*EPF304 08/11/2004
Transcript: U.S. Border Procedures to Reward Legal Crossers, Penalize Illegals
(Homeland Security's Hutchinson briefs on immigration policy changes) (6030)

Mexican citizens using legal border crossing cards will be able to enter the United States for temporary visits of up to 30 days -- an increase over the previous restriction of just 72 hours, according to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The new policy is effective August 12.

DHS also announced plans to expand the use of expedited removal procedures for illegal immigrants entering the country along the northern and southern U.S. borders. Under expedited removal procedures, individuals can be detained and returned to their home country as soon as circumstances allow, in most cases without an immigration hearing.

Expedited removal procedures, up until now, have been used only at border points of entry, but not along the entire border between ports of entry.

"We want to send a clear message that those individuals who follow legal immigration rules will benefit, while those who choose to break our nation's immigration laws will be promptly removed from the United States," said DHS's Under Secretary for Borders and Transportation Security Asa Hutchinson.

Speaking at an August 10 press briefing in Washington, Hutchinson said, "Those people who have waited in line for border crossing cards, those individuals who have gone through security checks, they ought to be rewarded for their legal behavior."

Following is the transcript of the Hutchinson briefing:

(begin transcript)

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC
August 10, 2004

TRANSCRIPT FROM MEDIA ROUNDTABLE WITH UNDER SECRETARY ASA HUTCHINSON ON IMMIGRATION POLICY CHANGES

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: This is Asa Hutchinson, Under Secretary at the Department of Homeland Security, and we appreciate those that have joined us by conference call, and we have an audience here in the room, media representatives, and I'm going to make some opening comments. We'll have questions from the audience here, and then we'll take questions from those that are with us on the conference call that will be moderated by the operator.

And so with that, let me make some comments this morning. Thank you for joining us today. I'm pleased to announce two initiatives in the form of rule changes that will provide greater control of our U.S. borders.

One, we are expanding our use of immigration authority that Congress has provided to Homeland Security to combat illegal entry between the ports of entry.

And secondly, we are facilitating travel for legitimate Mexican travelers who have passed security checks.

These two objectives will be accomplished by first of all expanding the use of expedited removal from the ports of entry to areas along the U.S. border; and secondly, increasing from 72 hours to 30 days the amount of time a security cleared border crossing cardholder can remain in the United States.

By taking these two steps, we want to send a clear message that those individuals who follow legal immigration rules will benefit, while those who choose to break our nation's immigration laws will be promptly removed from the United States.

Now let me go through these a little bit slower. While expedited removal has been effectively used at official ports of entry in the U.S. since 1997, it has not been applied on the land borders between the ports of entry. The expansion of expedited removal processing will allow the Department of Homeland Security to speed the removal of illegal aliens who are caught while attempting to illegally enter the United States by fraudulent means, or while attempting to elude customs and border protection, border patrol agents.

This new procedure will only apply to those that are apprehended within 100 miles of the Mexican or Canadian borders, and only if they are apprehended within their first 14 days in the United States. This of course will make sure that the individuals who are subject to expedited removal have a close nexus to the border and would have negligible ties to the United States.

The expanded use of expedited removal is primarily directed at third country nationals who are not citizens of Mexico or Canada. When an alien is apprehended and placed in expedited removal proceedings by a border patrol agent, he or she generally will be detained and removed to his or her country of origin as soon as the circumstances allow. The alien will not be released in the United States in most cases, and is not provided a hearing before an immigration judge unless the alien is determined to have a credible fear of return to his or her country.

And this is an important feature of what we're doing, or caveat, that any alien who expresses an intention to apply for asylum or expresses a credible fear of persecution or torture, or fear of return to his or her home, will be referred to a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services asylum officer for a credible fear interview. And that right, that protection is very important to be protected.

If the alien is found to have a credible fear, he or she is removed from the expedited removal process and may seek protection in a removal hearing before an immigration judge.

Now before I go to the border crossing cards, let me explain a little bit of the rationale behind this move. Congress first of all gave this authority in the 1996 Immigration Reform Act. It has never been fully utilized, and it has only been utilized at the border ports of entry. We are expanding that again between the border ports of entry.

And first of all, it made little sense to have someone that would be apprehended trying to illegally enter the country at say the Laredo checkpoint, but 50 miles down the road in the desert area or the vast open spaces, you could not use that same procedure. And so this expands the use of expedited removal all along our southern and northern border areas.

Secondly, if you look at the statistics, we're addressing a problem that we have confronted and are struggling with. Over a 16-month period on the southwest border alone, we had 42,000 apprehensions of illegal aliens from third countries -- not Mexicans, but third countries. Forty-two thousand over a 16-month period. During that same period of time, we only had detention space for a limited number, a limited percent of that 42,000. And so approximately 28,000 were given a notice to appear in immigration court, and of the 28,000 that were given a notice to appear in immigration court, over 90 percent failed to show. And, obviously, that adds to the illegal population in the United States, and it adds to the burden of our court system. It adds to the burden of our detention, removal, our officers, our fugitive operations officers, who have to go out and apprehend those once you have a final order of removal. The average time in immigration court is over a year, and extensive costs both in terms of detention, and for those that are released in terms of apprehensions and costs that are associated with it.

And so this addresses that problem by allowing us to, when there is not an asylum claim or a credible fear, to immediately process them back and return them to their home country, reducing a time period of in excess of a year down to probably on the average of about eight days in which it would take to process them back to their country in normal circumstances. That is the reason for this change, and what I believe is significant about this change in the use of expedited removal.

In reference to Mexican nationals, the reason it is not applicable there or would be used broadly there is because the vast majority of Mexican nationals who are apprehended are voluntarily repatriated across the border, and so it's not part of the equation for the bulk of those being processed through the court.

Now let me address the other side of the equation on the boarding crossing card. The Department of Homeland Security has decided to expand the time restriction on border crossing cards that are used by Mexicans to enter the U.S. for temporary visits. Current rules limit the border crossing cardholder to visits of up to 72 hours within the border zone of 25 miles along the border in Texas, New Mexico and California, and 75 miles on the border in Arizona. You might ask me why Arizona is different. I don't know the answer to that, but there was a distinction made that 75 miles was applicable for Arizona.

The change will be that the time limit will be extended from 72 hours to 30 days for the border crossing cardholders. There will not be any change in the geographic limitations. But this will be of a significant commercial benefit for the border communities as well as a recognition that these individuals who have the border crossing cards have already gone through a background check, a fingerprint check, a security check.

And so with those security measures in place, there's not any compromise in security or a difference that it would make in terms of any visa overstays. And this will make it more comparable to what we see on the northern border. And again, it would be a benefit to the Mexican nationals that utilize those border crossing cards and to the border communities that have the benefit of that commerce.

With those two points and changes that I've emphasized, I'd be glad to turn it open to questions.

QUESTION: Mr. Hutchinson, first I have a very short question that has to do with what you just said. It's only for illegals in the first 14 days. What happens after day 15?

And the other question I want to ask you is I've seen the Washington Times, the article on the front page, and it's about the plan the President has for immigration reform.

I wonder if President Bush is reelected, do you have already like a plan, something like a timetable, what are you going to do? Are you planning to go more aggressively?

Because everybody says, not only me, but everybody has said that this year it has been more like politics, just talking, and no action. Would you like to tell us if you have like a timetable of what is going to be done, when?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: In reference to the 14-day issue, the expedited removal would apply for an alien that has been in the country less than 14 days and within 100 miles of the border. The way that would be determined, if an alien is apprehended, if there's an indication they've been here less than 14 days, they would be subject to expedited removal.

If the alien claims, you know, that they've been here for 30 days or whatever, that would be a subject of review by the border patrol agent, looking at documentation and other evidence that was available. If there was any doubt about it, expedited removal would not need to be utilized. And so it's just a factual determination that the border patrol would be able to evaluate.

And again, that is not really would have any applicability beyond the 100 mile nexus to the border. The whole purpose is to get nexus to the border and negligible ties to the United States.

Finally, in reference to the President's immigration reform proposals, I believe the White House commented the other day that obviously during -- that has been presented to Congress. They will debate it during this year, election year, and hopefully they will be able to act on that as soon as possible, and without predicting, I would suspect it would not be this year.

Yes?

QUESTION: On expedited removal, I notice you mentioned you've had this authority since 1996 and the passage of the immigration law. Why now? Can you talk about some of the reasons, the factors behind this? Do you have intelligence suggesting that Al-Qaeda or other terrorist organizations are looking more at the southern border, and is this to combat that, or is this strictly for a security issue unrelated to terrorism?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, I mean, first of all, you -- we are concerned about both the northern and southern borders. And I would emphasize that this expedited removal does apply to both.

In terms of implementation from a resource standpoint, it can be applied on a discretionary basis, both the northern and southern border. WE have to look at the availability of our detention space. We're going to concentrate in the Tucson and Laredo sectors. But it will applicable to both borders.

The reason we are implementing this is for border security purposes, and you really cannot separate the illegal intrusions across our border from those that wish to harm us, from those that do not, but simply to come in for economic reasons. And so the border security applies across the board.

There is a concern that as we tighten the security of our ports of entry through our biometric checks, that there will be more opportunity or more effort made by terrorists to enter our country through our vast land borders. And we recognize we have to secure those, and that's the President's first principle of immigration reform is American must secure its borders, and this is a part of that effort.

Yes sir?

QUESTION: You talked about the 48,000 figure, and I guess what I would wonder is, I mean, assuming this works, you've got effectively tens of thousands of people now that you've got to return to their home countries, wherever in the world they may be. How do you do that? Who pays for it? You know, what are the mechanics of actually getting them back?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, I mean, those mechanics are in place right now. We have flights that go from the United States to the different countries that are in issue, and we would continue that pattern.

Obviously, if you are releasing fewer, we would be able to -- and we're utilizing expedited removal, we will be able to process them. They would spend less time in detention, and so we would have to build a system to have the flights going back on a regular basis, and that's something that we'll have to evaluate.

We're convinced that we can reduce the burden on our systems by this. We can discourage the illegal flow by this, and ultimately, we will save money. In the short term, you will not realize that necessarily because you're going to have your detention space full and you're going to have very likely increased transportation costs for the removal of these aliens. But in the long term, it will certainly save money.

Yes, back in the back.

QUESTION: You mentioned 42,000 apprehensions of illegals from third countries. I'm sure you all have done the numbers. Could you tell us if in that 16-month period, if you had had this law applicable, how many of those 42,000 would have been deportable, would have been -- and expeditable? How many of those 42,000 crossing the land borders, to give us some sort of universe of ideas of how many we're talking about here?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, of those 42,000 I mentioned, if this rule would have been in place, virtually all -- 99 percent I would suspect would have been subject to expedited removal. The only exceptions would be if they had a credible fear claim, if they had an asylum or refugee status or some other narrow exception. We would be glad to try to get the specific number, but this new rule would apply to the vast majority of that 42,000.

Yes?

QUESTION: In terms of the detention space, it was an issue -- you mentioned it being an issue before. Obviously it will be one with this program. Do you have the detention space available now? And if not, will you be giving local communities along the border the money to pay for the detention space, if you're going to be using local jails or local facilities?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, first, the President's budget has increased funding for detention space, and so we recognize that there is a need for increased detention space, and we're trying to address that and to have that properly funded.

You know, in terms of right now of course, our detention space pretty well -- I mean, it stays 100 percent full, and there's high priorities. I mean, obviously you put a priority on criminal aliens and smuggling organizations. But what this will give us an opportunity to do, as you can see from those statistics, you had 42,000 third-country nationals over 16 months. Twenty-eight thousand were released with a notice to appear, but we did -- we were able to detain 14,000. And so rather than those 14,000 being detained over months and months and months as they awaited their court appearance, we will be able to recycle those in a much quicker fashion, because rather than months and months in detention, they would only spend probably on the average of eight days to be able to return to their country.

So it has a beneficial effect for the illegal alien. They will spend less time in detention, be able to return quicker to their country, reduce our detention cost per alien. Our overall costs would remain the same because they're going to stay full most likely, but we'll be able to rotate them and process them much more quickly and be able to handle a much greater volume of detainees because of that change.

Yes ma'am?

QUESTION: Can you tell us a little bit about how this will be implemented? When do you anticipate -- will there be like a rule published in the Federal Register? When do you actually anticipate that this will start? You mentioned Laredo and Tucson. What timeframe are you talking about? What timeframe are you talking about for the northern border, if there is a specific?

And then secondly, I was wondering too if you could talk a little bit about training. You know, people -- you mentioned the asylum seekers. What kind of training will there be for border patrol agents to know who really has a credible fear, and what's the timeframe for that kind of training as well?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: The time frame is, that the expedited removal noticed in the Federal Register, should be published tomorrow. The notice for expanded border crossing card holders to 30 days should be published on Thursday, and they will be immediately effective. Now, on the -- prior to the use of expedited removal, we will not utilize that authority until training is in place. We have worked with a lot of partners to develop a training program for our Border Patrol agents, and I do want to commend Commission Boehner for his support of this effort, and the support for the training that we will put into place.

There will be -- before any Border Patrol agent can utilize expedited removal, they must have this training, so that they will be knowledgeable about the credible fear, the exceptions for refugee status, to make sure that those type of protections are still in place. And so, we would not be implementing -- actually utilizing it probably until August 24th. Something in that time frame. It's going to take us probably about a week to get the training -- training of the trainers, and -- and then it'll be -- it will not be used until each Border Patrol agent is trained. So there are those protections in there, and it's a very important part of it.

I'll also add that Eduardo Aguirre, head of Immigration Services here in the Department of Homeland Security, has been very supportive, and will be assigning additional personnel -- asylum officers -- to the Southwest border, as we implement this expedited removal, to make sure that they have personnel there to conduct any credible fear interviews that are appropriate and necessary. And I would emphasize again, that this is applicable upon publication of the notice. The authority is there for the Northern and Southern border. The training is a requirement, and it'll be used on a discretionary basis, except, it will be used more comprehensively in the Tucson and Laredo sectors. Suzanne.

QUESTION: You had said earlier on that -- that part of the idea behind this is to reward the legal immigration, and on the part, I'm wondering because Mexicans undergo far more screening than Canadians, why not go to a full six months for their crossing time, and then on the expedited removal -- it's my understanding that Mexicans who have had multiple violations of crossing the border would be subject to expedited removal. Is that correct, or -

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Yes. In reference to the Mexican nationals who will be subject to expedited removal -- it would only be applicable to those that are engaged in smuggling organizations, and those that are repeat violators, that would constitute a criminal offense. And so it would be applicable, narrowly, in that fashion. But the broad majority of Mexican nationals, of course, would be voluntarily repatriated, as they are now, and no significant impact in that arena. And the first part of your question was -

QUESTION: Why not to go -- go six months on the --

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: The most important thing for the border communities, for the border crossing cardholders, was the time. And that was the initiative -- the -- the most important thing, and so we expanded that to 30 days, as most people advocated. They obviously would have addressed the issue of the geographic area, and as we fully implement US-VISIT on the borders, then it -- we can take another look at that geographic limitation, because we will have greater protections in place for the -- to make sure the border crossing card time limits, and -- and limitations are honored. So, that can be reviewed down the road. But I think there are also the economic impact, and the economic needs are those border communities, and that's the original purpose of the border crossing cardholder.

QUESTION: I'm sorry. I don't understand, because most of the Texas officials I've talked to, including the governor, when they heard that it was going to 30 days said "Well, that's fine, but we want six months." And that's why I'm -- I'm not really understanding the answer. I'm not trying to be difficult, here, I just don't understand your responses. Are you saying that -- that the -- 30 days really makes the kind of impact that they're really looking for, or -- I didn't understand it.

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: We believe that it is -- I mean, first of all, the public officials -- you know, once you get -- you've achieved one result, I don't blame them for trying to achieve another result. I mean, that's the nature of public officials, and I respect that. But this is what we believe was consistent with the economic needs of the border communities, would address an immediate problem, and with the recognition that, as US-VISIT is more fully implemented, we can re-examine any of those additional requests. Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: Sorry about that. How many people actually are benefited by -- by the BCC being extended? Do you have any numbers for that, and what kind of people are benefited by this?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, I mean we have -- I believe it's about seven or eight million border crossing card holders that -- that utilize -- that make over 100 million crossings each year. Now, as to how many would benefit from, and have a need to stay beyond the 72 hours -- the figure I have is that 425,000 would derive some benefit from this extension.

QUESTION: Which is mainly -- these are people -

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: It very well could be tourists -- people that want to come in for not just 72 hours, but to stay a week at some location for tourism, or vacation purposes. So, you know, it's not designed for work purposes, and that's one of, I think, the original limitations of the 30 days. But it is designed for tourism, business, and travel. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: I work for a newspaper (inaudible) today, so I'm asking that President Bush propose on immigration -- 30 percent of -- of the quasi form of -- or a quasi amnesty for illegal alien. There is this group of Border Patrol agents to Border Patrol national (inaudible). The criticized the move, saying that the proposal, it it's (inaudible) to those who are imposing (inaudible). I would like to know, how do you respond to that type of criticism?

And also, if you can help us to clarify something that President Bush said of the U.S. meeting of (inaudible). He say that he will ask Congress to increase the number of (inaudible) for naturalization for certain national, where he mentions that -- specifically mentions that. There was a lot of confusion, because apparently, there is no such borders and (inaudible), so can you help us to understand better?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, I will leave the president's comments as he spoke those. I think he was very clear in what he said. So, I think this is consistent in the sense that we are rewarding those that seek a legal path to our country. Those people who've waited in line for border crossing card, those individuals who have gone through the security checks -- they ought to be rewarded for that legal behavior. And this is making their ability to travel back and forth across the border easier, and more convenient to them, and that's exactly the path that we want to take in rewarding legal behavior.

And the other part of your question was the enforcement side, and I don't know if I got it all, but we're very committed to enforcing our immigration laws. It is important for the security of our country, and the integrity of our immigration laws. And we are -- this is part of our effort to strengthen our border control efforts. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: A couple of questions, sir. Would (inaudible) the extension of 30 -- 30 days -- would you -- expecting negative economic impact to occur to (inaudible) some Congressmen were saying that the committed period of time was affecting the -- the border communities' economy, as well. I wonder if you detected some impact -- that was the basis for your decision.

And second question, regarding a report that the federal government's conditioning money to hospitals on the basis that the hospitals will report the status of (inaudible) alien patients. And I was wondering if you could comment in what way DHS is participating in that program.

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: And that's a study of a burden on -- a burden on local communities, or -- what was the -

QUESTION: No. The first part of the question?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: No, the last part.

QUESTION: A report about the federal government conditioning money to hospitals on the basis that they report the treatment of undocumented aliens for emergencies.

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: I'm not going to comment on the last part, just because I'm not -

QUESTION: It's a New York Times article.

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, I'll save comment, and take a look at that article. In reference to the first part, as to the economic argument that border legislators would have made to us -- it -- certainly, they made the case that it impacts the border communities, their -- their economy. But also, they make the argument in terms of fairness. You know, that the security checks are in place. You know, there is a different treatment for those Canadian citizens that are coming in, and so both those arguments were made. And I would say that it's not just by the legislators, by the communities.

I mean, I did not meet with a group of community officials without this issue being raised. It's clearly very important that -- when the security is guaranteed, that the economic commerce be considered as a factor, and -- and that was one of the considerations, obviously, in making this change. First of all, we're not -- we're confident we're not giving up anything on security, or the integrity of our system. And we're secondly strengthening the -- the border communities, and -- and the originals purposes of the border crossing cards. Yes.

QUESTION: Within a hundred miles of various (inaudible) cities, there's a lot of concern about the raids focusing in LAX, and that type of raid. Will that take place in terms of trying to catch people who are here?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, it's really a separate issue. I mean, you've got -- that's an interior enforcement responsibility, even though it is tied to a transportation hub. And there's a close nexus to the border, because many of those -- certainly with 14 days of apprehension, had recently crossed the border. But, this announcement today is a border control effort. It's a border security effort. And that does not mean that we are diminishing, or changing our contemporaneous responsibilities for interior enforcement. So we will continue to act upon intelligence, work site enforcement efforts, looking at transportation hubs, and so that will continue to be a part of our enforcement efforts, as well. Yes.

QUESTION: Two questions. Can you give me an update on the status of the -- the readers for the border crossing cards? (Inaudible) challenge (inaudible)? And also, how do you propose that Border Patrol agents are going to able to assess that somebody has been in the country 14 days or less, and if they got here illegally, then they -- then they're not on your radar until you catch them, so how -- how are you going to figure that out?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, first of all, the Border Patrol agents are very experienced, and they've dealt along the border for many years. They understand the communities, they understand the commerce, and their trained to make those types of judgments, based upon questioning, documentation, and other information that they might have available. So, I don't think that will be a particular hurdle. And, as you have a particular circumstance, a judgment can be made, but if the alien produces information otherwise, then it will be examined, and if there's any doubt, then we would not utilize expedited removal.

QUESTION: Can I ask a question on human smuggling? You had this case here the other day in Forth Worth where, again, immigrants were found in the back of a truck. I mean, this seems to be something that's recurring significantly. Are there not internal checkpoints? Are you concerned about the porousness in the interior, that you have people being moved via truck, and that you're not being able to detect these?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: No, we certainly are concerned about the smuggling organizations, and going after their infrastructure, whether it is a transportation system in the interior, or money launderers. And so, the Fort Worth case is a good illustration of the danger, and the devastation to life that results from these types of smuggling organizations.

So, you know, we have our border responsibilities, that the Border Patrol has the primary lead in. Our interior enforcement, our ICE agents -- Immigration Customs Enforcement -- had the lead in, and they're pursuing those cases aggressively. I would add that, you know, this announcement today should not only increase border security, but it should also save lives. Anytime you diminish the capability to the smuggling organizations, you will ultimately save lives, and I believe that we will see this as we have with some of our other efforts in the Arizona desert. Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: Thanks, sir. You had mentioned a couple of times the (inaudible) and I'm wondering if this announcement today was (inaudible) -- is, in part, intended to lay the ground work for further reforms down the line, and also I'm wondering what the reaction to -- the Mexican government is to this change.

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: The first principle of the president's immigration proposal is, that America must secure its borders. And so, every step that we take to protect our borders, to have more border control, is consistent with that principle, and furthers setting the foundation for the other criteria that Congress will look at in hopefully the near future. So -- and that's my job. I'm on the enforcement side, so I take that first principle very seriously, and everything from the Arizona Border Control Initiative to the Los Angeles Area Initiative, to the interior repatriation, to now expedited removal fits within that construct. And the last part of your question --

QUESTION: How does the Mexican government feel about this --

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, first of all, we have communicated to the government of Mexico. I understand Secretary Ridge talked to Secretary Creel. I spoke with the ambassador last night in reference to this, so there's been a strong level of communication on all of these issues. They're not catching them by surprise, but informing them in advance, and -- and making sure there's a good awareness as to what we were doing. They'll have to speak for their reaction to it, but we certainly have communicated on this issue.

PARTICIPANT: We have time for two more.

QUESTION: Repatriation flights that were announced a month or so ago -- do you have any numbers for how many people we sent back, or --

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Yes. We'll have to -- we can get those for you very quickly, but first of all, the -- at this point, the program has exceeded our expectations, and we started with one flight a day, went to two flights a day. There has really not been any issues in terms of the technical carrying-out of the program. We have seen a small -- a reduction, but it's a small reduction in migrant deaths in the desert, and very significantly, at this point, it is a very, very small percent of those that we have repatriated that have tried to re-enter, that have been apprehended. So the recidivism rate has been decreased as a result of this initiative. We will continue to measure it, but -- and we can get the exact number that has been processed through this.

QUESTION: Do you know the revisitism rate?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: I think we have some preliminary numbers that we'll get for you. Suzanne's got that right back there.

QUESTION: Can you repeat what you said about why Mexicans wouldn't be affected by this because of the voluntary departure.

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: Well, the Mexican nationals that are apprehended are simply returned back across and repatriated, and it's done on a voluntary basis. If they wanted to claim asylum, or seek credible fear, or have some other reason to get into Immigration Court, they technically could, but they're very happy to be repatriated back. And so, that's a system that is -- that has not demonstrated itself to be a problem that could be solved by expedited removal. I think we have -- I think we've covered everybody's one question. Did you have one question? I don't think you had -

QUESTION: Just on the -- how confident are you that this legislations is going to come before Congress this fall, and do you expect any kind of platform fight on immigration before the convention?

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: I don't know the latter question. Somebody familiar with the Platform Committee would have to address that. In reference to what goes before Congress -- I'll just speak as a former member of Congress. I know their plate is full, and now you've got the 9/11 Commission recommendations, so I would not suspect that they will take it up this year. I think the debate will continue this year, and that they'll look at it next year.

QUESTION: On security.

UNDER SECRETARY HUTCHINSON: I'm sorry, what?

QUESTION: On security. Yeah. I wanted to know (inaudible) this lease and the (inaudible) thousand people who are not --

(Whereupon, the interview concluded.)

(end transcript)

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

Return to Public File Main Page

Return to Public Table of Contents