level traffickers?

How should the FBI be used to step up efforts against organized crime's major role in drug trafficking?

How should narcotics intelligence and other enforcementrelated activities be coordinated throughout the Federal bureaucracy?

What is the proper role of the new Federal agency in relation to State and local antidrug enforcement efforts?

What is the proper relationship between Federal narcotics investigators and prosecutors for the most effective drug enforcement effort?

What steps must be taken for a smooth transition to the new agency so that drug enforcement does not suffer in the interim?

By using these hearings to address these issues, the Congress and the public can properly inform itself on how the proposed Drug Enforcement Administration should be structured to meet the menace of today's merchants of enslavement and death-the drug traffickers.

Senator Allen.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ALLEN

Senator ALLEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Drug abuse is, indeed, one of the most pressing problems confronting our society and our Government at this time. In fact, I would not take issue with anyone who would label drug abuse as one of our most serious domestic problems.

I think we all recognize that a concerted effort against drug abuse at the Federal level is long overdue, particularly in the area of enforcement. We need to launch an all-out attack on those engaged in the drug trafficking. The vicious drug traffic must be brought to an end.

I am delighted that the administration has proposed Reorganization Plan No. 2 and has recognized the need to establish a unified and coordinated approach to combat the entire range of the drug menace. This is long overdue, and the concepts of Reorganization Plan No. 2 are certainly welcomed by me.

I recognize the multitude of problems involved in any effort to resolve the issue of overlapping drug control agencies, particularly where two or more Federal agencies are involved. But they must be resolved if we expect to establish and maintain an effective and coordinated drug abuse and drug enforcement effort.

I am delighted that the top law enforcement officials of the Federal Government are here this morning, including the top law enforcement officer of the United States, the Attorney General. I am sure that they will make many fine contributions to the committee. They will be most helpful in our deliberations on the President's proposal to combine all drug-related intelligence and investigative responsibilities into the new Drug Enforcement Administration.

Senator RIBICOFF. Senator Javits.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JAVITS

Senator JAVITS. Mr. Chairman. I am pleased that the subcommittee is considering this morning the important recommendations of the President in connection with his efforts to strengthen the capability of our Federal law enforcement agency to interdict the domestic, interstate, and international commerce in illicit drugs.

The issue of drug abuse has been the subject of extraordinary consideration not only in the Halls of Congress during recent years, but also in forums throughout the Nation, including our State legislatures and the media. No longer is any voice needed to apprise our citizenry that drug abuse represents a standing challenge to the vitality and welfare of the American people.

What is called for is a redoubled effort to refine and improve our approaches on both the demand and supply sides of the drug problem. All of the basic assumptions underlying our national policies in this area ought to be questioned on a continuing basis. With patience and perseverance we must continue to seek better strategies and more effective programs in dealing with this multifaceted public health and law enforcement problem.

Reorganization Plan No. 2-which is the subject of these hearings-represents a sound and commonsense approach to the basic organizational problems which have hindered effective drug enforcement at the Federal level. The determination of the President to end the bureaucratic rivalry among several of these agencies is

highly commendable. I am acutely aware of the fact that the overlapping of jurisdiction between the Bureau of Customs and the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs has sometimes undermined Federal and local efforts in drug enforcement.

Beyond the technical and management questions raised by the plan, there are several important national drug enforcement issues which I hope will be addressed by the distinguished group of administration witnesses before us this morning:

(1) What is the proper Federal role in drug enforcement on the local and international level?

(2) How will the new agency relate to the operations of local U.S. attorneys?

(3) Illicit, international drug trafficking is a booming business rooted in international affairs and linked to rapidly expanding demand. How much do we really know about the nature of drug trafficking generally? What is the nature of our intelligence capability in the drug area, and how well are the efforts of the Justice Department, CIA, the State Department, and other agencies coordinated?

(4) What do we know about the economics of heroin supply and demand? Do the general economic principles operating in society at large also apply to illegal enterprises? How is maximum profit potential balanced off against the risk of arrest and imprisonment? Can supply conditions be effectively manipulated? Is the market truly competitive and how is control maintained with respect to the cost of entry and investment commitment?

(5) Should the new agency have an independent internal security office as a guard against corruption and mishandling of seized drug contraband?

(6) What is the proper role of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in supplementing the work of the new agency?

Mr. Chairman, relentless investigation and vigorous prosecution of large-scale drug traffickers would result in substantially reducing the supply of heroin and other dangerous drugs. While law enforcement, in and of itself, cannot solve the problem of drug abuse it is one of the most important weapons in society's arsenal. To be most effective, law enforcement must distinguish between different types of dangerous drugs such as marihuana, so called "soft drugs" and "hard drugs." Priorities must be set and hard, objective evaluation of law enforcement efforts must be undertaken in terms of the quality of the cases made. Some of these larger questions are addressed in my bill S. 1138, the Drug Enforcement Reorganization Act of 1973, and I hope they will be given serious consideration by the administration. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Senator RIBICOFF. Senator Roth.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROTH

Senator ROTH. Mr. Chairman, I would like to endorse the calling of these hearings on the problem of coordination of our drug law enforcement effort. The President's Reorganization Plan No. 2, as well as the legislation proposed by Senators Ribbicoff and Javits, clearly seeks to encourage a more unified Federal effort to control

the supply of illicit drugs. Having last year strengthened the coordination of our national campaign to prevent drug abuse through the creation of the Special Action Office for Drug Abuse Prevention, the Congress now needs to consolidate our antidrug traffic activities.

The unfortunate results of poor administrative coordination_in the drug law enforcement area only too clearly emphasize that there is an organizational element to the solutions to serious public problems. I think that we all too often assume that if we are sincere about accomplishing a social good, the organizational problems will take care of themselves. It is probably safe to say that most everyone considers the eradication of narcotics addiction in America to be a top national priority. Having settled on this goal we need to find the best administrative structure to accomplish it. Although poor program coordination may have an especially regrettable impact on the campaign against drug abuse, it lessens the effectiveness of many of our Federal domestic programs. Large numbers of categorical grants administered by many agencies rather naturally cause informational and management difficulties for grant applicants, Federal Administrators, and the Congress.

There will always be a need for certain narrowly defined categorical programs. However, the Congress and Executive should continue. to look for ways to improve their operation. Further, we need to at least experiment with the bloc grant, or special revenue sharing approach, proposed by President Nixon. The President's plans to generally reorganize the Federal Establishment along functional lines also hold out hope for the better coordination of Federal social programs.

President Nixon's message of March 28 to the Congress points out that the enforcement of drug laws in the United States is in the hands of half a dozen agencies. A study conducted in my office in 1971 found 70 domestic assistance programs which had some drug abuse-related use. These programs were the responsibility of 8 agencies and some 15 subagencies-bureaus, offices, and so forth. Such statistics make a convincing argument for the need to better coordinate our Federal drug abuse campaign, including that part of it dealing with law enforcement.

FRUSTRATIONS OF DRUG ENFORCEMENT

Senator RIBICOFF. I do appreciate all of you gentlemen coming together, so that we can discuss the problems of drug enforcement, one with the other, Mr. Ash putting the plan together, and you gentlemen who will have to enforce it.

Personally, I do want to express my recognition and appreciation to President Nixon for this plan. It has my enthusiastic support, and great credit is due to the President.

There's no question in my mind that the people of this country want the drug traffic stopped. The people of this country, mothers and fathers, feel frustrated and full of fear as the result of drug menace, especially as it affects our children.

I know that local and State police in the State of Connecticut are concerned with drugs on the street and in the schools. They are

trying to stop it. I don't think they can stop it without the cooperation of the Federal authorities.

Personally, I feel frustrated when I see some nine Federal drug enforcement agencies spending one-quarter of a billion dollars, fighting one another, confirmed by independent investigation. That ought to stop. Another problem that we have: What is the role of organized crime in the drug traffic? Can that be broken up?

I am confident that with this new agency we will finally be on our way to help solve the problems of drugs in America.

The President's Reorganization Plan No. 2 will become a part of the permanent record.

(See exhibit 1, p. 44.)

Senator RIBICOFF. Mr. Ash and Mr. Attorney General, if you have any prepared statement that you would like to give now, or you can give a resume of it, and then your entire statements will go into the record as if read.

I will leave that entirely up to you, gentlemen.

TESTIMONY OF RICHARD G. KLEINDIENST, ATTORNEY GENERAL; ROY ASH, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET; MILES J. AMBROSE, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF DRUG ABUSE LAW ENFORCEMENT; JOHN E. INGERSOLL, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF NARCOTICS AND DANGEROUS DRUGS; VERNON D. ACREE, U.S. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS; WILLIAM V. SULLIVAN, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF NATIONAL NARCOTICS INTELLIGENCE; AND JAMES F. GREENE, ACTING COMMISSIONER, IMMIGRATION SERVICE Attorney General KLEINDIENST. First, we want to thank you for this hearing, and the thoughtful work that you, Senator Allen, and other Members of the Senate have given to this very difficult problem.

We are all here. We have some prepared remarks. In that it might facilitate the dialogue, it would be constructive if we filed our statements, Mr. Chairman, then proceed from that point by a level of inquery from yourself and Senator Allen to all of us that are here. Senator RIBICOFF. Senator Percy and Senator Javits will be here momentarily, so we will have a good panel.

Without objection, the formal statements will go into the record as if read.

(See exhibits 2-7, pp. 50-65.)

Senator RIBICOFF. I will have questions from time to time, and the other members of the panel should feel free to address questions to any of the gentlemen before us. We have the top narcotic enforcement officials in the Nation here, and you should feel free to interrupt to ask questions as we go along.

ROLE OF ORGANIZED CRIME IN DRUG TRAFFIC

Mr. Sullivan, you have been with the FBI for many years, and now you are in charge of drug intelligence for these coordinated agencies. From your experience, would you give us your estimate of the role of organized crime in drug traffic?