Slashdot Mirror
CBC Warns Canadians of "US Law Enforcement Money Extortion Program"
jfbilodeau writes The CBC is warning Canadians about a U.S. program where America law enforcement officers — from federal agents to state troopers right down to sheriffs in one-street backwaters — are operating a vast, co-ordinated scheme to grab as much of the public's cash as they can through seizure laws. "So, for any law-abiding Canadian thinking about an American road trip, here’s some non-official advice: Avoid long chats if you’re pulled over. Answer questions politely and concisely, then persistently ask if you are free to go. Don’t leave litter on the vehicle floor, especially energy drink cans. Don’t use air or breath fresheners; they could be interpreted as an attempt to mask the smell of drugs. Don’t be too talkative. Don’t be too quiet. Try not to wear expensive designer clothes. Don’t have tinted windows. And for heaven’s sake, don’t consent to a search if you are carrying a big roll of legitimate cash.
The link is bad. American shakedown: Police won't charge you, but they'll grab your money
The link in the article is cut off and gives a 404. Here is the correct link:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/a...
Even the police are capitalist. They fiercely serve and protect their budgets.
As a U.S. citizen, I'm baffled as to why courts have accepted the validity of civil forfeiture laws. It strikes me as a blatant violation of our Constitution.
When nationalistic Americans brag about our Bill or Rights, I wonder which version they're excited about: the version one gets from a plain reading of its text, or the twisted monstrosity that the three branches of government have foisted upon us.
Similarly, 99% of the problem could be stopped if they cancelled the Equitable Sharing program and instead insisted that all such seizures to go to the federal government, not to any local fund.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
American police run an extra-legal extortion racket in the name of RICO laws. They can impound property giving the citizen no legal recourse. What do they do with the money? Buy military style riot gear and surplus MRAPS. Boy, I feel safer.
I don't know why any one in Canada would want to visit that cesspool we have what they have only without the suck and with a lot more natural spaces to enjoy.
CBC's article is just a Canadian take on things. The original article (just as scary) is here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
And for heaven’s sake, don’t consent to a search if you are carrying a big roll of legitimate cash.
You never consent to a search. Make them get a warrant or conduct an illegal search. You may have just bought the car. It may have absolutely NOTHING personal in it. You still don't consent to a search.
Period.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Are you sure there aren't any democrats supporting this unholy mess? Cause I bet this abomination has bipartisan support.
http://www.policecrimes.com/
Required watching (plus associated videos to the right)... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Did you even RTFA? Shall I avoid wearing designer clothes and having an air freshener? Drinking energy drinks is now a mark of being a drug dealer? Please send me a list of approved attire, standards of car cleanliness, and any other requirements for not appearing like a drug dealer.
Your naivete is mind blowing.
You haven't been following this issue very much, have you? Siezures have been made where there was no proof, only suspicion (based on the flimsiest of evidence). As the owner, you don't have the right to challenge the siezure -- the siezure is made against the property itself.
I don't expect that I have much to worry about, but that probably has more to do with my socio-economic status and the color of my skin than any other factors.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
No pretty sure police can't and don't do this in Canada. They actually have to arrest you and the money is evidence if purported to be proceeds of crime.
---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
First the militarization of small town police departments, SWAT teams for serving routine warrants, rising incidents of shocking brutality and now law enforcement has devolved to the point of being little better than a band of petty thieves. This is getting pathetic and scary. Foreign countries are issuing warnings about the conduct of U.S. law enforcement personnel. Am I the only person who has a problem with that?
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
When I go on a road trip I always carry enough cash to buy gas to get to my destination should my credit card stop working.
I got pulled over in Nebraska and when I was getting my license out of my wallet the officer saw a $100 bill in there and ended up confiscating the $400 I had on me as suspected drug money without ever arresting me or even charging me with a crime.
I got a receipt and an affidavit indicating the amount seized and why. I petitioned the court for the return of my money and the court denied me saying that possession of that much cash constituted probable cause of drug activity and that I should be happy not to be in jail for drugs.
You're missing the point: here in America you're *supposed* to be able to "do things that make you look like you are hauling drugs". You're supposed to be able to do whatever you want, as long as it's legal, no matter how illegal it looks.
Let's say I look like a burglar because I locked my keys in the house and now I have to climb in a window: the police have every right to stop me. If I'm (somehow) using my wallet to try and jimmy the window open, the police have a right to seize that wallet. But once I've shown that I'm not a burglar, I should get my wallet back.
The point of this article is, that's not actually how it works. From TFA:
"You’ll have the right to seek its return in court, but of course that will mean big lawyer’s fees, and legally documenting exactly where the money came from. You will need to prove you are not a drug dealer or a terrorist.
It might take a year or two. And several trips back to the jurisdiction where you were pulled over. Sorry.
In places like Tijuana, police don’t make any pretense about this sort of thing. Here in the U.S., though, it’s dressed up in terms like “interdiction and forfeiture,” or “the equitable sharing program.”"
> And for heaven’s sake, don’t consent to a search if you are carrying a big roll of legitimate cash.
Well, of course, but I'd say "don't consent to a search, ever. At all."
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
And there is only one group who puts them in a position to do it the Democrats?
Please there is no effective difference in US politics, it's the same group. Hell politician's change affiliation and still get elected. Sure one side tends to do one thing or another you need something to campaign on after all. Neither wants any real change.
No sir I dont like it.
My little brother had a gig at an auto rental place built into the side of a hotel. Once, they had to pick up a punk concert booker from the airport & they got pulled over by the 5-0 PO. There goes the $9K USD roll he needed to book bands in the city. They may have said something about picking it up from the evdience locker in a few months or something?
everybody knows that in a banana republic the cops are all corrupt and will rip you off.
Just ask John McAfee.
Why are the Canadians surprised by this fact?
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
For the police departments, this kind of robbery is just a way to grab some cash. But I wonder if this is accepted on a political level to get rid of non-traceable monetary transactions altogether.
Come on, don't fall for this stuff. It's not like we are a police state (yet).
Oh yes you are. You just haven't been paying attention.
[ReidNews]
The real source is this Washington Post article(s).
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
"Good afternoon, Officer. My time is valuable. Your time is valuable. Please don't waste time by asking questions I am not required to answer."
"Sir, Have you been drinking?"
"Am I required to answer that question?"
"No."
"Please stop wasting time. As I said, my time is valuable. Am I free to go now?"
etc.
I love how in several of these cases, they force the person to wait, bring in a dog, and then the dog "alerts" but there are NEVER any drugs... just money. This seems to contribute well to the theory that many dogs are just acting on a signal from the trainer (whether implicit or otherwise).
It's happened 65 thousand times according to this article. You can't assume that just because someone can't afford a lawyer that they're guilty.
Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
They've been running this shake-down on Americans traveling out-of-state, too: http://www.newyorker.com/magaz...
Basically, if you're not a local, they'll pull you over for some piss-ant, often fabricated infraction, claim that they "smell weed" (especially if your plates are CO or WA) threate-^h...extort you with some scary-sounding charges (which you'll be greatly disinclined to accept when you're a considerable distance from home, not wanting a huge ticket, points on your license and a trial that you'll lose in a kangaroo traffic court) and then miraculously offer to "make it go away" if you fork over whatever cash and valuables you've got in your car, which they get to use to pad their budget or their own fucking wallets (because it's untraceable and you're in the middle of dogfuck nowhere, who's gonna know, right?)
This is *literally* sanctioned and institutionalized highway robbery and they've gotten away with THOUSANDS of them.
Utter and complete bullshit. The asset forfeiture regime was introduced under the Presidentâ(TM)s Commission on Organized Crime in 1986, at which time the President was Republican Saint Ronald Reagan, and was ramped up through the GHW Bush administration.
Not that I absolve the Democrats in any way of their part is this travesty, but make no mistake...when Republicans have their way, this is *exactly* the sort of corrupt power grab they are famous for.
Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
The next line won't be "Okay, gtfo."
It'll be: "Sir, please step out of the car."
That's why I have a personal policy of always costing them more money than they seize from me. You confiscated $400 from me? I'm going to arrange to use more than $400 in police resources. I will mail you enough letters that you'll spend more than $400 just responding to them. I'll sue in small claims court so you have to send a representative to get it tossed out, then hire a lawyer to send fancy letters forcing the department to hire another fancy lawyer to send responses back.
I don't read AC A human right
And for heaven’s sake, don’t consent to a search if you are carrying a big roll of legitimate cash.
I have been pulled over twice for minor offenses such as a burned out taillight bulb and then had my vehicle searched for no cause. The police said they smelled marijuana and didn't need my consent. Basically, all they have to do is lie and the Bill of Rights is just a piece of paper as far as they are concerned. They found nothing either time.
"Choose to look like you might be doing something illegal" is one heck of a slippery slope. The problem here is that police can seize cash from you without valid cause. You are right its not a mexico like thing where they are taking $100 off random Canadians. However, you might want to think twice about that 10,000 you have to buy a classic car/motorcycle. And that is what they (the government of the Canada) are saying. That anyone should have to go through such a crazy process to get there money back (prove you aren't a terrorist or drug dealer? isn't the deal here supposed to be they have to prove you are one first?) is a sign that the laws are amiss in favor of the ever-growing local police. The ones that seem less friendly than ever no matter how innocent you are. I'd also like to point out that "This unlawful seizure has only happened in a handful of cases over the last decade" as you mentioned is not necessarily true. Please cite statistics, I believe there have been only a handful of PUBLIC cases, but that's because not everyone is interested in a media circus, guilty or not. How do you know who is guilty and who's not? By if they fight to get the money back? What if it costs more to fight it (say if you... lived in Canada)? Once again, cites please. Lastly, even if this is more PR than reality as far as travelers go, it's a good idea to warn people about US LEOs. We seem to have a very large amount of people in prison compared to any other comparable nation. Is it because we are inherently worse than them? I doubt it.
As much as I like the idea of limiting my responses to legally identifying myself according to my state's laws, presenting any registrations or licenses potentially necessary, and then locking myself into a loop of, "am I being detained?" "am I under arrest?" "am I free to go?" I'm also smart enough to know that the any chance of the officer simply sending me on my way with a warning to keep my insurance card in the car and get a new tail-lamp next time I pass a Checker/Kragen/AutoZone flies right out the window when that happens.
It's a good idea to know your rights, not offer consent to searches, not volunteer any unnecessary information...but it's downright foolish to get into some sort of "I am being detained" back-and-forth through a slit cracked in the window.
Neatly proving that you don't have a clue. Read this and see how asset forfeiture happens in the real world.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
only one case where the seizure was found to be unjustified does not actually mean all the rest were really justified. (It also doesn't mean they weren't, of course. Insufficient data. But it feels unlikely that there were no other incorrect seizures; 65000 instances with no false positives is a better accuracy rate than almost any human activity.)
Why are the Canadians surprised by this fact?
Two answers:
1) We aren't.
2) We need to be reminded now and then just how corrupt and borken the republic to our south actually is, as we tend to forget it and have trouble believing it.
Canadians, for all of our manifest imperfections, live in a relatively lawful country and take for granted that people in the US, the UK, Australia and New Zealand do as well. Despite being bombarded by news stories out of the US and UK in the past ten or fifteen years about how lawless things are getting there with their out-of-control security states we simply have trouble processing the practical implications.
Although... I renewed my passport recently and realized I haven't actually traveled to the US in over five years, whereas in the previous five years I had worked, lived and vacationed in the US. So we do kind of appreciate what a dangerous, arbitrary and lawless place the US has become, we just react by avoiding it rather than thinking much about it.
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
I hate stuff like this. I hate it because it is crooked and evil. I hate it because there is very little recourse for the average citizen to make against an attack like this.
Contact your congress reps, local and federal. Try to get them to change the law. What is happening in these stories should be illegal.
Posting AC just because:
The US revolution was unique. Essentially it was one government breaking away from another government, and not an overthrow of the current one.
People don't know how serious a revolution gets, which is why I respect the zeal of groups like the three-percenters, but I consider them foolish since they are not going to effect change by threatening armed revolt. Instead, they need to change what they do at the ballot box, not at the ammo box. Some things about revolution:
1: It will be stopped quickly. If push came to shove, .40 pistols and AR-15s won't do much against mercenary troops, UAVs, gunships, and Sarin gas containers. One brief shock and awe treatment, and most "revolutionaries" will be slapping the Flexicuffs on themselves and their families.
2: It will be violent. Most Americans are not used to real violence. At most, they play Call of Duty.
3: In a revolution, the most brutal and violent psychopaths will be running the show. ISIS shows what happens when there is a power vacuum and the result of no government in a region. Almost every professor at the university I went to who worked/taught in that region said a group like ISIS would form, and they were right.
4: What group would end up on top? Christianity is declining, and Islam is destined to be the top US religion in ten years (well, materialism is the #1 religion in the US, but spending a life chasing the dollar isn't really "official"). Would people want the US to end up like Iraq with sectarian violence forever and ever, separated by racial and religious lines? I'm sure a lot of people worldwide would love this, but not people living here.
5: There are players sitting on the sidelines. The US is the world's #1 food exporter, to the point where many nations would starve if shipments ceased. If the US government got weak enough, it would be inevitable that China would invade so they would have a secure, fertile area for crop growing. Already, they have a monopoly on pork companies in the US (which is why the price of bacon has doubled this past week.) Other players would love a chunk of the US territory, be it a return of Texas to Mexico, or a Middle Eastern nation deciding they are tired of the region and choose one of the Carolinas as a new Damascus or Dubai. What happened to the native Americans can easily happen to the current US population should the government get weak.
6: The US is a mitigating power globally. Should the US weaken and stop being a player, it would only be a matter of time before the Pacific Rim got hot. If one thinks the Middle East is bad, wait until China, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, even Australia start battling it out over racial and territorial disputes. China is getting belligerent , and Japan is re-militarizing.
Europe would be affected. For more than half a century, Western Europe had to spend almost nothing on defense. With the US gone, they would have to raise an army, or just watching as the ISIS map becomes a reality. The current European doctrine of Chamberlain-esque constant appeasement can only go so far. Would Germany want to split into the FRG and GDR again in order to avoid war with Russia? Do they want to return to Bonn for all government function? Would Spain mind having Arabic be its only official language? These scenarios would almost invariably happen if it were not for the US.
7: I'm sure people celebrate this, but even though states' rights are "cool", such as the Colorado candidate for governor who wants to take ownership of all Federal land and sell/privatize it, a bunch of states will be easily overrun by a foreign invasion force. The only reason why hostile actors have not fought wars on US soil directly in a century is the "united" part of the US.
8: People forget that the US government was hammered out as a 13 way compromise. Think that would happen again in this climate where the government shuts down almost every non-election year (and people forget th
Please send me a list of approved attire, standards of car cleanliness, and any other requirements for not appearing like a drug dealer.
I believe the primary rules for "not looking like a drug dealer" are:
1) be white
2) be middle-class
3) be middle-age
4) be male
5) be conventional in dress, behaviour and language
And really, if you aren't a white, middle-class, middle-age, conventional male, do you really have anyone but yourself to blame?
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
Unless you are incredibility stupid, or actually doing something illegal, you have nothing to fear from 99.999% of law enforcement, and for that 0.001% of the time there is a risk, there isn't much you can do anyway. But you have the same things at home I'll bet.
Are you deliberately lying or is the problem that you have not yet learned to Google before posting extraordinary claims?
Your claim is directly contradicted by an article in the New Yorker that was probably pivotal in raising the alarm. Here is a small sample:
Yet only a small portion of state and local forfeiture cases target powerful entities. "There's this myth that they're cracking down on drug cartels and kingpins," Lee McGrath, of the Institute for Justice, who recently co-wrote a paper on Georgia's aggressive use of forfeiture, says. "In reality, it's small amounts, where people aren't entitled to a public defender, and can't afford a lawyer, and the only rational response is to walk away from your property, because of the infeasibility of getting your money back." In 2011, he reports, fifty-eight local, county, and statewide police forces in Georgia brought in $2.76 million in forfeitures; more than half the items taken were worth less than six hundred and fifty dollars. With minimal oversight, police can then spend nearly all those proceeds, often without reporting where the money has gone.
It takes only a pinch of common sense to realize that if you allow a group of people the right to stop law abiding citizens and take their money and possessions with no legal repercussions then this right will be abused.
In some places it costs well over $1,000 for a citizen to start fighting a seizure. If the cops took $500 or less then fighting and winning will cost at least $500 and likely thousands of dollars more.
In a backhanded way, you seem to be saying that the police in America are a bunch of nincompoops who haven't yet figured out that it is much easier to steal smaller amounts of money from people who can't or won't fight back than it is to steal larger amounts of money from people who can and will fight back.
The way the system is set up, it may be impossible to provide accurate statistics on what percentage of these civil forfeitures had anything at all to do with criminal activity because no criminal charges need to be filed and there are big disincentives that prevent even completely innocent people from fighting back.
Many of the anecdotal stories in the New Yorker article show how easy it is for civil forfeiture laws to be systematically abused by the police. Even if the original system was created with the best of intentions it has devolved into us basically paying the police handsomely to violate people's Constitutional rights.
We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
-- Anais Nin
Hmm, 62K seizures in 13 years across the entire nation...
So, a bit fewer than 5K per year nationwide. Which is considerably lower than your chance of getting killed in an auto accident (about 33K per year).
So, while it's pretty clearly corrupt and of questionable Constitutionality, it's not so prevalent as to make it something to really worry about if I have seven times as much chance of being killed in an auto accident (or twice as much chance of being murdered).
Note that I am not endorsing this sort of behaviour by police/judges/feds. Merely pointing out that TFA is aiming to be rather more alarmist than reality requires....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Ever hear of saying no? "Sir, if you want my cash, you will have to arrest me and charge me with a crime."
or
"Sir, I will be happy to comply when you have a search and seizure warrant signed by the court. You may contact me at [phone number] once you have it. Until then, if I'm not under arrest, I'll be leaving."
Seriously, stop orzing. Yes, he'll be pissed... but what's he going to do, pull you out of your car? Shoot you? Maybe, but unlikely. Keep your door locked, and be firm but polite. Oh, and if you end up in court get an attorney to fight it, there's no justice for those without legal representation. None whatsoever.
There were several more specific cases cited in the Washington Post article, as well as statistics showing that 40% of people who chose to take the issue to court received their money back.
Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
I don't believe this is a partisan issue. It's a matter of good and honest governance, which neither of the two major parties has clealry demonstrated in recent memory.
Pretty much this.
TL;DR, careful what you ask for, you might get it and peaceful conflict resolution always beats the alternative.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I agree, except for #4. Islam at the top religion in the US in 10 years is just silly talk. It would require MASS conversion.
So did Germans in Nazi Germany.
Not really. The Nazis got control of the Reichstag by forming a plurality coalition government with other fringe parties, then negotiated with Germany's two MAIN political parties (neither of which had a majority, but both of which had pluralities that were larger than the number of Nazis, but smaller than the coalition of minor parties assembled by the Nazis) to convince them that allowing them to be nominally in charge was a lesser evil than cooperating with their traditional arch-rivals.
At the risk of getting downmodded, the Nazi takeover of Germany's government is basically the same thing that happened to the US when the Tea Party ended up with enough seats in Congress to be disruptive, without actually being able to seize outright power. We just got damn lucky that they ended up being just a few seats short of achieving their goals before Americans realized how completely nuts most of them were.
I say this with direct first-hand knowledge, because I went to college and used to be friends with some of them... there are Tea Party strategists who've studied the Nazi Party's rise to power, their tactics, and the strategies that worked. The Nazis won tiny victories, then had some of the finest filmmakers to ever walk the earth produce documentaries that were mostly fiction, but had enough truth to be accepted by many as plausible. Many of those strategists are vaguely aware that they're playing with fire, but have NO IDEA just how dangerous the game they're playing can become almost overnight.
There's a reason why the Nazis held their biggest public events at night. They used the same tricks modern directors use to turn a few dozen extras into a cheering crowd big enough to fill a stadium. They herded the attendees into crowded areas, then blinded them with arc lights so they couldn't see that the stadium was mostly empty. They deafened them with loudspeakers that amplified the (small) crowd ITSELF. And creatively edited in footage from unrelated sporting events (that DID have large crowds) to convince everyone who saw the newsreel a few days later -- including the relatively small number of attendees at the event itself -- that it was WAY bigger than it really was.
In many cases, elected Nazi officials did things that were blatantly illegal, or at least ambiguously taboo, and did it amidst a media firestorm they stoked with contrived moral outrage. They piled HUGE lies onto small lies, knowing that people would dismiss the big ones, but believe the more reasonable-sounding small ones. And every step of the way, they built up the exploits they got away until German voters started to believe they were legitimate, if not respectable.
Truth be told, most Nazi voters were fairly normal people. Many of them DID think the party's leadership was kind of nuts, but swallowed their propaganda hook, line, and sinker. The Nazis used the same tactics used by modern religious cults to draw in families, then convinced them to cut off contact with friends and family members who left the party... and socially-pressure them into publicly displaying their support for the Nazi party, even if they privately voted for someone else.
We NEED to study and understand the Nazis. Not because they were in any way, shape, or form admirable (or even non-reprehensible), but because their tactics are alive & well today, and being actively used against us, and most people are fucking OBLIVIOUS to it. Over the past 70 years, we've hyperfocused so much on Nazi concentration camps that we've completely forgotten how they managed to totally pwn Germany itself... and as a result, we (Americans) don't recognize what we're seeing now as the latest manifestation of the same tactics that finally allowed them to take control of Germany, even WITHOUT a real majority. In a very real sense, the Nazis lost the ground war, but perversely won an enduring victory in the public relations realm that has scarred our society with an eternal belief that the Nazis wer
http://www.newyorker.com/magaz...
From your link a few paragraphs, you posted AC, but this story needs to be modded up a bit.-----
The county’s district attorney, a fifty-seven-year-old woman with feathered Charlie’s Angels hair named Lynda K. Russell, arrived an hour later. Russell, who moonlighted locally as a country singer, told Henderson and Boatright that they had two options. They could face felony charges for “money laundering” and “child endangerment,” in which case they would go to jail and their children would be handed over to foster care. Or they could sign over their cash to the city of Tenaha, and get back on the road. “No criminal charges shall be filed,” a waiver she drafted read, “and our children shall not be turned over to CPS,” or Child Protective Services.
“Where are we?” Boatright remembers thinking. “Is this some kind of foreign country, where they’re selling people’s kids off?” Holding her sixteen-month-old on her hip, she broke down in tears.
Later, she learned that cash-for-freedom deals had become a point of pride for Tenaha, and that versions of the tactic were used across the country. “Be safe and keep up the good work,” the city marshal wrote to Washington, following a raft of complaints from out-of-town drivers who claimed that they had been stopped in Tenaha and stripped of cash, valuables, and, in at least one case, an infant child, without clear evidence of contraband.
That's just the cash. There's also the cars, boats, houses, businesses etc. About a year ago the CBC had a show on this including an interview with a motel owner who had his motel forfeited due to renting out a room to a drug user. He was as innocent as could be and eventually got his business back after much hassle but it seems forfeiting houses is also common. Interestingly they only go after stuff that is paid off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
There's many things wrong with the UK, but in general our police forces are not corrupt and won't take money from you if you're pulled over. They're incredibly unlikely to shoot you either.
We have so many laws and regulations that it is probably physically impossible for a single individual to read all of them in a lifetime, and we are creating more every day. Even one segment of the law that almost everyone has to deal with each year is basically unintelligible as it is almost 4 million words long and that is just the US Federal tax code.
Now joking aside we are probably at a point where due to the number of laws we as a country are very similar to a lawless one. You know it is bad when the people who do research for congress can't provide a count of the criminal offenses that exist in the USC:
When staff for a task force of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee asked the Congressional Research Service (CRS) to update its 2008 calculation of criminal offenses in the U.S.C. in 2013, the CRS responded that they lack the manpower and resources to accomplish the task.
Time to offend someone