Transcripts For CSPAN3 Politics Public Policy Today 20240622

The agenda for the most obvious reasons. It is the most populous country in the entire region. For the last four years it has teetered on the brink of political and economic and social collapse. I think it is still in a tenuous phase at this point. And when we talk about adopting or adapting the new silk road concepts to places like egypt there are places where it fits in with the president s attempt to build a second suez canal and to help egypt become a more functional place when it comes to linking parts of the world together. Where i think we may have some differences of views, and we can talk about this is how about the best way for egypt to approach the extremism and terrorism problem. And as we see in the last few weeks, this problem is not only gotten worse, it has actually made things much more difficult in places not only in the signi peninsula but in cairo proper. But this is again not only what type of in collusive Economic Growth we want to try to promote to help the societies establish value but what type of politics do they have and what is sustainable and in my view egypt today is on the brink of something much worse than weve seen before and cracking down on not only islamist but nonislamist and not allowing the space for security. And the last thing i would say and the reports didnt mention it and we wisely didnt mention it because of the uncertainty in the iran talks, throughout the period when we had the dialogues because you analyze something that is not complete and though this town is quite good at that and we are about to do more of that, deal or no deal, were going to divide into camps and spin for the summer about what happened here in iran. Though we didnt talk much about it in the papers we had discussions on the side lines and to me i think the u. S. And china have the shared interest of preventing iran from getting a Nuclear Weapon but the devil is in the details of how we do that. And deal or no deal it is hard to analyze that. But if there is a deal i think both countries have a responsibility to actually be very, very serious about how we implement all aspects of what that deal looks like. Im not certain look people talk about the snapback of sanctions and we didnt discuss whether snapback can be translated into mandarin or chinese. But i think china going back to my over all comment, it stands over all on foreign policy, becomes much more difficult when you have a detailed agreement or when you dont. And then how do we actually figure out what is the best ways to cooperate. China is irans largest trading partner and this implicates them in a different way than the United States does and it will have a different perspective. And china as we know from the history has had a history of weapon sales in the region and around the region. And i think we need to stay focused on that. And china, no matter what happens, deal or no deal on iran, will have the difficult balancing act of how to maintain positive relationships with read and saudi arabia and working with tau ran as well. And ill close with saying the middle east is in a period of disequilibrium and if there is a message in the dialogue and the papers and that is that the outside powers should be as constructive as possible in addressing the disequilibrium and if we make a mistake by choosing sides in iraq or syria on different sides rather than trying to foster some sense of common goals there i think it would be very difficult. But i think in conclusion. It is harder when you get into the details of cooperation because the u. S. Has its own views. It believes i think still on balance, that defeating terrorism and extremism needs not solely a military approach but a different type of Political Engagement approach and diplomacy and in ways and in some ways the toughest diplomacy like our friends like egypt. So ill close there. Thank you very much, brian. A lot of food for thought from all of you and i want to make sure there are times for members of the audience that have questions too. But i want to get to a few important issues. While i have the prerogative of the chair, the first thing i would like to ask about i think ill ask both of our chinese friends to help us think through. How does china view this emergence of isis and specifically this unfolding and metastasizing of global terrorism and extremism. And i ask in light of the news just this weekend of uyghurs being transported back to china from turkey and the tensions that sparked in the chinaturkey relationship. And it seems that china is starting to be effected by terrorism and extremism much more in the way that that western countries have felt they are being effected by it and facing similar challenges of how do you both ensure you are addressing the concerns and needs of a domestic population and preventing you know a move to extremism and then somehow participating with other countries encountering the global networks. But it is not clear what china ses it role as in an International Coalition against isis and how it analyzes the connection between the global extremist movements and what is affecting china directly. I first turn to dr. Young and then dr. Wu if you would like to chime in. Thank you. This is a very good question. China hopes that the emerging and the worsening of the isis they have a lot of other names the extremism and the terrorism is a great challenge to the whole international community. And we think we should not only tackle with the symptoms but also the root causes which could be traced into the local development, domestic politics stagnation of economics, and religious sectarianism et cetera. So this is a real new challenge to the world to the United States to china and others. Secondly this it an even more serious challenge than, lets say, 9 11 or the others, because in the year 2001 these terrorists were still disbursed and also intangible. But now they even created a socalled state. They are there. And they inserted a great turbulence chaos antihumanities, et cetera and this should never be allowed. This is why china and the United States and other countries joined our efforts in condemning the isis. However, because china and the United States have different practices, for instance you have your allies, the coalition of the willing and the able et cetera. But china has other ways of thinking and implementing. Thirdly, china itself is a victim of terrorism and extremism. For instance the symbol of china, the heart of the country was attacked by the terrorists just like an attack against the white house or something of the same. And now we found that thousands of terrorists and extremists smuggled out into syria and iraq to fight and to gain experience. And a few of them smuggled back. So these are the real antihuman challenges. And china wants to work with the United States and others to do that. So then in china we pay great attention to the harmonization of societies. We try to eliminate the poverty. One of the soils for ruining the extremism and the terrorist of course sometimes like the strong medicine to kill the cancer, they have the side effects. Some occurred because we do not know what is the better way. Some could be solved or improved in the course of development of the medicine. And so we also need to learn from the United States and other countries. So i think i better to stop here and dr. Wu i just want to add maybe a few points. The first of all is that i think there might be many reasons for the rising of the terrorism and extremism. But a very important reason is that the balance of power, the original balance of power in the middle east to some degree is broken and now we need to in a little bit resume that regional order or kind of system. But it consumes time. The United States and other countries can make efforts toward that direction but it is very important that for the regional countries in the middle east, for their development. So to some degree we still need some patience in that kind of process. And the second thing i want to say is that the countries like china and the United States, really need to strengthen our cooperation, especially i think on that kind of border border protection, that kind of thing, that kind of issues. And also i think the countries need to major powers outside of the region need to create some kind of atmosphere for the region to stabilize their relationship and also of course china and the United States maybe need to invest more to that kind of Society Building which is con ducing to stabilize the situation. So generally there have a lot of areas china and the United States can cooperate, not just on the military side but also on the social, financial, other areas. If i could add. I mean again the root causes are essential in looking at the reasonable wholistically is important. And the idea of horm onization within societies is a great idea for a place like syria and iraq and we are a long ways off from that. And whatever happens with the iran nuclear talks, the aspiration of trying to help the middle east achieve sustainable equilibrium is the right one. Two areas, one that may be longer term prospect and one more mundane and concrete, one, is u. S. And china discussing with the powers quite candidly that their supportist for extremist proxies whether it is iran or our friends in the arab golf, it is unhelpful, in yemen, syria or iraq, that is contributing to the fragmentation of the societies and if there is one fundamental to explain what is going on in the middle east today it is hard because it is so complex but the one thing is that countries that have more resources quite often from oil resources, are deploying the resources in proxy fights throughout the region. And getting to at least a ceasefire in some of the fronts if not all of this requires more candid talk openly and quietly from the u. S. To key partyers in the gulf region. No matter what happens with the iran deal, there is still a worrisome role it plays with the proxies and extremists and sending the signal that the threat it poses it not helpful to the broader region. That is a longer term fight. An the second and more someone date are when we get to the details of implementing economic details in the region. When i think of egypt, i think of a country that has so many different problems and one thing it hasnt done is reform of the Energy Subsidy systems and a problem many countries have had pakistan had it as well. The president took one half step in the right direction and it is essential because without energy sub suddeny reform these societies are eating up the reform the own budget necessary to do Infrastructure Development and set the framework for longterm stabilization and prosperity in egypt. And those sort of things arent as ambitious but tough to do because of systems in place for decades. So if we actually had a meeting of the minds and talked about how to help egypt move through the next phase, i think we would agree on many things including Bureaucratic Reform and governance but the u. S. And china might disagree on the style of governance than what the president is doing right now. And so there is a lot to be done. And i would close by saying the outside powers can do much but it requires leadership within the region to stay the hand the vengeance on the sectarian battles or to push through on historic difficult Economic Reforms like the energy sub suddeny reform in egypt. Let me make a few brief reforms. I should have noted that our report is Available Online for those watching on cspan and elsewhere on the video if you go to the cap website, the report was post today and available to all. The fact that we started this conversation with our china friends is important. But one of the things weve come to know is middle east is not a single issue. It is the security, and another point is when president obama talked about the rebalance to asia there was this view that somehow the u. S. Was loosing its interest or commitment to the middle east. I think we have completely disproven that not only in the dialogue by finding muteure goals for the mutual goals for the region but reflected by the administrations hard efforts to continue to focus on the security of not just simply a single issue, the defeat of isis, but the security of israel, the free flow of energy out of the persian gulf and deal with the prevention of extremism in individual countries other than in iraq and syria and that moving forward if we want to broaden and you get into the questions of Economic Strategy and diplomatic strategy, it is going to have to be more than just simply what weve seen in the past. Skin in the game is an american colloquial term but it means participation in hard issues where for the United States there is not necessarily a winwin there. We are doing it because of the importance of creating stability. Alan wong in his opening comment noted that for 70 years asia has been able to see this peaceful rise because it has not been kmumed with regional rivalries but instead everyone can focus on economic development. That is unfortunately not the case in the middle east. And so we see a variety of tension points coming together. And so as we try to move beyond just simply the security questions, but too the questions of can diplomacy in the impass in syria or can there be a program that actually does prevent an iranian Nuclear Weapon, let alone the regional issues, theyre going to require a cooperation that is consistent with the major powers model and one where the u. S. China dialogue is in the initial phase. Special these are good issues to put on the agenda for washington as well as the economic, the cyber, the other immediate issues in the u. S. China dialogue when we get to september. Let me see if i can press any or perhaps all of you on this. Now three of you have said that just the rebalance to asia and americas increasing Energy Independence dont mean anything about changing u. S. Strategic interest in the middle east. The u. S. Will continue to be as interested, will continue to be as focused and there are voices on the left and the right certainly of the political spectrum so across in the United States that would not only say that is wrong, they would say the United States should really take a big step back and that china and the rest of asia are enjoying the benefits of American Security for their Energy Supplies and letting america do the heavy lifting against terrorism and regional fragmentation and the other way to get others to step up more is to step back a bit. So do you believe u. S. Interests will stay the same. I think there is a broad center in the United States that thinks that is vital because the u. S. Should play a leadership role in ensuring a better world. Most of us agree with that. But do you really think there is no prospects for a change in how the United States in the next decade or two actually looks at the middle east . Well i mean i said, and almost parenthetically i think were at a start in a shift in the u. S. Strategy to the region. I think weve begun it. And no matter who becomes president in 2017, the Lessons Learned over the last 15 years of first going into the iraq war and getting more deeply engaged and built on sort of the framework of u. S. Engagement that essentially began decades and decades ago but got deeper after 1979, the whole sort of security footprint weve had in the region. I actually think it is changing as we discuss it. And obama is unique in the fact that hes reflecting i suspect where a next administration might go. Again not full disengagement. No other outside power has the presence of the u. S. Has. But when you look around and the general consensus here there is a view that the us not not need not bear all of the burden. We need to build relationships first in the region and that is the coalition that the Obama Administration started against isis may have a potential. There are some common interests there among all of the different actors. The notion that other countries like chooip have been china have been involved in maritime security. How does the u. S. Remain engaged. We are changing the nature of our engagement. Well still have a unique relationship with israel. No one else has done this and well continue to do it. And throughout the region, we would welcome, a. Who are the partners reliable and capable within the region and b. , who else can help. And whether it is republican or democrat, right or left in 2015, they are looking at the middle east and scratching their heads and wondering what more can we do differently. We got hyper engaged and involved in places like iraq and we pulled back and things get worse and now we are back in a little bit and one of the lessons is we cant do it all. And maybe others disagree. But i dont think the u. S. Is going to sort of step back completely. But i do think were at the start of defining how do we help the region a pathway for it to become much more integrated with itself and then with the rest of the world and the u. S. Cant do it by itself. I think the strategic importance of the middle east to the United States remains there. However, emphasis of the u. S. Strategic attention might be changing along with the course of developments. For instance the United States for a long period of time focused on arabic and the palestinian, visavis the israeli. And but now at least you have got three the palestinian israel, the confrontation is still there, but we have the gulf region. And the east coast and the west coast, they are the oppose they are opposing each other. And the third one is about the transition starting from tunisia, now to many countries. So the missions are changing. And the United States means are changing. And secondly the mechanisms the ways of dealing with the complexity of the situation are changing as well. For instance, the United States used to rely very much on on the socalled quartet which excluded china from that. But now with this Iranian Nuclear issue weve worked together for p5 1 and this also shows china wants to play a role. Although, the United States is still the first fiddle and china is the third one. The second one is the europeans, but we are learning. We are still in internship to have a die gression you have your American University in beirut for more than 100 years and you have American University in cairo. We even dont have many institutions there. So you can help us with that. The third one is there are emerging new overlapping interests in cooperation like our cooperation against piracy. The Navigation Safety and the security. And our cooperation on the chemical weapon issue of syria, et cetera. So i still believe the United States is the most important fact there. But you will change your ways of thinking and practicing. Thank you. Let me ask something you just mentioned quartet versus p5 1 and i think brian spoke very insightfully on the fact that p5 1, if a deal is done, the first question is can it hold together for enforcing and suppose poring a deal. But then another question starts to emerge which is can this sort of a structure be the basis for a different kind of forwardlooking cooperation . Do you see that as something is that a mechanism that can do more than just one deal and should we be looking at it that day . And a corollary question is that is the diplomacy question. And the coor larry question is the security and defense question. The United States is two minds of welcoming and expecting china to build military capabilities but having great doubt on how they are choosing to use it. Great for Counter Piracy but not so much for disputing claims in the South China Sea. Where do you see that going and is the middle east a different opportunity compared with other areas. But first the diplomacy questions. Everybody seems like they want to jump in. Let me start. Were coming out of a period where it is dominated by the security questions for last 15 years. And really, since the 9 11 attacks, afghanistan and then weve certainly had a full weve had major elections focused on the wisdom of iraq. But there are some enduring issues and enduring objectives for the region that i think dont expire and where if we can use the economic and the diplomatic that is so our advantage but the Security Issues still remain. So this is a resolution of the palestinian question but security for israel. It is the economic path for egypt Going Forward as it deals with population bulges and an economy that used to have a vigorous middle class that no longer does. And then to the gulf side. It is it is the security of Energy Supply globally. Were in a Global Environment where the right to navigate in International Areas becomes important, whether it is the South China Sea or the strait of hormuz and i think america will continue to lead. But if we do want to continue to move and solve problems and not just simply go with the muscular approach, then i think we need to be on the same page with our allies and i think china is no longer rising it is in fact a global stakeholder and their engagement becomes critical. What about the p5 1 question can it do more . I think p5 1 is not a oneshot. This is already a process that all of the major countries in the world have been cooperating on the nonproliferation issue. And for this i think, it will gradually evolve into a more lasting or permanent mechanism. On the other, china is learning and china is working hard. For instance at one time the differences between the United States and iran was so big and they could not any longer continue the discussion. And china used its diplomatic wisdom, okay if we could not continue talking at this level we propose we have the working group, lower level, just to make it survive and now our Foreign Ministers mr. Wong ye is sheltering between vienna and back and forth and they kept good and regular contact between chinese Foreign Ministers and other Foreign Ministers including secretary of state john kerry. And also china wants to have the outcomes. We are a stakeholder. For instance, because of the iranian issues china was being sandwiched between the two sides and we could not make longterm projects in our political diplomatic and economic relations related to iran. And it also hurts our relations with saudi arabia and other gcc countries, et cetera. So the outcome and the sustainability of the out comes are in the benefits of china as well. Thank you. Madam wu, could you speak a little bit as to the enforceability of the deal and other things beyond that. I think p5 1 is a good format to discuss and to enforce that kind of outcome of the dialogue. And a very important feature of the p5 1 is the multilevelism. And it is good to unite the stakeholders to Work Together to push forward the process. But of course, iran nuclear issue, a little bit it is kind of a nuclear issue. It is very critical. That kind of Weapon System is very special. Other issues like afghanistan or other issues maybe we need to involve more regional countries in a Multi Lateral process, because the regional countries have remote interest in that kind of issue, the solution of that kind of issue. So maybe on afghanistan at least some of my colleagues in shanghai institutes think we need to consider that kind of dialogue also on those afghanistan issues. So we can apply the p5 model to other areas. I would say we cant count our chickens before it hatches. A real test is a. , if there is an agreement and b. If it sustains itself. And as we speak today, there is still not a conclusion on the u. N. Security council arms embargo. And we know where russia stands on this. But this is a terribly important issue to highlight because with the iranians bringing it up at this moment and we know any arguments that say for instance that iran would need more weapons to fight isis doesnt need much sense because the arms embargo doesnt include small arms and things like this. So i think i would never disclose or cut off the possibility of p5 1 cooperation on other issues but i think first things first. But even if a deal is inked in the next hour or two, that is when the real work begins of monitoring verification and all of the other issues which i highlighted of which can outside powers help actors in the region stay the hand of vengeance because extremism, it comes out of sectarianism in which very wealthy actors in the region have invested in and those investments have yielded negative returns for all of us for the cause of global security. So deal or no deal on the iran nuclear front, this framework is good. It is important. But maintaining the cohesiveness and getting into the details of whether these things work is essential. Im going to have two more questions from up here and then take to the audience. The first will be on the overall macro dynamic of the region which is in some level the sunnishia divide and the heart of the conflict between iran and saudi arabia. And you doctor, were saying how it makes it difficult for china to pursue constructive relationships with iran and saudi arabia and it makes it complicated but you do ub like the United States, have relations with both. And increasingly deep relations, especially with saudi arabia. Does china see any kind of constructive avenue for engagement with countries that are essentially trapped in proxy wars and this sort of major this major competition that is on balance bad for all of us or does that just seem like it gets too much into internal affairs or other issues that are insoluble . I think it is very challenging to china, but still china can walk on the very thin line because as you said china maintains relations with both iran and the gcc countries. So that is to say china is in a better position to talk to each other and to understand that their mentalities their concerns. And also we can Work Together with them. And thirdly china and the United States now already have the Strategic Dialogue on the middle east affairs. So we can Work Together. The most important thing is that for the major issues Major Concerns propositions china and the United States should compare our notes first, not at the end. And also we would like to let the other parties know. And so this is very important. And china Still Believes in noninterference in those affairs fundamentally speaking that belong to the internal affairs. So there is still the margin that china can be flexible and have reinterpretation of these long persistence principles. My final question is actually back to pakistan where brian has spent considerable time and we were speaking about a little bit. But china has embarked on actually an endeavor with pakistan and the economic corridor which is very much in line with what u. S. Policy on the proactive constructive side has been with pakistan over many years which is to help pakistan invest in the people and the infrastructure, energy water the things it needs to be a Thriving Society and a little bit less on the military side of things. That seems like the area where you could see a link between a new silk road and chinese projects but i think there is a little chern and ambivalence in the United States. So do we welcome an aiib or a Major Initiative with pakistan or are we worried about it . I would just like any of you to maybe comment on this particular this particular investment in pakistan and then the potential for cooperation there. I cannot speak on the pack stab issue. But it can play an Important Role in issues related to the afghanistan situation. And china generally has a Good Relationship with pakistan. So i think until from the chinese perspective through Economic Cooperation we can jointly Pakistan Play some kind of constructive role in the afghanistan issue. But of course, at current stage it seems that the u. S. Pakistan issues and relations have some problems. But if we look at the history, we usually find that usually the United States has had quite a Good Relationship with pakistan. So it seems that maybe to some degree the United States and pakistan can still readjust their relationship and have more balanced relations in south asia and can unite both pakistan and india to input a constructive role in how to say dealing with that kind of afghanistan issue. So that is a kind of general thinking i think, in Chinese Research circles through Economic Cooperation and have a balanced relationship with pakistan india and then unite all of the positive elements in the region to that kind of terrorism or other difficult issues in afghanistan. If i would just say three quick points. First, the political talks underway right now, the diplomacy between the Afghan Taliban and the government with the involvement of pakistan, in our pages in the newspaper but not top of mind amazingly, and i think chinas role quietly and the u. S. Being involved in this and this is something john pedesta and john hadley when they did joint pieces three years ago it was politically fraught back at home but now this diplomatic engage that you have been involved with too vikram, is putting the blocks in place. And on the new silk road, i would restate what i said before, to the extent all of these things are helpful in generating job growth in pakistan that we call inclusive prosperity and create an opportunity for the economy of pakistan to open up and flourish. That is great. But if the approaches are again, more along the line of making basic investments that facilitate trade but making these countries sort of flyover regions for other parts then i think it doesnt address it. And then finally on the broughter and well get to questions on the cooperation, weve said it before but it is essential to under score it, it is difficult for the u. S. To talk about cooperation with china in pakistan or the middle east when there are big issues, including the Cyber Security issue which has a Great Potential for souring the strategic discussion. I think it makes it hard. It is essential for us to try to explore the ideas but it becomes a academic or think tank exercise and less of a practical exercise if these perceptions create distrust. Last comments before i go out to the field . So let me go out. We have a lot of hands and we have 10 or 12 minutes. So the gentleman way back on the left. Yes, you. Im bill jones from executive intelligence review. I would like to focus on the issue of one road and one belt. The way the u. S. , the attitude toward the one road, one belt, will determine the course of human history. If it is willing to join us and to work in this, i think were going to have a flourishing of Economic Growth the likes of which we havent seen. We saw at the oofa conference 50 of the population said we have to move in a different direction toward the infrastructural investment road and highway development. This is what the world wants to do. The United States has been invited to this. The president chi has personally extended an invitation to the United States to be a part of that but the attitude from the u. S. Mainly is either critical or even kind of paranoid about it because it is china that is pushing this proposal. The new silk road as it has been put forward, it largely a myth at the present moment. There is nothing being built or developed. But it was used i think as a ploy to try to show you have your silk road and we have our silk road. I dont think that will get it. If the United States is willing to participate in this the hand of the of president chi is open to that type of prapgs but i dont think we got our act together in understanding the significance of this because were mired presently in a debt crisis in europe and the United States and we see asia move ago head. We dont know how to deal with this. And until we can get our act together and move in that direction, we ourselves will not develop. Look at infrastructural development. How much of that do we need ourselves in our roads, our highways, our railroads. We havent done that in a long time. If the u. S. Policy were oriented toward that, we could take that extended hand and work with china in trying to develop the world and to realize that the common aims of mankind but i think we have to reexamine our own attitudes toward this and reexamine this project. Let me take two more questions and come back to the panel. Lets go to the gentleman up here in the front. Im choi from china data. Just want to continue from what dr. Wong started. Could china and the usa reconcile on this different approach. The intervention. For example, china sees differently the arab spring compared with the u. S. Or what china sees as the u. S. Abuse over the Security Council over libya and so china is mindful on anything for syria for now. So according to a pugh center survey, china is more popular in the middle east than the United States. So a starkly different policy. And so the chinese and the scholars does that mean they like the chinese approach or the u. S. Approach. Thank you. And to the middle. To the gentleman there. My name is mr. Rubin. Im assistant director for the jewish community. I want to ask four scholars from china. China and india have had close ties from the palestinians the people and since 91 have had growing ties with israel and how could both countries join the p5 1 not the quarter i agree with you excluded china, to help forth along the middle east Peace Process and ensure israels security with the kind of threats that iran makes. Thank you. Three really simple questions. The first is on the on the belt and road. Is the United States welcoming or not welcoming and should it. And the second on how do you reconcile the deep differences and the key there is the different approaches and per sepgs about the arab spring between the United States and china. And the third is can china and india help with the Israeli Palestinian Peace Process. Quite interesting. I think im going to go down the row and you can pick and choose what you want to answer of those questions. Weve only got about five minutes. Very good questions and difference in perceptions buts of the u. S. And china at the popular level. Let me start with your second question. Ive looked at the data a bit and i think part of it may be this issue of familiarity breeding some contempt. If you recall in turkey 2010 2011, 2012 especially after the first year of the arab spring there was opinion surveys that said turkey was sort of the more positive and favorable country in the middle east compared to all others. Thats changed substantially and i think turkeys very activist role in certain conflicts so this is i think a cautionary tale for china as it thinks about its deeper engagement possibly in the middle east and i dont think weve seen it just yet. Theres an issue of the more you get involved in a region of the world that is deeply fractious then you get these scenarios where in the case oaf jipt the United States remains deeply engage bud we probably have one of the lowest favorabilities in popular levels because people who supported the Muslim Brotherhood think we sold them out. People against it think we were with the Muslim Brotherhood. So the more you get involved in societies that are fragmented and fractured, the less dividend it pays in terms of popular perceptions buts. Your question on the sort of this dilemma of resolving u. S. And china, which are the issues in terms of the difference approaches. Ill reiterate. I think the p5 1 test case of iran and not just whether we get a deal today or this week but what does that deal mean and how can we actually extend it is one of the best test cases, whether it proves its value. I think the easier test case, like tunisia, and i would say even today egypt is much easier than, say, libya, yemen and certainly iraq and syria that in the short run figuring out if theres a practical way for the two countries to actually resolve its stated interests and then its stated program for the region. I would apply it to those countries like tunisia, like egypt where theres a greater sense of basic stability and not to those tough cases like libya or yemen. I think its really hard on iraq and syria as we saw. Many people put forward including china a peace plan for syria and it just hasnt work eded the difference of approaches of interventionism versus noninterventionism is easier to supply on societies that have a foothold on stability. I would start in those places but first and foremost i would start with finishing the work thats been started on the iran front. This weekend on the cspan networks, politics books and American History. Saturday morning on cspan startingstart ing at 9 45, the governors address the nations Opioid Crisis with guests mary bono. Later the governors will discuss how to stimulate their states economy and its impact on team ploimt rate with u. S. Department of labor secretary thomas perez. Then an interview the democratic president ial candidate lincoln economy a fee. So cspan 2 on book tvs afterwards, ralph nader on the unanswered letters he sent to president s george w. Bush around barack obama about domestic and foreign policies. At 3 30, journalist Roberta Brandeis grats on hurricane katrina. And on American History tv on cspan 3 we commemorate the 50th anniversary of president Lyndon Johnson johnsons signing of the 1965 medicare bill. Our kov rage clouds lbj conunsel and family, conversations with his aides and the signing of the bill at the harry s. Truman president ial library. Also saturday night at 7 15 u. S. Army Cyber Command historian Lawrence Kaplan on the history of computers hackers, and the governments response to computer abuses. Get our complete schedule at cspan. Org. Thursday, a house judiciary subcommittee looked at sanctuary cities and Immigration Enforcement laws. Sanctuary cities are jurisdictions around the country that have policies sheltering Illegal Immigrants and do not use local resources to enforce federal immigration laws. This hearing comes following the death of catherine steinle in San Francisco by an illegal immigrant with a criminal report. The victims father, jim steinle, provided by testimony at this 2 05 hearing. This is a judiciary immigration subcommittee meeting. The chair is authorized to declare recesses at any time. I want to start this morning with a matter of requesting reports from the department of Homeland Security for the potential beneficiaries of two private bill, hr422 for the relief of carina tsarnivoc and the relief of Carmen Castro ramirez and jay rojas. Under a long standing agreement between the committee in the first Immigration Naturalization Service now the department of Homeland Security subcommittee requests a report on the beneficiary of the bill, u. S. Immigration Customs Enforcement will stay the removal of the alien until march 15 until the first year of the next congress. I will support formally requesting a department of homeland support on the beneficiaries of the private bills if dhs finds no progresstory information the committee can make the decision and place them on the private house calendar. Committee has approved an house passed these private bills in the past but they did not become law. One of the bills would grant permanence residence to Maria Ramirez and jay rojas whose u. S. Born children suffer from Severe Health conditions that could not be treated in their parents home countries. The second would grand carina tarsinovik who came to the u. S. To care her fiance and then later husband who was a quadriplegic after being hit by a drunken driver in new jersey. Mass love miss lofgren, would you like to make any statements. I would just note that we are of one mind when it comes to these private bills. Without objection i would ask any written statements regarding these bills be made part of the written record. I move the subcommittee request departmental reports for these private bills pursuant for private immigration bills. The question is on the motion, those in favor say aye. The ayes have it, motion is agreed to and the reports are requested we will begin by welcoming everyone to this mornings hearings on sanctuary cities, a threat to Public Safety. I will recognize myself for an opening statement. I want to thank all of our what makes this different is our add theerns the law. This resolves the greatest unifying force. We taken a oath that contains six separate references to the law. This system of law failed kate steinle as it has failed others like her and this is more than an act tse. Ive been on this committee mr. Chairman for almost five years now and i have listened closely to the debate over immigration you dont hear many witnesses called by our colleagues on the other side to talk about Law Enforcement or background checks or enforcement mechanisms. You do hear certain phrases repeated with catatonic frequency as if rote repetition will make it true. Like functional control over the border uttered by witnesses who are uniquely well positioned to know better. You hear citizenship for 11 million undocumented aspiring americans, as if 11 million of any category could pass a background check. You hear arguments againstm pow everything state and local Law Enforcement to assist federal authorities and those are the most illogical arguments of all. We trust state and local Law Enforcement to investigate all manner of crime from six assault to narcotics trafficking but god forbid they help us enforce immigration laws. State and local Law Enforcement are good enough to provide protection for members of congress. In this city and when they are back home. Now that changes when it comes to the issue of immigration. They are no longer smart enough to enforce federal immigration law. And even though some do not trust state and local Law Enforcement to enforce federal law, they are more than happy to allow state and local officials to openly ignore that same federal immigration law. Which brings us to that benignsounding phrase sanctuary cities. The definition of sanctuary is a place of refuge or safety. It almost sounds utopian a place of refuge, a place of safety. Refuge for whom . Safety for whom . For a young woman walking on pier with her father . Or for a career recidivist like Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez . Who had a quarter centurys worth of law lestness dating all the way back to 1991. He committed local, state and federal crimes in at least five separate states. He was deported five times and each time had so little regard for the law that he reentered that border that we are supposed to have functional control over. His procedural history is every bit as disturbing. In may of 2011 this defendant was convicted and sentenced to 46 months imprisonment for illegal reentry again. At the conclusion of that sentence, he released from the bureau of prisons to a known sanctuary jurisdiction for the ostensible prosecution of an old drug case. And, of course, San Francisco did not prosecute that old drug case, they dismissed it which surprises exactly no one. And then they released this defendant. They did not return him to the bureau of prisons or federal probation, they did not honor the detainer placed on him by ice, they released someone they knew was not legally in this country and had a criminal history dating back to the early 1990s. And we are given a litany of excuses for policies like this. We are told we need policies like the one in San Francisco so people will cooperate with Law Enforcement. And i want you to consider how utterly illogical that is. We are releasing known criminals back into society so society will help us catch known criminals. Then, of course, some of our friends on the other side say all of this is necessary so folks will, to use the president s word come forward or get on the books or get right with the law i want you to ask yourself. What if this defendants background leads you to believe that he would ever come forward or get on the books or get right with the law. He was already on the books. Better than that he was in jail. And he was there because he had not complied with a single damn thing we had asked him to do. So are we supposed to catch him again after San Francisco releases him . Do we wait on another victim . Is that the strategy behind sanctuary cities . Release him and wait until they victimize someone else . Is that what we mean by coming forward . The president and others constantly talk about comprehensive Immigration Reform but they are very light on the details when it comes to enforcement and background checks. They fundamentally fail to understand that border security, both borders by the way, both of them and internal security are fundamental conditions precedent to fixing our broken immigration system. Mr. Steinle, about a year ago there was a precious little girl waiting on the steps of the cap top for capitol for me after votes and i knew what was coming. I knew or suspected that she would repeat those phrases that socalled advocates teach children to repeat to members of congress. But i had to stop as any father of a daughter would. And i stopped and the little girl said i want to pray for you. None of the stuff the advocates tell the children to say she just said i want to pray for you. So i picked her up and in a mixture of spanish and english she told god she was not here legally but she wanted to stay. And every one that i know would want to help that little girl. But everyone also should have wanted to help your little girl, mr. Steinle. She wasnt five but shes still your daughter and this country should have protected her and i hope youre given answers. I hope the politicians in San Francisco will explain to you why they thought it was more important to provide a sanctuary to Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez than they did to provide a sanctuary for your daughter and i hope the administration will tell you why a fivetime illegal entrant to a known sanctuary city for a piddling damn drug charge was dismissed. And i hope San Francisco will tell you why they released a convicted felon rather than honor the detainer in place or return him to ice. You deserve those answers and you deserve to know that your daughters dlet serve to save the lives of other people. When Trayvon Martin was shot, and even before our criminal Justice System had acted, the president said that could have been his son. For those of us that have daughters, which includes the president , your daughter could have been our daughter. I used to have a quote on the wall of my old office at the courthouse given to me by a victim advocate. From a greek philosopher named solie. Ill paraphrase it but this was close. He was asked what city was the best one to live in and he answered that city where those who are not injured by crime. Take up the calls of those who are as if it had been him. Thats the kind of country we should want, too. One where we do not have to lose our daughters to know the to feel the pain that you feel and we should havent to lose daughters to know that no one else should have to feel like you feel this morning. With that i would recognize the Ranking Member. First, id like to welcome all of the witnesses to the hearing today but i especially want to welcome members of the steinle family and to extend my heart felt condolences to you. As a parent i can only imagine what youre going through and any time an innocent person is lost to violence i think its important that we all stop and consider what steps could we take . Wh what what laws could be altered . So it is important, the process that were going through at this time. A hearing like this offers members of the public an opportunity to learn more about the issue and i hope we can Work Together collaboratively to address some of the problems we were sent here to washington to solve. Im eager to hear what each witness has to say. I must note that last night chairman goodlatte and i testified before the rules committee on hr3009, a bill that has already been decided is the answer apparently, to this. And i would note that if 3009 had been enacted into law it wouldnt have had any impact on the circumstances that as a resulted in the death of your daughter. In addition to that major Law Enforcement associations like that fraternal order of police, the Major County Sheriffs Association and others are telling us that that bill would make us less safe and they all oppose that bill. I do think the testimony of the police chief of dayton ohio, i hope will be instructive. Because i have not heard a Single Person who suggested that it was wise, appropriate or everyone legal for the sheriff in San Francisco to have released the individual who is charged with killing your daughter. Having said that there are Police Agencies around the United States who believe that it makes our communities less safe to inquire as to the immigration status in every case. For example, the Domestic Violence organizations have contacted us to say that if there is a call for a Domestic Violence situation and the individuals who are calling know that they and every in their household will be interrogated as to their status, a family where theres mixed status will not call for Domestic Violence. So we have to be mindful of those issues, the entirety of the situation that we face. I would ask unanimous consent to put into the record a bipartisan letter that was sent to appropriators just four months ago signed by 152 members of Congress Talking about the importance of the burn jag and cop grant for policing in this country. Without objection. Noting that it is those very grants that would be removed by the legislation that is before the Congress Later today. And i would also ask unanimous consent to enter into the record letters in opposition to hr 3009 by the Major County Sheriffs Association, the fraternal order of police, the Law Enforcement Immigration Task force, the league of cities and the u. S. Conference of mayors. Without objection. With that, i will just say that i will listen with great interest to all of our witnesses but especially to mr. Steinle and hopefully ill have a chance to meet you after this learing and your family as well. As you know, congresswoman pelosi and i sent a letter to the attorney general and the department of Homeland Security just a few days ago to explore how could it be that you would send a person who should have been deported to a jurisdiction for a warrant that was 20 years old that clearly there was not going to be a prosecution and oddly enough i mean, this individual was deported in 1994, in 1997 in 1998, in 2003 and in none of those instances did this ancient warrant prevent him from being deported. He was also convicted repeatedly of felony reentry after removal and served 16 years in federal prison for that crime. And he just kept trying to get in and i want to give credit to our Border Patrol because every time he tried to come back in they caught him, which is exactly what they should do. And he was prosecuted. So we need to examine all of this in knowing that none of it can bring your beautiful daughter back but hopefully we will be able to improve the situation as a tribute to your loss. With that i would yield back mr. Chairman. Choir would recognize the chairman full commit teerks mr. Goodlatte. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you for holding this hearing and for the work that you have dedicated to this issue for the last two years. I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today. I think you all have compelling testimony but i especially want to thank mr. Steinle who i just had the opportunity to meet. I told him that the fact that he would come here three weeks after the tragic death of his daughter to me shows courage and determination to make sure that other lives are saved as a result of this. So you have my deepest sympathy but also my deepest appreciation and admiration for coming here today. I also told mr. Steinle that my son lives in San Francisco, i have been on that very pier with my son and my daughter about we want to make sure that everybody is safe. Last week this Committee Held a department of Homeland Security oversight hearing with secretary johnson as the sole witness. Many members focused their questions on sanctuary tease immigration and Customs Enforcement detainers and criminal aliens. So we have heard much of what the administration has to say about these issues. But today we will hear perspectives on sanctuary policies that are distinctly different than what secretary johnson had to offer and i look forward to that testimony. Im honored to have the family of kate steinle here, and mr. Steinle testifying and of course their perspective on this issue is one we wish they never had to contemplate. The same is true for the countless other victims of criminal aliens that this committee has heard from, people like jamil and anita shaw whose son was murdered by a criminal alien gang member who had been released from jail by los angeles Law Enforcement pursuit to los angeles sanctuary policy. And people like Sabine Durden whose son dominick was killed in a car accident by an illegal immigrant who had two prior dui convictions. Ms. Durden is here with us this morning. I thank you very much for being here today as well. These tragedies were preventable. This situation must reverse its wholesale and unprecedented shutdown of Immigration Enforcement. Because of the result of that shutdown is that millions of unlawful and criminal aliens are not considered high enough priorities for deportation, they are left in american communities. In fact, in the last year, the number of administrative arrests of criminal aliens has fallen by a third and the department continues to release thousands of such aliens on to our streets. I submitted to releasing 30 558 aliens with criminal convictions in 2014. Last week, we publicized ice data showing the recidivist activity of those criminal aliens. Ice released in 2014. Already 1,423 have been convicted of new crimes like vehicular homicide Domestic Violence Sexual Assault dui, particularry and assault among many others and even more have been arrested and charged with additional crimes. Secretary johnsons electrocution, the priorities enforcement program, is a failure. Even the secretary admitted last week that five of ices priority a meaning the worst offending jurisdictions have refused to participate and while 33 of the 49 priority a jurisdictions have apparently agreed to participate, it remains to be seen how fully. The administration has admitted that when it says the jurisdiction has agreed to participate, that could encompass compliance with only a very small part of pep. There is a clear answer to this problem compliance with ice detainers must be mandatory. Jurisdictions that violate that policy must suffer consequences and, most importantly, Congress Must no locknger allow the president the ability to simply turn off the Immigration Enforcement switch. This committee has passed a bill that addresses all three of those priorities, hr1148, the michael davis, jr. And danny oliver in honor of state and local Law Enforcement act introduced by chairman gowdy. While i look forward to consideration of hr1148 on the floor later today the house will vote on legislation to address one part of the solution to sanctuary cities. That bill is a good first step and i will support it. I also appreciate the majority leaders commitment to me that we take additional action to ensure compliance with our immigration laws in the future. Today i look forward to hearing the witnesses thoughts on how to prevent sanctuary policies and the overwhelming number of crimes committed pursuant to these policies. And i also want to acknowledge that mrs. Wilkerson, i think is here this morning as well. She testified before the Senate Hearing on tuesday. I want to make it clear to everyone that this committee is committed to addressing this problem in a comprehensive way and we have taken the first step by bringing the bill to the floor today. But that should not be the end that should be the beginning of our efforts to make sure that american citizens are safe in their cities around the country. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Gentleman from virginia yields back. The gentlelady from california is recognized for unanimous consent. Thank you, mr. Chairman i should have asked earlier for unanimous consent to enter Ranking Member conyers statement into the record and i would also ask unanimous con sent to enter into the record 137 statements, including from the archbishop of San Francisco, the methodists and 134 other organizations on this subject. Without objection. We welcome our very distinguished panel of witnesses today. I would ask you to recognize so i could administer an oath. Do you swear the testimony youre about to give should be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god . May the record reflect all the witnesses answered in the affirmative. I will introduce you and then recognize you individually for your Opening Statements left to right, mr. Jim steinle of pleasanton, california, the father of kate steinle murder on july 1, 2015, by a recidivist criminal alien who had been released from the San Francisco Sheriffs Department. Sheriff scott jones started with Sacramento County Sheriffs Department in 1989 as the Security Officer and then brand new at their brand new main jail. As a deputy he worked in corrections, patrol, legal affairs, he was promoted to sergeant, lieutenant, finally captain. As sheriff he instituted a planning process that prioritizes projects and continues to drive the department forward. He holds a bachelors degree in criminal justice from csu sacramento and a juris doctorate degree from lincoln law school. Jessica vaughn serves at the center of immigration study. Shes been there since 1992 where her experience in immigration policy and operations topics such as visa programs immigration benefits and immigration Law Enforcement. In addition, shes an instructor for senior Law Enforcement training seminars at Northwestern University center for Public Safety in illinois. She has a masters degree from georgetown and a bachelors degree at International Studies in Washington College in maryland. Finally richard beal joined the police in 1988. He served on the Cincinnati Police department from 1980 to 2004 in positions including officer, sergeant, lieutenant captain and ultimately assistant police chief. Welcome to all of you, mr. Steinle, you are recognized for your opening remarks. Thank you. First of all, id like to thank the members of this committee for the honor to speak to you about our daughter kate. All children are special in their own way, kate was special in the way she connected with people. We call it the kate effect. Kate was beautiful, she was kind she was loving and deep in faith. Kate had a special soul, a kind heart, the most contagious laugh and the mild that would light up a room. Kate loved to travel spend time with her friends and most of you will spend time with her family. In fact, the day she was killed we were walking arm in arm on pier 14 in San Francisco enjoying a wonderful day together. Suddenly a shot rang out, kate fell looked at me and said help me dad. Those were the last words i will ever hear from my daughter. The day kate died she changed her facebook cover photo to a saying that said whats ever good for your soul, do that. This quote truly described her spirit. After graduating from cal pollyy at san louis obispo she went to work for a Title Company and saved her money so she could travel the world. She traveled to spain thailand amsterdam, dubai and south africa just to fame a few. She even made her way to the slums of mumbai, india, to reach out to her friends mothers nanny. She spent time there with the womans family and came home a changed person. Wherever kate went throughout the world she shined the light of a good citizen of the United States of america. Unfortunately, due to disjointed laws and basic incompetence on many levels, the u. S. Has suffered a selfinflicted wound in the murder of our daughter by the hand of a person that should never have been on the streets of this country. I say this because the alleged murderer is an undocumented immigrant whos been convicted of seven felonies in the u. S. And already deported five times. Yet in march of this year he was released from jail to stay here freely because of legal loopholes. Its unbelievable to see so many innocent americans have been killed by undocumented immigrant felons in recent years. In fact we recently came across a statistic that says between between and 2014 criminal aliens who had an active deportation case at the time of the release were subsequently charged with homiciderelated offenses. Think about that. 121 times over four years an illegal immigrant, a violent illegal immigrant with prior criminal convictions that later went on to be charged with murder when they should have been deported. Thats one every 12 days. Our family realizes the complexities of the immigration laws, however we feel strongly that some legislation should be discussed, enacted or changed to take these undocumented immigrant felons off our streets for good. We would be proud to see kates name associated with some of this new legislation we feel that if kates law saves one daughter, one son, a father or mother kates death wont be in vain. Thank you. Thank you mr. Steinle. Sheriff jones . Chairman gowdy and members, thank you for the invitation to speak with you this moring. Im scott jones, the sheriff of Sacramento County, one of the largest Sheriffs Departments in the country. In Sacramento County like the rest of california and many communities we have a very diverse population including a Large Population of undocumented immigrants. They are a vital important and valued part of our community. Unfortunately, theres also a percentage of that community that chooses to victimize others as a way of life and sometimes in heinous ways. Unfortunately, unlike their american counterpart i cannot protect my community from these offenders. Security communities went a good way in the right direction by allowing fingerprints to be processed by ice. We dont know status, but they did a good job of notifying their local ice office of the folks they wanted to take custody of because they cant be in every jail 24 hours a day theyd serve the jails with a detainer that says hold this person for a brief time until we can get down to the jail and take custody of the person weve already identified should not be released. It worked well and few people fell through the cracks. Even under if new wattered down version, its dependent on detainers to be functional. I can tell you the detainer system has failed and continue kwensly and necessarily then the Priority Enforcement Program is also failing. Even not withstanding the fact that the federal government allows and encourages states to pass their own immigration laws, though they have no Legal Authority to do so its a men are their and exclusive function of the federal government theyre allowed to do so without consequence or challenge because its much easier for that to happen so we continue wently have 50 different immigration policies. The trust act in california limited the types of crimes for which we could honor detainers. Then came a lowly magistrate county judge who Clackamas County, oregon, that detainers were unlawful in Clackamas County only. I begged ice to stand with us to so we could stand with our ice partners to keep our Community Safe and honor detainers for the ones that state laws allowed because they said they wouldnt contravene that. They said no that it would not happen during this administration. In a leadership vacuum, someone will fill that space and that someone was the aclu who seized on the opportunity so send a letter to every sheriff in this country telling them that if they honored any ice detainers, not just the ones allowed by state law, they would be sued again we pleaded with ice, to no avoid. So now over 200 jurisdictions in this country dont honor ice detainers, people are released without any scrutiny from ice at all. California has become a de facto sanctuary state and in short order that entire country will be a de facto sanctuary country. But thats not the same as sanctuary cities that pass laws that overtly and conspicuously violate federal law. They, too, are allowed to do so. I have it on Good Authority that the San Francisco Sheriffs Office has not contacted ice for any reason in over three years despite being served with many detainers during that time period. Its deplorable and reprehensible. Youll find no shortage of Police Chiefs willing to come here and testify that this type of legislation named after in part danny oliver, the deputy of mine that got killed last october 24 by someone removed four times, that its going to be bad for our community, that its going to erode trust in our immigrant communities, that we shouldnt be enforcing immigration law, it should be a function of the federal government. I cant argue with any of that. I agree with every little sentiment expressed. I dont care, i dont have any desire to enforce immigration law. But that preposes sezpresupposes that there are people responsible and that is not happening. Notice i mentioned Police Chiefs willing to come here and testify. I defy you to find a sheriff that will testify that some of this legislation is not a good idea because while were both singularly concerned with Building Trust in our communities, only the sheriffs because of their roles in corrections in this country are concerned with the dire consequence of releasing someone they know who should not be released, that they know ice already wants and that society should be protected from and having not to be able to hold them for one minute while ice can come down to the jail and take custody of them. Sheriffs are account to believe the people. Theyre elected we have our own political voice. Theres a reason, a very conspicuous reason even though our large role in connections in this country there that theres no sheriff representation on the president s 21st Century Task Force on policing and that said, even without national Immigration Reform, there can be solutions, there can be legislative or strokeofpen changes by policy that will make this part better to make detainers lawful and mandatory on local detention facilities so we can cooperate with our ice partners, despite what the policymakers in washington have. I hope youve had an opportunity to review the information i presented prior to this hearing. It lists some of those suggestions. I remain deeply committed to assisting in whatever way i can in this issue and i look forward to exploring these issues further through any questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you, sheriff. Miss vaughan . Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify on the Public Safety problems created when local governments adopt policies that obstruct Immigration Enforcement commonly known as sanctuary policies. According to an ice report that i obtained through a foyia request, as of october 14, there were 276 such jurisdictions in the United States. Over an eightmonth period in 2014 more than 8,100 criminal aliens who were the subject of detainers were instead released back into the streets as a result of these noncooperation policies. Approximately twothirds of these individuals already had a serious criminal history as defined by ice at the time of their release. Nearly 1,900 of them subsequently reoffended just in that eightmonth period. Only 28 of them have been reapprehended by ice. Now ive just reeled off a lot of statistics that i know sometimes make some peoples eyes glaze over, but as someone who also has lost a close family member, my brother, because of a negligent act by a sworn Law Enforcement officer and also a bad policy and i should add that the offense that was committed was one that some on this committee would call a minor Traffic Offense that killed my brother, i have to say that it is really not okay to refer to these tragedies as a little thing. As one member of this committee has. I have a friend, her name is heather, a few years ago she was carjacked at knife point and taken to Roger Williams park in Providence Rhode island, and raped repeatedly by an illegal alien who had been in the custody of the providence Police Department more than once but was released because of thenmayor cicillines sanctuary policies. This was not a little thing. I have other friends, some in this room, who can tell similar stories. And im afraid congress is about to try to get away with doing just a little thing by barring funding from these sanctuary jurisdictions, some funding. Im asking you today to not be satisfied with just doing a little thing. This big problem requires you to have the courage to do a bigger thing. You have the language in the davis oliver act. Please do this for these families who have lost so much. Sanctuary policies do nothing to build trust between immigrant communities and local Law Enforcement. They do not improve action to Law Enforcement services for immigrants nor have they been shown to increase the likelihood that more immigrant crime victims will report crimes. On the contrary, they destroy the trust of the community at large that the laws will be faithfully enforced to preserve the quality of life for all. Despite the widespread public outrage at the San Francisco sheriffs policies that caused the release of a man who went on to kill kathryn steinle, its clear that some jurisdictions will not budge from the criminal alien sanctuary policies. To make matters worse, the Obama Administrations new Priority Enforcement Program explicitly allows local jurisdictions to obstruct ice and also establishes the entire country as a sanctuary for nearly all illegal aliens by further narrowing enforcement priorities and severely restricting the ability of ice officers to deport removable aliens including many with criminal records. There are Congress Must step in to correct the situation by clarifying in the law that local Law Enforcement agencies are expected to comply with ice detainers, establishing that local Law Enforcement agencies will have qualified immunity when cooperating in good faith, by implementing sanctions for those sanctuary durs jixjurisdictions that continue to refuse to cooperate and by reversing the Obama Administrations nonenforcement policies. Thank you very much. Thank you, miss vaughan. Chief biehl. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to provide testimony on this important issue. Im Richard Biehl chief of police at the dayton, ohio, Police Department. I have the honor of serving this position since january 28 of 2008. Further, i spent the last 35 years working to improve Public Safety in urban areas. Through that experience i know that effective Public Safety, even when grounded in evidence based best practices is crucially dependent upon Community Engagement and support. First i would like to express my condolences to the steinle family for their loss and to sheriff jones for the loss of his officer last year. Sadly, i attended the funeral of Cincinnati Police officer sonny kim less than a month ago, killed in the line of duty he was my ninth in my career. I happened to read a proverb a couple days ago and i think its quite appropriate to the conversation today. Our passions are the winds that propel our vessel, our reason is the pilot that steers her. Without winds, the vessel would not move. Without a pilot, she would be lost. I know we are here to discuss the topic of sanctuary cities and the role in Public Safety. If we have the conversation about sanctuary cities how we define them are important as we think about how to best protect the residents and keep our Community Safe its crucial we dont undermine Proven Community policing practices. I would like to explain that daytons policy regarding cooperation with federal Immigration Enforcement officers. Our policy states the dayton Police Department hall schaal not stop investigate or arrest a person solely because of their real or perceived immigration status. Investigation of a persons immigration status must be done for the most serious offenders. This approach has served the Dayton Community well. During the time these policies have been there place, dayton has seen significant reductions in crime. As chief of police my primary concern is with the safety of all resident miss and in dayton we have seen a reduction of crime in our city. Our immigration Law Enforcement approach allows us to focus on true threats to Public Safety while ensuring our immigrant communities maintain necessary trust to report criminal incidents to our department. Im concerned the proposed legislation such as hr3009 would coerce Law Enforcement departments to make decisions and undermine our ability to keep our communities safe. The dayton Police Department is facing criminal staffing shortages that are already creating potential channel fulfilling its Public Safety responsibilities. Making local Police Departments fulfill enforcement responsibilities will only make it even more challenging ive seen the positive effect of Community Policing in my city. Dayton has a population thats only 4 foreign born. Given its demographics, it may appear an unlikely place for a National Immigration policy to be much of a concern much less of an issue impacting local policing but in my time as police chief i repeatedly witnessed how significant the issue is to our community. Within a month of beginning my service as police chief i was approached by multiple victim advocates who expressed concerns that the Latino Community members were being racially profiled. Allegations like that are deeply troubling to me. Our cities are safer when theres a sense of trust with our communities. If families view Law Enforcement as a threat or fear Walking Around their neighborhood, no one benefits. Dayton has seen a reduction in crime not increase as a result of Community Policing policies. I might add, we have been recognized state wides nationally and internationally for Community Policing. While Immigration Enforcement is a federal responsibility collaboration between state and local Law Enforcement and federal enforcement, officials can and should exist but policies need to be tailored to ensure Community Policing is not undermined. I agree we should deport violent offenders offenders, no one wants Violent Crime in their community. Its once we gent beyond violent offenders that some local thys disagree over collaboration with federal enforcement officials. I support the Priority Enforcement Program initiative as the u. S. Department of Homeland Security described it. That allows local jurisdictions to work with ice concerning crimes that most negatively impact Public Safety in their communities. I believe Law Enforcement communities should comply with detainers as long as the detain detainers do not rooir jurisdiction to exceed their Legal Authority to hold persons beyond their current sentence of local charges, require local Law Enforcement to hold persons for additional time must be supported by a legal basis, otherwise it would be asking the Law Enforcement to violate the constitution, something none of us wants. Before Congress Tries to impose legislative solutions, i believe it should allow pep to be implemented. What everybody wants is a safe community, thats what i want. We should not punish localities trying to promote trust in their community, collaboration with federal immigration officials should exist for those serious and violent criminals. That collaboration needs to ensure that Community Policing is not undermined such as through the pep program. A longterm solution requires Congress Come up with a fix to our broken immigration system and clarify Immigration Enforcement responsibilities. Until that time, local Community Leaders will continue to implement Practical Solutions to promote Public Safety in our communities. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. Im happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you, chief, and thank all our witnesses. The chair will now recognize the gentleman from idaho for his questions. Thank you all for being here. Sheriff jones, in your written testimony you provide some suggestions for fixing our immediate problems between ice and local Law Enforcement including making detainers mandatory in local jails and having ice share resources with localities to ensure effective enforcement. In your view given the current politicized status of isis policies, what can be done to compel ice to provide these resources to states and localities . Well, its important thank you for the question. Its important to remember that until a couple of years ago ice detainers were mandatory. Theres nothing kwif dmal the enabling statute. It says local jails shall not mayor their discretion, but shall hold folks for no more than 48 hours. Its only through policy of this administration that this has softened up. About three years ago they were mandatory for a year or twoyear period. The. From would refuse to answer whether they were mandatory or mere request and now, of course theyve thrown up their hands and said well, look at clackamas, thats federal law. Well, thats not the way our american system of jurisprudence works. Can you explain that to the American People . It is one judge in one jurisdiction to that makes the law for the United States . Its not even a judge, its a magistrate. Well, theyre judges but i guess. They still have a longer appointment than i do. So one magistrate. Its applicable in that particular district. No where else. So the federal government could have done something minimally such as say we dont agree with that let alone challenge it but they dont. They allow that to extrapolate to make National Policy and the aclu seized upon that vacuum to do so. So its not like its unprecedented that detainers are mandatory. They have been mandatory and that was the success of the secure communities program. So what can be done now that you see this administration not doing their job. . Well, a number of things. But specifically relative to detainers, they have to be once again determined to be mandatory. The fact that you cant hold someone based on anything less than a warrant or cord order is ludicrous ludicrous. We arrest everyone based on reasonable suspicion and probable cause. They dont see a judge for 48 hours or two days or three days so to suggest that because youre undocumented you somehow have greater Constitutional Rights than american citizens is ludicrous. Thank you very much. Chief beihl, thank you for the work you do in your community but i do have some questions for you. Your testimony discusses the need for comprehensive Immigration Reform to help Law Enforcement know who is present in the community. But isnt it true that Kate Steinles killer was previously in the custody of San Francisco Law Enforcement officials and thus was already known by the San Francisco Law Enforcement. That is a fact. Your reason testimony contains a quote from an email you received regarding alleged racial profiling in dayton. Were any of the allegations in the email substantiated . They werent substantiated through investigation. I will say that they were in terms of arrest data there was clearly a surge of arrests in hispanics at latinos that aoccurred one year prior to my approval that was substantial. So whether the actual basis of those allegations were any of these arrests taken out because there was insufficient data about their criminality . I dont understand. Were any of these arrests dismissed or not prosecuted . Yes, a number of them were because of racial profiling . Not because of racial profiling. A number were dismissed though. But not because of racial profiling. No. Your testimony notes that your departments focus on serious chronic and high rate offenders. Wouldnt it make sense to protect residents dayton by working with federal immigration agencies to enforce laws so that aliens never have the opportunity to commit so many crimes as to be considered serious chronic and irate offenders. Actually, we do with with federal authorities. We have partnerships with the federal bureau of investigation Drug Enforcement informations, u. S. Marshalls, department oaf Homeland Security including those who have credentials Human Trafficking Steering Committee and United States secret service. So we have partnerships across federal Law Enforcement. And you think thats a good thing. Thats why we do it. Absolutely. Do you comply with ice detainers . They are complied with in my county. Would you have complied with an ice detainer in the case of Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez a seventime convicted felon who had been deported five times . Absolutely. Your recent opposition to allowing local Law Enforcement officers include that immigration laws are complex. I dont know that immigration laws are more complex than other criminal laws. Why dont you think your officers are smart enough to act to federal Immigration Enforcement. Thank you for that question congressman. My understanding for individuals to be credentialed on a 287 requires three weeks of training. That is a substantial commitment of training time for Police Officers for a very specific area of enforcement. I cant think of any agencies that could spend that amount of time with personnel and training. There are training requirements now being proposed through the state of ohio, there have been a number of task forces established, the president ial task force that are once again emphasizing the need for additional training for Law Enforcement. I can tell you training time is at a premium, specifically as it relates to critical Staffing Levels so how do we spend Time Training Police Officers . And just from talking to the individuals in this area of law, the law is constantly changing so three weeks of training is only value as long as the laws dont change. Thank you, i yield back my time. Gentleman from idaho yields back. The gentlelady from california. Thank you mr. Chairman. First, i appreciated hearing from all the witnesses. Sheriff jones, you mentioned that no sheriff would come and take the position of chief beihl. Id like to ask unanimous consent to put into the record a letter from the Law Enforcement Immigration Task force opposing 3009 fined by a number of Law Enforcement officials including sheriff mark curran from illinois, sheriff tony estrada from arizona, sheriff leon lott from south carolina, is sheriff William Mccarthy from iowa. Sheriff markgaret mims from press the know. Without objection. Also id like to ask unanimous consent to place if in the record a for the record the Major County Sheriffs Association chief, your testimony i thought was very interesting. In your oped recently you said that crime in dayton had dropped by nearly 22 after you engaged in your new Community Policing effort and that serious property crime dropped almost 15 . Now, why do you think this happened in terms of, was it Community Trust . And have these favorable Crime Reduction figures continued or not . Thank you, congresswoman. In fact, they are a direct outgrowth of not only innovative policing strategies, but also community partnerships. Our Community Working with us to address crime particularly series of Violent Crime, has been crucial in reducing crime. Has continued through my tenure as police chief. Again, theres been a lot of discussion about detention and whether or not that is constitutional in citing one particular case, however there are a number of cases, rather than go into all of them here, i would ask unanimous consent to place a summary a series of cases that have found you cant hold somebody on a civil matter at the request of i. C. E. Absent a warrant or something else. And i think thats what sheriffs all across the United States, whether or not their communities say they are sanctuary cities, have been reduckluctant to do this. It doesnt violate anybodys constitutional right if you ask to be notified before you release somebody and what weve heard from i. C. E. Is is youve got a serious character like this guy in San Francisco, they will get there and they will pick him up. And they will take him way aand deport him. Which has what should have happened in this case. Actually, should have never been sent to San Francisco in the first place. Im wondering whether you have any objection, chief beale, or whether your community would have any objection to the Priority Enforcement Program that requires notifications, so that i. C. E. Could come and remove people who are priorities for enforcement, who are serious criminals . Im not aware of any objections from my community with that program at all. None have been expressed to me. Ive been involved in many conversations, the Task Force Conversations or development of fek meks and notification and also for being involved in the roll out. Its just literally being rolled out as we speak. I just met with our local Field Office Director last week. He gave me a packet describing the program and its implementation, so this is literally just being implemented. I see my time is almost expiring, that when someone is booked into a jail, their fingerprints are taken, and those of everyone. Immigrants, undocumented, legal american citizens, those are shared with the federal government and made part of the database and that is has not been changed at all, has it sheriff . No. And i dont think any theres any confusion that that interferes with Community Policing or Building Trust with the community. Have you heard that . Not at all. Mr. Chairman, i im hopeful that we can hone in on the need to make sure that the ability to remove dangerous criminals by i. C. E. Enhanced and that we dont get diverted by disagreements over overall immigration policy because i believe that we can have the ability to come together to reach consensus and in a way that would be a very positive outcome and with that, my time is is is expired and i yield back. Thanks. The gentleman recognizes himself for his questions and let me just say that there are 5,000 i. C. E. Agents in the country responsible for enforcing our immigration laws, which there are 350,000 convicted criminal aliens on the streets right now. There are 11 million or many people who are unlawfully present in the United States and that when you have over 900,000 local Law Enforcement officers some communities may want to participate. Some may not. We dont require them to enforce our immigration laws, but the people who are unlawfully present in the United States and cause various types of problems, including committing crimes, are a concern to not just the national government, to local governments as well. So, i think the first step is to see that our laws are enforced by the federal government. I dont believe they are. And by state and local governments. And i think that beyond that legislation is needed to address many aspects of our immigration policy. Me ask mr. Steinly and then sheriff jones to talk more about the personal experiences they have. Do you believe that San Francisco should have been required to honor i. C. E. Detainers . Well, absolutely. Do you agree that the policy should be done to lawful immigrants . Yes. So, wouldnt it be best to remove unlawful aliens before they commit crimes rather than trusting they wont commit crimes . Mr. Lopez sanchez, he had committed some drug o tenses and committed the offense of illegal illegally entering the United States. He had not committed murder at that point in time, but this whole debate about how serious a crime you have to commit before you can be subject to the enforcement of the laws that you apply to everybody gets to be problematic, doesnt it . Well, mr. Chairman, if i may, our intent with is to get rid of or do something with the violent fellens. The way i understand the law is is if any undocumented person comes into the United States and subsequently is is deported, then comes back into the United States, theyre a felon. Thats correct. Dont have to commit any other crime. Theyre a felon at that point. Would impose a mandatory minimum sentence. Where i see the that we have to hone in on is a felon not a felon is a felon. Were talking about violent felons that, that come in here to the United States. If we try to arrest every felon, the jails would be full and the officers here would be extremely busy. I think we need to dif wrenn rate some how or another the levels of felony. Thats another can of worms i understand that. But if you have cooperation between local Law Enforcement and federal government, with limited resources, they have to set priorities but theyll set those based on the best information, not based upon individual localities trying to set their own immigration policies. I understand. Sheriff jones, would you tell us about deputy danny oliver, his life and what kind of person deputy he was and the circumstances of his murder . Yes. Thank you. He was not unlike any cop in this country who was answering the call. Law enforcement is a calling, not a job, to help people and for a life of service. He was particularly assigned to the problem oriented policing unit, p. O. P. Officers might be more familiar. I call the quality of life police. Their job is to address quality of life issues not answer calls for service. Its what he was doing on that day with a particular Problem Motel in our jurisdiction, had already made contact with someone in the front and was on to the back of the hotel when he came in contact with two people in a car and i believe the last words he ever spoke was hows your day going today . And then he was shot a single time in the forehead, killing him almost instantly. Are there changes to Immigration Enforcement that could have presented Deputy Oliver and investigator davis murders . First of all, he was booked in under an alias that we didnt know his true identity for several days. Secondly, we realized he had a drivers license from an issue california does as well. Had suffered 11 different misdee mean nor quixs from hit and run to dui. Was able to walk in and reknew his drivers license. Next near, he was release, next day, captured, three days later back in this country. Released across the border the same day. Next year, came in this country illegally, was arrested on felony warrants for local crime. Was deported again. Thee days later, so not only escaping consequences for any prior illegal entry, but in the last case, escaped consequence frs his local criminality. It was easier to deport him than face criminal conduct