Analyzed. We agreed they should move forward. And what role can the database do for the future . We think they need to have good information because they need to be able to look at this more broadly, to look within classes, to look across time to measure whether or not they are putting the right steps in place and having the kind of impact to improve the situation rather than treating these as each individual things that need to be solved. I appreciate it. With that, mr. Chairman, i yield back. Now recognize the gentlelady from north carolina, mrs. Ellmers. In my district, this is a very specific situation, that im hearing from all of my hospitals. In particular all focused on wake med Hospital System. They are an 870bed Hospital System with multiple facilities around raleigh, north carolina. They basically deal with the three primary vendors for i. V. Infusions and all three have experienced Quality Manufacturing issues as well as holiday production shutdowns that contributed to the shortage. Wake meds pharmacy spent an additional 80,000 in january to stock up on the drugs in anticipation. I appreciate the efforts of the f. D. A. To address the shortage but it appears theyre only addressing the symptoms and not the real causes. Im also concerned about the medicare reimbursement system, especially the explosion of the 340b discounts thats reducing margins for generic manufacturers. This is pushing them to stop producing lowcost american injectables. It also appears that these manufacturers simply dont have the margins to invest in their manufacturing plants which is why we see many of the quality problems. My question has to do with what is and how are we addressing these issues right now. I want to focus my questions today on the f. D. A. s work with the industry to make sure everyone is working together to find solutions. Dr. Throckmorton, there remains virtually no transparency in the process for how drugs that make it onto the shortage list ultimately get off this list. How does an agency decide that a product is no longer in shortage and is there a consistent and standardized formula for f. D. A. Uses to produce a product from a shortage list . Thank you. The short answer is, yes, we do have a process to apply to when they get on the shortage list and when it doesnt exist and they can come off it. Our focus is determining whether or not patients in the u. S. Can get the treatments they need. So its not focused on productbyproduct shortage. So there may be a shortage of aspirin because one manufacture of one aspirin may no longer be manufacturing but there may be four other kinds of aspirin being produced. The other products can and will ramp up. Thats something our people know about, talk to those other manufacturers. Were able to assess using prescription data, using other data that we have access to, we can determine whether those other manufacturers can fill in for that manufacturer thats made a decision to not manufacture or needed to stop manufacturing to improve a product line. Thats slightly different than the kinds of data that the university of utah that dr. Crosse is referring to. We are looking at the totality of the data. The availability of a given therapy, not an individual product. And so our numbers are slightly different than ashp, that the university of utah have. We believe that ours reflect our Public Health goal, if you will. But behind that we have a process in place to determine when available production is not able to meet demand and then work with manufacturers and when production returns and is once again able to meet demand to take something off of the shortage list. Ok. Also very specifically, there again, dr. Throckmorton, the inspection of a. P. I. Can remain a barrier and anda can market the generic drug. How has the agency tried to improve its record on this issue to ensure that the anda holders can market a drug and potentially address a drug shortage . So two parts to that answer. The first part would be some of the actions we already talked about, the expedited reviews and expedited inspections. There is a second longer term and that relates to the passage of kadufa, an opportunity to sort of balance the playing field, if you will, so were able to devote the resources we need to to the generics market which 85 of the u. S. Drug market is generic now. Were able to allocate to it to make sure theyre getting the attention they need, the reviews from our reviewers that they need to. Thats an important addition to us. Thank you so much. I see my time has expired. I thank you, mr. Chairman. The chair thanks the gentlelady. That concludes the questions of the members who are present. Well have additional questions well send to you in writing. If youll please respond promptly. Remind members they have 10 Business Days to submit questions for the record and members should submit their questions by the close of business on tuesday, february 25. Thank you very much for the testimony, the good information and we look forward to continue to work with you. With that, without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2014] week janet yellen testified before the House Financial Services committee to deliver the fed annual Monetary Policy report. It was her first appearance before a Congressional Committee since she was appointed at the head of the federal reserve. We will have that hearing tomorrow at 10 30 5 a. M. Eastern on cspan. A. M. Eastern on cspan. Here they are, closing in on me. When i went through survival school, they taught us that the people who cap sure are probably the least trained to capture p. O. W. s and maintain them. Your best chance to escape is right then. I thought, these are rookies. Three rounounds and ds. I went like this, get away. I fired a round of that tracer over their head. They did not flinch. They just raised their rifles like this. One of them reached in his pocket and pulled out [indiscernible] it had drawings on one side and vietnamese semantics phonetics on the other side. The drawing show them capturing an american pilot. Said, surrender. No die. Hands up. Hands up. Here i am, facing about nine long guns staring at me. I decide thats probably the best advice im going to get that day. Former air force pilot and vietnam pow lee ellis sunday q a. T 8 00 on next, the results of a poll by the Siena Research institute. We discussed the results with the institutes director, don levy. For the fifth time since 1982, the Siena Research institute in new york has released the survey on the first ladies. Here are the results of the top 10. Number one, Eleanor Roosevelt. Two, abigail adams. Dolly madison, four. Michelle obama is in fifth place, followed by Hillary Clinton and lady bird johnson, betty ford, Martha Washington and Roselyn Carter round out the top 10. Don levy is the director of the institute. Rch dr. Levy, what do you see in this top 10 list . What is most amazing about times, 32y is five years, we interview historians, political scientists, scholars who study the presidency and institution of the first lady. What is amazing is consistency over time. Eleanor roosevelt first, every years. Ver 32 she really stands out is the quintessential american first lady. If we were going to put a picture of a first lady in the dictionary, it would be Eleanor Roosevelt. Why is that . We look at 10 different categories. The background, the value to the country, how much value they had to their president. Whether she is her own woman. Again and again, we see Eleanor Roosevelt stand out. Trendsetting a first lady, not only fdrs , but shend counselor reshaped that institution. She told american women that they mattered and that they were important in political and social life. Clearly, Eleanor Roosevelt not only campaign for fdr but she was instrumental in setting policy and the tone of the country during difficult years. She is warmly remembered for her entire time as first lady and for the work that she did subsequent to being a first lady as well. She really was a modern trendsetter for that office. Current first lady, Michelle Obama, is on that list. Is that a surprise . It is a little bit surprising. It is the first time that she was included. The last time the survey was taken was just before the obamas took office. She enters at a high level for a , andirst lady, at fifth bumps down Hillary Clinton to the six position. I think Michelle Obama stands out in a number of categories, her value for the country and value for the president. Being her own woman most especially. And her growing accomplishments in office. We also asked about which of the might historians and political scientists imagine as serving as president. While Hillary Clinton is the number one choice, theres a fair amount of support for Michelle Obama as a least a hypothetical president of the United States in some future time. Michelle obama enters at a very high rate. Hillary clinton, in 1993 when we took the same survey during the early years of the clinton administration, actually enter the survey at that point as number two. It is impressive. Two things i want to ask about on the top 10 list. Only one republican, betty ford, is on that list. Why is that . There are two ways to understand that. Many of the first ladies on that as having out accomplished a great deal, as being first ladies that all first lady is clearly aspire to. I think that what we find is this is a survey of practicing historians, political scientists, many of whom are nested within the academy, authors who publish books on the presidency, and as a group. That group tends to be a little bit more biased towards the democrats than towards the republicans. The only republican on this list is betty ford. Of the recent republican first ladies made the list of those first ladies who could have done more while they were in office. No first lady is a runway choice as for those who could have done more, but laura bush, barbara bush are all mentioned as first ladies who could have done more. Clearly Eleanor Roosevelt stands out. A couple of the early first the era oflly before partisan politics took place as we know it today. A small bias that we can perceive amongst these historians and political scientists. One other thing is that a lot of these first ladies on the top 10 list are within our lifetime, beginning with jacqueline kennedy, Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, lady bird johnson, Roselyn Carter, betty ford. Bias in thereer for contemporary first ladies . I think so. These first ladies are better known to historians. Also, they had a much more wider and Important Role in the modern era that some of the early first ladies. It is noteworthy to see that abigail adams, Dolly Madison clearly played Important Roles. Watch washington Martha Washington makes the list. Many of the first ladies and some of the ones who fall in the bottom five during the civil war era, with the notable exception of mary lincoln, are little known to many historians. And really, i think there would be the notable exception of ab adams,ms of abigail Dolly Madison, it is the more modern first ladies who have been full partners in the sense that it is known to those who theow the institution of first lady. Full partners to their president and are in the news each and every day. Are taking on issues. And really not only speak to the country but in many ways to the world about what and who america is. Lets look at the bottom five. Mary lincoln has been on this list in the past. Absolutely. And really, that is most notable when you talk about the bottom five. Mary lincoln has been among the bottom five each and every time until this year. The other influence we see in this survey sometimes is when there is New Historical work and or new owork of Popular Culture that open up the book a little bit and tell the story of a first lady. Moves a littles bit. Mary lincoln portray by sally field in the phil about lincoln and some of the literature on givenn of late has told, a Wider Perspective on mary lincoln. She does not rise to the top. She remains to the bottom, about 10 places from the bottom, but her stature increased a little bit with more understanding of the difficult situation she was placed in. And no longer just thinking of mary lincoln as someone who was mentally unstable, as she had been per trade for a long time. The other first ladies near the bottom, in many cases, are associated with presidencies that were seen as unsuccessful and that they added little to it. Florencele first lady, harding, i think stands out near the bottom because it is more and more been saying that she played some role in some of the perhaps corrupt aspects of the harding and ministration. Administration. So Florence Harding is nailed as lacking integrity peerages course right at the bottom. The other first ladies that tend to be at the bottom in many cases are associated with littleknown president s, and some of the president am a both bookon and pierce, who ended the civil war at a time in our country when we were really looking for great leadership and it was not until lincoln who, of course, is one of the most highly regarded president s took over. Andthe first ladies before after the civil war were seen as giving very little value to the country, very little value to the president s who themselves were unsuccessful. Iena Research Institute did this in partnership with cspan. One of the new categories that was on the survey greatest political asset. Eleanor roosevelt, Hillary Clinton, jacqueline kennedy, Michelle Obama, and nancy reagan. One other new topic area was Lasting Legacy. ToppedEleanor Roosevelt that. Jacqueline kennedy, Hillary Clinton, betty ford, and lady bird johnson. Fiveis about those women . The greatest political asset i think is a category that really matters now. No longer is the first lady only looked upon as being a white rather as ad, but very important political ally to the president. Eleanor roosevelt stands out here chief campaigns on behalf of the president. To negotiateout with various constituencies. She really stands out. Hillary clinton quite obviously was instrumental in many of the policies of the clinton administration. And of course now is seen as a first lady most likely to serve as president. Jackie kennedy makes the list. Michelle obama as a current asset. Nancy reagan shows up on that list in a very positive sense, i think, as a political asset. And the work that nancy reagan did as part of the Reagan Administration in some cases really taking care of the president , negotiating with various constituencies and even with warring parties within the administration itself was seen as quite crucial during the reagan years. Greatest Lasting Legacy Jackie Kennedy, i think, deserves mention there. We just saw the 50th anniversary of the assassination of president kennedy. Once again, the nation was reintroduced to the role that Jackie Kennedy played not only in her role of revitalizing the white house as an institution, introducing the country to the white house, but the grace she conducted herself was a model for the country at the time of the assassination. And that is truly a legacy that has stood out not only for the country but for the institution of the first lady and the importance of that position to the entire country. She speaks in many ways to the heart and soul of our country. At good times, demanding times, and at difficult times, as was that of the assassination. A quick look at some of the topline results of the Siena Research institute. The newest survey on first ladies in collaboration with cspans first lady serious. Series. Cspans original series first ladies concludes monday evening here and we will look at the different time periods the first lady served in and how the role of president ial spouse has evolved and which first lady wielded the most influence. We will also be looking for your comments by phone, twitter, and facebook. Live monday night at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan and cspan radio. President obama is in california this weekend. He traveled there yesterday to speak with farmers and ranchers who are currently dealing with severe drought conditions. He also met with King Abdullah of jordan to talk about u. S. Jordan relations and middle east issues. Next, a brief exchange with reporters before the closeddoor meeting with the king. Back to the United States. And its wonderful to be able to host him here at beautiful sunnylands. I want to thank the annenberg group that has maintained this wonderful facility and made it available to us. This gives me an opportunity to have an extensive consultation with his majesty in a less formal setting. But i think its fair to say that we have very few friends, partners and allies around the world that have been as steadfast and reliable as his majesty King Abdullah, as well as the people of jordan. In a region that obviously is going through enormous changes, the friendship between our peoples has been a constant. And most recently, we are now partnering because jordan just took its seat on the Security Council and is working actively with us on a whole range of international issues. Im going to be very interested in hearing more from his majesty about the reforms that he has initiated both politically and economically, because his top priority, obviously, is the prosperity of his people and providing more opportunity for the population there. Weve been very impressed with the fact that although oftentimes difficult and although it meets resistance sometimes, his majesty has been able to move forward with the reforms that meet the imf program that has been put together. And in part because of these successes, i want to announce today that we will be providing the kingdom of jordan a 1 billion Loan Guarantee fund that will help jordan access the International Capital markets, as well as extend for five years the memorandum of understanding that we have with the kingdom of jordan that allows that country to pursue the kind of development that will not only help the people of jordan but help the region as a whole. Our cooperation on a whole host of issues is extensive. Were going to be talking a lot about the political changes that are taking place in the region. Obviously, a central focus will be the situation in syria. And the people of jordan have been very generous in absorbing hundreds of thousands of displaced persons from that warravaged country. It puts a great strain on the resources of jordan and its very important for us to make sure that were supportive of the kingdom in accommodating all these refugees. At the same time, both of us recognize that we cant just treat the symptoms. Well be working aggressively at the United Nations level and at the regional level to try to provide basic humanitarian assistance and access to people who are suffering tremendously as a consequence of the war inside of syria. But were also going to have to solve the underlying problem a regime led by Bashar Alassad that has shown very little regard for the wellbeing of his people. Hes attacked civilians in ruthless ways. We are going to need a political transition in that region. And were going to continue to strategize on how we can effectively change the calculus inside the country so that we can have a syria that is intact, that is respectful of all groups, that ends the killing, and that allows for a Representative Government that can provide peace and prosperity for everybody there. We dont expect to solve this any time in the short term, so there are going to be some immediate steps that we have to take to help the humanitarian situation there. There will be some intermediate steps that we can take to apply more pressure to the assad regime, and were going to be continuing to work with all the parties concerned to try to move forward on a diplomatic solution. But in all of these issues, and in the critical issue of trying to bring about peace between israel and the palestinian an issue that his majesty and his father before him had enormous stake in and investment in, and has been a very capable and trustworthy partner on all these issues, we are very grateful for the work that were able to do together. And i look forward to what im sure is going to be an illuminating and constructive conversation. So, thank you, your majesty. And welcome. Thank you very much, mr. President. Im delighted and pleased on behalf of myself and the jordanian people, and really, really appreciative of the time that youre giving us today. And on behalf of all of us, thank you for the support of yourself, of your administration, of the American People, of congress, with the outstanding support that youve shown jordan with all the changes that were facing. With all of the challenges that are ahead of us, i will continue our comprehensive reform program. Were not using the challenges in our region as an excuse to waver, and im looking forward to our discussion, our reform process with you this evening. As you mentioned, we are going to be members of the u. N. Security council for the next two years. There are many challenges in our region and beyond, and i look forward to working with the United States and the International Community on how we can best bring peace and prosperity not only to the region but beyond. Sir, obviously, wed like to commend the role that the United States has been playing in bringing israelis and palestinians closer together. And obviously your role, the leadership that the United States has shown has been critical and very much admired. And the diligence of the way that the United States has been able to bring both partners much closer together over the past several months has really given me a lot of hope. And so i would just like to commend the dramatic role of the United States in that regard. As youre very well aware, were obviously a stakeholder in all final status negotiations and, therefore, our National Interest in these issues are of paramount importance. But i am cautiously optimistic even with the major challenges that america has been really working tirelessly to really improve the situation between the israelis and the palestinians. Obviously, as you mentioned, sir, the main challenge that we have is how do we bring a political, comprehensive solution to the Syrian People. Our major concern in the area is the rise of extremism in syria, the sectarian violence, and if we dont find a solution, the spillover in the region and the effect that will have. But, again, im sure that our views are similar and we will be working very closely with you, sir, and our western friends in trying to alleviate the suffering of the Syrian People as quickly as possible. Sir, youve mentioned your very generous support by yourself and the American People of the challenges that jordan faces. Jordan is a resilient country. We see ourselves as an oasis of stability to our neighbors. And you have mentioned that the challenges that we face with the immense pressure of Syrian Refugees and what it does to the host nation from a humanitarian point of view. And the United States has been beyond the call of duty in its support for us. And i just wanted to mention, again in front of you, how grateful i am and the people of jordan for that outstanding support. We do hope that the rest of the International Community also steps up and catches up in the support not only for the Syrian Refugees, but also the impact it has on jordanians and jordanian infrastructure, as well as looking at mechanisms of how we can push humanitarian supplies into syria. So we have a lot to talk about, sir, today, but i am very grateful on behalf of all of us for this time that youre giving us and the tremendous support that youve shown our people. Thank you very much, everybody. , david mediners is our guest. He advises the executive branch on issues related to privacy. On Tomorrows Program he will talk about nsa surveillance and the boards recent recommendation that the nsas collection of phone records be put to an end. Here is a brief portion of the interview. Guest we were concerned about its the program itself and implications. And the implications are quite serious because the government can collect credit Card Transactions because terrorists use credit cards. Once thern is that government starts gathering so much information about our everyday lives, it shifts power between the citizens and the government. And some people exercise their First Amendment right to contact journalists, religious organizations or political organization. If they know the government is monitoring their every move, it might chill their exercise of those rights. We were concerned about broad policy issues. We fell in this program, having telephone numbers and it lacks legal authority. As the Telephone Program goes, does it concern you if the government were to expand its current requirements for what Telephone Companies are required to store . There is this question from a citizens point of view how much do you really care about what the government is Holding Versus private parties . Private parties can interfere with your life maybe not as germanic lieff egovernment that they can cause you problems. If the information is there for the information to come get it guest having the government handle the information does have severe consequences. The government can audit your taxes, put you in jail. There is a difference between private companies that might hend you an ad and t government can impact your life in a serious way. Right now Telephone Companies are required to keep this information for 18 months for billing purposes under the federal medication Commission Communication commission rules. It was were the case, if added with additional privacy protections, that might be in approach. We do not recommend imposing requirements, but others have suggested it might be necessary to having dividers holding information. You can watch the entire interview with david medine when at 10 00rs, airs a. M. And 6 00 p. M. Gives you cspan. Org access to an Incredible Library of political events with more added each day to cspans nonstop coverage of national politics, history, and nonfiction books. Coverage ofs official washington or access more than 200,000 hours of archived cspan video. Everything cspan has covered since 1987. And our video is all searchable and viewable on your desktop computer, tablet, or smartphone. Just look for the prominent search bar at the top of each page. The new cspan. Org makes it easy to watch what is happening today in washington and find people and events from the past 25 years. It is the most comprehensive Video Library in politics. Next, the future of the Homeland Security department under the direction of the new secretary jeh johnson. This is from todays washington journal. And cspan. Org. Us is Alicia Caldwell. Were here to talk guest jeh johnson has come over from the private sector. Theres a new leader there . There is. He . who is guest jay johns has come over, he was the top lawyer at the pentagon. Tapped by the president know poll at a know decided to leave before the term was out. Ut system in northern california. Johnson took over the reins expanding. And hes number a four in a brief history. Theres lots of change, developments, footing, if you will, to be laid. Why did the president choose him . Meetings. Wasnt in the but hes a wellrespected attorney. Hes been in government for a number of ears and a different positions. Hes a top attorney for the air force before going to the department of defense. By all accounts, he is a well regard e regarded smart guy who knows a lot about a lot. Essentially the Legal Operations for drone strikes and been ininvolved and has National Security. So Homeland Security kind of akes it a nice transition or a relatively easy transition. Hes not coming into something ompletely unknown to him, though, again, there are 22 plus omponents and multiple tasks for the department of Homeland Security, not the least of which is, of course, National Security. Host does he bring a certain hilosophy when it comes to how to minister this department . Guest i think its yet to be determined. Him iswhat we heard from a little bit of twofold. In his testimony before the enate confirmation hearing, he said, you know, my priorities are the top priority was vacancies. Before his arrival, the top third of the department i think vacant, the secretary and at the time the deputy. Huge vacuum of power, permanent power. In temporary positions or jobs not filled. Thats come along since he was sworn in. So his second address or second morale. Mentioned was it has one of the lowest morale rates in the government. No secret. Trying to address it for a number of years. National security, immigration, all of those y, things kind of fall in line. Last week, he gave a first major the first topic of discussion was tearism. Syria being a Homeland Security issue today, which is a little it of change from what weve secretary nop cretaon nopolitano, it was immigration. He seemed to remain there in the first term. We saw a slight switch. Too early to see how significant the switch will be. National security is on the list of top priorities. Things that the struck out is because he mentioned morale and nerls. When previous folks have gone up to the hill. The first thing out of their counterterrorism. They made issue of that. Guest there were a lot of questions. That was his top priority and there were a lot of questions raised by that. Listen, this were, is my top priority. To the job, does that change . Have. Pears to hes number two, filling in the rank, the customs and border nomineeon has the first in many, many years. Theres not been a permanent end of the Bush Administration. The nomination is pending. Ou now have an empty directorship at uscis because mayorcas whos now number two position. Suzanne spalding has come onboard. Science and technology, youre all of thea cyberand other vacancies. So thats less it appears to a concern today, though theres still high including s empty, immigrations and customs enforcement. Acting director announced his resignation yesterday. Theres things to juggle in the department of that. A huge department. So lots of ball unless the air sense. Will in that Alicia Caldwell joining us to talk about the future of omeland security, a new leader there. Jay johnson, we talked a little bit about that. About the questions future of it, 2025853881 for republicans. 5853880 for democrats. Independents. Cspan. Tweet us at jeh johnson in this month talkingabout terrorism, about the idea of lone wolves in the United States. To give you a flavor of who the is, heres what he had to say. We face threats to those who violence, thee to socalled lone wolf who did not or n at an al qaeda camp overseas or became part of an nemy force, but who may be inspired by radical violentology violent ideology to do harm. Respects, this is illustrated by the Boston Marathon bombing that i worry most. The it may be the hardest to detect. It involves independent actors midst with easy access to things in the wrong hands become tools of mass violence. Must remain vigilant in detecting and countering all of these threats. In the department of defense, i was witness to all of the efforts in the military and the International Security and intelligence components of our government encountering overseas. Threats from ere at home, giving the evolving and diffuse threat, i believe its critical in the dhs several years that continue to build relationships with state and local governments. Responders in those governments. We must also continue to ncourage Public Participation in our efforts on their behalf. Away as far as e philosophy, the way he might that . His department from it perhapses a bit too early, we have a dramatic change eventse first big public nopolitano held. Now it was immigration, its counter terror, lone wolf, security being the issue for the homeland. Significant changeover from what weve seen in the last several years. The er, the idea of the lone wolf is something that weve heard for a number of years, particularly in the last the Boston Marathon attacks. O will he focus more on Homeland Security from a terrorism perspective . Perhaps. Thats his background. Coming from the department of defense, he was national ed about security than say immigration issues at uscis. Balance all of those and time will tell. Ut so far, his big talking points have been on a counterterror to protect the omeland front, weaving all of those components in, including but not limited to, of course, border security. Handful of ed a times now the idea of Immigration Reform needs to happen. Also is a Homeland Security concern in miss view. Now, did he mention syria first . Yeah. Does that hold greater weight . Yes. Ould argue we will see. So far, he seems to be taking it fairly balanced approach. But again with a big talking point, big push on, listen, counterterror, lone wolves, these things are serious concerns. We apparently have folks from u. S. Going to syria. They have to come back at some point. So what are they going to do t do we even heard that do we hear the term from him the war on terror . Is that still a philosophy of Homeland Security . Guest he has not mentioned that phrase. He appears to be looking at it from a much more holistic perspective inside the u. S. Lets prevent a boston type of event and that seems to be the that the threat is more diffuse today. Its the same thing we heard from his predecessor. There is a greater potential for these individual actors, some who have been radicalized on the internet or perhaps self radicalized. But we have not heard the phrase war on terror. Hear from this administration. It did not catch on as much as with those who first started it. Say that he is sort of gung ho war on terror in the United States so much as there are people in the United States potentially who want to come here to threaten the security of the inside of this country. Host our guest is Alicia Caldwell and this is a call from florida, republican line. Caller good morning. I have been to the Mexican Borders. One end ofit from arizona to another. Our borders are wide open. Dangers are not being addressed because the fence is not the discussed, the exit system is not being discussed. It seems to be held hostage in order to bring in all of the image it illegals that are here. Based on that, we will have border security. And now weve got an attorney heading up Homeland Security and has never been in security before and they have hired, im not sure if its 100 or 500 Immigration Attorneys to be on staff at Homeland Security. Muslims influx of the that obama and Hillary Clinton have brought into this country, maybe 30,000 Syrian Refugees, i have a report that 80,000 muslims were brought in in 2011 and all of them are going to be in islamic centers. Dallas is building a big one. They will go on federal benefits. Citizen,lar american that we, the me people, are not getting our constitution or our laws enforced. I worked on the Mexican Border for a number of years. I am very familiar and i grew up in arizona. Is a big, wide open place in many areas. They are fencing in some areas and not others. Secretary napolitano has said in 15es i will show you a foot fence and i will show you a 15 foot ladder maker. I have seen ladders and bungee cords going over the border. Those are pieces of security that the department over the last 25 years has put in. The government put up fencing in san diego and no gals, arizona. Some of it works and some of it is viewed as not as effective. Order patrol it tells you it slows people down. The apprehension rate at the Mexican Border is at one of its lowest rates in the last 40 years. We are still only talking about just over 400,000 apprehensions this year which accounts for 320330,000 individual people. We are at historic lows. Does that mean the border is secure . Thats for someone smarter than me or an elected official to decide. The reality is the numbers are down. You can say the numbers are down because security is working or they are down because the economy is bad. Playsn make a number of on those numbers but the numbers are what they are. Of peoplel rates living in the United States illegally are in the 400,000 range. You can make arguments over who those people are and how many more should be removed and so on. We are still talking about a ofatively net zero gain mexican immigrants which assist or could the Largest Group of immigrants coming across the Mexican Border. We now have an influx from Central America for various and sundry reasons. There is also drug cartel fighting and the economy. Is the border secure . Well, is it sunny today . Not right now. Fun standing on the porter southern arizona, i might not view the border is secure. If im in el paso, texas and looking at the fence in a concrete gully where the rio grande is, the border is secure. There are towers and sensors and cameras sure, it is secure as its going to get. It is in the eye of the beholder. Host i would say it is somewhere in between. There are many people who compare the department of Homeland Security to the department of defense. To get 40 years for dod everybody on the same page. It is not a fair comparison. Dod has five components or four components. They all kind of do the same thing. One does on water and one in the air and one on the land. The marines to it in all those areas. Homeland security has tsa,ustoms and Border Protection which includes the ports, then you have immigration and customs enforcement. There are all these other components doing a variety of jobs. Seemgel together and some out there on their own including federal protective service. I think they are somewhere in the middle so far which is yet to be determined. Its better today than in 2002. Nobody would argue or contends that it is not. Does it have functionality issues . You bet. Those things are still being worked out but it is the largest restructuring since the creation of the department of defense. Lets give them a little less like on that. Host democrats line, good morning. Caller thank you for taking my call. I was wondering if you could address the serious question. Im sure most people have taken notes about the fact that secretary johnson addressed syria. Andd you comment how dhs its partners will be working to combat that with the new secretary. Secretary napolitano focused a lot on immigration. I was wondering if you can comment on how secretary johnson will change that dynamic. I dont know if it is a changing dynamic so much as a topic he chose. Up in recent years praise secretary napolitano dealt with the start of this issue. Airplanes do go in both directions of people can come and go. If you are a u. S. Citizen, short of putting you on the nofly list, its rather difficult to keep the u. S. Citizen out of the United States for obvious reasons. When one returns, a variety of Law Enforcement and intelligence ofncies may be keeping track your travel or what you are doing in the United States. Thent cover as much of intelligence or National Security side as it pertains to foreign travel and things such as syria other than the crossover in recent days. Isthe degree that someone considered a concern to the government, there are a variety of databases in which their name can be added. Government, it sounds like big brother, but they can keep track. If you are entering the United States on a visa of some sort, there is a paper trail to you and there are background checks. Some would argue that they are not as successful or complete as they should be. They do exist and the systems are in place. When you travel into the United States on an airplane, your information, your name, is provided to Homeland Security in advance of your flight. If you fly in from london, two or three days before your flight, that airline will notify the department of Homeland Security with their manifest. On the day of the flight, they will get an updated manifest and continually check that to say we want to talk to this individual. Jfk, i have been in afghanistan and turkey and potentially syria and we would like to talk to her. I may end up going into secondary inspection. Then it gets into the weeds as to what they will do and how they will talk to me. As a u. S. Citizen, i will be able to come home. Short of being on the nofly list, im basically going to be able to get in. They may talk to me extensively and i may miss my connection out of jfk because i will be with Border Protection. There are a number of layers to security. Some are obvious and some are less obvious. Well mostot the wellversed in those areas. I cover immigration and Everything Else that happens in the u. S. But there are a serious number of layers that are designed to catch folks. Host next up is georgia, independent line. Caller thank you all. Let me see if you can clarify a couple of things. And dronescurity started up under the Bush Administration. House and in 2006, it was found out that the Bush Administration did not want the wiretaps. We recently found out that snowden had help. All these practices started in he Bush Administration and owns the Contracting Company that snowden was working for. The terrorists we should worry about the most is the right wing neonazis. Host you put a lot out there. Wiretaps, imless not the most educated on that so it would be silly to go down that road. As far as snowden, yes, there are reports this week that he aps trick to college colleague into providing a password. Who started those programs and the legalities and so on . Thats not something i can really address in an educated manner. I know what you know. I read the newspapers every day. I dont have the most detail on that. Mentioned a lot of things started under the Bush Administration so how many carry on in this administration . Guest a lot. Under the Bush Administration, 9 11 occurred. Thats a timing issue. You had the patriot act. That the department of homeland set up andat was with that, a lot of changes in Border Protection and customs. Less ins. Border patrol left ims. Ins. Now youre dealing with one agency. In terms of drones and the nsa, thats not something i could directly address. Those are largely programs run by other component agencies other than the Homeland Security. The nsa and other agencies run those programs. Homeland security has a significant role in the Intelligence Community but they are not the lead in addressing mr. Snowden. I could not intelligently go into how he did what and under whose guidance. Had to bejohnson approved by congress. What are relations between him and congress. . As far as the nominating process, what can you glean from that . Guest he did not have a lot of detractors. If you aree change out there in Middle America thinking that finally there is somebody who has been selected who is not being harassed on either side. Jeh johnson to quote. He said i love congress. He popped in on a number of offices and surprised some lawmakers pleasantly. He appears to genuinely enjoy the interaction with lawmakers. We will see if he enjoys the interaction with 122odd committees and the like that claim ownership in some capacity over the oversight of Homeland Security. It is the most overseeing department in the government. As a comparison. They have a handful of committees that has some oversight versus 122. Give him six months or eight months and we will see if he still likes congress. So far, its an amiable relationship. We saw more contentious back andforth with secretary napolitano and the senate, particularly senator mccain. We will see if that happens. We are only 1. 5 months in. He is just getting you to the office and getting his arms stretched out a little bit. Time will tell but so far, so good. Host initially, people like senator mccain and senator graham, any sense guest everybody seem to say welcome aboard, you seem like a good guy from your work at the pentagon. You dont come into this with immigration experience which secretarya knock on johnson, it was the lack of immigration and Law Enforcement experience. He brings that National Security and intelligence side of it. You are marrying those. So far, there has not been much criticism. His deputy facing ordinary criticism. There was the Inspector General reviewed thats still out there from his time at uscis which is the functional agency of administering immigration benefits. Butad denied any wrongdoing members of the senate said to hold this up. He has been approved and been in office now about 1. 5 months as well. Differentompletely nomination process and completely different confirmation process. Some republicans did not arrive for his confirmation hearings. Secretary johnson had the exact opposite experience. They went through some formalities and they liked what they heard so far. Things change. Six months or nine months or one year down the road, will everybody still be friendly . We will find out host michigan, democrats line. Caller good morning. I dont know if you can answer my question. Our young black men are being recruited for terrorism. Whats the difference between terrorism in america or in other countries . I think of all the murders that have happened to young black men either by the Police Department or White Supremacy groups. Thats what im more concerned about. There is a violence problem in the country and a handgun problem in the country which is an issue i also cover. How the department of Homeland Security plays into that is murky. Youve got more in terms of Domestic Crime for the fbi and the atf at the federal level and then you go down to the local and state level. Secretary napolitano several years ago warned that one big threat is this homegrown right wing extremists. She backed of the considerably after some fallout. That affects the Domestic Community is more of a local issue. It gets to the Justice Department to some degree and we have seen the Justice Department get involved in a variety of cases across the country at various times. Civil rights a doj Justice Department issued. Isre homeland gets involved like muslim communities and the concern that by creating a divide or creating a suspicious community, you potentially get folks to not come up and say my neighbor seems to be doing something a little screwy. They started the season on thing, Say Something campaign which they say is widely popular and successful as it prevented any significant events, none that i am aware of, but you dont know what you dont know. Dont know what has not happened. Outreach is a big issue. What the caller was referring to is more of a local police and state police and department of justice concern. Host rainbow city, alabama come republican line. I have something to say. I came into this country 45 as a political refugee. I escaped from a communist country. I have traveled to other countries. What i dont understand is why the United States has a civilian of itsuarding the border country when there is a military. We are guarding the borders of afghanistan and we were guarding the borders of a rack of iraq and we cannot guard our own borders with the military . If they put the military there on the border, there is people a canal a, dead in oka now in oka now a in okinawa. They should put the military there and forget about the civilians. Guest thats a pretty good question. The military cannot operate within United States and a Law Enforcement capacity. You dont get to do it. You can authorize the national guard. We saw that after Hurricane Katrina and hurricane irene. They can be there in disaster situations. Es have seen patrolling humve and society but they me\ a literary but the military does not offer that. I have hung out in the desert with the Border Patrol which is not the most fun or exciting thing to do. They cannot function as Law Enforcement or Border Police because the law just does not provide for it. They were there is a backup and i do a lot of drug interdiction down in Southern New Mexico and parts of west texas and arizona to a degree. Putting the military there, youve got to change a whole bunch of laws. So far, that does not appear to be something anybody wants to do. There are at least 22,000 Border Patrol agents and the vast majority of them are at the Mexican Border. There is talk in the newest immigration incarnation in the senate of doubling that to about 44,000. It is anybodys guess whether that will happen. Military, the law does not provide for that ability. Host ray from twitter guest i have not sat in meetings with these two gentlemen but a secretary serves at the pleasure of the president whether it be president bush or president clinton or president bush before that or president reagan. You serve at the pleasure of the president. Will you tell him no, you will not do what i want what you want me to do . There may be discussions like that in certain instances but the white house has the privilege of dictating the general policies and procedures of the department. We have seen the Justice Department act independently because its the Justice Department and thats what it does. Laws that have been established in various administrations and so on. Securityt of homeland has a series of laws to enforce. This administration has decided how we will enforce these. There is a giveandtake of certain things that you have to do. Is the fundamental function of government. The department of defense cannot decide to go to war because they feel like it. They have to go through a series of hoops, not the least of which is the white house and whatever administration happens to be occupying the building. To a degree, secretary will do what the president asks. Does he have a reputation of being forthright and honest . Guest im not certain. We have not heard anything negative about him. No one has come out of the woodwork to say that jeh johnson is this or that. They say he is well thought of within the department of defense. He appears to be well thought of within the department of Homeland Security now. It is new so we will see how that works out. He is a thoughtful guy. He was in charge of the countries legal processes for executing a war largely over the drones. That is a lot of responsibility. He was entrusted with that and is now entrusted with one of the largest of not the largest departments i think its second to the department of defense running that entire department. Multiple somebodies have a lot of trust in him. He was well regarded by the and passed confirmation easily. He appears to be a guy so far that people take his opinion and his direction seriously and they are appreciative. Time will tell if he finishes his term with a stellar reputation and a stellar history or if he goes down is just of as just another guy. The jury is out so far. Host does he have a role in the current drone strikes . Guest thats a department of Justice Department of defense issue. Just saw a story from a colleague of mine from the Associated Press discussing the thought pattern behind the potential strike of a u. S. Citizen abroad who is plotting or is believed to be plotting attacks against u. S. Troops abroad. That is not something to department of Homeland Security would have any purview in. Are they asking him aside in a Cabinet Meeting . I certainly could not rule it out. They dont invite me. I asked them is just one of those things. Host california, democrats line, hi. Caller i like what youre guest said about build me a 17 foot fence and i will build you an 18 foot ladder. Guest i stall that. I stole that. Our latin immigration is less than 50 of our problem. We have people flying over to the United States that come here on a oneway ticket with their passport and stay. I think this is a racial issue. Patrol is a federal issue, not a state. States that try to take on this issue are breaking the law because it is federal. Federal employees take your very immigration problems. I wanted to voice my opinion. Californiaouthern and i have a lot of spanish friends. I have a couple of spanish roommates. That we are cherry picking. That was my comment for today. The 11 oddt half of million estimated immigrants living in the country illegally are thought to be visa overstays. That means you arrived here on a visa and we said, on and then have fun and go to disneyland and then leave when you are asked to. Not everybody does, obviously. The question becomes how to find them. No one has come up with a great answer is yes. Congress has said for years now to create an exit system so that you know who is leaving. When alisha leaves, we should know she left on time. We dont have that exit system yet. The department will say and has said that we have a pretty good handle on visa overstays. They say we have looked at and generally know who is here and who is not. Congress says that is not the case. They say you dont have an exit system. Thats in transition. His starkly, it has come down to the department of Homeland Security has said time and time again that it is too expensive to create a physical exit system. Your fingerprint and literally check out like i would check out of a hotel. The argument is that you would have to redesign airports and so on. What they are trying to do is keep track with high manifests with flight manifests so the department of Homeland Security knows who is flying and where and when. So if you dont pop up 62 days after your visa was first checked in, you might still be here. Are they going to hunt you down and deport you . Thats a different issue. The department has laid out a series of priorities primarily those who pose a security threat. If youre being arrested for serious crimes, they will certainly catch up with you at some stage. Working under the table and doing your thing as you are not breaking the law and you have been here for number of years even though you are here on a visa overstay, chances are you have more leeway. There are some programs in development within the department to apply for potentially legal status or temporary status. Of visa overstay is one that has plagued the department for a number of years. It has plagued the country for decades. Folks you keep track of who got here on a visa and came re illegally and then overstayed . Its not like disneyland where you can close the gates. Host time for one more call. Republican line and we just about out of time so go ahead. Of the first of all, seven or 8 million illegal aliens in our country that hold jobs, over half of them got those jobs i presentation to their employer of forged Social Security cards and then by lying on
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.