get in front of a group of veterans, you thank them for us and we're doing that today. you're seeing the largest christian church in the world in seoul, korea. it's a methodist church. thanks to what the american people did, saw what happened after world war 2 roemtz. i cannot thank you enough for what you've done and made us a free nation. i could never do enough for our veterans in this country. we have a va hospital a mile from my front door in johnson city tennessee and you have my commitment and i wrote down your advanced appropriations. i couldn't see why we wouldn't do it. i think it makes absolute sense to do it with a whole budget, get it done in one years. the va was a good start and it shows us that the veteran shows

the way advanced appropriations work. i support that and the frustration i have here is the billion dollars we spent. last year about this time chairman remembers this very well, where we couldn't have an integrated electronic health record where the va and dod -- we flushed a billion dollars and still can't make it work. that's something that i think -- this is my sixth year here. i cannot understand in today's technology why a veteran service member can't lead and electronically transfer their record. it hasn't been explained to me. it is coming down. i salute the secretary on that. he has a real commitment to that. the two things that i really am passionate about are homeless veterans. i think it's heartbreaking when you see a veteran sleeping under a bridge that honorably served this country. we had the hud vouchers and that

has come down. i salute general shinseki for that. that's one of our problems at home. we've got to work on a place to house homeless veterans and people to go ahead and get the folks integrated into society. we co-chaired the invisible wounds caucus. when you have more veterans dying of suicide than combat, something is wrong. we need programs and look into that and find out what the causes are and put resources behind preventing that. we have so many veterans in need right now. i think that's one i certainly feel passionate about. i think the other one i've seen a local level is to bring the va to the community outpatient clinics that we have, we just opened one up in tennessee, it's going to have to be expanded in a year and a half, it was that successful. i think i'm going to encourage john and i are having breakfast with the secretary in the morning. if you want to give us any other

questions, we'll be glad to take them in the morning. we have breakfast with the secretary. i think it is a tremendous success and way to get the care instead of elderly veterans having to drive miles and miles to care have it in their own community. i'll stop there and thank you for your service. i hear all of it and i think we can support everything and thank all of you for your service. [ applause ] >> you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. well, on behalf of i think the five californians, three of us here, myself, congresswoman gloria mccloud and congresswoman julia brownly, paul cook, who is not here and also dr. raul ruiz,

i'm sorry, there's actually six of us i guess. i'd like to acknowledge the californians in the room. if you are here from california, please stand and let us know your presence. [ applause [ applause ] >> we make that trip back and forth between washington and california and we know what a journey you made and we appreciate that you've come all that way to let us know your agenda. it's a great honor to serve on this committee and do what we can. i represent the eighth largest veterans population in the country. i met with my veterans advisory council last week. they are doing tremendous work in my county to reach out to homeless veterans to find out where they are living along the

santa ana river and in different encampments in the valley, just to get a count. and i'm fully aligned as i think all of us carefully aligned, with ending veterans homelessness. i have one question that i want to ask you commander, it's my understanding that the va has published new regulations that establish presumptions for veterans living with severe traumatic brain injury. who also have a parkinson's disease, certain types of dementia and depression and unprovoked seizures or certain diseases of hype thalt mus and pit tu teary glands. is it your organization aware of any planning or analysis that va

has done that relates to the possible impact on veteran administrations backlog of claims? >> i defer that to the staff, sir. >> thank you for the question. we're not aware of any planning that the va has and how they are going to implement that but we've seen an overwhelming increase in claims at this time at this point. >> so because of that rule change we're not seeing tremendous impact as of now. >> you haven't seen a spike in the backlog or any discussions about initiatives to address those particular questions added as presumptive conditions. >> we're not anticipating a spike in your organization you feel you're prepared as of now? >> well, i'm not sure if we anticipate a spike. va hasn't discussed it. they are going to segregate these particular claims and send them to a particular place. if that does come to fruition

with veterans benefit management system they can electronically send those cases to regional offices that can handle the additional work load where it wouldn't increase the spike. >> very good. i don't have any further questions. i'll give my colleagues an opportunity to ask questions. i yield back my time, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. mr. win strom. [ applause ] >> thank you, mr. chairman. believe me, i'm so grateful to be here with you today. i know we have the opportunity to see so many delegates from ohio and i'm proud to be from ohio to see so many of you here today. and if anyone out there is somebody i had the opportunity to lay my hands on in iraq, i want to tell you it was my honor to take care of you. we have a wall that exists unfortunately and see is more

and more now on this side of things. between the department of defense and the va and i know we're in the process of tearing that down. we're one family. when you take that oath and say i'm going to serve this country, it should go right on through. there shouldn't be this wall and this divide between the opportunities that exist to take care of our troops. electronic medical records that he spoke about, to me that is a shame and delays care, makes it more difficult to have a smooth flow of care. i do see positive things. i was at base luis mccord last year and seen start upprograms where they are focusing on transition at the time of ets. and it makes sense to me if you are disabled, getting a medical separation that your level of disability can be determined at that time and carry over into

the va. instead of having to go through these processes and having redone the services. there's other things i see starting to take place and that's guiding as they are leaving the military into being able to use the skills they learned in the military and translate them into civilian work and helping them get there and guidance on the educational opportunities. and i do believe that you have the greatest opportunity when you have the troops still in uniform, they are a more captive audience. these are the types of things we need to do to make your job easier. tear down the wall between the two. we endured in our medical practice, my private medical practice where we had to change to electronic medical records. it can be done. you just do it. and then there's a seamless flow. things are getting better, the

opportunities are great. i don't have any questions of you today except i want to thank you for all that you do. i know how active you are and how many people you help and i know the challenge that comes with that. and i want to thank you for keeping your promise of service to this country. thank you. [ applause ] >> he is leaving us after one term of service in the congress to go home. >> well, thank you all for being here and thank you for your service and i won't be redundant but i want to thank the california delegation who is here. the question i would like to say since i have to leave, i'm going to roll two questions into one. i'll add an and. what's step has dva taken to

conduct outreach specifically towards women veterans and what could the vha facilities do more effectively to integrate women's health care programs into the rest of the health care centers? >> i'm proud to say madam congresswoman that we and the dav lead all of the legacy on the women's programs and we're the co-sponsors of every meeting that has occurred with the va in order to do that. the specific answer to your question i'll now defer to the staff. >> thank you. in 2008 we began stand up for women veterans campaign and since that time have sponsored several films highlighting the military experience of women veterans such as service when many come marching home. this summer we plan to release a special report and another event focused on women veterans

transition issue. women of war come home. we plan to bring the women featured in the film to washington and invite members of congress, their staff and va and dod officials to attend a panel discussion following the film screening. the magazine was mailed to every va medical center and screening of these films on capitol hill helped to inform and educate policy makers about the special needs of women veterans resulted in legislation being passed to improve benefits and service for women. they are also engaging this year on a special research project to look into the transitioning of women after deployment back into the civilian world. what issues they may be dealing with different from men. so that we can be aware of it and make the va aware of it. >> of course, there's lots of

women that have already returned who are out there and i know homelessness amongst women is a very large issue. and the places where they feel safe when they are homeless. thank you. >> thank you. [ applause ] >> you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to each and every one of you for your service. i checked the attendance list, i'm sure there's gotting to one or two but there's no new jerseyians on the list. i know everybody is coming down next week. but thank you all for your service. it is rare that we are a panel of expertise from the dav also sitting at one table at one time. usually we're issue specific on what we're talking about.

i really know he always -- when we talk about metrics kind of sets my hair on fire. i don't know if you're the once to answer this question so i'll direct it at the commander so he can maybe take a chop at it and hand it on down. when we talk about metrics and he touched on it a little bit, it seems to me a lot of time being where i'm at and many of our constituents and veterans that it's almost that the va is running to the next major crisis. now, is it there to put out a fire or combination of putting out a fire and actually having lack of personnel to address the crisis. because it seems our attention that are drawn to metrics in the va change monthly. and it's came up to now.

and it's fully developed and claims are great but now we've got an increase in appeals. so what is the flavor of the day? are we accomplishing anything or play ag shell game? i want to throw that out for comment on and any suggestions we can pin them down to actually get a set sheet of measurements to judge the progress you are trying to make. >> we have a report from general hickey yesterday that indeed there are reduction in the claims backlog that even goes beyond what we know but i would defer to the rest of the staff for the specifics of those questions. >> mr. runyan, it's one ever things that we raised in our testimony about the transparency and making sure we can see the progression and how they are proposing it. you're right, we put out one fire and that is the backlog and someone forgets about the fact

that we've done all of those claims and decided them what happens to them. they get 5% of appeals from those that are filed and that's one of the things we'd like to see the va do a better job at, giving us their metrics and how they are figuring this out and what they are looking at. one of the issues that we talked about in the independent budgets again is vha is able to determine what their needs are through a metric program and vba should be able to do the same. >> i appreciate that because it's -- i sit up there and chairing the subcommittee on disability and memorial affairs, it's a daily occurrence. what problem are we going to tackle this week and at the same time the va sits here and says it takes us two years to get anybody trained to do any of

this. >> if i might, we do believe that the transformation to paperless process is the right thing to do. it's in its fourth year, i believe. it's not an easy thing to transition a large bureaucracy into paperless process, but we believe many of their initiatives are now coming online. and we're hoping that they are showing positive results and will start to help the process be much more quality effective from this point forward. >> thank you for that. >> i'll leave with this. dealing with advance appropriations and i know i brought this up when secretary shinseki sat in front of us, it was literally within the first couple months of my term, first term three years ago, and i went to the district and brand-new expansion, they had the x-ray machines sitting there.

they couldn't install the x-ray machine because they didn't have the i.t. budget to put the kad 5 wire to hook it to the computer that came with the x-ray machine. that's the detail we're talking about. i yield back, chairman. >> mr. waltz, you're recognized. >> thank you chairman miller and thank you, commander, for your service and for continuing your service and to your family. no warrior deploys alone and no warrior comes home a lone. there's a family and broader community, commander miller, thank you. the importance of getting this right and work you do can't be understated. minnesota delegation here, there's a couple of these folks hold a special place for me i think for sergeant whitehead is here. he and i served together in the same artillery unit so i'll

speak up for you back there sergeant. dave went zell came to my office through wounded warriors, dave are you here somewhere? i ask that to make sure you're working. thanks. good, he's here. we're grateful to each of you. no one comes to capitol hill with more credibility than this organization. and no one understands the importance of what you're doing. this goes beyond care of our wounded warriors and cuts to the heart of our democracy, what our values and commitments and what do we do as for those who want to know a little bit about service to the nation. we understand now through technology and other things that less and less people serve in uniform. that's a good thing. as you know, what comes with that service, somebody still has got to do it. the rest of the folks who aren't

doing it need to understand that veterans benefits aren't a charity or a lottery. that's not the way this works. they are not a secondary thing that you think about. we have to get this right. we have to get it right not only morally do the right thing, we have to get it right because it cuts to that core of the nation. what's the next generation looking at? when you bring these things and bring your credibility up here, it's broader than that. you hear that. it's healthy to have debates up here. it's not healthy when veterans as commander said are put out there and their well being at put at risk because we have political differences. i can tell you it's healthy to have differences. this thing about you people can't get along and you have differences why can't you agree on that? i feel have you ever been married? do you agree all the time? you love your spouse dearly but you have differences and find that commonalty. this chairman and these folks you heard speak, there's no one i would rather stand with than

them. we agree for care of our veterans and the basics of the democracy that are right and when you come here and bring these things up, it's critically important. for many of you i see familiar faces here, there's folks here, you didn't only fight the nation's war but came back and fighting for these things for decades. there is a tendency why do we have to fight? you're right but democracy always has to keep going and keep coming. we have to keep at it. it's not going to run itself but we shouldn't have to put up with nonsense of not having the funding there when it's needed and fighting whether we were injured and how that injury came about. and how do we get the care because no one in my district or any of these folks districts tells me, you know what you guys need to do. you need to cut the budget by making sure they don't get the care they need. i've never heard anyone say that. they say lots of things good and bad. that's not one they say. so keeping the promise, nothing

should be easier than keeping that promise. every person in america wants us to keep that promise. [ applause ] >> here's what you need to know and folks sitting up here, i think it's important to understand and you who come out here, there is literally millions of folks working today and have families, they couldn't come out. you sacrificed. these folks out here in capitol hill, they are the best at what they are doing. i can tell you what, many things that get done here, they don't get done because of political malice or anything like that. they get done out of ignorance because people don't know. somebody needs to explain how it works and get this right. what you understand is that in this country right now, president kennedy was right about this one, you can curse the darkness or light the damned candle. come here and make people light the candle. find a solution, bring it

forward. your advanced appropriations, that's a kandsle. get it done, get it fixed. it's not that difficult. [ applause ] >> i'm going to ask one thing how we can together help this. senator boseman was part of a little documentary done that was on jason ear heart and his family, he was blown up in iraq. he came back home and the va as we did with the camp lejeune bill. through new technology it's not good enough just to get the guys in wheelchairs and good enough to find the newest prosthetic because there's folks living testimony to this, we don't know what the limits of rehabilitation are. let's get it there. then we also promised and said if your parents or your spouse are taking care of them, we're going to help do that because they may be your son but they are our warrior. you're giving the love and doing

that -- >> [ applause ] >> i'm out of time. i'm out of time but what i'm telling you this, jason and his parents, it's not happening the way we intend it to happen. they are paying out-of-pocket for those type of things. we have to figure out how to do better. this kid, this 23-year-old kid summed it up best. he said, what kind of person wants to be told they plateaued? what kind of man wants to be told i'm plateaued? i'm not plateauing i want to see and do things again. that's the candle we need to light. i would home we come back to figure out how we ask for that implementation. thank you for indulging me, mr. chairman. [ applause ] >> you know why we call him command sergeant major, the highest ranking enlisted soldier ever to serve in the united states congress.

[ applause ] >> miss brownly, you're recognized. >> i too want to welcome everyone who is here from the great state of california. thank you for traveling here and thank you for what you do every single day for our veterans in california, my hat is off to you. and thank you, commander johnston for your testimony today and your very detailed written testimony that has been offered to us. i think this is an excellent document for us to hold on to and document that we can refer to often to make sure that we are fulfilling our responsibilities not only that we are providing the services our veterans need but our oversight responsibilities as

well. thank you for that. and you describe the men and women in this room as men and women of honor. and i just want to tell you, i concur wholeheartedly that every man and woman in this room are men and women of honor. and every man and woman who have served our country are men and women of honor. and i want to express my deep gratitude to them. [ applause ] >> i wanted to follow-up on congressman mcleod's questioning with regards to our female disabled veterans and female veterans in general. and i'm very excited to hear about what is coming forward this year. i will look forward to the film screening and look forward to the hearing if there's anything i can do to be helpful in that

process, i would be delighted to offer a helping hand. i want to know if we will get to a place where we actually have very -- one of the very specific things we need to do for our women veterans and then our ability to create the metrics that we've been talking about today and the transparency to have the metrics that we need for us to oversee and make sure that we are providing everything we need for our female veterans. >> i'll defer to the staff. >> thank you. over the last several years va researchers have been evaluating the current health care delivery model for women veterans. as you know the population of women using the va system has doubled over the last five years. we're pleased that one of the v a's secretary's highest goals is to ensure that all women

veterans have access to high quality health care from a provider proficient in women's health and all facilities. there's still work to be done, to fully achieve this goal, we believe va is heading in the right direction. we especially want to be sure that women veterans have access to all va special programs and services. >> thank you, sir. >> i appreciate that. and last week the -- this committee, subcommittee on health, dr. ben shack and myself head a subcommittee and actually in my district in ventura county, in california, to discuss access to traditional and alternative mental health care. we learned a lot in that hearing because we -- my county, ventura county, up to a 44-day wait period to get any kind of mental

health care services, which is way too long. intake for mental health services, our veterans in ventura have to travel into los angeles county to just do the intake for their services. we are -- we don't have enough mental health providers to meet the needs in our county. so i am looking forward to being able to resolve some of those issues. but we did spend a great deal of time also talking about alternative mental health options. and i understand that the dav hosts a miracle on the mountainside event. and it sounds like a really wonderful event and i'm curious to know from your perspective, are there other alternative forms of therapy that the dav has found to improve psychological well being of veterans who are suffering from

post-traumatic stress. >> i serve as cheer operating officer in my full-time job at the largest mental health agency in cincinnati. yes, there are many things that are done and many things that the dav funds that are alternative therapies through our charitable service program and staff can tell you what some of those are. but it can be swimming with dolphins and it can be horse back riding or something as simple as growing a garden. all of those things are important to people that are reaching out because they have a mental illness, all be it depression or severe mental illness. the normalization of their lives is an important function of that. and we believe that and we do what we can do to fund those types of programs and i defer to

the staff. >> and we agree that alternative therapies are very important. even meditation is becoming more and more known as a way to deal with those type of issues. we're pleased that the va is looking at alternative therapies. the -- not just stuck in the traditional therapy mode anymore. they are considering other types of theerpz. recently they just hired i believe 900 peer to peer counselors that we are very excited to see the results of that initiative. so we do believe they are starting to understand the need for alternative therapies. >> thank you, sir. thank you, mr. chair for your indulgen indulgence. >> thank you miss brownley. thank you members for hanging in there. commander, we appreciate your testimony, again, to each and every one of you, that have made

the trip to your nation's capital, we thank you. we thank you for what you've done for this country. we thank you for what you continue to do for this country. i would ask that all members would have five legislative days with which to revise and extend their remarks or add any extraneous materials. without objection, so ordered. with that, commander, this hearing is adjourned. >> thank you, sir. [ applause ]rd to your

questions. >> thank you very much, dr. hurd. now we'll town mr. seth rogen. >> thank you for having me. thank you for the opportunity to testify today and for the opportunity for me to be called an expert at something because that's cool. i don't know if you know who i am at all. you told me you never saw "knocked up" chairman. it's a little insulting. >> i want the record to note -- >> very important, guys. >> want the record to note this is the first time i will wagger, this is the first time in any

congressional hearing in history that the words "knocked up" have been used. >> you're not going to like the rest of this then. [ laughter ] first i should answer the question i assume many of you are asking yes i'm aware this has nothing to do with the legalization of marijuana. in fact, if you can believe it this concerns something that i find even more important. i started dating my wife lauren nine years ago when her mother was almost 54 years old. the first time i met her parents being the mench i am i was excited to spend time with them and make lauren to think i was the type of guy she should continue to date. lauren first admitted to herself and to me something was off with her mother. clues were unfortunately easy to spot since both of her parents had alzheimer's disease. soon after this trip at 55 years old lauren's mother was diagnosed with early on set alzheimer's.

now at this point my impression of alzheimer's was probably what i assume most people's imexpression. i thought it was something only really, really old people got and i thought the way the disease showed itself was in the form of forgotten keys, wearing mismatched shoes and being asked the same question over and over. this period which was the only way i saw alzheimer's displayed in movies and television last ad few years for lauren's mom. after that is when i saw the real ugly truth of the disease. after forgetting who she and her loved ones were my mother-in-law a teacher for 35 years then forgot 0 how to speak, feed herself, dress herself and go the bathroom herself by teenage of 60. lauren's father and a team of caregivers dedicated their lives to make my mother-in-law be comfortable. they would love to do more but can't. there's no way to prevent, cure or even slow the progression of

alzheimer's. another thing i didn't realize until i was personally affected is the shame and stigma associated with the disease. it was before i was born but i'm told of a time cancer had a stigma. celebrities and other public figures that were stricken would hide rather than be voices of hope. although it's turning this is currently where we are largely at with alzheimer's disease. it's because of this lack of hope and shameful stigma my wife, some friends and myself decided to actually do something to change the situation. we start hilarity for charity. it helps families struggling with alzheimer's. the

>> as you know, extradition is a matter for the department of justice. i've read what you have read with great interest. one of the things that strikes me about where we are, it may be easier to work out the appropriate arrangement with the governor of mexico that will be

to work out an appropriate arrangement among the six u.s. attorneys who would like to prosecute this individual. that would be an interesting discussion. but i have to defer to the department of justice with the discussions i know they're having with the government of mexico regarding ex-tradition. >> you are a part of this administration. i would hope having a seat at the table you urged the attorney general and the state department as i am doing to seek extradition and bring them to the united states for trial. i would hope you would agree with that assessment. >> i agree wholeheartedly that we in this country have an interest in seeing him brought to >> and i know there are multiple jurisdictions here at play. i'm going to do everything in my power to see that that happens. you talked about serious in your speech at the wilson center --

syria. he said syria is now a matter of homeland security. i couldn't agree with you more as we see more and more jihadists pouring into syria for the fight in the rebel forces who have been now infiltrated by al-qaeda affiliates. it's become one of the largest training ground now in the world, in my judgment, surpassing pakistan. and therein lies the threat i think to the united states. these individuals have travel documents with training, expertise, leaving syria perhaps going to western europe or the united states. it's a serious concern of mine. i would like for you to elaborate on that statement. >> from my experience at the department of defense in counterterrorism matters, i know that terrorist organizations look for places to build safe havens. they look for places in remote

areas, in areas that do not have robust law enforcement to train and from which to launch terrorist attacks and terrorist planning. so we have to be constantly vigilant in looking out for those efforts and preventing them. i've seen that time again over the four years i was at the department of defense. we are concerned about foreign fighters going into syria. it is a shared concern between us and our european allies, and others in the world. the numbers are concerning. we are monitoring the situation very closely. i would say that for those of us in national security, homeland security, in this government, this particular issue is at the top of the list, or near the top of the list for us. we talk about it all the time. we are carefully monitoring the

situation, and i would be happy to share with this committee in a nonpublic setting some of the more sensitive elements of what our government is doing. i believe at least a couple of you may have been briefed on that, but we are happy to share that information. >> and we appreciate that offer. chernow recognizes the ranking member. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. again, welcome, mr. secretary. recently tsa decided to open a preclearance operation in abu dhabi. some of us have expressed concern that it might, in our estimation, has been a rash -- a rush that could create some photos for people traveling to the u.s.

and i think one of the issues that people coming from abu dhabi would bypass the domestic screening when boarding connecting flights in the u.s. some of those people are identified as select people. so if i'm coming from new york, dulles or lax, then you assure this committee that the process tsa has implemented would somehow allow the selectees to just pass through? that once the touchdown in the u.s., there would be some kind of rescreening of the individual once they are here?

>> thank you, congressman, for the question. the short answer to your question is yes, that is something that is important that i intend to look at in terms of what happens at the arrival once somebody has gone through preclearance overseas. i want to emphasize what i regard as the importance of preclearance. at our last point of departure, airports, aviation security involves in my judgment primarily security when it concerns what happens in the air on the way to the united states. we got a rude awakening on that on december 25, 2009. and so in my judgment looking at the security at the very last departure point airports that are out there in the world is in flights into the united states, i believe it's a homeland

security impaired we improved security one way or another. and i think preclearance is a good way to do that. abu dhabi is not intended to be an endpoint. it's a point along the way any progression. and we will continue to look at additional airports, and i think we ought to also look into question as well, what happens when the traveler gets to the united states. >> especially when some of the travelers have been pinged in this december -- in the system as a selective. have a number of those individuals who would, through that, and i look forward to working with you on that. i would like unanimous consent that a letter to the committee received from the airline pilots association expressing concern with preclearance operation in abu dhabi be inserted into the record. >> without objection, so ordered.

>> secretary, several years ago congress passed 100% screening mandate for maritime cargo. your predecessor looked at it and said we didn't need to do it. will you look at the 100% screening mandate that congress passed and report back to us on where we are toward meeting that mandate? >> that legal mandate is something that many members of congress have talked to me, too, talking about including the confirmation process and raised by a number of members of congress on both sides of the aisle. as recently as last week when i was at port of los angeles, i examined what our screening scanning capabilities are and the implications of putting

that, trying to put that, the cost bring that out overseas ports to comply with the legal requirements to i understand that the secretary of homeland security can prepared a time way that. and i'm looking at that but in general i believe that the department ought to comply with legal mandates. so if there's some reason we can't immediately, and consistent with a walker we ought to a least have a plan for getting there. so i'm studying the issue very closely and they did that as recently as last week. >> thank you. i yield back. >> the chair now recognizes other members for five minutes in order of arrival. mr. smith. >> let me switch to the subject of immigration. the administration has been taking a sales pitch that they are deporting or removing record numbers of individuals, compared to previous administrations.

you all count, do you not, the turnaround, the turn backs at the border of deportations? >> yes, congress and, i believe that was reflected in the numbers we reported recently. >> that is correct. the problem is other administrations including the bush administration and the clinton administration did not include turn backs at the border as a part of their deportation numbers. so to say that you're setting records when comparing oranges and oranges is simply not accurate. if you look at interior deportations, they are down 40% since 2009. the you agree with that, generally speaking? you may need to check that i realize, but i look at the figures and they are down 40%. so for this administration to say it's breaking records and removing individuals, is simply

not accurate. if you any comment on that you're welcome to make it. >> i would have to look at the numbers myself. my understanding, which could be wrong, is that consistent with prior administrations we have be ported the overall numbers, but that with respect to the last report, we broke out within that overall number the number of those who were border arrests. >> again, the problem with this administration is that there including the turn backs and the removals by the border patrol at the border, and previous administrations did not so you are inflating your figures so that you can claim to be setting records when, in fact, you are not. actual deportations from the interior are down 40%. if you want to get back on that you are welcome. >> i will look into those numbers. >> let me go to another subject. what did mr. houston with illegal immigrants have been -- what the administration is dealing with illegal

immigration's. the administration is releasing tens of thousands of individuals back into our communities where there are of course a threat to american citizens and residents. i was not able to get the figures from the department of homeland security but is able to get the figures from the congressional research service though they are i think a year old. 14% of those individuals who have been charged and released, were charged with dui, 10% drug violations, 7%, thousands of people, charged with murder, assault, rape and kidnapping were released back into our communities. why? >> what i'm committed to do is removing those who represent national security, public safety and border security threats. i believe that that requires a constant reevaluation of our process, what we're doing, who are removing and i'm committed to --

>> shouldn't individuals that are country illegally have been charged with these kinds of crimes, shouldn't it be a priority to be removed? why would we release them back to our streets and communities speak with those represent public safety threats, who are in this country illegally fit within our removal priorities. >> do nothing to represent a public threat, the individuals have been charged with those crimes? >> as i said, i think we should continually reevaluate what we are doing to make sure that what we're doing fit within those priorities. >> in your reevaluatio reevaluae you'll give greater priority to removing those individuals are clearly a threat to the lives and safety of american citizens and to have been charged with these crimes. tens of thousands of people. you are releasing more people into our neighborhoods then you are removing individuals have been charged with crimes. i just don't know what the justification or rationale for that is. last question goes to border security. as you probably know, and 2011

the government accounting office came up with a determination that about 44% of the border was under some level of control but that only 6.5% of the border was under actual control. 6.5%. the administration didn't like the result so they said we're not going to use the gao's metrics anymore. to this day they have not. so we have no way of knowing at this city right now how secure or insecure the border is other than 6.5% of years ago was actually under actual control. when is the dhs going to update its border security statistic? >> i agree with the goal of establishing metrics for what constitutes border security. i agree with that goal, and we are working toward that goal right now and we're working towards something we can share with congress. when i was at the southwest border and i talked to the border security experts about

border security, they emphasized to me an approach that is agile, with an emphasis on surveillance, with an emphasis on mobility so that we can follow the threats as they exist, as we can follow the trends in illegal migration as they arise. i think that's a good approach. i think that with the resources congress has given us, we've done better but there's always more work to do. >> chair now recognizes the gentlelady from california, ms. sanchez. >> thank you, mr. chairman secretary, it's great to have you. seen you before the task before and really excited to have you over at the department, have a lot of questions i'm going to sort of go through them and maybe if you the pencil, what have you. first of all i want to put into the record with unanimous consent, mr. chairman, a letter from the coalition for humane immigrant rights from los angeles to be into the record,

please. >> without objections ordered. >> secondly, here are my questions. the first is, i know that you are trying to understand what is going on in venezuela right now. fares not as much of an emphasis of what's going on in venezuela. you see the tv reporting as the ukraine for example, but the fact of the matter is it's getting incredible dangers. a lot of people are suffering. my first would be just to remind your uscis agents were dealing with some of these visas that people who are from venezuela, that at a time of such instability and almost a civil war going on there that they have a lot of discretion in being able to extend some of that time or helping people to stay here until it gets better and the situation over there in venezuela. i think that's incredibly

important for you to reiterate, please, with the people that you oversee. secondly, we have a particular situation on the california-mexico border. been working along time but as you know mexico has been, -- i know the area well because my mother grew up in the area. the weights are two or three hours sometimes in the pedestrian lines to walk across. there's a lot cross traffic that happened there people live in one place, they work in the other, vice versa. mexicali gets up to about 125 degrees in the summer. summer is coming up. there are no shade areas for these people as they stand in line. i know that the local chamber is coming up with about half the money but it would take about a million dollars to kind of restructure the pedestrian piece of processing way they could get

a much faster flow through, you know, without any increase in risk of who's coming across. a million bucks is not a lot, talking about the federal government. it would really, really hope there. just want to give some indication from you with the readers not working, what do you see as the future of what's going on with the whole quick card situation. the next one of course has been a big advocate of the biometrics, understanding the visas allow people to come in on and then they overstay. quite frankly the former secretary sat in front of us the first time she was there instead

she just wasn't going to do what we passed a law twice. this committee has passed it two or three times. i would be very interested in that. lastly, you have a lot of extremes from the defense department. what can you bring, how can you help us to get things more streamlined, more categorized and better off in this department? again, thank you for your service. >> item one, i would be happy to look at the letter that was put in the record i would like to mention that i was in los angeles friday and met with a coalition of those interested in immigration enforcement and reform. we could meeting at city hall with the mayor. two, thank you for your reference to venezuela. it's a situation were looking at closely, but i appreciate the context in which you mention it.

three, on the issue of wait times, that's something i will look at, particularly in the port of entry you mentioned. i do know that wait times, whether it's at a lan port or an airport, can spike upward and to be on circumstances but i'm happy to look at that as well. with regard to twic cards, i think the overall goal of the card, the overhaul my security goal is a good one and if i wanted i think it's a program that we need to continue to develop and pursue. and the children of such a program like that there are always a few things that could be done more efficiently. i know that a number of truckers, for example, would like to see it be done in sort of one-stop shopping versus having to visit two or three times. and i understand that and i think we will get there. biometric exit is, in my judgment, the gold standard.

it's a place the we eventually ought to get you but i've asked about it. we have biometric entry. i would like to ultimate cities get you biometric exits. are some practical and cost considerations in doing that it is the gold standard. i agree with that. >> thank you, mr. secretary. i look forward hopefully to have an individually and going more in depth on some of these issues. >> nice to see you again as well. well. >> the chair now recognizes chairman emeritus mr. king. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me also at the outset thank you for the visit you made to new york on monday, talking to us there. it was very, very frugal and thank you for the interest you have shown. secretary johnson, and i want to welcome you to the committee, thank you for the interest and the at rich you have done since your nomination and service since your approval by the service. it was mentioned 21 years ago today was the first attack on

the world trade center but a neighbor of mine was killed that day. the mistake all of us made was none of us realized the full applications of the. you said you were in new york on 9/11 itself, and we did respond very strongly to that because you said, under both of mr. shuja gone a long ways in estimate the leadership of al-qaeda, the core al-qaeda. the concern that i have, all of us have, make sure we don't make the mistake we made after 1993 and not realize the full extent of the threat. because as you mentioned regarding syria and the chairman mentioned also, al-qaeda is to metastasize a more. core al-qaeda is no longer probably the main threat we face. in your speech you mentioned syria but also egypt, iraq, libya, yemen, algeria, mali, somalia, all of which have organizations with either direct relations to al-qaeda or fisher the al-qaeda philosoph

philosophy. what is the transixteen to adopt the threat that could become from those countries and specific like syria where we that people are foreign fighters, come from visa waiver countries where they could be u.s. citizens, or the other countries that were mentioned? how is dhs adapting to this new type of threat? >> thank you for the question, congressman. i think from my homeland security perspective, which includes tsa, cbp, cis, ice, coast guard, information sharing with our partners through which individuals of suspicion may travel. we need greater information sharing, we need greater attention to the borders, not just the u.s. borders but it's something we're working on, something i worked on with our

allies as recently as two weeks ago when i met with my european counterparts. syria was the issue at the top of the list. i think we need greater attention to aviation security and port security, and that's what mentioned that in my judgment precludes is very, very important from a homeland security perspective. i think we need to build on the. i think we need to continue to build on intelligence information sharing across jttf, fusion centers with the intelligence community and homeland security. i think information sharing is key. i am also concerned about those who self radicalized. and i think you share that concern, about the so-called lone wolf. i think the boston marathon bombing may be a sign of the future. and in many respects those threats are harder to detect. and so working with state and local governments, first responders, lease commissioners,

fire department -- police commissioners, funding, training, preparedness. as we so i think a decent example of how that training and preparedness can work in places like boston if another tragedy happens. so i think we've got to be vigilant but i think the terror threat is becoming more diffuse. in many respects it's harder to detect. beginning around 2000 we saw the rise of affiliates but i think it's become even more diffuse. >> whenever the secretary of homeland security comes in we were always critical of the fact that department is not want efficiently enough, and yet looking at us yet looking at us as we have by thing 100 congressional committees and subcommittees which have just totally spread friction all over the place when it comes homeland security. i would have both parties have failed to address the. i would ask that we have asked other secretaries to try to use whatever -- what influence you have, the strain and the fact

you can respond to that many masses. basically the defense department has had. you know in your capacity have assets of 110 committees and subcommittees, so just lend your voice to that would be appreciated. >> i hesitate to tell you folks have to do your job, that's your prerogative's, but i do agree that when i had 108 committees and subcommittees of congress performing an oversight function, it takes a lot of time to -- >> and i enjoy coming up there but it takes a lot of time to do with all of the oversight which detracts from the core mission that i think you want me to pay attention to. >> i have 10 seconds. there's a matter which i'll talk to you privately about. i've met with homeland security, fbi to try to resolve this iss issue. and unfortunately to say since i've been asking questions, it

seems to be getting worse. i'll discuss it with you privately. it's not your responsibility but again tsa does have some bearing his i just want to discuss a we deprived that i do want to cause any other extra problems to the person by mentioning his name publicly. >> glad to take up for the record. >> let me also say i agree with the jurisdictional problems. i think it detracts from your mission. it's something i would like to fix. we have a hearing scheduled on this issue, and the aspen institute he met with a very good video called homeland confusion or so with that i recognize the gentle way from texas, ms. sheila jackson lee. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, for the string. secretary, again thank you for your commitment to service. and might i just echo two of my preceding colleagues, it would be great if we ourselves self regulated ourselves with respect

to the streamlining of committees that address the question of homeland security. so i hope that we'll have the opportunity to do so and we hope the administration would be supportive as they can be with the three branches of government. let me very quickly at my appreciation for the apprehension of guzman and all that represents, particularly the heroic efforts of i.c.e. and u.s. marshals, d. a., mexican authorities but it is a very important statement and i will join my colleagues in getting that i am respectful of mexican sovereignty but i think we are neighbors and collaborators, and i believe it would be very important that we have the ability for mr. boozman to be transferred here to the united states under the necessary procedures. i also want to thank s. second of homeland security for your forceful comments -- mr. chapo guzman. security of our athletes on all the efforts made by americans to government the work that was done in europe and in russia and we are very thankful to the safe

return of our athletes. i want to quickly ask some questions, and of going to save them then hopefully you will be able to answer them. i want to go specifically to the question of detention. i think we've had some discussion, and the whole idea of the fact that we are detaining through i.c.e. and we've gone from 106 he 7000, the 478,000 there has not been much use of the alternate detention process. i would be interested in your thoughts on that. and then i want to thank cbp and others. i always acknowledge the good part of the service but i am concerned about the number of deaths and the issue of excessive force by cbp and the report that came out and suggested they will be engaged in reform. my question to you is, how are you engaged to make sure those reforms are moved quickly and that they are done in highest professional way? in addition to cbp short term

facility, they are at the border and they are classified hold 300 persons. we found that they have upheld three times that much, 900 people, and a honduran lost his life. had a massive stroke i believe, or heart attack and he was in one of those facilities and the question is whether not he was able to get medical care quickly enough. there are questions of heat, questions of cleanliness, et cetera, and i would be interested. we are in the business of protecting our borders but we are also a country that believes in humanity and humaneness. the issue of human trafficking has become a major issue in the southern border, in houston, texas, and i would like to know any strategies. we will be holding a hearing on that in texas but what will homeland security be doing on that particular issue? if you would i would appreciate your answers.

thank you. >> ma'am, first on the issue of detention and detention practices, when unless general counsel of the department of defense, within the first three or four weeks i was in office i visited our detention facilities at guantánamo, in iraq and in afghanistan. and urged certain reforms that were made. i recall in afghanistan, actually going to one of the cells and asked the guard to close the door behind me so that i could fully understand, you can imagine the lawyer jokes when i did that, but i'm very interested in this issue. i visited the detention center in south texas already. i intend to visit more around the country. it's an issue i want to study carefully. one thing that strikes me about southwest border in particular is that almost everyone who crosses the border illegally has paid money to a smuggling

organization, is being trafficked so to speak. i think they key is to attack the network in some way. in working with her in the agency partners, working with our mexican friends, we should focus on that. >> did you, i think you, i think i asked you another question about the short-term facilities and the reforms on excessive force by cbp. that's a different question and there is a report that indicated that they would be reforming their processes use of force at the border. >> i'm very interested and concerned about use of force. i think a law enforcement agency or an armed force military has to be credible in the communities in which it operates, and so i was happy to know that the cbp commissioner intends to make the policy

public any day now and i'm encouraging other components of dhs to think along those lines. i'm also interested in reviewing some of the more recent cases myself to ensure that we're getting this right. right. >> i think you answered the human trafficking question, not the consumer homeland security of engaging o on the issue? >> yes, ma'am. something i intend to do. >> thank you very much. yield back. >> let me remind members, the secretary has a hard stop at noon so i would ask you stay within a five minute world. chair recognizes -- >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, thank you for your statements regarding want to work with this committee and being responsive to our inquiries. after years of frustration and stonewalling from her predecessor, i look forward to having a dialogue. in fact, if we have as much stonewalling going down at the board as we from this demonstration we would have a secure border.

and i am very keen on doing that first and foremost. that being said, i'm very concerned about some of your comments regarding illegal immigration. you claim the so-called conference immigration reform is a matter of homeland security. you've even gone so far as to say that those here legally have quote earn the right to be citizens unquote. which clearly signals that you favor amnesty. however, as we've seen in the past, amnesty simply does not work. we need to enforce the laws on the books and we need to secure the border the 480 conversation on any broad reforms. your comments of those, comments of those that you've made as was what president obama has made promising amnesty seems to encourage, not discourage, illegal entry into this country. my question is, do you believe

that your inclination towards amnesty will improve homeland security and not worsen the problem of illegal immigration? do you honestly believe those who have broken our laws, if i can have broken many of our laws including those a secure defraud, identity fraud, and lots of others, that they have earned the right to be citizens? >> senator, congressman, sorry -- >> i'll accept that. [laughter] i'm running for senate, so -- >> i spent a lot of time with senators, sarris. -- sorry. the quote you attribute to me is a misquote. that was a journalists, triggering to be something i didn't -- >> okay. do you think those here have earned the right to be citizens? deeply -- >> no. what i said, what i support is how it's reflected in the senate

bill which was passed by a vote of 67 -- bipartisan senators, which is those present in this country, the 11 and a half million or so who go through background check, are held accountable, who pay their taxes and do whatever the law requires them to do should be eligible to be put on the earned that position ship. >> let me interrupt you, sir. i apologize. i just have a very short period of time. >> understood. >> very concerned about refugee relocation because we are getting a lot of these refugees coming to my home state of georgia, and i am not sure that these refugees are being vetted as thoroughly as they should be. we have a lot coming from places around the world where there are a lot of people who want to do harm to americans. i would like to work with you on this issue because i think this is a very dangerous issue of are

accepting these refugees in this country and not having some way of monitoring vendor i think we are getting too many, and these people are being forced upon american citizens in a way that will be dangerous for our own homeland security. i'm also very concerned about the abu dhabi precludes that has been suggested. we have seen tsa allow people who are on the no fly list it on airplanes. tsa is not in itself prevented one terrorist attack. every single terrorist attack the we've seen against this nation that has been prevented has not been prevented by tsa. i think he is a has been a total failure as a way it's set up now. i think we need to focus upon those who want to harm us instead of patting down grandma and children at the airport, and having this tremendous attack upon personal persons, u.s.

citizens, that we need to focus on those that want to harm us, which means having the intelligence gathering capability to focus on those and let's get rid of this idea of political correctness. we need to focus on those who want to harm us and i don't think the department has been and i would like very much to work with you as secretary to try to reform, do something with the tsa to make it so that it is functional, or get rid of it all together. my time has expired. thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to work with you as we go forward. yankees are. >> with the secretary like to respond to that? >> yes, very briefly. on the issue of refugees, i agree we should work together on that issue. when i go down to the border it's been one thing people on the front line talk to me about. i would like to work with you on the. i have some concerns and just on the initial point, i have told

my staff we need to be more responsive to this committee and the congress. when you write to me, when you have inquiries, i read each one personally and i've told my staff we need very prompt responses we get the information you need. >> i thank you for that reassurance and i look forward to working with you. >> chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secondly, thank you for being with us today and congratulations. i think you've taken on what i think is the most difficult job, challenging job in the cabinet, and we all wish you well. our mission and your mission i think are united in making sure that the homeland is protected. i also want to thank you for stepping our invitation to come down to the border. less than a month after you confirmed and sworn and you came to my district which is the most porous of the border where we have 13% of the border but 47% of the drug sees in this country

and i know the people i represent appreciate the opportunity, appreciated the opportunity to talk with you. as you will know from the time we spent together my most important priority is order security. isolate people who were unsafe on the land every single day. i still have the drugs coming in and illegal immigration is, while getting lower, still a major problem. but my responsibility, as you know, is to make sure that we have the resources we need along with my colleague, to get the job done. to ensure the safety and security of people who live and work near the border. and this includes the steps of courses to support our agent, our border patrol agents in particular and, of course, our customs agents, that they have the resources they need to get the job done effectively. in january, mr. secretary, he issued a departmentwide memo calling on all components to conduct a position by position review of the use of administratively uncontrollable

over time, or a ul. and if it is found that position uses a ul on a regular basis as a regular part of the shift duty, that position will no longer be eligible to receive aul. for border patrol agents, this policy shift threatens to reduce the number of agents or time when the border by as much as 20%. and i believe this will undermine the progress we've made in securing our border with still work to be done. it would also hit our border control agents and their families very hard because they would face the loss of pay to get loss of ours in some cases up 20% pay cut. we have heard in this committee before from reports that morale in the federal agencies is measured and, unfortunately, the department of homeland security moralities amongst the lowest and within the department, cbp is the lowest. i'm concerned that this that ths adjustment o for this change wil further exacerbate morale problems.

when we toured of the border we heard very real concerns about those who live and work near the border about the important of safety and security 24/7/365. i believe now it's time to strengthen our position and effort, not weaken them as ugly this change in payment we'll do. i'd like to focus my question, mr. secretary, on this issue. first of all, how do you believe that the policy is in the best interest of our security? and should the department and cbp decide to limit or eliminate overtime for border patrol agents, what plans does it have in place to ensure that there are knots they gaps in border patrol shifts on our youth borders? let me ask a second question and give you could answer both. there are efforts underway, mr. secretary, as you probably know, to reform agent day and aul system specific visibility just

which i'm a cosponsor to reform the pay system in a way that preserves security efforts and save taxpayer money. i assume you're aware of these are and if it's the case are over, why would we change the aul system when this reform is underway? >> first, congressman, thank you for spending the day with me in arizona and introducing me to a number of state and local officials there. appreciated the time. with regard to aul. as you know, we have on the office of special counsel allegations, findings, however you characterize it, of widespread abuse of uncontrollable over time. the review of that is pending right now within the department. i look forward to the results. in the interim, what was brought to us was three discrete classes of people who were eligible for

aul that we could not continue to justify paying out aul in that manner, given the allegations of widespread abuse. free very, very discrete classes people that totaled i think 900 people across the department of 250,000 people, just 900 people. the suspension, and the want to emphasize this to you and to the workforce, does not affect border patrol agents on the front line, and people are still eligible for overtime if they earn it and they're entitled to it. for those discrete number of people, they have to go through a different method to get it, but i'm fully supportive of paying somebody overtime when it's necessary when they earn it. >> thank you, mr. secretary. yield back. >> the billiard you refer to, i'm happy to review the build. >> chair now recognizes the chair of the border and maritime

subcommittee. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i appreciate getting. i certainly want to as well welcome the secretary and thank you so much for your service to our country. look forward to working with you. i sort of want to add, express my admiration as well to the great work of everybody from dhs in regards to what they did with capturing chapo guzman command i served want to associate myself with the chairman's very strong feelings about extradition and we appreciate your assistance if you can help us with that as well. as you might imagine as the chair of the border subcommittee, i have the border question. we have been working very hard on a border bill with bipartisan support, actually pass our subcommittee unanimously and then pass the full house unanimously. i appreciate your comments about the senate immigration bill. however, i am one that does not agree with the senate

immigration bill, copper instability pass. however, i do think that this congress, and i hope that we will pursue moving on a border security bill. that is one of the responsibility under the constitution of the congress, and i think we have to pursue that. so i would ask you, if i could, i made a note when you talk about establishing the metrics that you agree with the goal of establishing metrics. maybe you could flush that answer out a little bit for me if you would. your predecessor indicated that the term that we just previously about establishing operational control, the term of operational she said was an antiquated term. maybe it is, maybe it isn't but we're trying to understand what term might be agreeable and what the construct of those terms actually would look like. so then we were looking at the border control index. that also has been abandoned now by dhs.

i think it's important with some actual metrics that the country can understand, that the congress can understate in regards to what kind of control we have at our borders. as mentioned, about 40% of operational control at one point at the southern border, as you know, secretary, i have a northern border district. that same study shows the operational control in the northern border was only 4% essentially with no operational control on the nort north bordeo speak of. so could you tell us what your department is doing to develop measures that could give us an accurate picture so that we could, again, understand not only our successes or failures as well lex and so as we can proceed on establishing order control. >> let me begin by saying in my conversation with the border security experts in uniform, what they emphasized to me is a risk based approach.

that is agile, that is not necessarily operational control as i think a lot of people define it. the risk based approach is effective, it's cost efficient. now, in terms of metrics, i've read h.r. 1417 which defines an effectiveness rate in a certain way. what we have said is that, first of all, it is congress' prerogative to define border effect is however you do that in a fully informed way. what we have said, and i tend to believe this, that border security should be defined by looking at a number of things. it's not simply the percentage of all those who attempted to cross the border who are either arrested or turned back. you have to look first of all at the quantity of people who are attempting to cross the border. you to look at the nature of the

traffic, is a third party nationals? is that mexicans? is a somebody else? you have to look at the motives, on these convicted criminals are attempting to cross the border for drug smuggling? so you have to look at the nature of the traffic, the quantity of the traffic, and there are number of things i've looked at which i've asked my folks to further develop that we can share with congress in an effort to define what we believe is a secure border. i would urge us not to focus simply on a percentage which tends -- which tends to disregard very unimportant things. so if something that i'm committed to it and i think in order to further immigration reform over all, we ought to settle on a set of metrics that we all agree to and understand. >> i appreciate that. as i'm running out of time, not so much as a question, a headset. we will be sending you a letter on another issue about these overseas.

your predecessor had agreed to give congress a report, and the percentage of these overseas and how you are tracking that and that was simply be given to the congress at the end of lashes obviously that deadline has come and gone. we were probably sent that letter off alone to shortly asking for that report. >> i have seen a draft of the report. i think you need for the work anything there was something that i wanted some sucker third opinions about before i share it with congress. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> chair now recognizes the gentleman from new jersey, mr. paying. >> mr. second, it's an honor and privilege to have you here today. and i am just delighted that you're confirmed and looking forward to your leadership and your capacity as secretary. and also feel that you want a

defined as members of congress representing you from your congressional district. so everyone knows, i am -- let me just start with something that is one of my major priorities, and that is been the whole issue around sandy funding. one of my major priorities on this committee is ensuring that hurricanes -- hurricane center relief reaches the area that need it the most. a portion of the fun you know is controlled by the state of new jersey and i'm getting disturbing complaints from constituents from the news, from organizations like the fair share housing center that many, many stars that were hardest hit, including a for low income and minority populations live are not receiving the relief proportionate to the amount of damage suffered.

these reports are concerning to me. in this congress we have failed to have a hearing in reference to this. i think oversight is very important. i was delighted to go to the floor to congress that eating to implore -- that evening to implore to my colleagues to make sure that we got the relief in the area of the country that we needed. and they responded to their fellow americans. so even though it's my area that has benefited from that, i still feel that there needs to be oversight and responsibility to the american people that congress knows how those dollars are being spent, irrespective of what area it goes too. i am just asking to like to get commit to ensuring that dhs is conducting proper oversight over the state of new jersey so that

the people who are deserving of that relief are being provided for. >> thank you for that question, congressman. first of all my own home was impacted by hurricane sandy. took us months to repair the damage. i would also point out that a lot of the funds that we refer to we talk about sandy relief money, housing and urban development money as well as dhs money. a lot of hud money in that mix. i would be interested in seeing the report that you referenced, and i certainly agree with the importance of congressional oversight with regard to how the money is spent. >> a lot of it, as you know, a lot of the discretion when it comes to have that money is spent belongs with the state. but insofar as the federal government is concerned, i agree with you certainly by the

importance of congressional oversight. >> thank you. and in reference to, it's been brought up by several members, and the ranking member, the whole issue around abu dhabi and the preclearance facility there. and i know the deputy administrator was in abu dhabi last week observing the operation there, and they're still a lot of concern about allowing passengers once they get there not to be reject what -- we checked while they're in this country. the other thing coming in, we have issues over years ago at newark airport in a covert operation taking place and they were able to slip things past the tsa. so we are concerned. how often will tsa be afforded the opportunity to observe

passenger screenings in abu dhabi? will tsa and other agents of the train the government be allowed to conduct unannounced inspections or covert test of the screen in abu dhabi? >> first of all, it's my understanding that the preclearance operations at abu dhabi are conducted by cbp, customs border protection. i am concerned that there are not any security gaps when it comes to arrivals as well, and that's an issue that i intend to look at. certainly when it comes to newark airport, it's an airport under his money with. it's probably the airport i use most myself. -- airport familiar with. i want to focus on that and interested in a further dialogue with you, congressman, on that question. >> okay.

thank you. i yield back. >> chair recognizes mr. median. >> thank you, mr. chairman. secretary, thank you for your long and distinguished service to country. thank you for taking on this very, very important mission. and thank you as well for the work that i know you are doing in the area of cyber but i look forward to working with you in that area as well, but in my limits on to talk about a couple of issues but one, the chemical facilities and high-tech stage victory important work that has been done in our country on this. we appreciate the situation in texas, west, texas, not so long ago, identifying what happens when the art outliers who are allowed to exist without our recognition of their being there. simultaneously, or conversely industries made significant investments in responsibly accounting for and also creating the kinds of protections systems

that have been called for underneath the program but it's now been three years since it was reauthorized. there's been some breakdowns in debt to be sure, a legacy that has not been too proud from the department but at the same time there's been significant progress in the course of the last year, and very deliberate efforts to look at criticism that has been taking place and to address those in a proactive since. we've introduced legislation to reauthorize the program and want to ask whether you believe that you don't you can support? >> i have reviewed h.r. 4007. i think it is a good bill. i'm very supportive of the. indeed, my folks coming we wish we could extended period longer. we have a regular scheme that we have put in place.

i agree with you that over the last year it's gotten better. that all stems from an appropriations measure, not an operations measure. i've read this bill. i think it's a good bill. our critical infrastructure folks thinks it's a good bill and i support it spent i think you. i look forward to working with you and may be able to discuss a further extension if, in fact, we can make sure that we are working simultaneously towards the progression which i think this will allow us to do. let me switch hats very quickly. i know you been dealing with the questions of abu dhabi, so this is not a new matter for you. although most of these decisions have been made at least while you are overseeing your anticipated leadership. there's been a series of programs that already exist. immigration advisory program, global entry, trusted traveler, all have been used in the past. can you explain to me whether the stated security goals that

we have outlined in abu dhabi could not have been realized using those kinds of programs? or do you believe they could have been realized using the kinds of programs that currently exist, like immigration and pfizer, et cetera, that i identified? >> congressman, i think that in general the more opportunities we have to put security in place ourselves in last point of departure airports, the better. so that bad things don't happen, not just once a terrorist gets into the country but on the airplane, flying into the country. i've looked at the very different levels of security at our last point of departure airports. it tends to vary, and that's of considerable concern to me. so i believe, and i understand the concerns that have been raised about alternatives. i understand the concerns that

have been raised from the commercial airline industry. i believe preclearance is a homeland security imperative. now, could things be improved at the point of arrival, or in the abu dhabi situation in particular? i'm not going to insist to you that we are doing it absolutely the best way out of work in progress along the road. >> determination instead of going to the bible we have five times the amount of identified going to abu dhabi -- going to dubai. if, in fact, it was the policy. >> abu dhabi is not an input. i think this was a point along the way in a progression to were i think we should get to a more aviation security and vibrant for this country. >> may i close my question on this? what of it going to do as we put more resources over there and we're saying to the very airports you identified, newark among others, as american

citizens flying in from all over the world are seeing extended delays in simply getting through. they already down in the form of resources that you need to do the work that you're doing. why are we sending personnel overseas during a prototype when you're remarkably understaffed right at our own border? >> in general, the more we can put at communism in forward as, last point of departure outside this country, before the terrorists can get on the airplane to fly into this country, the better. i believe that is a homeland security imperative, congressman. ..