Transcripts For CSPAN3 Acting DHS Secretary Wolf Testifies On Presidents 2021 Budget Request 20240713

49. 1 billion in discretion fundi funding and the disaster of the relief fund. Today we welcome chad wolf, the acting secretary of the department of Homeland Security. Thank you for being with us. Mr. Secretary, the fy 21 budget proposes 49. 7 billion in discretionary funding for the department of Homeland Security. This is a cut of 750 million below the current year level. I want to be clear, absent of any in acted law to affect such a transfer, this subcommittee will continue to include funding f for the secret service. When including funding for the secret service for the total, the budget request for fy 21 is 1. 78 billion above the current year level. There is something of the proposed budget that i believe will find strong bipartisan support. However there are also proposals we should not expect to see funded in the house bill. Among those are funding for border barriers and the expansion of capacity. Particularly in light of high priority needs that just continues to hire custom officers to speed to flow of trade and travel at the port of entries. Most of todays hearing will focus on Immigration Enforcement and Border Security including serious cases of abuse of authorities by some personnel and contractors. While the misstreetreatment of migrants is inexcusable, women and men of the department of Homeland Security who carry out the Department Vs vital missio that helps protect our country. This will includes rescuing giving aid to americans following Natural Disaster and Cyber Attacks and securing our airports and investigatiing trafficking. The subcommittee will continue to work with you to make sure they have the tremendous sourrey out. The subcommittee has the responsibility to make sure the department and its personnel carry out its mission responsibly and lawfully and efficiently and humanely. We have also endeavors to work with you and your predecessor to fix problems where needed and well continue to try to do so hopefully with better cooperation with the department. Unfortunately, thats getting harder and harder to do. I have been a member of this subcommittee since the creation shortly after the 9 11 terrorist attack. I cant remember a time when there is less consensus about immigration and Border Security and for my point of view it is systematic disregard of the rights of migrants that detain population and asylum laws of this country. Shutting down migrants coming into the United States across our southern border. The administration implemented multiple new programs to expedite the new process. At every turn in response to the question of how to balance the departments duo mission of Immigration Enforcement and protecting Asylum Seekers, the administration has aired exclusively and determined on the side of enforcement and removal regardless of the circumstances. This socalled migrant protection protocol is a clear and heartbreaking example. Mpp have been implemented with only the most superficial effort to ensure migrants returning to mexico being supported and healthcare. Access should be at the very least be equivalent to what they would have if they were not replaced in mpp. The devaluing of the rights of migrants go beyond the design of these new programs. Under mpp guidelines, vulnerable populations are not supposed to be place inside the program. There is a steady stream of report of pregnant women and individuals of Serious Health issues and including children and lbgtq migrants being placed in the program and in some cases coming to harm as a result. Mr. Secretary, i doubt that well come to an agreement on whether this administration, immigration policies strike the right balance. Changing these policies under the jurisdiction of the authorizing committee. It is squarely to ensure that the Administration Policies and the use of funds to implement them. Do not run a foul of the humane treatment of the migrants and their Due Process Rights and their asylum laws. Unfortunately, the department and its agency are not always forthcoming with all the requested information. While appropriation lays on from budget officials and uscis usually do their best to get us the information we theed need t their work. They are not sufficiently and powered to do so. We are stone walled in getting the requested information. Mr. Secretary as the head of the department of Homeland Security, you set the tone and established the rules thatll guide the department in meeting our goals and protecting our homeland and american values. If we are to be successful in achieving these goals, we need your support and cooperation and performing an over site function. I truly hope it will be forthcoming. Before i turn to aking secretary for a summary of this written statement. The texts will be included. Mr. Fleischman, any remarks you wish to make . Mr. Secretary, i thank you for the way you have been so courteous and assessable, you and your staff have reached out to us on numerous occasions and stepping up at a difficult time in our countrys history to take on this task so my perm thanks sonal personalthanpersona personal thanks to you. Again this is an awesome responsibility that you have under taken and i am ready to work with you as we move forward. As always there is a lot to observe with the departments request. There is a lot of new initiatives and a lot of threats we are trying to cover. I look forward to hearing the the individual components in the hearing planned over the next two months. I thank the chairwoman for putting together a schedule thatll allow us to get over the specifics. We work well together and there is a tremendous amount that we should respect. I truly thank you for that. It is clear the people of the department is working hard everyday to keep our country safe. Again, i had the opportunity to visit many dhs site and offices with the chair and many members on both sides and basically across the country to hear from your people and dedication and commitment shown by the people of dhs. Please pass along our thanks for the work they are doing around the clock everyday sir. Last year we saw an unprecedented crisis at our southwest board. I am glad we can come to the four corner agreement to provide humanitarian aid and relief some of the stress on customs and Border Protection and help move the unaccompaniied mied minors care. You see migrants apprehended at the border every month and we are seeing challenges at ice and uscis. I am optimistic we can Work Together to address these challenges and i continuei impart with our distinguished chair that there are so many ways we can agree, increase investment in our great United States coast guard assets and improve trade, travel and investigations and enforcement. Even the request continues construction on the border wall system is 2 billion. I am going to continue to work with you and with the president to support his initiatives and his requests for Border Security. I am hopeful that together both sides of the isle and both sides of the capitol we can continue to come to an agreement and solutions. I look forward to your testimony today and the departments initiatives. I thank you for being here. Madame chair, i yield back. Thank you. Now i would like to recognize the chairwoman of the full Appropriation Committee miss lowey. I thank you chairwoman and our Ranking Member fleischmann for holding this hearing today and thank you, i hope you had a good longterm in this position. That has not been the case so far. I want to thank all our witnesses for joining us. The department of Homeland Securitys mission to secure our nation from persistent and persuasive threat is not an easy task. We know it is better than most to ensure safety and different parts of dhs most effectively coordinated and cooperate while some working with other federal states and multiple agencies. Thats why the state as i told the last aking secretary who testified before our committee, it seems like the car is driving off the cliff with no one to take the wheel. In three short years the department of Homeland Security has been through five secretaries. Your before predecessor instituted inhumane policies of ripping children from their families and jailing people and ensuring the integrity of our border enforcing our immigration laws. It is a difficult and necessary job. This administration has taken it too far with the heartless obsession of Immigration Enforcement. I have recently received calls from local officials in any district with heartbreaking news that our young people are being pulled over, roughed up by i. C. E. Enforcement officers for no apparent reasons. This creates a culture of fear and works directly against the Community Policing work and local on a daily bases to build trust and keep us safe. In addition the department deploys personnel from the southern border including personnel from Law Enforcement Tactical Units to augment enforcement operations. This action was meant to punish localities like the one that i represent. Th i refuse to participate in the cruel and lawful Immigration Enforcement initiatives. It also came on the heels of another decision meant to target my constituents, suspension of cbp traveling program of new york. It affects 200,000 new yorkers by the end of the year. Turn to fiscal year of 2021, the budget yet again calls for the unnecessary hiring of the additional 2,044 i. C. E. Law enforcement officers and proposed an outrageous increase of 60,000 detention beds. The administration appears to learn nothing as democrats were not funding or his Campaign Promises particularly for an agency that lacks transparency and whos enforcement tactics are out of control. The request misses the point by focusing on the political agenda instead of securing our homeland. The budget was cut 239 million from the urban Area Security initiative which is high threat and high density urban areas with the consequences of attack would be most catastrophic. 228 million from the stayathome land Security Grant Program enhances Law Enforcements ability to prevent and respond of aks of terrorism or disasters. These cuts could have disaster consequences. My district witnessed the horrific antisemitc attack. The cut that you proposed are a slap in the face to my constituents who live in constant fear that they wont have the security and funding needed given the sharp rise of such attacks. The committee remains eager to support the departments core mission. Well not be apart of a political act that distracts from the real threat facing our homela homeland. I look forward to a productive discussion today. Thank you. Now i would like to recognize our Ranking Member of the committee, mr. Granger. Mr. Secretary, thank you for coming before the subcommittee today to present the fiscal year 2021 budge for the department of Homeland Security. You recently taken over an enormous responsibility. You are now charged with 240,000 men and women who work tirelessly protecting our nation without the proper credit. In my home state of texas, we share the longest stretch of border of any state and having an important relationship with our neighbors to the south. I appreciate your understanding of our unique situation. I know you remained committed in securing your border and keeping our Community Safe and ensuring the legal trade and travel so vital to our state and nation. I was in mcallen texas with Department Secretary defense to see firsthand where our heart fall investment and Border Security have produce results. This is my sixth trip to the border during this crisis. Partnership with the department of defense is allowing Border Control agents to get back to their border. I was amazingly aware new technology that are being developed where they can spot a person coming across our border in time to apprehend them safely. I would encourage all members to travel tl border and see some of these improvements particularly Cooperation Among sections and the detechnology they use. With these improvements we continue to have a crisis on our hands and the facts are undeniable. In 2018, 400,000 people were apprehended at the border which is unbelievable number, an unauthorized border crossing. Last year that number more than doubled and nearly 1 million marking a 12 years high. The pressure on Immigration Court grows and as we speak, the backlog of cases is already now five years long. The most important issue that we have is the high amount of Illegal Drugs carried across our border and the criminals who are bringing those drugs in and also children. This is something we need to be aware. I remain hopeful that our colleagues on the other side of the isle to work with us to address these real issues. I commend the president to address these issues head on. Mr. Wolf, your propose budget demonstrates how the department can and take action if given sufficient resources. I will continue to work with the administration to find solutions for these challenges. I do want to be aware that the criminal action at the border and criminals coming as acting secretary, my priorities are guided by determination to ensure that dhs is robust, resilient, forward leaning, prepared to address the threats of today and those of tomorrow. Fiscal year president s budget is a path to achieving those priorities. The department of Homeland Securitys mission spans air, land, sea and cyber domains. Our workforce of 230,000 strong stands watch for the nation 24 hours a day, 365 daysy year, safeguard the United States from terrorists, adversaries and others who seek to do us harm, lawful trade and travel, balancing security and freedom of movement with care and precision. As i often say, Economic Security is Homeland Security and the department plays a Critical Role in this mission. The president s budget ensures the workforce meets these responsibilities, 8 billion in net discretionary funding and an additional 5. 1 billion for Disaster Relief fund to support response to and recovery from disasters in the homeland. Budget priorities remain consistent with recent years, include securing our borders, enforcing our immigration laws, securing cyber space, transportation security and american preparedness. Recognizing that threats to the homeland are more dynamic than ever before, the budget positions us to respond to a number of emerging threats, including those emanating from nation states. To be clear, the lead federal agency in charge of this response remains the department of health and Human Services. Dhs remains focused on assisting travelers arriving at our airports of entry, land ports of entry and maritime ports of entry. The Department Took action early on to prohibit chinese nationals and foreign nationals who recently traveled to china from entering the United States. Additionally, flights with american citizens arriving from china or american citizens with recent chinese travel have been funneled through 11 airports with enhanced medical screening capabilities. These measures have been effective at keeping the virus at bay. This is an evolving risk. We are assessing our resources and measures on a daybyday, weekbyweek progress and we will monitor the situation and adjust our numbers as necessary. The Department Must continue to grow our digital defense of Cyber Security threats as they grow in scope and severity. The department maintains enhanced posture on Election Security front to preserve our electoral process and system against interference of any kind. President s budget invests 1. 7 billion in infrastructure security agency. This is an increase of roughly 150 million above the president s fy20 budget request. Security in our nations border remains a priority focus for the administration and the department. Most notably, it includes 82 miles of new border wall system as well as additional funding for technology and staffing. While securing our borders is of utmost importance, our immigration system requires we enforce the law as written. It remains the priority of the department to protect our citizens by identifying, detaining and removing criminal aliens from the United States. Budget includes over 3 billion to ensure our Law Enforcement has what it needs to faithfully execute the law. As true as it was in the wake of 9 11, the president has increased funding by 500 . 96 million in funding distributed across dhs components to identifying atrisk individuals and preventing their radicalization to violence. The budget also invests in modernizing the fleet of the United States coast guard, 550 million to fund the construction of the second polar security cutter, which supports our National Interest in the polar region, and including 564 million for the offshore patrol cutter, another critical Capital Investment for the coast guard. And as our threats evolve and capabilities grow new talent is needed to execute our mission. Cyber security employees across the department being asked for, for cvp, 750 new Border Patrol agents and 126 new support staff as well as funding to sustain the that congress provided resources for. New Law Enforcement officers which includes as well as 420 new i. C. E. Attorneys and 1400 new support staff. For tsa, sustaining the pace and passenger growth by sustaining 47,000 transportation security officers. 3 for uniform coast guard men and women. Diverse and complex mission sets. I continue to be amazed by the professionalism of the men and women of dhs. Instead of demonizing our workforce, we all need to thank them for what they do every day. Their commitment to our mission is beyond reproach and we should all sleep better at night knowing theyre on duty. Therefore i ask for your support through the president s fy21 budget request. Thank you again for the opportunity to be here today. I look forward to your question questions. Thank you, mr. Secretary. This is a drastic increase of 14,726 over the capacity funded in fy2020. And would require an additional 710 million. After request to transfer secret service to the treasury, proposal of overall increase of 1. 78 billion above the fy2020 enacted level. Yet theres no funding for the cutters and aircraft for search and seizure activities, drug operations and Disaster Respons response. Yes, chairwoman. As you know, we do have a model that drives the number of beds that we request every year. Weve shared that with the committee. That looks at a number of facters that we need to i. C. E. Needs to continue to do its mission. Many of those months coming across the border illegally. Theres a tail to that enforcement cycle that i. C. E. Will have to go into communities and for those that are here illegally, that are criminals and the like, that fall out of status in some cases, will have to continue to remove those individuals and the only way is to detain them. That is a concern that you have shared this information with a number of folks but its not been shared with the Sub Committee, being that we over how things are spent. Its critical that above all, number one, this Sub Committee should be the first to get that information. My second question, over the last year, the department has rolled out several new programs that result in the removal of migrants from cvp custody instead of being transferred to i. C. E. Moreover this committee has provided increased funding for alternatives to detention programs, which follows Asylum Seekers to live in their communities. Were these programs factored into the 60,000 i. C. E. Bed requirement . And, again, if the answer is yes, we need to see that analysis and ill just add to that, why havent we . Sure. It has been factored. Many of the programs you mentioned, chairwoman, are new initiatives. A lot of them have not been fully implemented, pacer, harp or a few of the others. We continue to implement those numbers. Emp flights these are all efforts to ensure that those seeking meritious claims can have their day in immigration heard in an effective manner. Were hoping to do that in months and not years, that has been the case in the past. Effort on a number of these programs, and im happy to walk through these, is to ensure we root out fraud. So they have legal right to be here in the u. S. Or they dont and we effectuate that accordingly instead of the years and years it has traditionally took. Well be asking further questions about those programs and the impact it has on immigrants. I want to emphasize again that the importance of this subcommittee, getting the analysis for the things that youre asking for, rather than whoever some folks are. My time is almost up. Im going to yield to the nextm member. Thank you, madam chairwoman. Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. Mr. Secretary, i want to talk with you about something that is obviously affecting the world and, of course, is impacting the United States. The coronavirus situation. First and foremost, i want my colleagues and the people in the room to know that you have been so proactive and cooperative, you called me early at the inception of this crisis and have kept me abreast. And i thank you for that. We are all keeping a watchful eye on this critical ly importat situation, and ive received updates from the medical side and have been kept abreast by others involved in this crisis. We certainly want to be responsive to needs. Can you kindly clarify what exactly specific areas of responsibility are when it comes to the coronavirus . Fortunately theres been a Strong National response. Cdc is involved. As it relates to Homeland Security, what is within your purview, sir . Thank you. It is certainly a whole government approach that the administration is pursuing, regarding this, specifically for the department. We are there to support, again, the department of health and Human Services as they outline a medical strategy to deal with the coronavirus. Were there to support them and adjust our operations accordingly. Specifically, the department was involved early on in the funneling of all flights from china to 11 different airports. We were involved in standing up medical contracts through our cwmd office at those 11 airports. Individuals that come off those aircraft first will see a cvp officer, immigration officer. Theyll then go to contract medical screening. The department has set up in those 11 airports and then if necessary will be referred to cdc medical professionals to determine if a quarantine is needed or not. We do that in airports. We also do this at land ports of entry, maritime ports of entry. Cargo ships arriving every day from china, but also have crew that perhaps have visited effective areas as well. Coast guard involved, cvp involved. Whole departmental effort to make sure that we are instituting the measures that the president has put into place, to include travel restrictions to make sure, again, the American Public is safe and secure. Thank you, sir. And count me in for our full support of your endeavors and that of the other departments as we combat this critically important situation and crisis. Mr. Secretary, during my time in congress, ive come to learn and appreciate the Critical Role that research and development plays in our nation and providing money for innovative goods and services. What is chs doing to prepare to meet the nations future security needs and as a followup to that, how is the science and Technology Leveraging scientific expertise in resource and Development Researchers of National Laboratories . We do that a variety of different ways, at the component level with the funding they have. The operators know for the most part when technology and what capabilities they need. So, we use the funding within those components to mostly acquire commercial offtheshelf products that are here, ready to go today. We have a little bit longer term idea when we talk about our science and Technology Director, in those technologies that perhaps are not ready today but will be in the short timeframe, looking at that one to two to threeyear period. Early had on in the departments mission, lifespan that science and Technology Director had a little bit longer tail, what was five or ten years out. Over time, i think weve seen we need the capabilities a lot sooner than that. Well continue to invest in that. S t uses centers of excellence, again, that they receive funding from congress on, but also the National Laboratory network to do that, to invest in some of the hightech expertise that they dont have on sight, but obviously different National Laboratories around the country do. We have agreements with them to continue to utilize their expertise as well. So, again, it spans the spectrum from technology that we need today, relatively soon from an International Requirements to those technologies that could either be improved on or we need to invest in with other ailments of the u. S. Government. Thank you, mr. Secretary. Since my time is up, i thank you for your responses. Madam chair, i yield back. Mr. Secretary, your predecessor established a red team review of the migrant protection protocols last fall. Can you share with us what dhs has done in response to the red team recommendations, particularly with regard to ensuring migrants have meaning full access to Legal Council . Weve done a number of things. We sent the previous acting secretary took that Red Team Report and sent it out to the department to say we would like to see your responses. Again i. C. E. , cvp, here are the results of that red team and then we would like to see the responses, some initial responses came back and gave them two different timeframes to do that. Initial responses came back. We started to implement those. And a response will be forthcoming as well. We try to do a number of things to improve the program. Weve heard from the chairwoman and others about access to council. We continue to look that the. Everyone who comes into mvp receives a medical screening each and every time they come into that program. If theres three or four times theyre coming back across the border to go to Immigration Court, every time theyre look at a medical screening. Every time theyre meeting with uscis officers. May i interrupt . Time is so limited. Youre continuing to look at access to counsel . Yes. What are you looking at . What can you do . Of course they have access to counsel. Its been an issue were discussing with Committee Staff and others is how do we continue to improve on that . One thing is we have a know your rights video, very specific to the mvp Court Process that does not occur in Immigration Courts. Its a continuous running video of know your rights. Committee staff and chairwoman has asked if we could do that in person. Were look at that with our operational components, something thats not done in domestic Immigration Courts today. I want to interrupt for a minute. I was in laredo last week and i was concerned that the know your rights video was shown on a Small Television in a room with fans so loud it was very difficult for migrants to hear or understand. So this is obviously unacceptable and must be addressed immediately. I dont know if youre aware of that. I have not heard that specific concern about the television and the fans, but i made a note of it, so well take a look at it. Additionally, yesterday at your hearing before the Senate Appropriations committee stated many migrants in the mvp program are not showing up for hearings, and you attribute that to a lack of a valid asylum claim. Do you have analysis to justify that claim . Can you provide that to the committee . I think my comment is again were seeing roughly 50 of folks who dont show up to continue their immigration proceedings in the program. Thats roughly the same that we see with interior courts or interior proceedings as well. So, part of that is not having a claim. Some can simply choose to not be part of the program any longer. If they dont like how the program is going, dont like the wait, they can choose and leave. Thats hard data to have. Theres a number of reasons why an individual may not continue to proceed with their immigration proceedings under the mvp program. My comment was to draw the parallels between sort of the noshow rate we see in the interior and specifically what were seeing at mvp courts as well. I would like to see if theres a better analysis to see why theyre not showing up. And if theres something we can do to improve the system. We ask because weve been made aware of several of the factors that impact mvp migrants ability to appear for the hearings. Lack of understanding of the process, shelters are far from the border, the requirement to be present by 4 00 a. M. At our ports is often both logistically challenging and unsafe, migrants may not know how or have the ability to communicate with the u. S. Government, that they need to postpone due to Health Reasons or that the migrants have been kidnapped. It seems there are many reasons that some may not appear for the hearing, and our system, it seems to me, should protect those who need at the most. I would hope that we could avoid jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions and give us a better understanding of where we go from here. I see my time is almost up. Thank you. I would just say that we continue to work with a number of ngos regarding the program, making sure they have enough information. Theyre also communicating with the migrants in the mvp program. Well continue to do that. One thing i did shortly after becoming in the chair, we heard a number of folks saying they didnt have access to our ihf facilities, so ngos, nonprofits, Catholic Charities and others who wanted to understand better about these facilities. Weve done that. They can now come into these areas and even though they may not be part of the proceedings, they may not be part of that, they can see whats going on. Again, were not trying to hide anything. Want to make sure we can do this in a safe environment. Well continue to work with the committee and staff to see how we can improve this program, make sure that folks understand what the program is about and what the procedures are. So i commit to doing that with you. Thank you. Thank you, madam chair. Miss granger . Thank you. As i said, i was at the mcallen border station on monday and i heard from your people on the ground. The border crossings are down from your peak of last year. The crisis hasnt passed, and criminal organizations continue to make this out of trafficking people and drugs. I visited the Central American countries called the northern triangle that weve referred to people coming across our border and also to mexico. I know youre recently in honduras. Can you tell us, give an update on what those countries are doing to address the human trafficking, the smuggling and the root causes of this problem of migration . I was in honduras for the 12th ministerial. It was my third one in this chair but probably my sixth one overall, being part of that. We have agreements with northern triangle countries, all three of them, on Border Security, information sharing and asylum capacity. Were doing a number of initiatives to build their capacity. Its a regional solution. Its a regional problem. And they understand that. And they are putting resources to those agreements as well. So, we continue to see progress. We continue to see the collaboration is certainly a lot stronger than it has been in the past. Its not only the northern triangle government of mexico continues to step up and continues to do additional, i would say, enhancement operations on making sure that they address the illegal flow of migrants in their country as well. Part of the effort here, the department, in addition to some of the programs weve talked about, we are also looking at the source in these areas. What do they need from a security and stability . Part of that equation is about the prosperity in those countries, knowing everyone recognizes those countries are more prosperous. Economic situation improves their individuals in those countries will stay there and that illegal flow line the pockets of the cartels will reduce or eliminate all together. So, through other elements, u. S. Government, department of commerce and others. Were also looking at Economic Prosperity investments in those regions to, again, build up those economies and the like. Theres a number of things were doing with the northern triangle in addition to, again, all the programs that were doing at the border as well. Weve helped them or tried to help them in the past, the leadership in those countries did not do what we wanted them to do with our efforts. The difference i saw in whats happening with mexico in helping us, whats going across our border was really very evident and making a huge difference. Do you agree with that . I do agree. Its almost night and day. You look back two years ago on the cooperation we have with these governments, up and down from northern triangle. We also included just recently into our ministerial costa rica and panama. Expanding those that are participating, knowing its much larger than just the northern triangle. The department continues to see a number of populations crossing the southwest border, brazilians, ecuodarians and others. We need to involve all the countries along the route and others to address this problem. So well continue to look at that. I would agree that weve seen quite a bit of improvement from all the countries involved. And theres just a number when several years ago we were counting immigrants coming across our border from 51 countries. How many countries are we tracking now . Its much higher than that. I wouldnt say its someone from every country, but its much higher than 50. Thank you. Thank you, madam chair. Mr. Secretary, thank you again for the work that you do, your men and women. I appreciate it. I live on the border, so i spend a lot of time with your men and women, Border Patrol, airmen, marines, i. C. E. I appreciate the work that they do. You mentioned in your statement about the coronavirus. Since february 2nd, cvp refused entry to 14 travelers at the ports of entry, 97 preclearance and it goes on, including 319 chinese nationals that were attempting to enter illegally. About 194 were in my area of the rio grande valley. So again i appreciate what youre all doing. My question is, is there anything extra we need to do to protect our men and women in doing their work . I know theres protocols and theyve explained it to me already. Is there anything else that the committee can help you to make sure we protect the men and women at the front lines . Thats certainly one of my primary concerns when dealing with the coronavirus, not what were doing only to protect the American People but cvp officers, Border Patrol officers and tsa officers at our airports. They have all the equipment that they need and thats ppes. Were providing them a lot of training and medical information from the cdc on with an we know about the virus to date. Best practices on what we know about other coronaviruses that are similar. As the medical strategy from cdc or hhs changes, we may have to change what were doing with our officers. As of today, we feel very confident in the measures that have been put in place from a variety of different perspectives, including the protective wear, gloves, masks and things like that. Well continue to do more if the virus and our strategy demands we do more. I will say that the department continues to spend funding that we didnt, perhaps, allocate for this virus. And well do that right now. We have the money that we need. We may be moving money around in this fiscal year and well have to see, depending on where this proceeds. Any dollars you want to take from the wall over to that, would be happy to make that transfer. No, im just kidding. Mr. Secretary, we were down there inlaredo this weekend and your men and women are doing a great job. Sometimes we might disagree with the administration on policy. Policy is one thing, but the men and women, we support your men and women. Thank you. Just want to make sure that you understand that comes from my committee. Second of all, the border wall, because its coming down to my ar area. My understanding, its been replacement or secondary miles but now youre going into a lot in texas where its owned by private Property Owners and one of the things that i or the committee, we added in the appropriations was to make sure that we mitigate environmental impact. Sometimes its symbolic. I say this with all due respect, because none of the people ive talked to have given me a pleasant conversation. Its basically we have to do this because Congress Told us. But i havent seen, except one area youre working with on the bulkhead in laredo, i havent seen a place with the land owners. As you know gao was in laredo, in the valley the last couple of days to make sure we dont abuse Eminent Domain when it comes to private property rights. I want to make sure there is a sincere intention to make adjustments to the design. I dont want to symbolic, we checkmark, checkmark, checkmark. You certainly have my commitment. I spoke to acting commissioner about that as well. And you have his commitment as well. Yes. We have seen that in downtown l laredo where were working with the city on perhaps alternative designs that meets their needs as well as ours. We will continue to do that. Obviously in the rgv valley where predominant private land is, department and army corps of engineers, doing the work on the ground, is out trying to survey the land, trying to assess title, trying to do a number of things as we look at constructing that border wall system. Yes, you certainly have my commitment to make sure we bring in the land owners, have that discussion. I think at times there will be some we just disagree with and will have to continue that process. But we want to be transparent about that. We want to let them know what our requirements are and what their concerns are and have that discussion. You have my commitment. Thank you, mr. Secretary. Mr. Palazzo . Thank you, madam chair. Thank you, mr. Secretary for being here today. We spend time as a congress as a whole talking about the southern border and what solutions we can bring to bear to stem this dangerous tide. One thing that is often overlooked is our maritime border. A goal line standard at our one yard line. Its great if we can get the stop. Where we need to stop smuggling of drugs is where they begin at their one yard line. I continue to brag on the security cutter with good reason, seizing millions of dollars of drugs routinely on patrols using the National Security cutter. To date, this committee has funded 11 of these multimission trips. With our men and women of the coast guard theyre taking these drugs off the ocean in bulk. Not just a couple of kilos hidden in a truck or carried on someones back but billions of dollars of hard drugs destined for our communities. Coast guard seizes more drugs than all other federal agencies combined. Coast guard has seized 2 Million Pound of cocaine, estimated street value of 26 billion. Mr. Wolf, i would appreciate if you can ko talk about your vision and using appropriated funds on drug smuggling in south and central america. Thank you. The coast guard certainly plays a vital role there. When we look at what they do, patroling from an intelligence perspective on the drug flow, drug traffic coming from south america in the caribbean, in the eastern pacific, im happy to report that it is the coast guard assets making those interdictions almost exclusively. Coast guard ships, helicopters as well as cvp helicopters and assets as well. An interagency, interdepartmental process, a number of intelligence comes into that. But the folks on the ground, or in this case on the sea that are making those interdictions are coast guard men and well. Im incredibly proud of what they do. Of course, you know, i would say that the u. S. Government doesnt have enough resources to to interdict all the drugs coming in from south america. If you put the outline of the u. S. On the eastern pacific in the caribbean, thats what coast guard patrols with a handful of ships and will continue to do that. But its a very challenging task. Well also say thats just one part of it. Obviously when they interdict, the drugs are critically important. Its also the investigators that are talking to those individuals, gleaning information, trying to bring sources and the like to, again, get at the issue at the source. Well continue to put resources into the interdiction. I would also say the investigation part of that process that we do across the country is vitally important. Dhs plays a role there with i. C. E. , Homeland Security investigators, dea and other elements of the u. S. Government. I agree 100 with your remarks. And once again, it reinforces why the National Security cutter is so important. I know several of us were disappointed that we had funding, this committee had appropriated funds for a 12th National Security cutter only to see the president s budget remove those funds. But they also went, in addition, they froze the Fast Response cutters. So, you know, removing these drugs before they make it into mexico is vitally important. Once it makes it into mexico its pretty much in america. You know, i think we can afford to, you know, fund these coast guard assets more, because these drugs are destroying our communities. Theyre destabilizing the countries in south and central america, probably leading to the mass migration that were seeing at our southern border. Its being driven by transinternational criminal organizations. Ill continue to work with the commandant, as i did during a little bit of the budget buildup of this one. The commandants priorities continue to be the security polar cutter and the budget request is funding to support a second one as well as the offshore patrol cutter. Those are two Capital Investments that the coast guard is focused on. Obviously they still very much believe in the National Security cutter and the mission that they have. Its a budget, like any other budget, where theres tradeoffs that have to be made. We want to make sure they have capability in the polar region as well as the new offshore patrol cutter capability as well. But well continue to work with congress on what the right priorities are, going forward. I agree. The polar security cutter and offshore patrol cutter are important. I think we need to maybe look at the demands that were putting on the coast guard and what theyre doing and protecting our Homeland Security, maybe we need to fund them more. Thank you. Madam chair . Miss ming . Thank you, madam chairwoman and Ranking Member for todays hearing. Thank you to all our Committee Staff for all the preparation and, of course, thank you to acting secretary wolf and your team for being here today. I wanted to ask about an incident that happened in my hometown in new york city where i. C. E. Recently shot an unarmed man who was not even a subject of a warrant. And two weeks ago, news outlets reported that the administration is deploying Border Patrol tactical unit, essentially a s. W. A. T. Team to raid sanctuary cities. You can understand that actions like this cause a lot of alarm for our constituents, both undocumented and documented from children to seniors, who fear that these units will further terrorize their and our communities. The tactical and operational steps involved with enforcement at the southern border are really different from the steps that these officers would need to take in a heavy populated urban area, especially like new york city. Has there been an update in policies and trainings for these bortac teams to ensure that theyre not engaged in unnecessary and excessive force, especially in urban areas . Sure. The individuals that, again, cvp is lending i. C. E. In this case for 90 days comes not only from bortac but ofo, the nonBorder Patrol parts of cvp. Its about half and half, about 50 and 50. All of those individuals that are deploying in a number of cities have specialized training that would support i. C. E. , ero officers going into these communities. Its very similar to what other federal agencies provide i. C. E. On a daily basis as well. Other federal agencies provide that as well. Theres misconception. These arent individuals that will show up in riot gear, riding down the street in a tank, which ive seen pictures of as well. Thats not the case. You probably wont be able to distinguish them any different from i. C. E. Ero agents or any other Law Enforcement agent that supports i. C. E. Theyll be in plain clothes, have the appropriate vest on they need to do their job but there to support i. C. E. As needed. Are there been previous deployments of teams like bortac in recent years . There has been deployment of cvp forces to assist i. C. E. Ill get you the exact number on bortac specific agents over the last several years. I dont have that number with me and what weve done in the past. We read from a New York Times article that the deployment reportedly will be from about february to may of this year. Just wondering why and how this timeframe was chosen. One of our concerns is because it is around the same timeframe as the census and its being carried out all throughout the country, as you know. Theres a lot of fear in our communities and in our districts, and the timeframe just makes it a lot more challenging for the Census Bureau to do their job, and people have misconceptions that they are not coordinating with Law Enforcement. Im wondering if you would sorry im so rushed and i dont have a lot of time. Im wondering if you would consider halting these raids so that the Census Bureau will not be seen as coordinating with Law Enforcement . I can tell you in all the discussions ive had and that ive had with commissioner morgan, lets say the timeframe where the coincidence of the Census Bureau is never factored into that Decision Making for us. Its never been brought up in any discussions ive been in. Ill take that back to the team to see what i can do to address any concerns about the census and see what can be done in these specific locations. Again, theres only about 6 to 7 cities, i believe, that these teams or hsi sorry are being supplemented. Sorry. Just want to get in one more quick question. A different topic. Trusted travelers program, a couple of weeks ago you announced that dhs is suspending the program, including global enry for u. S. Stit zens. Was there any attempt by dhs to coordinate and work with new york state officials in carving out these exceptions to the ban . As the law is currently written it does not allow any carve out. So we continue to be in touch, not only with the governor but other new york state officials to reach a solution. Im hopeful that we can. I will say in this were there Prior Communications before the suspension was announced . Yes. We communicated to new york state prior to, including a letter prior to the suspension. Again, we did not hear from them. New york, sorry, dmv has stated theres no criminal history information thats held exclusively in their database. Im wondering what criminal history data is only available through dmv . Whats the reason for the suspension . The information that we need for trusted Traveler Program but the wide range of Law Enforcement mission of the department goes beyond just criminal information. Theres other data in that dmv database thats absolutely critical, to vet a trusted traveler applicant. You have a dui thats perhaps not a felony conviction but have an arrest, that factors in to the addition making process on whether that trusted traveler warrants the ability of Global Travel or another program. Cvp needs for trust ed traveler. Cvp and i. C. E. Needs from a longstanding perspective. I. C. Homeland department is pulling over a car, they need to understand who is in that car, who it is registered, have a picture of that individual. Yiet now they can cannot do that. Its severely impeding the safety of new york residents. I yield back. Mr. Newhouse . Thank you, madam chairman. Acting secretary wolf, appreciate your presentation. I want to take a moment to use this as an opportunity to thank the men and women that work in dhs. And for the dedication to the mission in protecting our country. We appreciate that very much. And we look forward to continuing to be a partner with you. I wanted to talk a little bit about the role of the National Laboratories and what and how they can be an integral part of dhs work. I heard your response to mr. Fleischmanns question and i appreciate that. I dont have to tell you that we are facing an evolving number of threats both natural and manmade. A lot of Different Things that are coming at you. Im sure sometimes you feel like the little dutch boy with your fingers in the dam, but a lot of things are happening. Especially in areas like bio defense and Cyber Security as you mentioned. Right. One way weve been able to stay ahead of the game is through research and development. And thats certainly something that the National Laboratories, including the National Laboratory of my district, Pacific Northwest national lab, theyve been active and strong partners in bio defense and Cyber Security for a long time. I want to take a moment to extend you an invitation to come and see the laboratory and the work theyre doing and how we could integrate more into the responsibilities of the department of Homeland Security. Thank you for that. I will just say that we continue through our s t director, cwmd office, utilizing a number of resources to include the national labs. Specifically when we talk about corona, we have a facility outside of fed rirederick, mary looking at the virus, in conjunction with a number of other federal partners as well as outside entities. We have a lot of threats, as you indicated, needs and resources only go so far. How we utilize other elements of the u. S. Government, private industry and the like is absolutely critical to making sure we secure our homeland. I would be happy to dive into that further. Perfect segue into my more difficult question. With the science and Technology Directorate and mass destruction office. And as we talked about, theres continuing threats and challenges that we face daily. The labs seem very suited for this position and you talk about the integration of private sector technologies. Could you address this issue and speak to the rationale for these cuts . Relatively new office. Were going into our second fiscal year. Number of resources provided in fy20. So it helps them sustain their work and continues that for s t, i believe we fund in the budget request 5 of 10 of dhs centers of excellence, focused on National Priorities we have on detection there are tradeoffs we have to do. To resource men and women and making sure there are enough resources to continue to plan for, invest in and work with them on some of the longer solutions in technology solutions. I dont disagree. Cwmd office, right in the middle of our response to. Appreciate that. Certainly were asking people under you to accomplish an almost impossible task. I appreciate that. But as i said, we do have a lot of assets at our disposal and would encourage you to utilize them as fully as possible. Thanks for everything you do and appreciate you being here today. Thank you, madam chair i yield back. Mr. Agolar . Thank you, chairwoman and acting secretary for being here. Asylum seekers are forced to camp out as a result of dhs in policy implement by your agency. Asylum seekers are required to stay in mexico as they await their hearings. I permanently saw children and families who lack access to medical care and some were drinking out of water sources that had been exposed to e. Coli. Truly, truly awful conditions. And some of them living along the border that included kidnapping and extortion by cartels. Are you aware of the extreme violence along the border in regions where people are living because of the mpp policy . Yes, im aware of the number of statistics, the department of state warnings. Im aware of all the informatio information. Serious risk to kidnapping and other Violent Crimes . Im aware of anecdotal information about kidnappings. I dont have any specific information about the violence you described. My statement is more general. Im aware of the general violence. Lets get beyond anecdotal then. Ahuman rights identified 816 incidence of torture, rape and murder of Asylum Seekers september back to mexico. One woman from honduras was abducted by Mexican Police and raped. One man was sent back to mexico only to be assaulted and robbed at a local store. Asylum seeker from guatemala was sexually assaulted in front of her 4yearold son. So this is beyond anecdote al. This is not the only organization that has documented these incidents. The following findings, 8 out of 10 patients treated in laredo were eye Doctors Without Borders were victim of violence, 8 in 10. 43 of patients treated experienced violence in sven days before consultation with Doctors Without Borders. In 2019, patients treated returned to mexico through the program had been kidnapped and in october 2019, percentage of kidnappings among those returned increased by 75 . Can we move beyond saying this is anecdotal . This is real. Organized crime is playing a role along the southern border and is a direct correlation of mpp. Would you not agree with that . I would agree that the journey, and weve talked about it for a number of years, is very dangerous for a variety of Different Reasons theyre choosing to come to the u. S. Is a very dangerous journey. Theyre in it for the bottom dollar. Not all of them are paying smugglers. We can move beyond that seek those protections as close to home as possible so you dont have to make this dangerous journey as youre describing, congressman, tlut parts of mexico. As we speak specifically of mpp ill certainly address that but were working with other parts of the u. S. Government to provide resources. To date weve provided 20 million to the government of mexico for mpp shelters that include security so u. S. Government is going above and beyond on try iing to help the government of mexico provide these shelters along the mpp. Theres plenty more we can do. How much of the requested budget, as you mentioned i would call that humanitarian. Yes, sir. Work thats been done how much of the 126 million will be directed toward these humanitarian concerns at the border . Generally address the wellbeing of Asylum Seekers . That fupding comes from state department, who have different sets of funding and different sets of buckets they provide to unhcr. Everyone on the dias is aware of the different agencies responsible for this funding. Out of the 126 million, which is within your agency, none of that is going toward the wellbeing . Youre allowing it would be through state or other agencies that would provide the funding related to wellbeing . Right. Again they have the mechanisms to apply that funding. Obviously our funding comes with certain restrictions, making sure we apply that to our operations. We continue to work with state department to Fund Additional servi services at those mpp sites through unhcr, number of ngos that will go in there and continue to build that capacity and talk to the government of mexico about that. Appreciate that. Thank you, madam chair. Yield back. I can tell you that enhance ed the safety and security of my community. We reeve re moved thousands of violent criminals as a result of that program. I see the numbers you talked about here today, 4300 gang member members. As appreciative as i am of that, im also appalled that the sanctuary city concept endangers citizens back home by knot working with i. C. E. To remove these kind of criminals from our streets. I want to start with that. What is being inspected through the nonintrusive expectation process . I would probably need to get back to you countrywide. We have funding that congress proceeded in fy19 and 20 were deployed over 400, higher systems that will go mainly at the southwest border to interdict those drugs and other illegal camera band. I have much more clarity on those numbers. I would like to see that. I think the numbers are pretty low is what im hearing. And really if you think about it, these ports particularly where we have these containers coming in, its almost like the trojan horse going into the city of troy. Were inviting these things in. Right. We have no idea whats inside a lot of them. Last year, we appropriated 60 milli million. Whats in this years budget . Maintenance and support of that. We had 60 million as you indicated, congressman, fy 19. Thats a total of over 660, large, medium and small scale. Thats a lot of money, lot of equipment. If not all of that fully deployed by 2022. Its a little over 140 million for support. I dont care if its replacement or new but how many miles total . 146 miles cleated new border system, because it provides agent news capabilities theyve not had before. And how much have we invested in the technologies to help with that . Its cameras, roads, we have 213 miles under construction, another 414 in the preconstruction phase. We are getting at it as quickly as possible. You talked today im sorry. That threw me off. One last question. President in pbr has asked for 2 billion for border border wall. We know it has had an impact with the technology because we have seen the numbers going down as you addressed earlier. Is that adequate for you . It is. With the fy 21 budget request and the numbers we have in 17, 18, 19, 20, we will have over 570 miles of what that funds, we will continue to look at what we need, along with Congress Going forward. We have a Border Security Improvement Plan that cbp is working on to update, i believe congress has the last one. I think some saw this as a kind of a pullback from the commitment and its absolutely not. Its still i think you have to look at the totality of funding that weve gotten over the last several fiscal years and its not just looking at the president s budget request for one year. You have to look at it in totality. Right. Thank you. I yield back. Mr. Price. May, madam chair woman, welcome, mr. Secretary. Let me ask you another question that has multidepartment aspects but nonetheless one that i hope you can answer because Homeland Securitys role is a key one. It has to do with refugees. In fiscal 20, the twaigs set a refugee admission ceiling of only 18,000 individuals. Thats the lowest refugee admission cerealing in the programs 40 year history and it comes on the heals of two previously historically low ceilings in fiscal year 18 and 19 as well as the 2017 executive order which halted our entire Refugee Program for 120 days. Not only 18,000 refugee ceiling shockingly low, but currently, almost halfway through the fiscal year, the United States has admitted only about 5,000 refugees. Thats less than 30 of an already low ceiling. That puts our nation on track to admit a total of only about 10,000 refugees in fiscal 20, which would be a complete dereliction of our duty to the worlds most vulnerable, as deadly wars and political and religious persecution are increasing around the world, producing 70. 8 million forcibly displaced people worldwide currently, and 25. 9 million refugees. Now, weve all heard the reports of bureaucratic slow walking, administrative barrier, a lack of adequate staffing, bureaucratic rerouting of paperwork, drastic reductions in circuit rides, the closure of uscis international offices, socalled security measures, enhanced security measures, together all of this seems intentionally designed to prevent our nation from accepting more than a trickle of refugees. I hear about this at home because i have wonderful organizations, that have participated in refugee resettlement, they want to fulfill their promise. They hope to integrate refugees into north carolina, but they get weeks, they go weeks without seeing a single refugee. This is totally, totally unprecedented. So how you can explain the fact that were almost halfway through the fiscal year and have admitted less than half, a third of the refugees that we pledged to take, in is my projection of 10,000 unrealistic, as to what this is going to look like at the end of the year . And this is taking place during the worst, one of the worst refugee crises in world history. And i thought about these various bands of administrative obstacles and do they really reflect some increasing danger . As you know, refugees have committed no terrorist act. None. Zero. In recent years. What leads you to conclude that the security measures have been inadequate, or whats going on . How has that changed . And if it has changed, why does our country seem unable to determine the danger without just stopping the flow entirely . Why do we have an appropriate vetting system to deal with this and yet do our duty, to fulfill our obl cation, as a member of the international community, to deal with this international crisis. Well, congressman, i would say that we are one of the only countries that distinguishes between refugees and Asylum Seekers, so i think you have to look at the protections that we provide and the totality of not only the refugees that the department is vetting but also the Asylum Seekers that we process each and every year. Looking at that in the totality, we do allow historic numbers to provide protections to historic numbers, regarding the 5,000 historic number, like what . How does that youre telling me that really invalidates the importance or the significance of these historically low numbers ive cited, if thats the case, please correct the numbers. Again, im happy to get you the numbers, where we look at both the refugees, and asylums, Asylum Seekers and asylum cases that we adjudicate each year, and goy back to, i do back to my statement earlier, we are one of the only country, one or two others that distinguish between these two populations. And youre suggesting that our treatment and the protections that are very similar granted. A lot of us in the hearing this morning has to do with the treatment of asylum seeker, it is astounding that you would be claiming that our treatment of slau Asylum Seekers somehow compensates our shutting doors to refugees. I really would like to see those numbers, and i just dont understand the argument, that somehow were doing so much to open the door to Asylum Seekers, that these refugees, these disgraceful refugee numbers are meaningless, or need to be corrected. Im happy to again get with the department of state on your 5,000 versus the 10,000 projection. We obl play a role in vetting the refugees, but that is a department of state program that im happy to touch base and provide some more information on where they see those numbers going, and i have no information that says we will not reach the 18,000. On what increased danger is this space . I mean am i wrong about the failure of the administration or anybody else . Because the facts arent there, to associate refugees with acts of terrorism. So whats the reasoning here for slowing this flow to a trickle . Is it a matter of security . Or is it Something Else . It is. I will say that a number of the security measures that we put in place in 17 and 18 were real. They were vulnerabilities in the system. There continue to be vulnerabilities in the system. Im not going to go into it in this setting but there continues to be vulnerabilities that we see in that program, that we want to address, we want to make sure that it continues but we need to make sure that the individuals that are coming here are fully vetted and that we understand who they are. So well continue to get at it. Well continue to increase not only the processing and the security vetting that we do, but making sure that we have resources dedicated to that. Thank you madam chairman. Ms. Wasserman schultz. Thank you, madam chair. Welcome, mr. Wolf. By way of reference you may not be aware that my role on appropriations is i chair the military construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations skmi skmkt so it is primarily my john job to make sure our Service Members and our veterans have everything they need both during their active duty service and once they leave active service. Im not sure you understand the burden on our appropriators as, in terms of the quality of life of our Service Members, and also making sure that we protect the billions of dollars in equipment that the United States funds every year to keep us safe. Because otherwise, why would your department steel 3. 6 billion in military Construction Funding that was approved, asked for, and signed by the president into law, and 2. 5 billion in defense money, last year, the president s border wall. And why would you steal a whopping 3. 8 billion in defense funds this year. That money was for f35 fighter jets and ospreys and aircraft and National Reserve and reserve equipment just to name a few. What that tells me is that the Trump Administration fears poor persecuted families coming across the border more than they fear russia, china, or any other foreign adversary. So after the administrations outright of theft of funding from our troops once before, how can you possibly justify requesting another 2 billion in congressionally appropriated funding for fiscal year 2021 and why would you bother requesting more funding through the regular order of the appropriations process when we both know that you are just going to break into the pentagon and steal it again, which you already have startsed to do during this fiscal year. What i would say, and i think the administration has been very clear on this, is that Border Security is National Security, so the president thats not my question. How is it more important than the money that i talked with secretary esper on multiple occasions and he is supportive of this funding for the border wall system. We continue to have great partners at d. O. D. , not only active duty but national guard, providing a number of capabilities on the southern border, it goes back to my initial comment, where Border Security is National Security and i think the president recognizes this, and it again is a whole government effort. I think the overwhelming majority of the American People, members of congress, and the military leadership, despite what you say about secretary esper, understands that protecting our troops, making sure that they are ready, protecting our overall National Security, and not just trying to unsuccessfully block poor people who are fleeing persecution from other countries, is much more, i would say, is a much more dire and significant National Security issue than putting up a lame wall that isnt going to keep dangerous people out anyway. And despite that, it is important to note for the record despite that this being the president s flag ship political issue, nearly all of the barriers that President Trump has built is replacement barriers, when he leaves office in january, he will be nowhere close to the southern Border Covering the southern border so he failed. You may not care, but i want people to know where this money is being stolen from. To pay for the absurd border wall. Keeping our troops children in rundown crowded schools in ft. Bragg and fort campbell. A replacement, a replacement for a moldy ratinfested Child Care Center at joint base andrew, the wall has taken money from a wildfire Flight Simulator in Southern California and a drone Pilot Training facility, it has sinkholes in that. I personally have traveled with many members of this subcommittee around the world, and looked at rusted hangars that literally have to have their doors bound together with wire, in order to make sure that they dont damage the billions of dollars that theyre designed to protect. This is a tiny example of the sacrificed project from the money you stole for this boondoggle of a border wall. Mr. Wolf, i know that the president doesnt care about the military enough to actually protect them and their family, but dont you agree that canceling necessary and overdue projects for our men and women in uniform is dep mental to their quality of life and readiness and dont you worry about the terrible precedence that this sets . Again, ive had numerous conversations with the secretary of defense im asking what you think. What i would say is that the violence that we see, and i have talked to Law Enforcement Community Across the southwest border, i think some of those comments trivialize the violence that they see that they have to come to. And putting a border wall to block that socalled, is more important than any of the money i would have to say we have priorities and we will continue to balance those. The president has made a decision, and we continue to operate and continue to build the border wall system reclaiming my time. What is evident is that mr. Trumps fake professed love of the military has been absent. It was all a scam. And this is what happens when you elect someone who, and allows that, and someone who is as inept as he is running the government that is the most powerful on earth protecting machine and women in uniform to protect it. It is called the catcracy look it up and i yield my time. I would say i yield my time. Chair woman, may i respond . Ive yielded back. Thank you. Youll have an opportunity to respond when we go to the second round. It completes the first round. Mr. Secretary, the fight guidance that vulnerable populations are not amenable to placement in the mvp program. Still sending pregnant women, persons with disability, including children and lgbt migrants back to mexico, in an unfamiliar case where a vast majority of the migrants, to wait months for the Immigration Court proceedings. Just a few weeks ago, vbp placed a family into the program that any reasonable definition should have been considered vulnerable, based on the medical condition of one of the family members, a 7yearold girl who has encephalopathy, a seizure disorder and severely developmentally delayed, she needs daily medication and still has seizures every ten days and has a Life Expectancy of only a few more years. Nevertheless, you refused to reverse the decision to place the family into mpp, so they will be in mexico for months, in squall id conditions, awading their immigration hearing. Your reasoning for not helping this child was reportedly that you did not want to contradict cbp field personnel. But this is not an operational issue. It is a policy decision, and you are the political appointee who makes policy decisions. Under current cbp guidance is a family like this really amenable to placement into mpp . A family with a child who has lifethreatening medical condition, and if not, who is considered medically vulnerable enough under cbp guidance to not be amenable to placement in the program . We certainly do allow our cbp officers guided by policy to make those decision and so part of that characterization is accurate. What i would also say is that when you look at populations that need emergent care, lifethreatening care, and we provide that in the paroles, cbp parole, i. C. E. Parole, individuals into the country every single day. We have to make the decision on, lots of times, is chronic illness, chronic disease, versus lifethreatening and emergent response that they absolutely need. And so our cbp officer, the port director, at those facilities make those decisions every day, guided by policy. Again, we talked about this, i know we talked about, it our staff has talked about this, happy to clarify, if you believe further clarification is needed but again, we want to make sure that we provide that latitude to our cbp, to our Court Directors to make that call on what is emergent, lifethreatening, versus what is just a chronic illness, that can be provided for in other locations as well. This is a chronic illness that the child has, which she has seizures every ten days. And needs this medication. And unfortunately, in choosing to send this chronically ill, severely disabled child to mexico, the department made no effort to ensure that she would get the treatment and the care that she needs. So you really think that it is okay for the department to wash its hands of the welfare of these returning migrants . We talk about this country, that country, so we send them there, but we just wash our hands, and you heard from mr. Augilar, the conditions under which they are living and what is happening to them. How do you again, i would not agree that we wash our hands of any matter. Any time theyre, i indicated earlier, they come back into the u. S. For those proceeding, they get medically screened each and every time they come back into the u. S. Sko each and every time, they get assessed again by medical, mostly contract professionals and cbp officers, about their condition. If its changed, if its worsened, every time they come back in, so i would disagree that we wash our hands of the matter. Were allowing cbp officers to to be there for weeks or months, and we do nothing to address the conditions, under which they are living, which have been already described by again, i would say were working with our department of state, and provided over 20 million for those facilities, to help, again, some of the ngos, unhcr and iom, go in there to construct those facility, to improve those facilities, to provide security for those facilities, so again, there is a number of things that the department is doing, not only our ourselves but again with some of our other agency colleagues to address mpp, to continue to improve the mpp program. Well, something is clearly not working, given what is actually happening. Do you have any metrics or other data to show that the cbp personnel understand and are following the guidance related to vulnerable populations . Data that shows that they understand . Im not sure i understand the question. Youre asking for data, how many folks they let in . No, that they understand how to evaluate whether or not someone should, or can be sent to mpp. I mean do you have that, do they understand what, do they have the guidance . Im happy to go back and look at both the guidance and the training theyre provided and were happy to provide that to the committee. I dont have that here with me today. I would appreciate that. Thank you. Because it appears that they do not. Mr. Fleischmannn. Thank you, madam chair. Mr. Secretary, again, i want to thank you for being here today and for your wellreasoned responses to our questions. Its really, youve got an arduous task carrying out the administrations requests, largely which i agree with, so i wanted to thank you and the men and women who are dedicated to doing that. As you know, Congress Passed the real i. D. Act more than 14 years ago. And the deadline for compliance is about to come up in october. From my understanding, a majority of Americans Still dont have a compliant i. T. And many dont even know they need one. My first question, sir, is what is the department doing to get out the message to the American People to make sure folks get a real i. D. , and ill ask, ive got a series of question, but well start with that one, sir. Thank you. We have a Robust Communications plan at headquarters and tsa, we have individuals engaged on that, reaching out to a number of stakeholders, particularly focused on the transportation industry, and the aviation industry, as you indicated, individuals that are wanting to fly commercially, in october, 2020, need to have a real i. D. , and they need to see that star on their drivers license, to do that. Unfortunately, right now, were about at 35 of i. D. S that we see out there in circulation, are real i. D. S, so that is a relatively low number. As we look to october, 2020, we believe that the states have had 14 years, as you indicated, Ranking Member, to roll this out, we believe thats enough time. This is a security issue. We encourage them to continue to issue cards in all 50 states and territories are come plooi, com not everyone is issuing cards, we still have some states not issuing real i. D. Cards. The prospect of their constituents in that particular state, a real i. D. By october of 2020 is probably fairly small so the state department is trying to did a number of initiatives. One action i took, think it was about a week and a half to two weeks ago to allow individuals coming into dmv to submit their documents electronically to dmv, before they arrive, 0 dmv can take a look at that, yes, these are the documents you need, or these are not the documents you need, and we can cut out some of the back and forth that we hear. We would like it do more. Were taking a look at more things that we can do. And we maybe back at congress at some point asking for some legislative relief to that law that was very preskip scriptive, 2006 law, very prescrape tive with no smartphones at the time so the idea of Electronic Exchange of information was not contemplated. Were asking information from all states on a monthly basis to determine, as we move closer to that october 20620 date what will be the state of compliance. Thank you. As a followup then, mr. Secretary, is the recognition that there may need some type of a request for additional time, for compliance by the states, on your part. On the part of the department. Does the department intend to develop any alternative screening procedures for airline passengers, on the airport, without a real i. D. Or acceptable alternatives beginning october 1st . So we talk about that issue quite often with tsa. Tsa as you know is, they dont struggle, they do a very good job, adjudicating the passengers that they have in line today, they are not set up, they are not resourced, to adjudicate dioxide i. D. S, thousands and thousands perhaps millions of passengers come october 2020. So yes, they continue to look at operational solutions. I will say none of those solutions are good. What we are focused on, the department is making sure that we get enough of the real i. D. S out there, into individuals hands, to continue to push that. What were doing today at tsa checkpoints is there is signage up, theres videos up, each tsa officer, when they get presented an i. D. Thats not real i. D. , they remind that passenger, you dont have a real i. D. , you should go and get it, and were also trying to push messaging that come october 2020, you need a real i. D. But there are other alternative forms. There is a passport, theres a military i. D. , there are other alternative forms that you could show up at the airport and utilize as well. So were trying to blanket our constituencies. Thank you, sir. My time is waning so ill be very quick. Customs and Border Protection has pursued a successful private public partnership. These deployments also create opportunities to im purchaprove efficiency and effectiveness of your operations. These achievements have been an important test bed for these technologies that can be utilized and other applications within the cbp and throughout dhs. Very quickly, sir, how do you perceive the development of facial Recognition Technology expanding in fiscal year 2021, and beyond, entry for sea and land borders. Cbp continues to look at the exit part, part of the Entry Exit Program using a variety of bio metrics. Tsa i would say is also very interested in learning what cbp is doing from their pilot phases. Theres also looking at some of that bio metric technology, on how they can apply that at checkpoint as well. To utilize again some of the experience, some of the backbone of that. So my job at the department is seeing what centers of excellence that we may have at christmas that are doing bio metrics and facial recognition, particularly on exit side and how we can scale that across the department at tsa and some of our other travel programs that we use. Again, i think any time youre talking about bio metrics and facial recognition, weve got to talk about privacy, and that is something that the department keeps very focused on. Makes sure as we roll out these programs that were keeping u. S. Citizens privacy protected, Civil Liberties protected, and thats something that we hear about at the department as well with these programs. Thank you. And i yield back. Mr. Quellar. Thank you, madam chair. Again, mr. Secretary, appreciate the work that you and the men and women do. We support them. Sometimes we disagree on the policy, but thats nothing with the support of our men and women. Let me go back to our wall issue, in our area, one. Things that i would ask you, when you look at a map from washington, d. C. , and look at the border, it is so easy to say i want new miles here, new miles over here, it is very easy to do that but once you drill in and see whats there and the people who have lived there and some people who have lived there for generations, you see some historic areas, for example, one of the areas that yall are looking at is the rancho which is a National Historic site, in in saint ignacio texas. Saint ignacio in 1972 was listed on the National Hedge industry of historic places. And im looking at the Cultural Resources web page on that and just ask you to make sure that we really follow the rule and the spirit on that. Ive added language, weve added language to say no funds will be used on historical cemeteries, chapel, and i think there are six different exceptions that weve been able to add there. So i would ask you, just to not look at this from washington, it is so easy to, for members of congress, or administrators to just look at it and just see a border. It is a lot more. There are real people there. There are real historic areas. I would ask you to please take a look, and include the Community College there, i mean ive been in there, there is the old historic fort there, where the army used to have this fort, and theyre already asking right away, a request to have access, and its right there by this historic fort. So i would ask your folks to just be a little bit more sensitive to look at that, number one. And then if i can ask you a second question, and ask you to answer that, when i fish, b finish, but the other thing is the two things that mexico wanted from the United States which is the usmca, which we have done, we have passed that, but the other thing is to help them stop the illegal arms from going into mexico, and i know there has been different attempts and i had the chair woman down there, we were talking to mexican official, and they said thats our number one issue. I dont know if you can come up with an idea, because i know there has been differing thoughts that we looked at, that we put some sort of technology, that we put personnel, i know, because most of it is going north, of course, but if there is Something Else we can do, i really would appreciate your thoughts on that. Finally, the last question is, mpp. The city of laredo, id like to meet the person who made this decision for you, you were not here, but the city of laredo offered them for one dollar, 18 months of a facility that is right there. We met with them on a thursday. By monday morning, they just disregarded everything we said. When i asked them how much money were going to spend, they couldnt tell me, a venue, they didnt want to tell me, and actually, it was, it literally would be a 70 million contract, 35 million in laredo, where they put this in an area that is go ith toing to be, that has flooded in the past and the International Water commission gave the okay and they started doing that, i called the commissioner, she had no idea, a little bit after that, they had given the okay. I mean i can understand you all are moving fast, it was before you were there, but one dollar, for 18 months, a facility that would have been a better place for yall, better place for the people that are coming in through the mpp program, but they decided to spend 35 million to put tents there. Now, they said, well, we dont know how many people are going to come in. You know the numbers. 50 of them are never going to show up. I can tell you why. Some of them thought they were going to walk in and say hey, i go in, right into the United States. And except for cuban, venezuelans, people from other places, africa, that travel a long way, the rest are saying, i thought i was just going to go in, and enter the u. S. That is one of the successes of the mpp. But i just cannot understand, when the city of laredo was able to say we would get this done as fast as you wanted for one dollar, and they, and i really would like to meet your person, to say why were you willing to spend 35 million in laredo, when they could have been done for one dollar. I would like to meet that person. Nobody seems to tell me, nobody wants to take the responsibility. But 35 million is wasted taxpayers dollars. And again, im not blaming you, mr. Secretary. I look forward to working with you. But its just a little frustrating. Well, i appreciate, thats the first time ive heard that, with laredo, with the facility, the mpp, or the facility, and that contract, so ill take a look, ill certain inquire and see if there were valid reasons, or not, in that. On the southbound weapons, yes, that is a topic of discussion that we have often with the government of mexico. Ive talked to ag barr about it as well, i think there is obviously that the department can do from a cbp perspective, as well as an i. C. E. , hsi perspective, on the investigation front, but we also need atf, d. E. A. , we need other agencies pulling together, with dhs, and with the department of justice. And commissioner morgan has thought this through, and is outlining a program to inform, or sorry, increase southbound, its a its inspections but also investigations as well. Inspections are good but easily defeated as im sure you know, you set up a checkpoint and word gets out and you just go around. Try to get it at the source and trying to get it, if theyre buying weapons in bulk, and you know, other places in the country, and in oklahoma, and kansas, and elsewhere, trying to work with the atf, to determine those types of purchases to see, and tracking those, and trying to get it at the source that way, so theres a number of things were doing both on the detection side, but also trying on that investigative side. Give aus plan and well work with you on it. Well talk about the wall at a later time. Thank you. Mr. Secretary. Mr. Polanco. Thank you, madam chair. Real quick, something that i like to bring up in these hearing, whether it is d. O. D. Or Homeland Security is a conversation about the jones act. Are you familiar with the jones act . I am. Im familiar with it. I think im been one of the most outspoken advocates of in my ten years of serving in congress, because i believe it to be truly important to our National Security, but i would like to briefly hear in your own words why you think the jones act is important. Well, certainly and to protect the jones act, and not to weaken it with waivers. Right. So obviously the jones act there is to make sure that we protect u. S. Businesses, u. S. Interests there, that provide those capabilities, along the coast, to offshore facilities, and so we have jones act there, to protect that. Im a supporter of that. Strong supporter of that. Obviously cbp has a role when we talk about waivers to that. I think historically, cbp has offered very, very few waivers, if at all, and a couple of those are in extraordinary circumstances, and i know it was during some hurricanes, back in 17, i believe it was harvey, that we issued one, regarding when a pipeline went down to make sure that we can continue to move refined fuel and elsewhere. And so what you will find as far as my approach is im a believer in the jones act. Cbp has to adjudicate each request for a potential waiver coming in. I know cbp did make some definiational changes back in october of 19, i believe. Working with industry. And i think that was a twoyear process. So happy to continue to have those discussions, to see if theres other tweaks that we need, that need to be made and i know they engaged in a number of constituents before they rolled that out. Well, thank you, and i appreciate your comment, and i know your predecessors were pretty much on the same note that the jones act, is vitally important to protect americas maritime industry. And it is an extremely important to our National Security commandants, admirals, generals have all agreed with your assessment as well. Real quick, we hear Border Security is National Security. That is so true. Ive had the pleasure of serving under five different president s in uniform. As a member of the reserve, or the national guard. And i have to tell you, that this president , three short years, he made a commitment to rebuild our military, strengthen our nation, and put america first. And he has fulfilled, and he is fulfilling those commitments. And i think the majority of the American People see that. And i think its kind of a shame that if some of the people on the other side of the aisle would put National Security and the American People ahead of partisan politic, and you wouldnt have to be, in the terms of my colleague from florida, using terms like stealing, or robbing, from d. O. D. Hes putting the American People first. Hes choosing our National Security. And hes doing what he thinks is right. And i agree with him. But i do believe, if the others would fund the Border Security, the barriers to technology, to boots on the ground, as well as our needs for our department of defense, then we really wouldnt be having this conversation. But i do know you were somewhat rudely cut off, and if you would like to make any comments to my colleagues, her remarks, or to mine. I would say, as you indicated, President Trump, you will find no bigger supporter of both the military and the men and women at the department of Homeland Security. So that is first and foremost. And we certainly thank the president for everything that he does for the department. I will say, again, Border Security is National Security. And whether its building a border wall system, understanding and knowing and vetting whos coming into this country, the goods that are coming into this country, is job number one for the department. So whether again, were talking about a border wall system or were talking about travel restrictions that have to reduce the threat or vulnerability and understanding who is coming in, we talked about the Refugee Program, making sure we have the right security protocols in place, that is job number one for the department and for the administration. So again, the department is doing all that it can, to increase the security, understanding whos coming into this country. There are vulnerabilities out there that we are addressing through a variety of programs. But as i said earlier, it is not a tag line. Border security is National Security. Im not sure that, before this administration, that was all, that was made abundantly clear, but again, i think under President Trump, he has made that abundantly clear time and again. I agree. Border security is National Security. Its a nobrainer. And id like to also say that the morale in our nations military is the highest that ive ever seen it under this president , because he is focused on the men and women in uniform, their families, as well as fulfilling the commitments to our veterans, to make sure that they have the health care that they deserve, and that theyve earned, and so id like to also just say, you know, you have a huge mission, securing and protecting our homeland, so thank you for your work, and thank you to the tens of thousands of dedicated employees under your watch. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Price . Thank you madam chairman. Picking up on the last discussion, you would agree, wouldnt you, mr. Secretary, that the considered judgment in the congress in writing the military construction appropriations bill is also about National Security. I would. And that there is a burden of proof on the president or anyone else who would come in and divert that funding, the prerogatives of the congress notwithstanding, for a preferred project down on the border, presuming, presuming to judge that that vision of National Security trumps the best judgment of the congress, with respect to the military construction appropriations bill. That, youre okay with that . I would certainly agree that it is not only the president s decision, obviously, its informed by what you do here in congress, the funding that you pass, and the president s budget, as well as authorizing bills, so yes, its a shared responsibility. Shared responsibility that we need to figure out how to assert sooner rather than later. Lets me ask you a quick question, to which i hope you can give me a reassuring answer and then i want to turn to a somewhat more complicated matter, that is this renewed travel ban. But first, the question of earthquake recovery assistance in puerto rico. As you well know, there was a devastating series of earthquakes in december that caused further damage it an island already damaged by previous disasters. The president quickly declared a major disaster, based on the earthquakes on january 16th. He did limit puerto ricos eligibility for assistance to debris removal and emergency protective measures. In briefings, since then, fema has acknowledged the damage from the earthquakes more than meets the criteria to make puerto rico eligible for assistance to repair or replace damaged facilities. So i am asking you, why hasnt the disaster declaration been extended to include the repair, or replacement of damaged facilities and when we can anticipate that it will be i can certainly followup with the fema administrator gainer on that front. Im sorry . You say you will follow up . I will follow up. Obviously those requests, those operations come through fema through from this case, from the governor of puerto rico, so i will look into that. I dont have specific information on why certain categories of that funding, i understand what the president approved, i think youre talking about additional categories. Im talking about what would normally be, what would normally be included in such a declaration. Of course, fema looks at any declaration, any request for funding under the stafford act. Obviously that is not a check. They go through a series the governor requested this over a month ago, january 11th, as i understand, but the point is, why wouldnt this be routinely done . Were talking about fema assistance that applies to a disaster of this sort, your own fema officials readily acknowledge that the damage meets the criteria, so why not maemd that declaration . Again im happy to work with the fema administrator to get more information. Fema assesses each request that come in from the governor in this case, look can at, and doing the analysis and determining whether it meets the thresholds shall and if it does, making a recommendation to the president. So we will continue to do that. Thats a process that has been long in place. Happy to follow up with fema and see where they are in the process. Norm tally there is not a point of delay. There are other points of delay. But we would appreciate a very Quick Response on that. And hopefully a favorable amending of the declaration. My time is moving right along here so i want to pose the question of the expanded travel ban and maybe complete is in the next round. As you know dhs has announced new travel restrictions on an interesting list of countries, i cant make, it includes kyrgyzstan, large and strategic countries, in africa, nigeria, tanzania and again the original restrictions are maintained on iran, libba, syria, somalia, yemen, north korea, and venezuela. Thats a huge number of countries. The muslim ban revised as you might say and expanded and we all know the hardships these pose, these bans pose and denies the opportunity for people to reunite with their families, denies the opportunity for personal and Educational Development and lifesaving medical care and so on. It should be a heavy, heavy burden of proof on imposing or maintaining this sort of ban. So i have three interrelated questions. And maybe we will have to wait until the next round. One, why are these countries singled out . What is the thread connecting this seemingly incoherent list. Two, even if there are legitimate security concerns and there may well be, why a travel ban . What happened to normal diplomatic interactions and other avenues of dealing with this . The draconian remedy of a travel ban, is it really the best remedy . And ill have some other questions as a followup but we can wait because i know my time has expired. Mr. Rutherford . Waiting on the clock. Thank you, madam chair. Mr. Secretary, i want to go back, just one moment, to the ports and containers, coming in, and being screened, i want to make sure that when we get that information on what percentage is actually being screened at this time, there are some new and emerging technologies out there that i think has the capability to really get us to where i think congress set the goal at 100 a few years ago. And were nowhere near that, is my understanding. But so i look forward to working with you. Again, one of the reasons i took that back is i want it make sure that we get you the right information. Obviously we do a number of screenings overseas at various ports. We also do targeting information to identify those high risk cargo. Again, when we talk about targeting, sometimes we talk about screening cargo. So happy to work with you and your staff to understand the specific data sets that you are looking for and be happy to get back to you on that. Thank you. On another issue, the state of florida right now is looking at some legislation to possibly require everify across the state, and one of the concerns that ive heard is that everify system has some drawbacks, the time i think to get responses and that sort of thing. Can you talk a little bit about any improvements or enhancements that may be coming for the everify system. That is a system that i think your comments are spoton, on that. Weve heard from a number of business communities that talk about the difficult nature of that program. Not only using it, but getting results back, so we have a number of initiatives under way, at uscis, which runs that, which runs that program. I will say that we look at the voluntary nature and use of that program, versus the mandatory use of that, and how do we do that, and the imposition that that would place on companies, balance that with making sure that workers are protected as well. So it is a, its a balance that we continue to look at, we continue to review on a number of our different programs. We provide a lot of i would say Technical Assistance on a lot of different pieces of legislation that target everify, but again, happy to maybe provide you a forward briefing, we have an office at uscis that thats all they do is everify. I would love to hear about that, as were moving forward with that. So thank you. Thank you for that. And this kind of blends into maybe, i think can you talk a little bit about just, i mean obviously, weve got the 2020 elections coming up, i see 1. 1 billion dedicated here for sisa, in addressing not just the election issue, but obviously the Cyber Security for communications and a lot of other situations as well. Can you talk about, is that going to be sufficient for that, for those innovations that we need to move forward with, through sisa . It is, the president s 21 budget request fully supports the missions of sisa and whether that, the priorities that they have, include federal Cyber Security, that is protecting the federal networks and Election Security as were in the 2020 cycle, soft target security, supply chain security, agz security and the like. So theres a number of priorities that cisa has, we talk about Election Security, afternoon that is front and center, as we continue this year, so it is going above and beyond. We saw improvements made over 16, as we went into the 18 election, one of the most safe, security elections that weve had. We will continue that progress, in 20. And theyre doing that in a vaefrt of different ways. Theyre providing no Call Services to secretary of states, who control the election systems in individual state, providing those same services to political parties, to campaign, to every campaign, and some choose to take them up, some choose not. Trying to educate voters, voters have a play and a responsibility here, when we talk about our elections. Trying to make sure that they are, can identify perhaps disinformation, or information thats not from a trusted source. So we are continuing to try to educate them. And then there are some other operational things that were doing such as contesting and the like. So trying to do, to cover the wide variety of services that state and locals need but i will say that cisas primary role and responsibility in Election Security is to push those resources and those tools to the local, state and election officials. And theyre doing that better today, than they have ever before, and in 16, very few relationships between the department of Homeland Security, and secretaries of state, and today, all 50 states, were talking to all 50 state, over 2300 jurisdictions, so we feel very, very good at where were at at this point. And i know the supervisor of elections that ive talked to are very appreciative of the cooperation and assistance that theyve got. And ill tell you this. I want to thank you all also for paying great attention to the Emergency Communications program for Public Safety and that whole repackaging, as a Law Enforcement officer, first responder, like our fire, and rescue, and others, we obviously, we, our lives rely on that communication, and i think yall are doing a great job in addressing that issue, and i thank you for that. I yield back. We will have a third round. Before i ask my question, i just want to go back to the whole issue of that 7yearold little girl, as a mother, i just cant accept that we would send a 7yearold child who is extremely ill, has uncontrollable seizures, back to mexico, in the deplorable conditions that have been described there, so what im hoping that i can get a commitment from you, to work with me, and to work with my office, and see about the possibility of having a qualified medical personnel outside of the Operational Agency review such medical records, and also to work with us to define what is medically vulnerable. Perhaps working with your policy office, and the departments chief medical office on a definition. So again, i certainly understand the issue, as a father of two young boys, i, this is personal to me as well, and i would say for our cbp officers that have to make these decisions every day, theyre not easy decisions, so i understand the concern, happy to work with yourself and the Committee Staff to address any daylight between the policy guidance out there, and the decisions that they make every day. So happy to continue to have a dialogue about that. Thank you. Mr. Secretary, we continue to receive damaging reports about unacceptable substandard conditions at i. C. E. And cbp detention facilities. For example, at i. C. E. , the detention center, the conditions for several months were so bad, they transferred out all i. C. E. Detainees with chronic medical conditions. And this is not a new problem. There are welldocumented divisions over many years, that range from nutrition to medical care, to due process issues, and even basic humane treatment. And we have seen some of these deficiencies during our visits to facilities across the country. But the problems persist. And as the size of the population increases, they appear to be getting worse. As we have discussed improving the quality of care for migrants and dhs custody, is an area in which we can, and should be able to make progress together. In our fy 2020 bill, we provided resources to i. C. E. Office of professional responsibility to hire additional inspectors, with a goal of increasing inspections from once every three years, to twice per year. We also significantly increased funding for the inspector general, and for the office of civil rights and civil liabilities, with direction to use those resources, for Immigration Enforcement, and detention oversight. To help ensure that this enhanced oversight actually results in changes to the quality of care that is provided to the people in dhs custody, we also establish and funded a new ombudsman for immigration detention. My question is, what is the status of establishing this new Ombudsman Office . And because it is critical, that the ombudsman, and the new office be widely perceived as fair and objective, and for the ombudsman to meet the professional criteria established in the fy 2020 bill, what guarantee can you give us that you will do Everything Possible to ensure that the first ombudsman will in fact meet these criteria. Absolutely. You have my commitment that they will. So we are in the process of standing that up, as you know, we have a working group, thats going to come back, from 90 days, from when that bill was passed, which i believe is the middle of march, march 14th, to come back with a plan for the office, sort of a, not only a strategic plan, but more of an operational plan, how theyre going to staff, what its focus, what are the priorities. I look forward to getting that, and we will certainly come and talk to the committee about that and yourself about that plan. The idea after that 90 days is to make sure that that office is up and running within six months. Im going to see what we can do, once i get that plan, to try to shorten that time frame. I think that we can. And of course, during that, after that 90 days, we will start to look at, were already starting to try to identify who might run this office in the long term. So we want to make sure that we get professional folks in there that have a background not only in detention but detention standards that come from this community, to be the most successful on the job. Okay. So the ombudsman will be reporting directly to you, so that they will. So you will have an unfiltered window on detention conditions. Correct. And just based on your comment, i take it that you are committed to ensuring that this new ombudsman will be used to improve the conditions at dhs detention facilities, is that correct . Thats correct. As the committee and the congress directed. Thank you. No further questions. Just want to thank the secretary for his testimony today. I yield back. Mr. Price . Thank you, madam chairman. Mr. Secretary, let me return to the question i was articulating when my time ran out. Because it is an important question. And ill just repeat it very briefly. Im asking about the expanded travel ban, which now has reached large proportions affecting, by our calculation, about 300 million people. And i was asking you about the newlytargeted countries. What, are they unique . Are they being singled out as examples . Or are there unique problems here . Whats the nature of this seemingly incoherent list . Secondly, if there are legitimate security concerns, and im aware there may well be, if theyre legitimate security concerns, with these country, and the way they handle security, is a travel ban the way to disagree with them, to express disagreement, and above all, to secure improvement . Is a travel ban, should we see it just as a punative measure, designed to single out these country, and somehow punish them . Or is a travel ban somehow designed to fix the problem . It looks like a blunt instrument. Im assuming that the reason for each of these countries being included is not the same. So the question is, does one size fit all in terms of a remedy . Or are we just singling them out and doing that in a punitive way . Or is this actually a remedy . And then thirdly, assuming its a remedy, just giving the benefit of the doubt to the policy, it seems strange on the face of it. How are you addressing a National Security concern if the travel ban doesnt even apply to nonimmigrant faces, individuals who receive immigrant visas are already highly scrutinized, and thats, theres presumably are very, very, if this is about security, there are very stringent vetting procedures in place, but youre not applying this to nonimmigrant visas, so as a practical matter, how is sh supposed to work so those are three questions that i hope you can help us understand. I would start by saying that understanding who comes into the country is first and foremost. I will, let me answer in a long way, to say that starting in 17, and then of course in 18 with the original travel restrictions as you mentioned, congressman, of the seven countries, the Supreme Court upheld that, upheld the process that we went through during that, and over the next several years, we only increased and enhanced that process. So every six months, we adjudicate whether certain countries are meeting certain baseline security requirements, such as do they have an electronic passport, do they share lost and stolen passports with interpol, do they share known and suspected terrorist information with the u. S. . Do they share examples of their passport to u. S. Or cbp and customs officers to know what a faud lent is or is not . So what we did back in march of 19 is we demarshed all 200 countries and gave them the survey and all the questions and started to work with them, the state department, in all of those locations to say, heres the information that we need from you. We went through six, seven, eight months of that. These countries knew where they stood. New they were deficient. Knew they could not answer, could not address, we worked with them and tried to put a number of them on Improvement Plan, thats my term, not the official term, tried to put them on Improvement Plans, and we saw a number of countries during that process that were not going to meet these middle and baseline security requirements step up and put measures in place so they did meet them. What you see from these six countries out of all 200 countries, very few, very few set that were not able to meet minimum basic security requirements that then get put on travel restrictions, to reduce that vulnerability going forward. To answer your last question, i believe, is if you look at the original seven, obviously he would not only looked at immigrant visa restrictions and nonimmigrant visa restriction, the six countries that are more targeted today, obviously, the u. S. Has a relationship with them. Many of them want to work with the u. S. Government and certainly want to address their vulnerabilities for a variety of different reason, and theyre all very different. They were simply unable to meet the minimum requirements. And again, the again, president s executive order and the like tells us to look at that vulnerability and then make recommendations to him to address those vulnerabili vulnerabilities. The restrictions we have on these six countries is very targeted and what weve already seen a number of these countries even though weve been in discu discussions with them for six, seven, eight months, when we put a travel restriction, let us talk to you about how we get off this we saw that in 2017 and 2018 with the republic of chad. They did a number of improvements shortly after those travel restrictions came out. We provided them an off ramp. The president took them off those travel restrictions. I would say its a very transparent process to these countries on how both meet the minimum requirements but then how to increase their measures to provide that off ramp and to be removed from those travel restrictions. All right. So theyre not not more where these came from, necessarily, these are unique cases. In all of central asia, kyrgyzstan is the only country that theres a problem with. I would say we had deficiencies across the board. We had to draw a line using a variety of assessments to say there are minimum baseline requirements that everyone should meet. Even countries that meet that baseline requirement that may perhaps not be under trail restrictions, were still working with them, want them to do more, need them to do more and continue to have that dialogue with them. These are, again, six countries that for a variety of Different Reasons were not able to meet the minimum basic Security Standards that we require. Mrkadam chair, i know my tim has expired. Let me stress the strong hope that we will work with these countries constructively. I its important not just to call them out, not just to impose punitive measures but to work whatever the problems are, to work them out and to work them out cooperatively because on this list are countries that we have had good relationships with. Yes. Important relationships with. And those relationships are very, very important, and i would say transcend minor differences we may have. As part of the process, dhs does this assessment, we provide recommendations to the interagency. We have departments and agencies that dod and others that provide input to the final recommendations presented to the president so a lot of the other considerations and National Security considerations in others are factored into those recommendations to the president. Mr. Secretary, before adjo n adjourning, i was going to ask if you had any closing comments or clarifications. If theres anything else you would like to say before we adjourn. No, and i appreciate the opportunity to do that. I would just say, again, i always like to talk about the men and women of dhs and every opportunity i think in many instances, they are unfairly criticized and i think we all can agree that, again, i keep saying not only Border Security but ill just say Homeland Security is National Security. And so i, you know, my message would be to the men and women of the department of Homeland Security to continue to do their job every day, you know, considering the noise and the environment that were in, their job is very difficult. Its very dangerous. Whether its on the border, in the interior, whether its on coast guard ships, anywhere and everywhere that they serve. Very dangerous job. And i need them focused on their Mission Every day and not worrying about the noise that they hear in the background. And so, again, i thank the men m and women for what they do every day. I thank the committee for the resources you provide the department to do our mission and look forward to the continued dialogue. Thank you, and if there are no more questions, we are adjourned. Federal Health Officials testify before the Senate Health Committee Regarding Coronavirus Response efforts. Watch live tuesday at 10 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan3. Online at cspan. Org. Or listen live on the free cspan radio app. Watch our Live Campaign 2020 super tuesday coverage of the president ial primaries and caucuses from 14 states. Including alabama, arkansas, california, colorado, maine, massachusetts, minnesota, north carolina, oklahoma, tennessee, texas, utah, vermont, and virginia, with candidate speeches and results. Coverage begins tuesday live at 7 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan, at cspan. Org, or listen from wherever you are with the free cspan radio app. The senate commerce, science, and transportation subcommittee holds a hearing on mitigating the spread of Infectious Diseases such as the coronavirus. Watch live wednesday at 2 30 p. M. Eastern on cspan3, online, cspan. Org, or listen live on the free cspan radio app. Now, secretary of state mike pompeo testifies on u. S. Foreign policy toward iraq and iran before the House Foreign Affairs committee. Secretary pompeo fields questions on a number of issues including the strike on iranian general ka sessem soleimani