David Price: “I want to commend our colleague from Colorado for offering this amendment and for calling attention to some of the…”

“I want to commend our colleague from Colorado for offering this amendment and for calling attention to some of the deficiencies in the 287(g) program and some of the ways that we need to do things better. I would have wished for an amendment, though, that would have given the Department of Homeland Security more direction. If not 287(g), then what should immigration enforcement look like, and what should the interface between the Federal Government and local authorities look like? I'm afraid the amendment doesn't really address that very conclusively, but I want to offer just a few reflections on the 287(g) program and the ways in which I think we might transition to something more positive in the area of immigration enforcement. The gentleman from Colorado has already described the 287(g) program. It delegates Federal immigration authority to local law enforcement in many respects, supposedly to identify criminals in their communities. At the end of the fourth quarter of fiscal year '10, the 287(g) program had established partnerships with 72 local jurisdictions; but both the DHS Inspector General and the GAO have raised serious concerns about the 287(g) program, particularly related to the lack of oversight by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the fact that it was not really living up, in many cases, to its stated goal of focusing on serious criminals who pose a threat to the community.…”