CONTENTS Ford, Jess T., Director, International Affairs and Trade, U.S. General Accounting Office; Tony Edson, Managing Director, Office of Visa Serv- ices, U.S. Department of State; Donna A. Bucella, Director, Terrorist Screening Center, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice; Robert M. Jacksta, Executive Director, Border Security and Facilitation, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; and Robert Schoch, Deputy Assistant Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by: Bucella, Donna A., Director, Terrorist Screening Center, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, prepared statement of Edson, Tony, Managing Director, Office of Visa Services, U.S. Depart- ment of State, followp question and response Ford, Jess T., Director, International Affairs and Trade, U.S. General Accounting Office, prepared statement of Jacksta, Robert M., Executive Director, Border Security and Facilitation, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, prepared statement of Kucinich, Hon. Dennis J., a Representative in Congress from the State Schoch, Robert, Deputy Assistant Director, U.S. Immigration and Cus- Letters dated July 12, 2004 79 3 VISA REVOCATIONS II: STILL POROUS, SLOW TO FIX TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2004 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY, EMERGING THREATS AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Christopher Shays (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Shays, Duncan, Schrock, Kucinich, Ruppersberger, and Watson. Staff present: Lawrence Halloran, staff director and counsel; Thomas Costa, professional staff member; Robert A. Briggs, clerk; Jean Gosa, minority assistant clerk; and Andrew Su, minority professional staff member. Mr. SHAYS. A quorum being present, the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations hearing entitled Visa Revocations II: Still Porous, Slow to Fix, is called to order. Entry by a non-citizen into the United States is a privilege, not a right. For a variety of reasons, a request for a visa may be denied. If those reasons arise only after a visa is issued, it can be revoked. The discretionary process of visa revocation is an important tool used by the Departments of State and Homeland Security, DHS, to protect our borders. But when a visa is revoked after the alien has arrived here, what happens? Thirteen months ago, at a hearing on visa revocation as a counter-terrorism tool, the General Accounting office, GAO, described a process riddled with flawed communications within and between agencies. Poor coordination and haphazard followup meant suspected terrorists who entered the United States were not being tracked or removed. Parallel inconsistent data systems treated visa revocation actions differently, creating confusion about the number, as well as the status of aliens no longer welcome here. We were assured the problems would be fixed. We were told new procedures were being implemented to share visa revocation information quickly and effectively. We were assured the language of the visa revocation instrument would be reviewed to close the apparent loophole making the revocation effective only after the alien left the United States. We asked GAO to audit compliance with those commitments. More than a year later, GAO reports some progress in strengthen ing revocation processes, but finds continual delays and disconnects plaguing the system. Information about visa revocations based on terrorism concerns can still take weeks or months to appear on watch lists used at the border. DHS may not investigate some aliens who enter or remain in the United States on a revoked visa. Additionally, discussions of a regulatory change to permit removal of an alien holding a revoked visa seem stuck in a legalistic and bureaucratic quagmire. Border security against terrorists depends on multiple layers of protection. One of those layers, the visa revocation process, remains partially blind and needlessly porous to incursions by individuals who might pose a grave risk to our security. We continue to look for a far sharper use of the visa revocation tool to turn away, or if necessary, remove anyone intent on abusing the privilege of visiting our shores. We know all our witnesses share that goal, don't have any doubt about that, and we look forward to their testimony. [The prepared statement of Hon. Christopher Shays follows:] TOM DAVIS, VIRGINIA, CHAIRMAN DAN BURTON, INDIANA CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, CONNECTICUT ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, FLORIDA JOHN M. MCHUGH, NEW YORK JOHN L MICA, FLORIDA MARK E SOUDER, INDIANA -STEVEN C LATOURETTE, OHIO OUG OSE, CALIFORNIA ON LEWIS, KENTUCKY JO ANN DAVIS, VIRGINIA TOOD RUSSELL PLATTS, PENNSYLVANIA CHRIS CANNON, UTAH ADAM H. PUTNAM, FLORIDA JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., TENNESSEE NATHAN DEAL, GEORGIA CANDICE MILLER, MICHIGAN MICHAEL R. TURNER, OHIO JOHN R. CARTER, TEXAS MARSHA BLACKBURN, TENNESSEE PATRICK J. TIBERI, OHIO KATHERINE HARRIS, FLORIDA Entry by a non-citizen into the United States is a privilege, not a right. For a variety of reasons, a request for a visa may be denied. If those reasons arise only after a visa is issued, it can be revoked. The discretionary process of visa revocation is an important tool used by the Departments of State and Homeland Security (DHS) to protect our borders. But when a visa is revoked after the alien has arrived here, what happens? Thirteen months ago, at a hearing on visa revocation as a counterterrorism tool, the General Accounting Office (GAO) described a process riddled with flawed communications within and between agencies. Poor coordination and haphazard follow up meant suspected terrorists who entered the United States were not being tracked or removed. Parallel, inconsistent data systems treated visa revocation actions differently, creating confusion about the number as well as the status of aliens no longer welcome here. |