get used to? rep. chaffetz: we should have seen this coming a long time ago. very nefarious actors across the world who have been trying to penetrate our infrastructure -- our i.t. infrastructure. multiple reports warning telling them that they need to make sure that these things are encrypted. they did not do that. millions of records with highly sensitive information that is out there. on tuesday, we are going to have a hearing. the office of personnel management is being resistant to agreeing to attend. i am prepared to issue a subpoena to get them there. i think public employees need to hear about this. it may be the single biggest breach of data that our government has ever had. stephen: obviously there is a lack of security. they not follow oig recommendations? is this something hackers are using that we were not aware of? rep. chaffetz: they are very sophisticated but there are basic things on our community -- on our computer systems that were not implemented. government watchdog groups that came in who did look at this, who we do hope to hear from -- they issued the warning multiple times over a long period of time . i don't think our government took it seriously enough. it did not implement these things. the worry is somewhere between four months and perhaps a year, these hackers were able to extract information about personnel records, social security numbers. we are worried about medical records potentially. that is part of what we want to have come out of the hearing and know who has security clearances. you can understand if it is somebody like china, that they have a vested interest in understanding who their targets should be. matt: congress has had its hands in -- i'm wondering what responsibility you think the oversight and government reform committee has in looking at the e-mail scandal and what was going on with hillary clinton using a private server. rep. chaffetz: what is curious about this is secretary clinton come on the day she started her confirmation hearings, set up this private server. i have told our folks that i think the right position has been, we should not be any tougher on her just because she is the former first lady, a candidate for the presidency of the united states. let's also not be any easier on her. she was the secretary of state for a significant period of time. we have the federal records act which is within our jurisdiction . i think they are legitimate questions. trey gowdy, one of the best members of congress in a comprehensive way, he is the chairman of the benghazi select committee. we will let them push that as far as they can. i have concerns about the safety and security of putting our men and women in jeopardy. allowing the intelligence agencies of other countries to be able to hack into this information. i think it is a legitimate thing or congress to be able to access that information, as well as the public. we have a freedom of information act that public should be able to get to. matt: should there be hearings in your committee about hillary clinton us private e-mail server -- hillary clinton's private e-mail server? rep. chaffetz: we will see where it goes. susan: can i ask whether or not you see the stories that have been percolating about the foundation and donations to her foundation being appropriate? rep. chaffetz: there are some things we're looking at. something's we are concerned about. one of those things has to do with some of the visas that were granted. we have questions about that along the way. they have an important role to play and there are questions in somethings the committee is looking at. there seems to be an overlap. we will let the truth prevail and follow the path wherever it may lead us. if there is nothing there, we will move on. stephen: do you have concerns about the clinton foundation's tax status, given the details we have heard about -- at least accusations of them getting donations and dealings with the state department at the same time. are you planning on looking into the foundation in that sense or anything else about the foundation itself? rep. chaffetz: there are some outstanding concerns. what did the foundation do? was there any crossover with somebody who was in office? when you have a secretary of state, how does that clearance happen? how does that clearance for speeches money and revenue to come in to any foundation happen? there are highlights in haiti and other places where contracts were given and money changed hands. we will see how that plays out. we are not the only committee looking at that. we are not targeting, going after secretary clinton, but she was the secretary of state and we are going to pursue wherever that path may lead us. matt: you mentioned the freedom of information act. i know you had a hearing on this last week. what do you think needs to happen on the act? a rewrite in this congress or whether this is something the agencies themselves can handle. rep. chaffetz: they have not been handling it. in the obama administration, 550,000 plus times they claimed exceptions and that they could not facilities request. we heard from panelists that worked for or are currently working for the u.s. times -- the new york times, the associated press, others that came and testified that they have a terrible time getting information from the administration. they also said that was a problem in the bush administration. we need to change the law so that no matter who is in the executive branch, the public, which has the right to know, can access that information. darrell issa and elijah cummings have a good piece of legislation. i want there to be a consequence for the administration if they do not come in a timely way, for phil request and i want to limit the number of exceptions. i think you'll see us past that legislation and make that government -- and make the government more transparent. matt: you're have been a stern critic of the freedom of information act. last week you said to the justice department that people are living in a lie a lot man -- a lie allow land hack -- what score would you live congress' transparency. rep. chaffetz: age of the agencies were rated and the ones that were there, they all got the highest possible score yet we heard two panelists -- two panels saying, it is not working for anybody. for them to give that kind of score, it is obviously not working. the legislative and judicial branches live under a different set of rules. we have in place is the freedom of information act that does require the executive branch and the execution of those laws to be open and transparent. that is the way it has been for decades. i think congress could improve its openness and transparency but we are trained -- we are trying to be as transparent as we can along the way. before you -- it applies to the executive branch. matt: it is used to shield certain activities. the media cannot access police reports on the sort of things because it is shielded by congress' exemption. i'm wondering if there's hypocrisy that congress has extended itself and is going after agencies were being less than transparent on the freedom of information act when congress itself is not subject to those same sorts of rules. rep. chaffetz: the judicial branch also falls into that category. i don't think there has been suggestion that that include congress. there are places and ways to get access to a lot of information but the current law, as it is, the executive branch is not living up to those standards. stephen: one of the other agencies you had at that hearing was the irs. an observation about the number of the folks you have, i found in my experience with freedom of information act, you have to be willing to sue these groups. if you're going after sense of data to be willing to put a lawsuit behind it to free that information, an interesting way. an extra step young the freedom of information act. i'm wondering, lois lerner, you had an exchange with the ig at a previous hearing a couple months ago where they mentioned there might the criminal investigation into the tapes and backup tapes. can you tell us where things stand and what your understanding is of that investigation of the doj's investigation? whether we are going to see charges at any point. rep. chaffetz: the inspector general has indicated to us that we are days away from having them be prepared to introduce their investigation. conclusion of their investigation into the disposition of the lowest lerner e-mails. from the irs we have heard that these tapes were destroyed recycled. we heard we had all the e-mails. we have heard everything other than my dog ate this. now that the inspector general has gone back in, they have found thousands of e-mails that were not previously given to congress even though they said they had given everything to congress. we are days away from the inspector general being prepared to testify, i hope before the oversight and government reform committee. this is the irs targeting people for conservative, political views. either side of the aisle, no matter your political disposition, you cannot have an irs that is politically targeting people. we will get to the bottom of it. matt: there are two different explanations. stephen: that it was bureaucratic bumbling and the existence of the tapes got lost and once i did not know the other was talking about. the other is that there was intent to hide them. you have a sense for which of those is likely to be? rep. chaffetz: it may be something in between. the irs had taken years to look at and said it would take years more to get. the inspector general took 15 days to find them. when they spoke with the person who was there in the so-called cage with luck -- with locked up tapes the person said, nobody has asked us for them. it smells and looks like an obstruction of congress. when we have a duly issued subpoena, there is an obligation at the highest levels for the irs to comply. if the irs was coming after you as an individual, asking for your documents and you did not provide them, what do you think the irs would do? we will hold them to the highest standard. i expect them to fulfill a duly issued su subpoena. we will hear the perspective of the inspector general. stephen: the justice department's investigation. in the days after we learned about this in 2013, that has gone quiet at this point. i'm wondering what you understand about that. is it better just to wait for the next administration? you hope you do not get an answer and it carries over. what are your thoughts on how that stand? rep. chaffetz: the department of justice, the person they put in charge of this investigation from the department of justice was a max out donor to president obama. there are some of us that question if we will get a fair hearing. we talked to the victims of this. people on the receiving end of not being able to get the information out of the irs who were clearly targeted by the irs. the fbi did not ask them a question. you're the president of the united states in an interview on the super bowl sunday say there is not even a smidgen of corruption here. how did he come to that conclusion? the department of justice had not come we did its report. the inspector general has not completed his report. i do not think there is anything signaling to his political allies this is the conclusion we're going to have. that is not what congress is going to do. we will let the facts dictate the response and the next step is hearing from the inspector general. matt: wondering what you think needs to happen with secret service. rep. chaffetz: we have had scandal after scandal. deep-seated cultural problem. a lack of leadership within the secret service. he difficult ship to turn around . in no failed mission for the secret service. we have had multiple mistakes. i think the president and country has gotten lucky to this point. we have thousands of good people honorably and patriotically served this nation but when the average secret service agent the average secret service officer who is working has 25 minutes during the course of a year of training, there is something fundamentally wrong at its core. the scandals have got to stop. it have to be able to fire people who do not act in a responsible way. all the scandals and you have not seen the secret service fire anybody. matt: these are difficult issues. last year you said, after another one of these people i jumped the fence you stand by the comment of having the secret service's back? rep. chaffetz: the inevitability that the secret service would prevail if some nefarious person off of the fence or tried to take up the president, that the secret service would prevail without question, that shine is gone from the general copter, to all the incidents that have happened previously. what happened in atlanta with close proximity. that gives crazy folks a lot of ideas and terrorists encouragement that they might avail. -- mike prevail. i want those agents and officers to know i got there back. use excessive force. do whatever it takes but you never, ever get close to the president and you never get in that white house. no question. a guy in crocs who had foot surgery hop the fence and ran all the way to the white house. that cannot happen. stephen: you recently returned from a trip to the border to investigate a shooting of a marine helicopter. i wanted to ask with your impressions were from having been down there. what you believe the security situation is on the border. a lot of debate with last summer surge. homeland security secretary jeh johnson said the apprehensions are at their lowest rate since 1972. what is your impression of border security at this point? rep. chaffetz: if apprehensions are at their lowest level, does that mean security is better or worse? statistically, hundreds of thousands of people are able to cross our border on impeded. -- unimpeded. we trade goods and services with mexico but they are about -- there are about 100,000 people who have died in the trunk wars -- in the drug wars in mexico in the last year. that is a lot of people. if you look at the state near brownsville and laredo on the mexican side of the border, you do not have a police force. you have the army and navy from mexico trying to create law and order but it is one of the most dangerous places on the face of the planet. i have seen it. i went there. we just had an incident a week ago where a border patrol homeland security helicopter was shot from the mexican side and that pilot was almost killed. it hit his bulletproof vest. i do not see this administration taking it seriously. i think they're doing a public a disservice by telling them how the border is not a problem. i have seen it. i went out with those agents and it has to change. jeh johnson, a great deal of respect for him but he is doing this country a disservice by telling them apprehensions are down so it is safer. i will show him any place he wants or they are able to cross by the hundreds on a nightly basis. stephen: you're currently probing the state department about its activities and whether employees are safe. should we pull those officers out of their or are there other states -- other steps we should take? rep. chaffetz: we asked the men and women who serve in the state department to be in some the most interest places. -- the most dangerous places. it is not just the people at the consulate. we have thousands of people doing business on a daily basis in places like nueve laredo. i do not think the state department is giving enough attention. secretary kerry has been in office, do you know how many times he has been to mexico to work with our neighbors and friends to the south? one time. he spends an awful lot of time in france, riding his bike. he is been to the middle east but we have 100,000 people who have died in mexico in the last nine years and our secretary of state has been there once? that does not sound to me like a priority and i think it should be. matt: your committee voted to overturn one of the first -- overturn a d.c. law, the ban on employees being discriminated based on reproductive decisions. rep. chaffetz: just as our founders laid it on the constitution. washington dc is not a state. if they pass a law, congress has the opportunity within 30 congressional business days to be able to express an opinion. if there is a resolution of disapproval, that law can be repealed or taken back. we passed it out of the house. the senate did not take it up. we needed to express our frustration with the direction of this law. a law that the former mayor had been opposed to because he thought there were constitutional problems. i believe it was the attorney for the city who said it had comes to show problems -- had constitutional problems. matt: you do not think the district of columbia has evolved at all. ? rep. chaffetz: it is a big city. i think there is a way to get them representation if they want to. the areas of washington dc, we could get them not only a member of congress but two senators, state legislature and a governor. if they want full representation. it is not something we are striving for but for me, that is the way i look at it. district of some be a -- this should of columbia was set up separately. consequently, members of congress, representatives from around the country all get a say in what happens in washington, d.c. stephen: you have a hearing i believe coming up on drones in commerce. i'm interested in what you're looking for and how you evaluate the current federal rules for using drones for commercial and law enforcement and whether you foresee the need for congress to get more involved in setting those rules. rep. chaffetz: it is an emerging technology and something we will have to address. at what point is the airspace in our nation federal? at what point is it a local or state issue? if you will have innovative technology where they are delivering packages for instance , which is exciting technology. i am excited about the positive things. we have to make sure they are not bumping into each other running into airplanes. it is more exploratory. how do drones work? we think it is a great way to get technology to help. you have exciting companies like amazon who are trying to do exciting angst. it was your from all of them -- trying to do exciting things. we are excited to hear from all the. susan: a lot of friction under the last chairman three at how are you approaching the relationship now? rep. chaffetz: i have the great respect for elijah cummings. we disagree on a lot of issues. i was coached by john boehner and he said, you can disagree, do not be disagreeable. i went out and visited a elijah cummings' district in baltimore. i took him out to utah to see the red rocks and federal lands issues we're dealing with. we will disagree but i think we will do it in a respectful way that everybody can be proud about and write home and say, look how this went. susan: thank you for your time on newsmakers this week. gentleman, what is the committee like and what do you think of the kinds of issues? there were often accusations by the democrats under chairman issa. stephen: you have had some of the same accusations but at the same time the freedom of information act hearings are something you see a lot of bipartisan support to continue those investigations and make sure the process is working. the law is working as intended. this bill is sponsored by mr. issa and mr. cummings. there are things with a can-do bipartisan action. there are going to be places where they clash. some of the clinton investigations will certainly be places where they clash. that is the nature of that committee. we have not seen the sort of explosions that we saw with the former chairman cutting off microphones and whatnot. there has been a difference but you will still see clashes. susan: what a wide birth this committee has. the question illustrated district of columbia laws to drones in co commerce. i'm wondering what your sense -- where do you go to really matter? matt: so much under his jurisdiction. it seems from the early tells that he wants to address the freedom of information act and get some accountability from the administration on answering's request. -- answering these requests. it is unclear whether that means reforming or a total rewrite. he seems open to overhauling the system. susan: that must be good news for you two as reporters. you trust him on congress and its transparency. it sounds like a rewrite would include extending to the legislative branch. rep. chaffetz:matt: he was clear that he does not believe congress should be subject to the freedom of information act. for a lot of americans, it is jarring to see a congressman pressing for transparency and having this criticism, congress is not subject to those same laws. why is it that we need to see hillary clinton's e-mails but not jason chaffetz' ? it is still something under negotiation right now. susan: there is this question about investigation of hillary clinton's e-mails. with the presidential campaign going on, what did you learn from his answers about the direction the taking? stephen: he said we should not be investigating her more than we would anybody else, but she was secretary of state. i thought that was a careful answer. interesting to see whether the temptation doesn't get the better of house republicans. they do investigate her more than something else. there are some areas of legitimate inquiry but they will not go after her just because she is a presidential candidate. matt: and very nuanced answer. he is saying, i will give the committee on the latitude they need in investigating but there is a component we addressed, his committee. one bite of the apple, hillary clinton's contention that i will testify wanonce. susan: let's talk about the irs. a sense of frustration from the chairman. stephen: boiling up for a while. i think it was interesting that he, the fact that we are going to see the inspector general's report on the e-mails and backup tapes. he does sound like he does not believe -- i believe use the words obstruction of congress. they will have a decision to make on how they pursue that and whether they asked the justice department to pursue criminal charges. the justice department turned that request