the world economy. that's a lot of leverage. we should use it to address problems such as china's disregard for intellectual property rights, gross human rights violations, unfair trade practices, currency manipulation, the looming presence of china's state-owned district. in addition the u.s. e.u. partnership is critical to more realistic approach to russia. i know samir might disagree and i'm assuming the present why but i feel like we have gotten precious little from russia in return for concessions on nuclear weapons. the reason is because russia's domestic politics shape its foreign-policy and an autocratic russia tends to be more anti-western and to act in ways that to integrate russia into the global community and the free international order. putin may talk tough, but he knows he is weak. everywhere he looks he sees --

threats to his rules real and imagined. he used a state-owned media to preach antis russian sentiments. he faces a rising china in the east and hostile islamic forces in the south but he tells his people the biggest threat they face is from nato. some of our allies in europe recently feel our recent recess with russia tended to ignore and in some cases undermined them. we need to re-energize and lead a united coalition with the european nations to tackle issues ranging from missile defense to the continued enlargement of nato. furthermore, we are successfully forming a western hemisphere energy coalition that takes advantage of the shale gas russell -- revolution. we will be able to have our european allies reduce the coerced dependence on russian energy. j. reenergize u.s. european coalition can help empower those forces within russia working to end corruption and open their political system. and if that happens, then it we

will be closer than ever to the bipartisan american vision, endorsed by both the clinton administration and the bush administration but they europe whole and free. face with a startup is this endangers national debt there has been increasing talk of reducing our foreign aid budget but we need to remember that these international coalitions that we have the opportunity to lead are not just military once. they can also be humanitarian ones. every region of the world, we should always search for ways to use humanitarian assistance to strengthen our influence. the effectiveness of our leadership in the service of our interest and ideals. when done so effectively, a partnership with the private sector with faith-based organizations and with our allies, foreign aid is a very cost-effective way but only to to export our values and our examples, but to advance our

security and our economic interests. one of the programs that i am proudest of is the effort that began under president george w. bush with robust congressional support and has continued under president obama and that is to combat aids in africa. millions of human beings are alive today because the united states and others and the global community are paying for they anti-viral medication. this investment allows us to say without any hint of exaggeration that by 2015, the world could see the beginning of the end of aids, something that was unthinkable just a few years ago. we need to continue this kind of foreign aid investment but not just have far but malaria control and vaccine programs and agriculture initiatives so we can make similar strides in preventing hunger and establishing a healthy global community. this is by no means intended to be a comprehensive analysis of our challenges and opportunities around the world.

after all we could dedicate an entire speech to the emergence of functional faith in africa or the challenges posed by the arab spring. my purpose is not to catalog our interest in every corner of the planet. my purpose is to argue that the world is a better place because of america's engagement in it and it will continue to get better only if we continue to engage. i disagree with the way in which the current administration has chosen to engage. while there are few global problems we can solve by ourselves, there are virtually no global problems that can be solved without us. in confronting the challenge of our time, there were more nations than ever capable of can and should bidding but there are still is still only one nation capable of leading, and i disagree with voices in my own party who argue we should not engage at all. we should heed the words of john quincy adams not to go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. i disagree because all around

us, we see the human face of american. it begins not with our government but with our people. millions of people have been the catalyst of democratic change in their own countries but they never would have been able to connect with each other if an and america did not invent. the atrocities of joseph kony would be largely unknown but in fact millions of people know about it, because an american made film and distributed on distribute it on another american innovation, youtube. even in our military engagements, the lasting impact of our influence on the world is hard to ignore. millions of people have emerge from emerged from poverty around the world in part because our navy protects the freedom of the seas, allowing the ever-increasing flow of goods between nations. long after the last american soldier has left afghanistan, god willing there will be a million strong productive and independent afghan women because

today, they are the first girls in generations to attend school, thanks to the generosity of the american people. we do these things because we are compassionate, but we also do it because it's in our national interest, because perhaps more than any other nation on earth, we understand that a world that is freer, more just, more peaceful and more prosperous poses less of a threat. now look i know this is a time of great uncertainty, time when many wonder if america is in decline and once again as bob kagan points out in his book however there've been other times when we felt less than confident about the future. went to look no further than a decade of might earth for an example. in the 1970s, we experience it acts against communism in asia, the collapse of trust in government, the oil shock, stagflation, high interest rates, soviet expansion, the hostage crisis in iran and disco

music. [laughter] americans are worried that something had changed for our country. we couldn't be certain our standard of living would improve generation after generation. and even less certain that we could maintain america's privacy in world affairs. sat has confirmed these worries and gained attention in a national debate. we had a nice run but nothing lasts forever the argument went. our problems are too numerous, our resources to depleted, our economy too dependent on dying industries and their public institutions to undetectable and arrivals too potent for us to keep pace with less stay ahead of the now they said back then, the most important responsibility of is vista manager declined and to mitigate its consequences at home and abroad. we know now of course that is not how it turned out. by the end of the next decade, few were speculating about the

what the world would be like without american leadership because we were once again in a unique unipolar moment when american power and influence seemed virtually unchallenged. that we are worried again and that is understandable. the pace of change in the world is so fast the challenges we face so numerous that many americans worry we cannot sustain our way of life at home much less maintain the burdens leading the world. the financial crisis, the steep drop in the value of our homes, a deep recession and excruciating slow recovery, high unemployment and stagnant wages, record budget deficits, the lack of confidence in the ability of our government and political system to solve problems, soaring energy prices, too long wars, new and complex threats to international peace and stability and the rapid rise of china as an economic competitor and a rival for global influence. there are plenty of reasons to worry and yet, with all these

problems, there's absolutely no reason why america cannot remain a global superpower in this century as well. we have a huge headstart in dealing with the challenges of transforming -- we have the advantage of concentrating energy resources productivity and innovation on figuring out the future. continued power is possible but it is not self-perpetuating. it will require us to do what every generation of americans before us has done, confront and solve the domestic challenges of our time. it may not seem that way if you follow the daily news coming in from around the world, but this new century is the as a time of great promise. it is not the promise of a perfect world, not one without injustice, violence, conflict hunger or disease, but a promise of a better world come better, r than the one we have today, better than the one we have ever known. a world where democratic elected leaders govern as was possible

democrats. a world where women -- is is not culturally acceptable. world where aids is a disease of history and starvation is no longer part of our future. a world of extraordinary innovation, the generations born of the world wide web in the most skilled collaborators that brand now that everyone everywhere can talk to anyone anywhere at anytime, they can talk to each other and come up with new ideas that are still unimaginable. above all else, the 21st century provides us the opportunity for more freedom, a world where more people are free to grow their economy, free to pursue their dreams, free to become prosperous. i left my last page of the speech. does anyone have my last page? [laughter] above all else the 21st

century provides the opportunity for more freedom. a world where more people are free, free to grow their economy, free to pursue their dreams, free to become more prosperous. this is the promise of this new century, but it will not happen if we are not engaged. it will not happen -- coble why does it have to start with us some say? why do we have to do it? refiner answer in the words of good american. this is why i needed this page. in an address to congress in 2003 british prime minister tony blair said, this is a quote, you might have been there that day. i know it's hard on america and in some small corner of this vast country in nevada or idaho, i have never been to but always wanted to go, i know out there there's a guy getting on with his life, perfectly happy, minding his own business saying the political leaders of this

country, why me and y. s.? white america? the only answer is because destiny put you in this place in history in this moment, in this time and the task is yours. so it is. for this century is a time of tremendous challenge, but it is also a time of tremendous promise. this is indeed the world america made and it is freer and more prosperous than it has ever been. it can be even better. as americans we cannot make that happen ourselves. but the world cannot make it happen without us. thank you very much. [applause] [applause] >> thank you very much senator revealed. this program is being webcast.

i want to repeat that again and if you want to reach us by twitter the hashtag is -- rubio. we did not have a great deal of time and i know you're both rush to get back. rush to get back to, but senator rubio i would like to say, you start by speaking of your longtime passion for foreign-policy and clearly in your speech you have demonstrated that. and you have made this point about the continued role of a strong america and a leadership sponsored by america. how concerned are you however, because this also comes during through in your talk, but the rise of isolationism perhaps sponsored by a number of people in your own party. >> well i'm not sure that the inward looking tendency and as bob points out in his book and i point out at my speech and many of the written it's always been the tendency of american -- of america do not want to get

engaged in the world that they don't have to. we don't really enjoy getting engaged around the world and telling people what to do. we have done so because history is called upon us to do so i don't think -- i think that combined with some of the domestic issues that we are facing today in the challenges that i outlined lead to the natural tendency of saying maybe it's time to look inwards once again. i think it's the responsibility policymakers like ourselves to remind people that there is no such thing as just an american problem and and every aspect of our lives is directly impacted by things going on around the world. i think that has always been sure sure that that's increasingly true given the global nature of our economy today and so i think that is why it is critical for us to explain to people that in fact, everything that we did today from the price of who they are going to be to the quality of the air we breathe is directly related to decisions being made overseas. >> okay let me then be specific and ask you about afghanistan which is the subject you barely touched on the talk. if you take a look at the latest

polling data, it's clear that more and more americans are getting fed up with a continued the continued american involvement in afghanistan. are you confident that the afghan armed forces will be able to pick up security for themselves in a timeframe that is quote acceptable to the u.s.? >> that partially will depend on us and it will depend on them that partially will depend on the commitment we make to ensuring that comes about. for example i think there has been tremendous progress with some of their elite forces, some the special forces that conduct specialized operations and there is great reason for optimism there. as far as the rank-and-file of the military forces there is more concerned. concern. part of the concerned and part of the instability about its future is because folks in the region are not quite clear what our long-term commitment is. if you are in the region and you think the american and nato are going to be gone in two years, you start hedging bets and you start figuring maybe this might not be smart to be to corporate

a because the people are going to be running this, the taliban in a few years in their mind are going to make us pay the price. part of it is this long-term agreement that hopefully will be the details of the announce and. hopefully we will start to get some certainty about the role of the isaf countries will plan that region. >> in other words you are saying that our remaining in afghanistan is more pork than the desire of the american people to get out? >> i think the desire for and it was a reflection of the fact that we have lost lives and treasure there and we cannot put a dollar figure on that. in terms of the number people that have seen loved ones lose their lives or be injured. clearly people are reflecting that. there's a certain level of conflict. i think it's critical once again and i don't believe a timeframe in afghanistan is an indefinite one vatican i think it's critical for public policymakers to clearly explain and persuasively explained to the american people why our engagement there is so important and not only does it honor the

sacrifice that has been dumb but a strategically important on a number of fronts. in addition to having a functional afghanistan that no longer is the place for future attacks against the united states to be coordinated for example in a strong and stable afghanistan our presence will provide many more options to do with increasing uncertainty and pakistan. >> and more stable afghanistan is a good strong stable possibility? >> i don't think it's going to think come canada but i certainly think it has the opportunity to create for itself a functional nation-state but again a lot of that will be dependent upon our commitment to helping them get there. >> you spoke about the importance of american leadership, especially in the middle east. let me ask you and try to bring in senator lieberman as well, you speak about du and helping to create the safe haven, providing food and medicine, communication equipment and then you add, quote, potentially weapons. now the word potentially does

not seem to me a clear definition of american leadership. so what do you mean potentially weapons? what kind? >> first of all we have to make sure that whoever it is ultimately we equip them or our allies equip them we understand the nature of who they are and their ability to protect these weapons from falling into the wrong hands. they have to show us increase in structural capacity. you can't just give that over to a force that is disorganized and can become, the weapons could fall into the wrong hands in the global marketplace so i think we need to see progress in terms of the development of more organization. >> how long? >> it all depends on how long it takes for them to organize. american leadership comes in helping them get organized. one of the criticisms of the eye here is we don't know with our position is and they are not well corrugated and i know you a chance to visit and you may want to comment. some of that is what we need help them with. certainly they are disorganized and not well organized. two years ago none of them were

involved in this endeavor. this is something that has sprung up from the grassroots. so i think you have to create that capacity before you ultimately make a decision like weapons and let me just say it doesn't have to be the united states. their other nations in the region that i think would be willing to step into that void and help along with the effort. >> senator lieberman i would like to ask specifically, you have spoken about the support of manpower in syria. am i right? >> that is correct. >> what about boots on the ground? do you go for that? >> there is no need for american boots on the ground because there is very broad willingness among syrian opposition to take the fight to assad. i will tell you that i admire marco for how expressive he has been about serious and how we are called on to do something there. this is a classic exhibit, an illustration of exactly what senator rubio is talking about,

which is almost everybody in the region, except iran, believes that one assad brutal slaughter of his own people has to stop and two, if he falls, it will be a devastating body blow to iran which almost everybody else in the region wants to see happen. but no one else in the region will assert any leadership unless we do. that is what they told john mccain in the q. and when we were there. i agree with what senator rubio said. at some point we have to work to get the opposition better organized. we have come a long way in a gear, having brought up in a country where assad did not allow any opposition to take shape, but at some point we simply have to say, we are going to help them. we are going to give them weapons to defend themselves and that will make them stronger and more organized. >> wait a minute, we are going

to give them to the u.s.? >> we in the rest of our allies. it's a lot of willingness to be involved but no boots on the ground. and frankly in our direct conversations with the political and military leaders of the syrian opposition, really what they ask for effectively all they ask for is weapons. gives the weapons to defend ourselves. we are not going to give up but we will not be able to bring down assad unless the rest of the world helps is. >> us. >> above talked about the link between syria and iran and i want to pick up a phrase from your speech senator. you said if all else fails preventing a nuclear iran may require a military solution. do you have in mind the use of american military power to bring down that nuclear iran option? >> we get into the tactics -- i'm always very cautious about the role the president has as commander in chief.

my bigger point is that ultimately we put full negotiations. we don't have a good track record of negotiations with iran. we would hope that would work and we would hope the sanctions would discourage them from continuing or empower some voices within that regime that are arguing that they should not go this far. this that is what we hope and we should try everything we can to avoid that but there is the reality. i think we have to come to the conclusion that and an iran with nuclear weapons is an unimaginable thing. is impermissible and no option should be off the table because of that. think the president basically said as much in the comments he has made. i think we are the most powerful military force in the world and is difficult to imagine a successful engagement that doesn't have significant u.s. engagement but once again while that should be discussed were hopeful a negotiation will work. i'm not necessarily overoptimistic about it. my bigger concern is reliance and negotiations would lead us to somehow postpone sanctions or walk away from some of the other things were working on. >> one final question because i know you're both anxious to get

back to work as we say up on the hill. >> not really, but. [laughter] >> as much as we are engaged in postal reform. >> one country about which you have spoken very warmly as israel and people talk about the possibility of israel taking direct military action against iran and perhaps even sometime this year. would u. you as a great supporter of israel back israel with that kind of operation? >> the leaders of israel have the same obligations of leaders of any country and that is to provide for the national security of their own people. i'm not in a position to sit here and dictate to israel's leaders what they should and should not do. i think a clear and more concise and more persuadable the american position is on these issues, the less likely they may be to do something like that in the short-term. ultimately, think we need to be very clear as i outlined in the speech that why we would prefer

for negotiation to work and sanctions to convince them, it may require tragically and that is the word because we are is one to avoid armed conflict of possible but the notion iran would have a nuclear capability is so horrifying that no option should be off the table. to clear the united states is on that the better off the region in the world is going to be. >> we have got time for two questions. i see about 20 hands immediately. but let me start here with eric in the middle there, you. >> senator, hi. thank you for your remarks. i'm garrett mitchell and i write "the mitchell report." as i listened, two things struck me at the outset. >> please on the short side if he can. >> that you said bob kagan's again as you know it's on obama's table also and as they listen to the litany of things you talked about, it seems to me

that on the sort of fundamental issues, there is not a lot of space between your vision and the vision for example that president obama is talking about. so my question is, after having been here for a couple of years and looking at this, do you get the feeling that the distance between your vision for example and the president's vision is on the fundamentals or is it at the margins and is it a reflection of the notion that the government is to choose? >> let me take your second question. in the middle there please. >> chris at the center for global development. you spoke about the western hemisphere and your hopes and concerns. i know you kind of omit it -- and the u.s. involvement so i know it's an issue that is kind of close to you and you have been very vocal about. your hopes for haiti and future u.s. engagement.

>> the second one i will take first because i visited haiti in january so i'm hopeful that the situation there will continue to improve. office that they have structural issues in that country. it as you were called their prime minister has now been forced to resign. the president has been ill and there've been all kinds of rumors floating around about what the future of of the government may portend but we always hope there'll be an establishment, democracy that will take deeper roots and become functional. right now the country has an, an overabundance of ngos and certainly the deep ngo presence in the country and the country, the government sometimes feel threatened by it. so the most important issue in haiti apart from the immediate aftermath is the establishment of long-term sustainable prosperity and how do you begin that? for haiti they started from scratch on virtually everything from educational system to the transportation systems but there is some good news beginning to emerge. there is an industrial partner

and the clinton initiative has been involved in where american companies are looking to build in some of the underdeveloped parts of the country which hopefully will create jobs which hopefully will start creating the fundamentals for an economy. the other fundamental challenges haiti has however our property rights and who owns title to wetland. it's hard to do business there so i think we can hopefully survive with technical support in terms of creating a registry where people can register their property rights and we will feel safer in terms of investing in a the country and the feeling it will be protected under the rule of law. ultimately education which is striking to me is such a strong societal value. >> families in haiti even the poorest families come me see their kids to get to go to school and dressed in the most impeccable uniforms because it's a reflection of how they value education and how important it is to them. i know it's a cliché to say that but if we can empower the new generation of children haiti to have a knowledge base where they can then be employable and skilled in trades, we can combine that with the trade of some of the diaspora trained in the annie ended in florida.

may be can begin to see a little bit of a reemergence there and a little bit of progress. so so far it has been slow coming for the country but it has not had a golden age and certainly hasn't been the last two or three decades. on the first question about the differences in policies. i always try to take foreign-policy nonpartisan as much as policy. it weakens her hand in the world and maybe it's because i'm new here but it has always been my perception that when you deal with foreign countries and we deal with foreign relations the nation as a whole has a stronger hand on partisan or certainly irresponsibly stated. that being said there might be a fundamental difference of opinion. it's not that we shouldn't be engaged but how we engage and i think it may be -- the present administration had an over reliance on institutions, global institutions whether secure counsel with united nations to take the lead on some of these initiatives and i use libya is

one example. we did engage in libya and we engage pretty significantly on the front and probably for the first 72 hours, four days and then we kind of backed off and allowed our allies to going into much of the work. it ultimately turned out fine. my argument was not that it did not work out in an. and. my argument was that the u.s. had been more engaged the job would have been done sooner and what that would have meant as the following. we would have less militias running around but every now which would then it easier to get a national central government form. right now they're having a real challenge getting these militias to turn over their weapons. the conflict would be less protracted and less injuries and death would ultimately is counterproductive for the society and we would have more influence on the outcome even though i must tell you i visited libya probably a month after the fall of gadhafi and i was taken aback by the amount of pro-american graffiti on the walls and the people that would come up to us in the streets and say thank you president obama, thank you united states for what you did for us.

and the clear recognition that they u.s. was involved and the effort and i applaud that. if we had done even more we would have even more influence on the way it was going to turn out. ..

i am so pleased that senator lieberman could be with us as well. >> thank you all so much for coming. if you would all be seated until the senators leave, that would be much appreciated. thank you very much. [applause] >> c-span congressional directory is a complete guide to the 112 congress. inside, you will find each member of the house and senate, including contact information, district maps and committee assignments. also, information on cabinet members, supreme court justices, and the nation's governors. you can pick up a copy for $12.95 plus shipping and handling at c-span.org/shop.

>> we are at the national public radio table. you guys are still here. [laughter] that is good. i couldn't remember where we landed on that. [laughter] >> this weekend on c-span, the 98 annual white house correspondents dinner. president obama and jimmy kimmel headline the event before an audience of celebrities, journalists, and the white house press corps. coverage starts with a red carpet arrival live at 6:30 p.m. watch the entire dinner only on c-span. you can also sync up your experience at c-span dinner hub. find guest lists, highlights of the nerds, and blog and social media posts. c-span.org/wh cd. live on saturday at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span.

>> homeland security secretary janet napolitano told congress on wednesday the alleged hiring prostitutes by secret service agents in colombia was inexcusable. but she said that the present security with was never compromised for the president. she testified before the senate judiciary committee for two hours. >> i think we can get started. senator graham is here. i know senator schumer talking briefly before. senator grassley has told me he is over on the house side. is that correct? and he will be joining us. senator kyl is here. senator grassley said go ahead,

and we will. secretary, you know senator kyl is from the state of arizona, i believe. i suspect you do. i want to welcome secretary napolitano back to the judiciary committee. we are continuing our oversight of the department of homeland security. she is testifying here and has done so before. i speak for everyone -- every member of the committee that she has been responsive as we have called with questions in between the testimony period this is our oversight of the department of homeland security. the women and men of the agency is work everyday to keep america safe. much attention has been focused

on the incident prior to coming president obama's attendance and southern america in colombia. i have spoken number of times with secret service director sullivan, we met privately for about an hour yesterday. we have been on the phone half a dozen or a dozen times. i have no the director from the time that he was an agent. i knew that he was appointed under president bush board director of the secret service and under president obama is a reappointment. i know that he shares my view that the alleged conduct was unacceptable. i think he is doing all he can to ensure a timely and thorough investigation, accountability for behavior that has failed to

meet the standards he expects. certainly, the standards for the president of the united states and the american people deserve. he has taken action on 12 agents who have been involved in misconduct. last week, during the bipartisan briefing, the judiciary staff committee and the officials of the department of homeland security office and inspector general, i asked the director to ensure that he is available as the investigation continues. and he said he will be. he will make sure that we know when the investigation is thinnest and everything that we found. i have no doubts that you are treating this situation with equal seriousness, according to my conversations with you. you have talked a great deal with the director during this time. nobody wants to see the president security compromised.

nobody wants to see america in paris. i pointed out to the director that we have -- optically, we have to protect the president of the united states, or else it will be protecting the republican man who is the nominee for president, governor romney. i can't think of anything, aside from the personal tragedy, anything that would look worse to the rest of the world if something happened to either president obama or governor romney, especially during a presidential election. i believe everyone here would agree with that. your first appearance as secretary, he focused on using law enforcement resources in a smart and effective manner. of course, immigration laws. dealing with immigration and

talking with john morton to follow through. it is a positive step forward. this new policy has the effect of way of improving this end you stand by your commitment to focus on the most important population. esther martin was in vermont. we discussed back then, too. you are doing the best you can. taking a meaningful and comprehensive immigration reform. as you know, i supported president bush's efforts for meaningful and comprehensive immigration reform. i would still like to see that happen, although that has very little impact on my state, but has enormous impact on the rest of the country. as we hold this hearing today, the supreme court is hearing arguments on both arizona immigration enforcement law.

the constitution declares the no government to support a rule of naturalization. this is a subject we could act upon and should act upon. it should not be a hodgepodge of conflicting state laws. i hope we can get back to where we can do good, strong bipartisan commission policy. in 2010, we passed an emergency appropriations major to provide $600 million. we also made reportedly significant strides there. i understand the illegal border crossings have declined. we have seen steady increases in more protection. since monitoring our borders, i take special notice that you are working with canadian officials on the border initiative, coordinating on our shared

northern border. i am impressed with that. it is very rare that someone is parochial in any one of these committees, but in vermont, many people visit the border and enjoy all that vermont has to offer. when i was a youngster, you just found going to another state -- it was back easy going back and forth between the border. we take that for granted. i hope that we can work on that to keep it protected and keep the borders open as possible. i am pleased that the senate recommendation programs are among your programs. that is one of your jobs. we have worked with that in vermont. i look forward to working with the reauthorization of this program.

senator grassley and i have been working to get this and other expiring visa programs reauthorized by bipartisan measure. we continue to work with you and the director to strengthen the program. i have raised issues creating procedures with the technology of the air force. i continue to have questions about these policies. the impact of the privacy and health of americans. when this technology happens in the most effective use of resources. honestly, when you see an elderly person in a wheelchair going through a lot of screening, i am not quite sure how that is keeping us safer, but we can talk about it. i want to make sure that it is before the national federal security, that we protect our rights and civil liberties. finally, i want to commend the women and men who work in these agencies. there are so many of them, all different types.

i know that they work very, very hard, care about our country. many of them are working hard to adjudicate immigration benefits for the vermont service center. we will expand the workforce for the vermont service center. senator grassley, senator kyl, do you wish to make an opening statement? >> no, mr. chairman. we would like to hear from the secretary and then we will have questions. >> secretary, it is your -- it is open to you. then we will go to seven minute rounds. we will rotate from side to side in the order which people arrive. secretary, please go ahead. >> thank you chairman leahy, and members of the committee.

i am pleased to be with you today. i think the committee for your support of the department over these past three years, and indeed, if the department was founded more than nine years ago. before i begin, i want to address the allegations and misconduct by secret service agents in colombia. the allegations are inexcusable, and we take them very seriously. since the allegations were service, i have been in close touch with director sullivan. the director took immediate action to remove the agents involved, and a full and thorough investigation is underway to determine exactly what transpired and actions we need to take to ensure that this kind of conduct does not happen again. director sullivan has the presidents and michael confident. investigation will be complete and thorough, and we will leave no stern stone unturned.

thus far, the implication has a implicated 12 secret service personnel. eight individuals are separated from the agency. the secret service is moving to permanently revoke his security clearance of another, and three of the employees involved have been cleared of serious misconduct, local base appropriate administrative action. at this time, therefore, all 12 egret service personnel identified in the investigation have either the personal action or have been cleared of serious misconduct. let me be clear. we will not allow the actions of a few to tarnish the proud legacy of the secret service, an agency that has served numerous presidents entries men and women execute their mission with great professionalism, honor, and integrity every single day. i have nothing but respect for these men and women. many of whom put their own lives at risk for the president and many other public leaders.

we expect all dhs employees in the secret service and throughout the department to adhere to the highest professional and ethical standards, and we will continue to update the committee as the investigation proceeds, and more information becomes available. let me now move to the department's progress since 9/11. ten years after the terrorist attacks of september 11, america is stronger and more secure today, thanks to the support of the congress, the work of the men and women of the dhs, our federal, state, local partners, who work across the homeland security enterprise. as i have said many times, homeland security begins with hometown security. as part of our commitment to strengthen hometown security, we have worked to get information, tools and resources out of washington d.c. and into the hands of state and local officials and first responders.

this has led to significant advances. for example, we have made great progress improving our domestic capability to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against our people, our communities, and are critical of the structure or if we have increased our ability to analyze and distribute the information at all levels, through fusion centers, the nationwide suspicious activity reporting initiative, the national terrorism advisory system, and other means. we have invested in training for local law enforcement and first responders, in order to increase expertise and capacity at the local level. we have supported response across our country to approximately $35 billion in homeland security grants since 2002. we have proposed important adjustments to our grant programs for fiscal year 2013, to continue to develop, sustain and leverage these were capabilities.

our experience over the past several years has made as martyr about the terrace that we face and how best to deal with them. we've learned that an engaged, vigilant public is essential to efforts to prevent acts of terrorism, which is why we continue to expand the apc something say something campaign. we have also expanded our risk-based intelligence driven security efforts across transportation sector, the global supply chain, and critical infrastructure. by sharing and leveraging information with our many partners, we can make better informed decisions about how to best mitigate risk. over the past several years, we have also deployed unprecedented levels of personnel, technology, and resources to protect our nation's borders. these efforts, too, have it achieved significant results, including historic decreases in illegal immigration as measured by total after hitchens, and

increases in seizures of illegal drugs, weapons, cash and other contraband. in fact, illegal immigration attempts are at the lowest level since 1971. while violent crime in border communities has remained flat or falling in the past decade. we also focus on smart and effective enforcement of immigration laws, while streamlining and facilitating the legal process. lester, i.c.e. boot record numbers from the country of illegal aliens. 90% that were in our priority categories of criminal and repeat violators, recent quarter interest in immigration fugitives. we have focused on identifying and sanctioning employers who knowingly hire workers not authorized to work in the united states. we have made important reforms in our immigration detention system, so that every individual in custody is treated in a fair

and humane way with i.c.e. standards. we have worked with in visa programs to streamline entrepreneurs who wish to bring business to the united states, and improved business and services. in the area of cybersecurity, we also continue to lead the federal government's effort to secure civilian government networks while working with industry, state and local governments to secure critical infrastructure and information systems. we are deploying the latest tools across the federal government to protect critical civilian systems, while sharing timely and actionable security information with public and private sector partners to help them protect their own operations. with these partners, we are also protecting the systems and networks that support the financial services industry, the electric power industry, and the intellect to mutations industry,

to name a few. we stand ready to work with the congress to pass legislation that will further enhance our ability to combat threat in the cyberdomain. specifically, we support legislation that would, among other things, established baseline performance standards for the nations critical core infrastructure. remove barriers with information sharing between government and industry, so that we can more quickly respond to and mitigate cyberthreats were intrusions, ensure robust privacy oversight to ensure that voluntarily shared information does not impinge on individual privacy and civil liberties, including criminal penalties from misuse. and provide dhs with that flexibility to attract and retain cybersecurity professionals we need to execute our complex and challenging mission. mr. chairman, the threats against our nation from

terrorists, criminals, or cyberadversaries, continues to evolve. he just must continue to evolve as well. i look forward to working with you and members of the committee to build on the progress we have achieved as across the mission areas. we remain ever vigilant to threats as we continue to promote the free movement of goods and people essential to our economy. and to protect our essential rights and liberties. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. of course, we will put your post statement in the record. the jurisdiction over the secret service, we did want to ask you some questions later. of course, all americans are concerned about the safety of our president, whether it could've been jeopardized by this behavior. just as i am concerned about the safety and any of the project he is. i mentioned governor romney, but there are several others.

with the misconduct, did that pose any risk to the present security in colombia or to national security? >> mr. chairman, that was my first question to director sullivan when he called me. the answer is no, there was no risk to the president. >> you made that assessment? >> yes, based on the information supplied to me by the director. >> is the secret service coordinating its internal investigation with the department of defense and the u.s. agency that might have been involved, preparing for the president's arrival? >> mr. chairman, we reported in the investigation with the inspector general. we have an existing come away with the ig between the secret service and the ig. they are, in effect, supervising the investigation, even though it is being done by secret service agents. >> was there any evidence that

the presence of dance team was involved in this misconduct? >> i have not been informed of any such evidence. >> as we continue to look at this, we know the agents are trained to what is acceptable. what is unacceptable -- are there standards in place governing appropriate conduct for agents on foreign trips and how they may interact with locals went on assignment? if there are such standards, how are they convey to the agents? >> there are standards. they are conveyed through training and supervision. one of the things we are doing, mr. chairman, is looking at the standards, training and supervision, to see if what if anything needs to be tightened up. we don't want this to be repeated. >> is training given to agents related to private or intimate contact with foreign nationals when traveling for security work? >> the training is focused on

professionalism him on conduct consistent with the highest moral values and standards, and i think that would include your question. >> well, secretary, i know that when we travel -- members of congress travel that's we go to regular security and foreign intelligence advisories. in some countries, for example, we leave all our communication gear dismantled dismantled with u.s. security officers. and so forth. our agents giving training and security and foreign intelligence, for a particular country they might go into? >> i think that that is part of the advanced process, mr. chairman. >> so if this was thought to be an intelligence threat in a

particular country, they are advised that? >> yes. >> again, during my career during the cold war period, we had some of the assessors who were given somewhat different -- some of the assessments at different today, and we increase types of communication here. electronic -- i'm assuming that is geared based on today's real threats? >> do you mean how to secure argumentation's equipment and -- >> what things an individual must look for -- this is a country that they are going to -- is it going to be a threat from -- agents of another country? >> the agents are informed as to what the intel is, what specific country or country specific

measures need to be taken. in this instance, mr. chairman, there was no intention on the security of the president. there was no access to any secure information by the people involved. >> you know, i have been in many cases where the secret service is around. always very professional men and women. i have traveled with several different presidents over the course of my career. lots of secret service. again, very professional men and women there. when i heard the number of the agents involved, i thought particularly -- when i got my first call at home from the director, the head of my staff looked into it. the bipartisan staff of the committee looked into it. the numbers i found were shocking. to your knowledge, is this the first time that something like this has happened, or have you

had reports of similar incidences in the past? >> mr. chairman, i ask the same question, and over the past two and a half years, the secret service office offered a professional responsibility -- there has been no noncompliance. the secret service has provided protection to over 900 foreign trips and 13,000 domestic trips. from that standpoint, there was nothing in the record that suggests that this behavior would happen, and it really was, i think, a huge disappointment to the men and women of the secret service to begin with, will pull very high standards. they feel their own reputations are now besmirched by the actions of a few. >> to the extent listening to

this hearing, i would hope that they would not be distracted from their jobs. those who are protecting governor romney and those who are protecting president obama, and all the other people they protect. that has to be the choppers. even the director have the job of seeing where we go from here. can you assure us that there will be -- there will not be -- can you assure us that there will be -- it will be made very clear to secret service agents with this kind of conduct is not condoned. >> that is our goal, mr. chairman. there are three things that i immediately discussed with the director. the first was to make sure that the present security was never at risk. number two was to make sure that we instituted a prompt and thorough investigation into the actual allegations in colombia, and three, what other steps we

need to take for the future to make sure that this behavior is not repeated. >> on a different matter, we are going to turn to the reauthorization violence against women act. the provision of visitors authorization would increase the number of temporary visas for those cooperating with law-enforcement officers and cooperation. sometimes the best sources of information, including domestic violence and sexual assault -- law enforcement all over the country support this. does the department of homeland security support this provision of increase of visas for the purpose and cooperation of criminal cases? >> absolutely. >> i told you i am running over my time, but the question before

about technology use for screening, i was very concerned about the earlier x-ray type machines. ..

cost about 12 million? >> i'm not sure they cost that much because part of the contract of the vendor was that the software change, the hardware would be able to accept the software. but all verified who is 12 million or not. >> what companies provide this? >> rapid scan and all three are the two major vendors. >> senator graham, i apologize for taking the extra time. please go ahead and answer. >> welcome, matt and secretary. i enjoyed working with you on some things you need to south carolina and the country security issues as a whole. my experience in the secret service is very similar to what senator leahy said. really it is basically the time i travel with senator mccain during the last presidential election and i'm very impressed by the people coming for your hard work and a lot of time with long hours you suggest any kind

of military problems and you don't want to paint with a broad brush, the 99%, let's start with that baseline. but just like in the military, abu ghraib another systems obviously felt on an odyssey of system failure here. but the likelihood that this is the first and only time that such behavior occurred, do you think that's great or not so great? >> i think part of our investigation is confirming that this was an aberration, or not. but i agree with you, senator. the secret service does a marvelous job. i have worked closely with them. >> the only reason i suggest we need to look harder is because we are lucky to have found out about this. that may be an argument when the agents for lack of better word about money we probably would've

never known about this. so the point is that you've got a good order and problem. do you believe the agents were confused they were wrong? >> i don't think it's a lack of training. i don't think anybody -- >> you know, i think the conduct was unacceptable, unprofessional. as i said in a statement, i think the people most disappointed the men and women of the secret -- >> i couldn't agree more. but human beings being human beings don't make mistakes. organizations can get lives. being a military lawyer for 30 years, one of the first things we would advise the commanders, a new squadron commander is you've got a bunch of people in the military for first time away from home. go to the barracks when they least expect you to go. show that three in the morning for the first sergeant edward

peaked out pretty quick you've got to watch what you do in the barracks because you never know when the commander is going to show up. is there any similar program or supervisors from the home duty stations that go out and visit people on a random basis? >> i'm not aware of that, which is not to say there isn't one. i just don't know the answer. that is one of the reasons we continue our work and want to continue to brief -- >> me i suggest you look at a program similar to what the military does, where people from the central body would show up on an unannounced basis without the world and let people know that somebody back on this watching might do some good in the future. is there any exit interviews done for people leaving the organization when you ask them? does anything bother you? have you seen anything during your time that bothers you? because we do that in the military trying to find out how it works and people are leaving. >> under civilian agency.

there are exit energy interview somewhere that is asked or something like it. i don't know the answer, but i can finally answer out for you. >> i think we should look at changing the system a bit so people away from home never really believed their way from home. seems like someone's always watching. >> senator, willie got this from the aspect as i said earlier, one of which the president security impinge to discipline for the agents involved in three, what do we need to do to take many standards that need to be tightened? so i take your suggestions very seriously. >> i think this is a bipartisan bipartisan -- mr. sullivan have never met the man, but everybody who knows and think of nothing but good things to say about him. we want to get this behind us and not have the problem emerge again. homegrown terrorism -- would you

agree that probably the idea of homegrown terrorism and they attacked from within is greater today than it was then maybe five years ago? that the radicalization? >> i think that's right. i think we have seen -- when i say terrorism continues to evolve, that's one of the evolution specie. radicalization to the point of terrorist violence and we have seen several episodes across the united states in the past several -- >> let's go to the recent tragedy in france where you had a young french citizen, my slum who went to i think pakistan to study the madras that they are, came back to frampton engaged in horrific acts of terrorism. do you worry about that happening here in the united states? >> one of the things we did in the wake with senator looseness to analyze what happened in that case and were there any early signs of indicators come anything that would give us an

early tripwire to some in the united states is getting ready to do the same thing? >> terrorist organizations are trying to come to her country and recruit within our around. is that a fair statement? >> it doesn't really require a visit. you can do it online. >> that's exactly right. to contact her people through the internet. and recruit them and unfortunately there's some immigration advocate before the supreme court today. each person can make their mind up about south carolina and arizona on the lot and what we need to be doing. the president and his campaign in 2000 a prominent immigration reform and his first year. do you believe there was a real genuine effort to make that happen? >> as someone who spent a lot of hours visiting members of congress on the hill to see if there was any room for

negotiation of the comprehensive bill, i would say yeah, there is a serious effort. >> so it is congress this fall? >> senator, i think all of us have a responsible to jonah bipartisan way with a problem. >> we didn't deal in a bipartisan way with health care. not one republican voted, yet six vote on the democratic side hit a huge majority in the house. so i guess my point is that i believe there is much of an after to deliver comprehensive immigration reform that i think it's congress' fault. and not making this a priority with a large majority to work within each has health care over immigration and here we are. so not to say that the parties blameless, were not. i just want to understand when people talk about this issue that we remember exactly what happened. 60 democratic senators, large majority in the house. do you remember any bills coming out of the house dealing with

immigration reform? >> you know, senator m. not familiar and i obviously disagree with kind of how you are putting the issue. but i think we can both agree that at some point we are going to have to deal with comprehensive immigration reform. >> thank you or image for your service. >> thank you. parenthetically. i sat on the meetings with president bush on immigration reform. i strongly supported his efforts. i sat on the bipartisan meetings that president obama hunt was some of the same people who were at the president bush won and the follow-up and i recall him being told, don't bring it up because it's not going to go anywhere. but i hope and i still hope in the senate that we will have comprehensive immigration policy is we need it.

senator feinstein -- senator feinstein. >> thank you very much. martin secretary, i'm one that thinks you are doing a very good job and agency that is perhaps too large. i think it's 22 departments in over a couple hundred thousand people. it is a very big job. i wanted to concentrate my questioning on three areas. the first is student visa and fraud. an earlier last year i joined in a letter with senator schumer on this program and i am concerned that i.c.e. is not adequately certifying each educational institution. in may of 11 we had a case of tri-value university, a sham school certified for dirty

students bringing 1555 students and, nick and $4 million here that had is now being prosecuted. to make a long story short, the united states immigration and customs enforcement on around here as i.c.e. wrote an interesting letter on may 3, 2011 same days, the student asked the vp does not have the statutory authority to close noncompliant schools immediately, nor does it have the authority to restrict dso access to seven. and it goes on to say they have done a risk analysis under 6487 sevp school finance schools and low, medium or high risk

categories. here's a breakdown. low risk, 4700, medium risk 1276 schools. excuse me, 20%. and then there is high risk. 417 schools or 6%. of all of the schools examined. now here is what they say. many of the noncompliant schools are already the subject of criminal investigations. forestalling any administrative action to limit access to issues of form 520. please know that sevp pekin immediately on-site reviews once cleared to do so. can't they be cleared to do this early on? >> i think we have to remember, 9/11 hijackers came in on student visas, went to schools

that taught them how to fly, but not to land and nobody thought it was unusual. so i am really concerned about sham schools and that we have a good sense of who is coming in under a foreign student visa, whether they are attending the school at all. i do not is, madam secretary, for about 12 years. and initially, everybody object did to it. then they began to do it. now i see it eating up. so i wanted to bring it to your attention. >> i share that concern. the sham school shouldn't be allowed to operate. we have increased efforts against them. that particular letter i suspect is that we are coordinating with u.s. attorney offices in development districts they've asked us to postpone the start of action to their criminal criminal cases ready to go. i will follow-up on that. >> take a look at it.

>> the second thing is agriculture enforcement audits. obviously i'm a bias. with 81,000 farms in california. virtually all of the labor is undocumented. what happens is in harvest season, canning season, i.c.e. swoops in. i've tried for 10 years to get an act job bill through and i can't get it through. the fact of the matter is if we want american produce, the labor is generally undocumented and we have to find a solution. so i am hopeful and i know that you are doing aggressive ionized audit to target employers. i am very concerned that these are going to fascinates farm and farm dependent jobs.

thoughts? >> i think the base is his problem is that there is no provision under the current immigration bond that enables more agricultural workers to be documented. and so, we have some employers and we try to pick those who are really knowingly and intentionally violating the law when they have other options, trying to focus on them through the audit process. but the underlying issue goes back to the immigration law itself. >> senator schumer just murmured to me, most don't have other options. california is a state that can't use the h. 2a program, the visitor program. so it depends on a large skillet rotating, generally undocumented coterie of 600,000 workers for 81,000 farms. is i.c.e. swoops in, farmers can't plant, harvest can end

this has been happening. i want to bring it to your attention. and it is a hard problem. if this body won't take action, you're going to put ag -- we are going to put someone out of business and i'm really concerned about it. if there's any thoughts you might have, i would very much appreciate them. and the last point i wanted to raise with you is another long-standing issue in mind and it is the visa waiver program and biometric exit. for many years i have been trying to get data on visa overstates for each country to no avail this fire. last month, dhs assistant secretary, david heyman informed me by june of this year, dhs will have a fully operational

biographic exit system in place that is going to provide real-time information on those who ask that united states air force. this new exit system is expected to allow you to calculate overstates her country by may of this year. here's the question. i think this is very important because it's got 15 million people that come in every year. we don't know whether they leave are not on the visa waiver. his dhs on track to have a fully operational biographic exit system by june of 2012? >> senator, i believe the final plan is in the clearance process with omb, but that is our intent. >> good. will dhs be able to provide overstay rates per country by may of 2012?

>> we should be able to provide some of that information is not all. >> good, thank you. >> well, now we will go to senator grassley and senator cayo -- over to senator kyl max. senator grassley would've been next,, but we will go to senator schumer. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you in the senator grassley. this is an a first-time senator feinstein and i seem to have been thinking about exactly the same thing. then they quickly touch on this three things that were concerned to man student visas. it's not just a matter of sham schools, but also the failure of advice to follow up of students who have overstayed visas and the very poor record of schools providing information to i.c.e. second on the add workers, the rags could be reformed.

it's not just a matter of our failure to pass legislation here. h. 2a were reformed at the end of the bush administration and they were more workable i am told. i was then changed with the obama administration. if we could work more towards the kind of breaks that existed towards the end of the bush administration that might be at least a hope for some. on the visa overstates and the exit system that's going to ask about that. your budget actually was denied $30 million by the appropriation committee because of his frustration with the lack of a plan. we need to get the plan implemented as well as appier. let me go on to -- >> if i might, can i talk about the visa overstates issue? one of the things we have done over the last few years has added databases and been able to link them so that before these as i and shoot there is a check against our data, and ctc data

in certain nsa data. we have done now same name, gone backwards to find visa overstates and we have put god and prioritize those that provide any kind of public safety or security risk. we have looked at the backlog and i'll give you the inventory of what we have found and we are prioritizing those visa overstates. >> i understand. what is your estimate now, just approximately by the number of the visa overstates as a percentage of the toilet illegal immigrants in the country today? as opposed to those across the border illegally? >> well -- >> the numbers around 40%. is that -- >> that may be high number because a lot of people have in fact less.

>> 40% might be too high. that is the number that is usually given when we complain about lack of security at the border, dacey remember 40% of the people here illegally actually overstayed visas. he think the number is higher? >> and maybe a little high. >> in either event of the problem. it's fine to prioritize for criminals, but that's it small percentage. >> senator, we have to make the best use of the i.c.e. resources. >> that an secretary, every year sap or resources come resources come ask for them. no, we've got everything we need. and in excuse of not moving forward as we don't have enough resources. you can't have it both ways. if you need the resources ask for them. >> senator come as you know we're all working under constraints of budget control act. that's the gilstrap. to your point, yes, to senator feinstein's point, we believe these are keen interest.

>> so do we and we appreciate that. another very parochial but important point and i know you appreciate this. every time i go to the border, the first thing people talk about is not illegal immigration. it is the incredible delays at the ports of entry. we need a lot of things, and looting more officials at the border and the american side here that is not the total solution to the problem. a lot has to do with the inadequate link up on the mexican side of the border. at dinner posada and families, both i know you're intimately familiar with we need more agents. that's what they tell us down there. and yet that was not in the budget request. i would just ask you to please either ask for the agents we need there. and this is just to facilitate commerce between the two countries. >> yes. >> and should make life easier for people who have to cross every day. either ask for the budget or find some other place we can get

it or make your recommendation as to how could we move money around to provide for additional agents. the estimate at mariposa is about 250. doesn't seem like that many. we have to go to find the money. would you agree to work with us on that? >> will definitely work with you on that, senator. >> i appreciate because i know you know the problem. >> very well. it's not partisan. we all agree we need to resolve it. >> we want to facilitate the trade and commerce. there's a lot of jobs dependent on it. >> last point i want to make. six months ago you wrote a letter and then another three months ago about the lack of enforcement of the federal detainer's, specifically in cook county. at 630 we received a response to a letter. it certainly is a good response in pointing out the problem. where i fail to see the response is what you're doing about it other than writing minors.

this letter dated april 24 from nelson peacock ask unanimous consent to put in the record because as i said it lays out the problem from i.c.e.'s perspective and your perspective as well. cook county is not abiding by federal and detaining officials who have criminal records that you've asked them to detain. for example, since the board and it was not good, i.c.e. is plushy tanners for more than 432 removable aliens whose custody's have been charged or convicted with crime and then offenses. cook county is not honored any of these 432 detainer's. they point out a case of gravity recently reported in the "chicago tribune." and mr. peacock notes that this probably violates federal law. the only action that i can see taken here is two letters have been written in cook county has

been encouraged to change its policy and has been advised that if it continues this policy, it may result in denial of reimbursement to the state of costs under the scout program. he now come in the federal been aggressive in telling lawsuits against states to do something about illegal immigration coming but it doesn't look like the government is doing that much to enforce the law that currently exists with respect to detainer's. what more do you plan to do with entities like cook county, were obviously flouting federal law and jeopardizing american security in the process? >> i agree. i think cook county's ordinance is terribly misguided. and it is a public safety issue. we are evaluating a lot of options right now. you know, we always start out trying to work with local authorities and work things out. we today can cite no success there, so we are evaluating all options. >> i hope more than evaluating

you take action to be soon. will you report as soon as you decided what action to take? keep this advice rather than waiting for correspondence from us? >> we will keep the committee staff advised of how to proceed in there. >> appreciate that very much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator kyl. i also know today is undercut oseberg day. >> happy birthday. it is his birthday and appreciate him being here. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i wish senator pio happy birthday. you're an expert they may be even happier than this one. thank you coming mutually seriously. senator feinstein and i were just mentioning that a second

ago. first, two points of housekeeping. i am not going to good news for you. i'm not going ask you questions on the secret service. i have a lot of faith in your ability to get you the bottom that. all of you are shocked and hurt the troubled by it, but i think the kind of investigation you and your departmental do i have a lot of faith in. second, senator find a mention student visa issue when i believe she mentioned in the middle of her testimony unfortunately, shania rogelio. we will have hearings on the gao report when it comes out. so it should know about that. i have two questions here on other issues in your vast jurisdiction. the first relates to passenger advocates. over the past several months, there have been an increasing number of news stories about passenger complaints over tsa

screening procedures in these complaints include for instance the female passenger being told she could not carry her pump on board the plane while milk bottles were empty. imagine how a child is that way. asking for repeated inspections or body scanner machines for non-security reasons. asking elderly and disabled passengers to remove critical medical equipment and undergo strip searches prior to security clearing security. i like tsa and i think they do a good job and i was involved in setting them up. it's our job to balance security and commerce, but you can always make it better without impeding -- without one impeding the other. tsa's original response at the lower levels here is to first my wrongdoing and issue apologies. so in light of these incidences, senator collins and i decided to introduce legislation called the rights act. and the rights act will help

curb abuses in tsa screening simply by requiring the tsa to establish a passenger advocate program to resolve public complaints and conduct training of tsa officers to resolve frequently occurring passenger complained and also require every category x or 10 -- the big airport, let straight category acts -- it's a funny category. a through z. we don't know. anyway, to at least have one passenger advocate on duty at all time. someone is faced with the choice. they're lined up, do you think that's uncalled for. i don't expect every tsa agent to be schooled but at kennedy airport that handles tens of thousands of the common or someone who is trained that can come over in 10 minutes.

no new people, none of costs, one of the existing employees who knows about how to do this and can resolve this sticky situation and avoid the passenger the choice of undergoing an examination that they think is intrusive or humiliating or not going on the fly. so do you support the creation of passenger advocates of airport and will you work to rule those out at airports without the need for an act of congress? >> absolutely. and if i might, just to go through first as you know, tsa does a very good job and it's a very difficult job. you know, every morning i start my morning with a thread brief of what is facing us in the evolving world of terrorism and aviation security still remains the number one threat. but we have taken steps to try to make it less onerous. we have taken those over 75, children under 12 out of the routine lines.

the breast pump incident was not in accord with how we do that and they received appropriate training. so we keep trying to do that. the idea of having crosstrained advocate among our tsa personnel in the category at airports is something we support and tsa authority move toward that goal. >> that's great news. thank you. we'll avoid senator collins and my having to pass legislation. since legislation is so quickly these days to the senate, okay. second is a parochial issue, but of great importance to western europe. an accra air force base. i want to ask you about the possibility of constructing a border patrol station at nyack or air force base to replace the existing niagara falls station. as you know, the existing station is insufficient for your current needs. we all agree to that given all the new security we have had

terris crossed over the buffalo border. it? capacity needed to accommodate the number of agents now housed at the station, business basin resource or agents need to do the job. the new station can comfortably accommodate 50 agents, could be modified to accommodate even 75. the lawsuit include critical items at the border patrol needs, such as maynard building will be suited for mastering and training that will put an armory and necessary buildings that will have vehicle maintenance and close parking and kennels obviously we have the dogs at the border, too. the new station would be a win for border patrol and an accra air force base, which is being curtailed because of the cutbacks in the military. would you support the creation of a new border patrol station at an accra air force base? >> is very much under consideration, senator. the issue is for construction of a new facility, but certainly

nyack or is under consideration. >> so it's a good idea to have it there and we have to find the funds for a? >> that's one way to put it, yes, sir. >> i like the yes part of that answer. thank you. mr. chairman, i am finished. i would yield back my remaining time. >> thank you, mr. chairman. first, just a statement i want to give you an up date. first of all, i want to put a statement on the record. >> senator, i don't know that your microphone is on. >> i'm not talking right into it. that's the problem. i'm surprised you want to hear me, but thank you. [laughter] first, not. about 99% of the time when i write you, no good response strictly from you. the response comes from legislators. second and more frustrating, many times my questions are

rarely, if ever answered. third, delays are unacceptable. just five night i received a response from the department about cook county six months after my initial letter of inquiry. and zero so, just responded to questions we posed that the last judiciary committee oversight hearing, which took his last october. that is just to bring you up-to-date. that is not a question. i don't want a response to that. but the chairman and i want to get to the bottom of the secret service matter. i know the chairman has covered a lot of the issues i wanted to cover, so not going to go back over that. i thank the chairman for asking those questions. i was briefed by the secret service director and he responded about the insect or general been involved. and i have asked for that involvement. but he said he was already involved before i asked for it, so i complement direct or

sullivan on that. director sullivan has included the inspector general and the investigation up to this point. but i want to know if the inspector general is truly conducting an independent and impartial investigation. i think the same independent investigation is necessary from the inspector general in defense and from the white house to get to the bottom of the story for all the dance team staff that was in columbia. you mentioned in previous answer to questions, you mentioned that the i.t. supervising investigation. do you agree that the inspector general should conduct the full scope investigation to determine if this is a cultural problem routinely occurring in additional cities instead of just reviewing question number

two fall and complete access to the secret service investigation as far as you know it's not been a quattro issue. and to enact tears don't you think we are to make sense before david and the last two and half years were going back now and they've gone back even further at this point. in terms of the ig's involvement and supervision of the investigation investing these questions. we have an mla with the ig with the ig service that in these

kinds of cases, whether it's alleged misconduct, they actually commit a meaning the ig supervisory investigation, but they use investigatory resources at the service. that is how we manage this one and i believe the ig has been with the direct. during the congressional briefings to confirm that point. so we expect the ig should be conducting a full investigation. >> on another matter, dealing with cybersecurity, specifically one cybersecurity proposals would place your department, the lead agency in overseeing regulations for cover critical infrastructure. i have concerns that this proposal because it creates a new regulatory bureaucracy. i'm also concerned that this new regulatory power giving dhs background on overseeing the

chemical facility security, congress gave your department regulatory power over chemical facilities, regulations were issued 2007. friday's data come in nearly 4200 chemical facilities have come with the regulations, but your department has yet to approve a single plan. so far spending half a billion dollars and not getting anything approved. i have obtained a copy by secretary brand bears by two subordinates that details the problems dhs faces and implementing c-5. this memorandum is the most candid review of a failed federal government program i have seen. this memorandum details failures at an unprecedented level before hiring, hiring people not skilled, poor staff morale, management leadership failures,

lack of subject matter expertise, union problems and quotes, catastrophic failure to ensure personal and professional accountability. the memorandum also state that inspect his lack expertise to affect as they evaluate site compliance with cybersecurity requirements on top of this memorandum the department has failed to implement gao recommendations. so taken together, these reports paint an agency that cannot control cost management employees and effectively. it cost each is 489 to effectively regulate your chemical facilities, how much can we expect to cost the taxpayers of the department to regulate cybersecurity month thousands of private businesses? >> senator, let me take those issues, both of them. first, the c-5 or chemical

facilities. yes, we did a candid internal review because we were not satisfied that we were achieving results we need to achieve, which is tasty and security of our chemical facilities and their possible security issues with them. we now have a very aggressive correct to plan in place. i'd be happy to brief you or your staff on that. we have been impervious a specific plans. that process is really moving forward with great alacrity. so we have learned a lot and we are succeeding those problems. we have put new people in charge, done all the things one needs to do to make sure that a program is for defect to flee. with respect to savor, this is an area where our deep concern as the nation's core critical infrastructure on which farmers depend and small business depended everyone depends on is

very susceptible to attack and the attacks can occur in a variety of ways and we are seeking found means to have basic performance standards by that core critical infrastructure, have real-time information sharing so we can safely move in help medicate and share information it needs the pair were actually asking the congress to give us hiring authority so it's easier us to hire people who are experts in the cyberfield. so if the congress begins to consider this legislation, we hope they do it in a sense of what the risk posed is really to the country right now. >> next, senator klobuchar. >> well, thank you very much, mr. chairman and thank you and the secretary napolitano for

being here and the good work you've done and i share in senator feinstein sees that you've done a good job with very difficult challenges. and i also wanted to thank you for answering questions about what happened in columbia. in my old job as a prosecutor had very positive interactions with the secret service and i am hopeful that the action of a few won't overshadow the good work that they do every single day. but as you want to ask him questions about that because they think it really shook the trust of a lot of people and i think the way you make sure the actions of a few don't overshadow the actions of many, the good actions and how they sacrificed their lives everyday and put them on the line between making sure we clear up what happened, but also make sure that it doesn't happen again and that we have a clear understanding of what is going on. one of the senators asked about this cannot but there is a "washington post" report

recently that type about the fact that this may have been going on before. in fact, one of the visit, the person is identified, the one asian not in a matter remark that of course this happened before. this is not the first time. it really only blew up in this case because the u.s. embassy was alerted. and i just wondered if you could comment on that, how you think we need to move forward and how, to me this day seem to create a risk when you're in a country like columbia and your people doing things for they could potentially be brats. if you could just comment on that. >> well again, the actions were unacceptable and they were on except to vote taken by themselves. i think every mother of a teenager knows that a common defense is everybody else is doing it, so i get to do appear first, not everybody else is doing it in second, the behavior is not part of the secret

service way of doing business. but we are going to get to the bottom of this. we are going to make sure the standards and training, if they need to be tightened up our tight and we have moved with great speed to steal as disciplinary faction with the 12 agents involved. >> i don't expect you to real things that are public, but there are instances where people tried to bribe or blackmail agents because they believed or have some kind of interaction with or someone with them kinds of illegal activity? >> senator, i am not aware of any. as i've said before, the office of professional responsibility in the secret service went back to a half years. that covers 940 trypsin 13 million domestic trip did not have and not. any kind of a complaint. that doesn't obviously include

the ig. that is an independent entity. if we are looking to see and make sure this was not some kind of systemic problem. and most importantly, to fix the current >> and there was one agent that was in the president's hotel. is that correct? is also just identified. >> i believe that is correct. >> another question that was a completely different incident i think every employer has had incident is of people posting things on the internet and pictures of themselves, like maybe in their boss drinking a. that having an effect years ago as an interest. it was anything, but these are things that happen. when i happened upon force may come it takes a step above and i think much more of a security risk.

i know that recently one of the secret service agents reportedly posted photos on facebook to pick and himself on duty protecting a dangerous as presidential candidate therapy. as you at the secret service rules regarding agent sharing details of assignment online or otherwise and does the secret service have policies regarding agents use of facebook and other social media websites? >> yes, we do have a social media policy and we would be happy to provide you with a copy of that. and yes, to the extent there was such a posting, unprofessional and unacceptable. >> okay, very good. i wanted to ask you were working very hard on cybersecurity initiatives here going forward. can you talk about how homeland security is currently working with state and local law enforcement to prevent and mitigate cyberthought in disguise their campaign in efforts to educate the public on the role they have to play in this important site?

>> right, just as we have to see something faceup in campaign, stop and can act as one our efforts to educate the public about everyone's shared responsibility who is on the internet. everyone has a responsibility to have good cyberhabits, just like when you get in the car you should buckle your seatbelt. should be reflected above anything else. we continue to push imap. with respect to coordination with state and local government, we do that quite a bit, senator. we have the nk cake out of northern virginia appear to be a state and local representatives on the floor. that is her 24 watch center for cyberis concerned. so we work with them extensively on that. >> very good. turning to borders, unsure of the u.s. canadian parliamentarian group and i know you've been working on

cross-border crime issues. i did want to thank you for an initiative had been raising for a few years history of the canadian baggage screener which has finally been resolved as part of the beyond the border action plan. to thank you for working on that. and then i wanted to ask i know senator schumer had been things about the tsa. again, i understand there is always incidences that has to be resolved anything, good but overall, they also like yourself have a challenging job and i've been proud of the work they do at least in the minneapolis airport. you just brought in the pre-checkout program interstates. do you know how that's been going? >> appreciative pet programs are very popular. this is the domestic branch, the kind of trusted traveler programs that we began with the global entry program internationally. so we are expanding that pre-check program as rapidly as we can. >> very good.

at last, the jolt act to call your attention to that. that is bipartisan legislation was introduced with senator schumer and mikulski, curt emily and it's very important to move ahead with that. would've appreciated some of the work you've done on tourism and as you know we were at the state department to improve the visa wait times. but there's also other things we do contain it as fact. the thought to have your help and support that bill. >> i'd be happy to take a look at it. he might thank you. >> senator cornyn. >> by undersecretary good morning, good to see you. we can all stipulate you have an extraordinarily challenging job. i want to ask you a question about the dna testing of detainees. i know you're a former federal prosecutor and attorney general so you know how powerful the tool dna can be in the line for

spent investigation. as a matter fact that the aggressive important and reauthorization of the bill added this afternoon or tomorrow and i'm offering a bipartisan amendment that will address the 400,000 estimated untested kits that currently are sitting in police lockers and elsewhere, which as we all know is a powerful tool to help identify what in many instances are serial perpetrators of sexual assault. let me bring you back to 2005. senator kyl and i sponsored the dna fingerprint act during the last reauthorization of the violence against women act. the legislation gave federal law enforcement authority to collect small dna samples from all federal arrestees and detainees, just as we take fingerprints, but as you know more accurate.

these dna samples again as you know can be checked against the fbi's nationwide dna database to determine whether the arresting or detaining have committed other crimes, perhaps in other jurisdictions. so far it has assisted law enforcement officials with more than 100 xt 9000 investigations, including 10,000 in my state and texas. so we have seen it to be a powerful tool. or 2009 confirmation hearing, i asked if he was beat to it that the alien deportee, dna testing regulations are fully and pop are implemented by this department and you replied appropriately at dhs will fully comply with the applicable statutory and regulatory framework. nearly three years after the hearing, how do you feel like that is going?

>> well, i think, senator we supported a record number of individuals as you know. i will be happy to go back and look at all the regulations governing that to make sure we are in compliance. but we have had aviary aggressive plan to deport those who should be removed from the country. >> and my question is a little more narrow because what we want to do is identify whether detainees have perhaps committed other crimes in a fun person agencies in the course of other investigations, not just enforced immigration laws, which is important, but it's not the complete rationale. would you be willing to on involuntary basis submit to the committee sort of the department's evaluation of how it has come high and handled this requirement of 2005 into the dna fingerprint act?

>> i'd be happy to supply that. >> could be very helpful. when you say the reason for my concern is that of course we know the fbi's has used a great deal of taxpayer money and crime lab resources to prepare for hundreds of that dna samples as a result of the passage of this act in 2005. we are told the fbi is prepare for an expected to receive between 120,240,000 samples from the department of homeland security and the year 2012. to date they report only having received 4000 samples. so i hope you'll help us -- >> yeah, let's get to the bottom of that. >> disparity between samples anticipated by the fbi as a result of this because while i am aware that, for example in afghanistan and iraq, when their military captures high-value detainees, they do get isometric

identifiers from them that could be used data can be used by law enforcement agencies and the department in the united states when identifying people coming across with it the southwestern border without the appropriate css to make sure they are not coming in to commit acts of terrorism and other violence. >> sender if i my -- >> it strikes me this dna evidence and i'll be glad to let you answer, but this dna information would be vitally important and enormously useful not only in assisting your department in terms of border security and immigration enforcement, but to help law enforcement at large in terms of identifying people who come into the country and commit crimes that currently runs salt. please go ahead. >> thank you senator. i didn't mean to interrupt. but we do run illegal immigrants

against a variety of databases. and i think i should supply you with that information. and then i will look specifically into the issue of dna with the fbi. >> to my knowledge and i look forward to your report, that is more in the nature of fingerprints and other biometric identifiers and it did not extend the dna testing of detainees until the congress passed the dna fingerprint on 2005. see you understand i know the issue and i would very much welcome your response to me in the committees that we can help you to the bottom of that. be not good. >> mr. chairman can i.e. old joke that i remaining time. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. welcome, secretary napolitano. >> thank you. this one question the secret service episode. what opportunities did this

behavior creates for compromise of the president security, for instance if the had connections with colombian criminal networks or foreign intelligence services? i'm not saying that it did, but it seems like it's the kind of behavior that would render an agent vulnerable to blackmail and influence have criminal networks and foreign intelligence services were aware of it than that as a potential avenue for compromise of the president security. >> senator, we are still completing the entire investigation and there are still interviews to be conduct it. but i think we have plan to keep the committee briefed on what we find and whether their code on a future basis be that kind of risk.

>> are certainly a risk. >> i testified earlier the first question i pose to the director was was there any breach to the director and the answer is no. >> there is a risk of breach along those lines at the connections existed, correct? >> there may be enough by behavior cannot be tolerated. >> when they switch to cyberand that may thank you for your energetic work and persistence on this issue as we in congress tries to pass the legislation that we need. they're a variety of different approaches that her feet must out here. let me ask you this. if we were to pass it though that failed to protect american critical infrastructure in private hands like garlic regretted, financial processing systems, communications networks and so forth and indeed is that those even failed to define critical infrastructure or provide a process for defining

critical for lunch to structure so we knew what it was and what a pleasure, how well was that bill has met the threat that ucs facing in this round? >> well, it would lead a significant gap given the kinds of attacks we already see. that is why we think the nation's core critical infrastructure should have some basic performance standards to me. that is why we think it needs to have real-time information sharing and incentivize information sharing. and so, those are the kinds of things that really should go into a comprehensive cyberbill. >> and would she be able to say that the national security means of the united states had been met by a bill that did not include any protection for critical infrastructure? >> senator, based on what we know now and the risks we rdc now in the kinds of attacks we rdc now, the failure to address

core critical infrastructure would be a significant gap in the legislation. >> thank you. my last question on the same subject, but switching from the national security and public safety side of cyberattack to the intellectual property and economic competitiveness this side of ours cybervulnerability in, i set about two years ago that i thought we are on the losing end of the biggest transfer of wealth in the history of humankind through theft and piracy because of the attacks on our industrial base and our technological base from overseas for the purpose of industrial espionage and stealing intellectual property.