Efficiency of federal employee background checks. The Oversight Reform Committee questioned office and management of budget officials to protect federal employees personal information. This hearing is about 2. 5 hours. Committee on oversight government reform will come to order and without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time. Appreciate you all being here. We have very important hearing. We have a number of members that im sure will be here, but it will be late. There is the National Prayer breakfast and getting across town at this point of the day is a difficult task. Nevertheless, glad to have you here and look forward to this important hearing. Two years ago, the office of Personnel Management suffered one of the most damaging data breaches in the history of the federal government. This went on for some time and we still, there are still Additional Details that need to be learned. But the counterintelligence value of the data that was stolen will last
Who is going to pay for the detectors, the kind he was talking about. How much money do you need to put these . Well, thats a difficult question to answer. I would suggest that the Government Fund these Research Projects like these drive through por holes that we could see that could detect nur rons at the same time. Were invested at my particular board working with dndo and a company to develop a state of the art detection system in the port of boston. There is definitely money needed to fund the programs. They are a federally mandated system. Dr. Flint is willing to put 10 to 15 on the container. We are looking to spend 3. 5 billion for a Missile Defense system for the east coast to deal with your rainian iran nuclear weapons, which presumably arent going to be available for some decades. Thank you mr. Chairman. I yield. Thank you. As you said, they scan less than 1 of u. S. Bound cargo. Do you believe that scanning at the point of oregon is 10 effective . Or should we be investing m
Indicated that we are real into the 80s with probably the u. S. Amount i already told you. I dont think this is a huge problem. Senator udall . I yield my time to senator boxer. And mr. Chairman, here we are again. We have two different venues where we can argue about climate. [ laughter ] and always very pleasant. Were friends. But here we go. I continue to be perplexed by those who wish to obstruct action to reduce Carbon Pollution. Some are deniers, and weve been through there before. They say theyre not scientists and i would agree with them. They ought to be listening to the 97 , 98 of scientists who tell us human action and activities is causing too much Carbon Pollution. And some just dont seem to grasp the incredible advantages that we have in moving toward clean energy and im not going to go into it because were not the environment and Public Works Committee and its not about public health, but its so clear that when we do this we also create a tremendous number of jobs that c
We hadnt set fort and secured agreement for this kind of structure then. You did have a number of countries, but a quite small number of countries who had essentially put out press releases saying this is what were planning to do, but i think you could have counted those on one hand. That was not a large number of countries who did that, so its a completely different, its a kpleeptsly different ball game now. And it started with the durbin mandate for this negotiation. Which we were instrumental in developing at the end of 2011, where the whole theory of the agreement was that it was going to be applicable to all. It was going to be the notkyoto. It was going to be everybody. That was the huge, that was the starting point. And then we, as i said, weve worked through these different structural features along the way. And so fort. A and the impact of the china announcement was significant. The 1997 bird hagel resolution asserted that the United States should not join an International Cli
The senate and house senate arms and we recommended it would be nice if you can move those district offices into the gsa facilities we protect because anyone coming in there will go through screening and well know anyone going to that auditorium for that speech doesnt have a weapon because theyve been cleared. But then the members of congress say, well, i need to be with my people, i need to meet them and see them where they are not i dont want them to have to come through this gauntlet to see me so its a heck of a balance. I think its something all of us are working towards to make sure our people are safe. Lamar, do you have anything to add . From a local perspective, any types of intelligence that dictate there iss a threat or anything directed toward a military recruiting facility or base we would pick up either through our joint Terrorism Task force or it comes through our fusion center, the rtac who monitors various different systems, guardian, eguardian and your system is built