could be spent currently by any family is $32,400. that cannot replace a homeowner's policy or a flood owner's policy and i don't think anyone is rex irresponsible but there is the image created don't worry, fema and dollars are coming we will be taken care of. there is some truth in that with the state and local governments but certainly nothing replaces solid insurance and a culture of preparedness. . .

senators mark kirk and robert menendez have introduced a bill which adds economic sanctions against iran for its nuclear program. it restores some sanctions that were lifted when i ran into negotiations with the u.s. and imposes new sanctions on senior iranian officials and their families. the senate banking committee met today to work on the bill. this is an hour. [inaudible conversations]

>> the meeting will come to order. as we are getting a quorum here we will move to opening statements. we will then consider a nuclear weapon free iran act of 2015. i would like to come in at this time senators kirk and menendez for their tireless efforts and i mean tireless over so many months including this legislation. earlier this week we heard testimony from senior administration officials and a panel of experts on the need for iran sanctions. i will note that this testimony is an addition to the at least 11 other times administration officials have testified before senate committees on iran since 2013. yesterday members also were dissipated in a classified briefing on iran sanctions which covered the same topics of

numerous classified briefings for members of congress and staff. moreover this topic has been discussed and analyzed with the administration multiple settings by most of us. both the administration and its critics agree that it was escalating pressures of economic and financial sanctions many of which originated in this committee that brought iran to the negotiating table and 2013. in recent months the sting of these pressures seems to be lessening in part because some of the sanctions have been the ease. kohl. ..

i understand that we have a number of amendments today and will 1st turn to senator brown.

any other member may either submit the statement for the record will be allowed to make a statement after the final vote. >> thank you. none of us disagrees with the goal of the legislature before us. we are united in our desire to prevent iran from securing a nuclear weapon through peaceful diplomacy a possible another means if necessary. we differ and tactics which is often a little consequence, but in this debate tactics that have anonymous impact our national interest. many of our colleagues at talked about how economic sanctions have brought a run to the negotiating table, and i think that is true. a solid multilateral sanctions regime that has done so. it seems to me that those who have the greatest skepticism about reaching an agreement with iran should also have the greatest

reluctance to do anything to undermine our ability to stiffen sanctions on a multilateral basis should the negotiations fail. that is not the case. the administration and some of our closest allies are telling us that unilateral actions on sanctions in advance of the conclusion of the negotiations may in fact -- and this is so important,, may make it significantly harder to keep the coalition, the p5 +1 and plus one and our other allies who have been supportive, make it harder to keep the coalition together. my democratic colleagues in the community including senators menendez and schumer and donnelly have indicated they will give the president at least until after march 24 24th before agreeing to support new sanctions legislation on the floor. this is helpful. even so as some as some of us have heard from european ambassadors on tuesday are versus partners in these negotiations turning that soft deadline in fluid negotiations into a hard deadline for legislative of legislative action may have

consequences for the negotiations partners and ultimately for us and our national interest to read consequences we cannot now foresee. the collective patients to wait until the end of june to see whether our negotiators can resolve the nuclear issue with iran through diplomacy. once that is determined and if negotiations fail congress and the president will unquestionably join hands in applying greater pressure. we will be in a far better position to ask the rest of the world to join us. in the past this committee has worked patiently to create targeted sanctions. instead and especially sensitive time in negotiations we are considering a bill with no legislative hearings, no opportunities to thoroughly and responsibly assess the likely consequences of our action.

the additional questions for instance, the witness is tuesday's hearing are not due until next week. the answers will be received sometimes later. there should be used to inform our work, not 2nd guess it after we voted for me that we are marking up this bill before we decided what questions to ask. there are one two, three four five new committee members. we have not had them on this committee, hearing on iran sanctions in this committee says december 2013. so for all intents and purposes they have had three days of formalized discussions. the hearing not on legislative language for the hearing on this issue on tuesday classified briefing yesterday. a very useful briefing. briefing was truncated last -- lasting only an hour and

now we're voting today. again no hearing on the legislative range. there are substantive issues with this this should be addressed, should negotiations fail what can be implemented, how quickly. these issues need to be resolved before floor consideration. consideration. the president has said new sanctions legislation would draft a medically undermine the negotiations, undermine our relations with our negotiating partners and eventually jeopardize international support for multilateral sanctions. he will veto the bill. bill. our negotiating partners have expressed similar, strong opposition. we are acting hastily and unwisely.

if congress acts to force the president's hand in the next few months by pressing ahead and overriding his veto any contributes to the collapse of negotiations in our heading down a path toward military confrontation congress beginning with each of us will likely be held responsible. this is the 1st step in a longer legislative process. in the coming in the coming weeks and months i hope my colleagues will finally heed the president's warnings and give our negotiators the time that they need to try at least to try to resolve this diplomatically. we have the time for all the relevant committees in both houses to ensure that all members are fully informed of the potentially profound and historic consequences of our actions. let's use it. >> thank you. i have been working on this legislation for quite some number of years to thread the ultimate needle, to make sure that we achieve the ignoble cause of making sure we avoid a nuclear war in the persian gulf and make sure that our kids never

ever half to witness such an event and to make sure this war in the persian gulf does not happen. i i wanted to use the strongest non- possible military means to affect this. i would say sanctions do work that we have seen previous. the value of iran's currency by 76 percent. the president has said that those sanctions, the entire reason why they were at the table, let's back a winning strategy and make sure that the nuclear war in the persian gulf never happens. i i would say that for those you think that we are working to fast about how close the rain is coming on the enrichment of uranium. with that i would reemphasize my thank you's.

we have been attempting to make sure that we bring the whole set forward on this with democrats and republicans to express our views in a most unified way with that i yield to bob. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me start off by thanking senator kirk for working with me to accomplish a mutual goal to have iran never achieve the capacity for a nuclear weapon and i appreciate his work. the essence of this legislation has been well debated over the course of the year, probably have more legislative attention

between the senate foreign relations committee the banking committee hearings in the series of classified hearings than most other pieces of legislation we ever deal with. i would say that in that context i support moving forward today but want to reiterate my position along with other democrats that have joined with me but have no intention, while i will move to vote today and support of the underlying legislation i have no intention of moving forward in supporting it on the floor if it is brought before the march 24 deadline to understand whether or not an agreement is possible and what that agreement would look like. i would just say: mr., mr. chairman, that this legislation has been carefully calibrated to achieve our ultimate goal which is to prevent iran from achieving nuclear weapon ability and the essence of the legislation itself, the timing may be an issue but i think it is the essence of the legislation would have broad bipartisan support which i think is essential at the end of the

day to send the world and to send iran the messages that we have sent in the past so that as they calibrate their decision-making they understand that we are very closely unified in our goal. now, i will say that i respect every member's rights rights to offer amendments. i wanted to offer them in the past and sometimes have withheld in order to achieve the greater good. i respect every member's rights to offer amendments, but while i will support some of the amendments i will have to oppose others that i think particularly at this time would move us in a direction that would break the very essence of the strong bipartisan support that we need. finally, i am concerned i must say when i have been reading and hearing constantly the refrain if

no agreement what then? that suggests that there has to be an agreement at virtually any cost. now, an agreement that is bad is not good in the national interest of security of the united states or our ally, the state of israel or the effort to stop a nuclear weapons arms race in the tinderbox of the world which is the middle east. and as i have traveled traveled in most countries, many other allies who were not brought before the community but would tell you the saudi's, immoralities turkey among others, others, that if, in fact, around the choose nuclear weapons capability then they will under the theory of mutual self-destruction seat to do the very same thing themselves. so i would simply suggest that this constant refrain if no deal than what well

that indicates to me that we are headed toward a deal for deals sake, and that is extremely dangerous. there are other alternatives, and being prepared to have iran understand that it will suffer more greatly and maybe create regime change from within may be the ultimate mechanism that has been decide to make the deal and so what i don't want to do is be in the process of an appeasement that ultimately left north korea to be a nuclear weapons state. that is not a history i want to relive once again and is why many of us are focused on this in that context so that we do not relive that history and the challenge that we have on the north korean peninsula and that part of the world

as a result of the bad choices that were made at that time. >> we now have a quorum. the first amendment, the chairman's amendment, very straightforward, technical in nature and would require the president delivered to congress and economic sanctions relief assessment report by the sec. of the treasury. in addition to the verification assessment report by the secretary of state required in the bill within five days of entering into a long-term comprehensive solution for any extension of the joint action plan. >> thank you. you. the question is on the chairman's amendment, number one. >> i commend the chairman on this initiative. i know it is intended to ensure greater clarity. i think at some.we should be balanced by an appraisal of the cost of continued sanctions to the economy but certainly have no amendment.

>> thank you. the question is on the amendment. those in favor say i. the eyes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the floor is open. the committee is open. >> mr. chairman. >> sen. >> if this is an appropriate time i have filed three amendments. i intend not to ask for a vote on all three. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me address the 1st of the three amendments. this is an amendment that would preclude the possibility of uranium enrichment on the part of the irradiance plan i will ask for a vote on this but i do want to address this issue because i think it is important. >> let me interrupt you a quote to have a 2nd. dispense with the reading. >> reading. >> i would ask unanimous consent.

>> thank you. >> six seven and eight. >> yes. yes. i am referring to amendment number six. so fundamentally what this is about is the fact that the only thing that iran truly wants is the ability to generate electricity with uranium they don't need the ability to enrich uranium. that is an indisputable fact. fact. they nevertheless are insisting on having enrichment capability which troubles me deeply that they have some other purpose and the obvious purpose is to preserve the option to one day and rich to the level that will generate weapons grade uranium and the distance between having the nuclear fuel enrichment to weapons grade enrichment is not a great distance. so

leaving leaving that capability in place on any meaningful scale is very dangerous and very worrisome my amendment would say that it is the language of my amendment drawn entirely from the kurt menendez bill. this is the language that was written into that legislation which i supported. i think it was appropriate then and is appropriate now but recognize that for a variety of reasons that were not have the votes to pass it at the moment. it is an issue i intend to address on the floor and i think it is an important one i would ask unanimous consent to be able to withdraw. >> without objection. >> thank you. mr. chairman if, if i could, i would like to move to amendment number eight. >> recognized. >> first, let me start by commending senator corker who has been particularly active in advocating that congress should have a role

i should also give my great respect and congratulations to senators kirk and menendez for all the work they have done to get us to where we are. a very simple. simply states that it is the sense of congress that the president reaches should be voted on by congress. nonbinding, does not specify the form that the vote would take whether it be a negation or in the affirmative. that may suggest a couple of reasons why that is important. if an agreement is reached the calendar is clear there will only be about 18 18 months left in this administration if and when such an agreement is reached obviously our national security interest in ensuring the not develop a nuclear weapon extends well beyond that. congress has no manifested by an on this agreement

raises the question of how enduring this will be. i do not think that we should have any such question. i think we should have broad support and it should be manifested by a vote of congress. we. we have loaded on many other nuclear related agreements most of which i can't think of any of which are as important as this one. so if we have routinely voted on other manners of lesser import think we certainly should have a vote on this. this amendment does not bind us to that specify the form that it would take, but it does underscore an important principle. a strong and enduring agreement must have a buy-in of congress. i urge my colleagues to support this short, simple amendment that establishes a sense of the congress that we ought to have a vote on any final agreement.

>> i i oppose this amendment. clearly it undermines negotiations. we know that the political climate in this country right now. our negotiating partners know that. this is why it we will undermine this congress. there is not a major role for congress. the sanctions. obviously a very important part of this. a big step in getting where we are today. today. we know that congress will be consulted on any permanent relief and must closely monitor and oversee the implementation. so it so it is not that if there is no congressional vote overall congress won't have we will have

significant input in making sure it is carried out properly. >> and going to say now so i don't speak to anything else first of all, all i do want to thank kirk and menendez. i don't think there is any question we would not have the negotiations right now without their efforts. i look to this bill if you think about it, we are in regular order now meaning we vote on things on the floor that come out of committees now. that is the way that the senate is going to work. i look at this effort today overall is putting in place a placeholder on the senate floor, a placeholder. my guess is the negotiations break down many people may

want to do something even stronger than what this bill says today. this is a placeholder, the topic and all of us understand it we will not be voted on to after march the 24th. that is my understanding today. i just want to go to the amendment. on 27123 agreements where we have a nuclear arrangement with any country a one two, three agreements, one of my 1st votes. if the threshold is low you should look at the way -- it is very low. it is not something that a potentially dysfunctional senate could even mess up.

i have talked to all but one of our allies. this does not in any way impede negotiations. absolutely not true. so each of the countries understands that we have processes we go through. each country goes through a process of ratifying whatever happens. the ukrainian parliament has to go through a process. i would say to my friends the fact is that ultimately we're going to vote. think about it. to permanently suspend the sanctions takes the vote of congress. the sense is, should we not vote on the front end before the temporary suspensions begin? and he does not even specify that. i'm going to vote against

most of the minutes today, and the reason i realize that senator kirk and menendez have a coalition that has been put together that is bipartisan. even bipartisan. even though i support some of the amendments that we will be offered i want to honor the bipartisan coalition that has been put together here, so at sen. kirk's request and sen. menendez's request i will vote against amendments that i actually agree with. i don't. i don't know how anyone here on the sense of the senate that we should have a role some kind of approval process, i don't know how any senator who came here to deal with the big issues of the day cannot support at least the sense of the senate that at some.we should have a role in ratifying what is going to be probably the biggest geopolitical agreement that this administration will ever be involved in that by the way, we were the central

force in causing this negotiation to take place in the 1st place. moderate negotiation. absolutely not true. an outstanding meeting this morning i think it is just absolutely not true and hope that at least when something that states that we should play an appropriate role will pass unanimously in this body. >> sen. menendez. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate the center's intent and in general construct i am largely in agreement and appreciate the distinguished chairman of the senate foreign relations committee i have worked with for the last two years and he has put a lot of time and effort on this. here is why not at this time can i support even the sense of the senate. this is an

issue that we have been discussing with senator corker because oversight of international agreements and disarmament issues come within the jurisdiction of the senate foreign relations committee. the members of that community have participated in a multitude of oversight hearings and classified briefings both on the negotiations and terms of the agreement. if we were to decide that we should vote on an agreement which i am inclined to believe we should do but we need to come to an agreement on how that boat would be -- how that vote would be taken subject to voting thresholds and the consequences consequences, if any that exist if the agreement was disapproved. there are potentially consequences and precedents that could be set for other executive agreements by a vote of this agreement which is also a matter for the committees of foreign relations and its. these are all things that we are talking to senator corker about.

i am not inclined to have that issue decided here today in the sense of congress that does not consider the mechanisms were the implications of such an action. and so i appreciate the goal , but this is not inconsequential because how that vote takes place what structure, with threshold, what consequences are critically important. and while i know this does not dictate what the structure is or is not the precept of going ahead and saying that there should be a vote with no understanding of how the voters should take place is something that at this.in time i am not willing to buy into. >> any further debate? if not we we will roll call the vote. >> folk will call the roll.

>> rollcall.

>> mr. chairman the vote is 14 in favor and eight opposed. >> the amendment is agreed to. any further amendment? >> amendment number three and number two. we will take them up whatever you would like. >> you are recognized. you want to dispense with the reading of the. >> absolutely. i will explain. >> dispense for the reading. >> yes, yes, i move we dispense with the reading of the amendment. >> without objection, so objection, so ordered. >> very simple simply inserting into the text a basic statement of israel's right to defend themselves. the sentiment and this type of language was in the prior version of this bill. the concept is not knew.

certainly the sentiment and the text is very straightforward with regard to israel's basic right to defend themselves, command the reason that it is unfortunately necessary is because and the international community and particularly forms like the un that is not a given a ridiculously controversial topic. i think i think that we should make that statement in this context. again, it was in a prior version of the bill so so i commend it to everyone. happy to answer any questions. >> i support the amendment to. >> all in favor say i. all opposed they. the eyes have it. the amendment is agreed to. >> i moved to dispense with

the reading of amendment number two. >> so ordered. >> this amendment adds language so that the bills verification assessment report involves the treasury department in looking into existing inadequacies in the international monitoring and verification system that we need to work on and improve. it simply beeps up the report that is already in the bill. we would all agree that we need to trust but verify and verify a lot when we are talking about iran and this is a challenge, the existing system that has certain inadequacies, and this will simply improve the report with regard to verification assessment. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we ought to extend the time frame given the intelligence

community and this report if we are looking for serious and thorough piece of work i think that this helps. >> all in favor say i. all opposed they. i ask unanimous consent that we dispense with the reading >> without objection. >> thank you. >> you are recognized. >> first i would say that i i think it is a mistake to ever go down this path. iran is a radical islam's theocracy. it's. leaders of honor that constitution for 35 years killing americans. in 1983 1996 having a nasty habit with the proxies of killing jews and as recently controlling or exerting dominant influence

over capitals in the middle east. i would rather see this negotiation and because the administration is committed to a deal at all cost were committed to drag manlius she is. therefore i propose amendment 11 that would call for immediate sanctions upon enactment but given the realities that that likely would not pass the community of the floor i am calling for a vote on number 12 is modified which would take the stage sanctions starting on july 6 and starting one per month july 2015 through december 2015 and make them all effective on july 6. if it is the judgment of this committee in congress we need to provide the

administration yet another five months before putting conditional perspective sanctions in place then surely we can say on july 6 after 20 months of negotiations with secretary kerry originally proposing would only last three to six months that all sections should go into place on july 6 and do not need another six months of stage sanctions. >> senator brown. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i oppose the amendment. the stair stepped incremental approach the bill was designed to ratchet up pressure incrementally and provide time for effective implementation of the sanctions by all of the partners who have been so supportive of sanctions which would kick in, my in my understanding was taken all sanctions immediately mid-july which would not give our allies time to adjust and make it more difficult if not impossible for the ministration to responsibly implement. i oppose the amendment.

>> further debate. >> mr. chairman, i appreciate senator cottons strong concerns which i share. however the reason that we created a calibrated and stage different is to do two critical things. if the agreements could not be achieved and agreement that we could collectively support than it would be to consistently have iran understand the consequences of additional sanctions in an effort to get them back to a table where they would agree to an agreement that we could collectively support and to do it in such a a way that would still keep the international coalition that i think is critically important in order to have multilateral sanctions which i think has been a key element of our ability to bring iran to the negotiating table.

that that is why we structured it in the way that we did and i think that being able to keep it in that context is incredibly important and has nothing to do with giving the administration more time but is focused on how we create the greatest consequence on iran the least consequence on us and keep our coalition together. i will have to oppose the amendment. >> i would simply i would simply say the leaders of assumptive of apparently made it clear that they believe any new sanctions would violate the gpl way and lead to the end of the negotiations. to me to me that is illogical. if they want to deal they can reach a deal. if they want to deal after july 6 then they can do exactly what south africa did in 1989 1989, libya in 2,003 the unconditional, complete nuclear disarmament.

estimated it was july 16 which was a technical error. in keeping with the original text. >> the clerk we will call the wall. >> mr. chairman. >> i.

>> ms. miss high camp mr. donnelly the vote on the amendment is ten in favor and 12 opposed. >> the amendment is not agreed to. >> i move unanimous consent

we dispense with the reading i will not offer amendment number nine. i am offering amendment number ten which would limit the president to 130 day. currently allows the president to indefinitely waive the sanctions of this legislation for 30 days. in the national security interest of the united states. i would say that the president has overlooked or turned a blind eye to the uranian actions and if he is so hell-bent on getting a deal he will compared to the continued away sanctions. surely 21 months is enough time to reach a deal that

secretary kerry predicted would take only three to six months. >> thank you. with the intent of the sponsored amendment clearly to oppose in good conscience the success of these negotiations for all intents and purposes again undermining that and plays to what you say that you want to happen. the additional waivers are basically designed to allow the president of the united states to avoid imposing new sanctions during ongoing negotiations to enable them to maintain pressure on iran if he so chooses. in general in deference to the president's foreign policy powers national security waivers on sanctions have been provided for presidents of both

parties for years and years. this undercuts, erode the policy raises questions in the minds of our allies about the president's ability to deliver on commitments made in negotiations as he deems necessary. we we have a commander in chief for a reason and look to him. we do not need to tie his hands in this way and leave him at the end of the 1st 30 30 days with less ability to waive the new sanctions even in eggs and circumstances. i oppose the amendment. >> mr. chairman, i think this is a good amendment. i think one of the things that we have learned is that we have made some mistakes on the 1st sanctions we put in place. people are now realizing that the president has the ability to suspend forever and the rains know that and once you suspend sanctions for a year two years some long time, ultimately the regime the sanctions regime

itself falls apart which is one of the reasons i think many of us are looking at this legislation knowing it is not going to come up until the 24th and also looking at some of the ways for congress to weigh in on the efficacy of the deal itself. i would say i am going to vote against this amendment because of the arrangement and the work that has been done but my senses when it comes to the floor if floor, if it comes to the floor and the deal has not occurred my senses, their will be people on both sides of the aisle that may wish to strengthen the underlying legislation and i would say to the sen. i appreciate your effort. i will not not support this my guess is, if we end up without a deal there we will be a lot of strengthening in the underlying legislation at that time. >> i just want to get to the

implications. this waiver authority only applies if sanctions are in effect as of july 6. he has said moments ago from ongoing negotiations. there should be no negotiations. there should be a final deal or sanctions should kick in. the implication of the statement is that the ranking member and i suspect many people in this institution expect continued extensions of the gpl way. he said in his opening statement we we will not have a vote on the floor until at least march 24 and i suspect there is high likelihood we we will not be voting on march 25 because the president will ask for more time. he said in his opening statement the end of june. that suggests when we plan to vote and implies that members pursue a continued

extension and i don't know what would be worse or allow them to achieve it in slow motion. >> the clerk we will call the roll. >> it is available only for 30 day only if the president can certify the waiver is in the national security interest of the united states and that is necessary and likely to result in achieving a long-term comprehensive solution and iran is not making further progress on its nuclear weapons program. those are high bars to clear the waiver standard in this amendment actually would be less than what we

circumscribed. i i am not for an endless continuation of the joint plan of action without getting to a.at which we make it clear that iran will either strike a deal or not. i am not for that. for the purposes of this legislation we are creating an incredibly high bar for the president to meet, but if he can meet it and thinks that we are on the verge and i certainly want to give that option opportunity. >> the clerk we will call the roll.

>> the amendment is not agreed to. any further amendments? if not the question is on ordering the bill, the nuclear weapon free iran act as amended be reported as an

original bill. >> thank you. >> i appreciate it. i just wanted to say a brief few words. introducing a strong sanctions bill with bipartisan support, and i would stress to this committee the need to maintain bipartisan support which has been long a tradition of those of us in the pro-israel community and we ought to be working and taking the extra mile to do that and appreciate particularly even though he might have believed in a few of these agreements very easy to say we should just go off on her own but the

sanctions as we have lined with learned with any nation that has sanctions that is subject to sanctions does not work if they can go around our block and go with other countries and get money or trade oil or trade products or anything else. and i have to say as much as i disagree with the president on some of these things and publicly disagree with them on the interim agreement where i never would have loosened sanctions at all did a good job getting the nations of the world together. they may not stick together but that is important, as is our bipartisan policy. one other.i want to make have a great deal of sympathy for mr. venters amendment. as well as working with sen. corker and sen. menendez to come up with congress having final say.

that that is a good check a very good check, and it makes sense. and and so i hope we we will pursue that. it must be done in the right way and carefully. but making clear that their will be additional sanctions this is a good step forward. i hope we can keep our bipartisan coalition together and make it clear to the iranians who i do not trust in any way that if they don't come to a tough, strong agreement there we will be further sanctions and actions. >> thank you we can go back to this bill. of the weapons free iran act of 2015 as amended the reported as an original bill. the clerk we will call the

role.

>> eighteen in favor, for opposed i now ask unanimous consent that they be allowed to make technical and conforming changes and we waive the rule. without without objection so ordered. this meeting is adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

join the conversation, like us on facebook or follow us on twitter.

>> homeland security secretary spoke about national security threats and what his department is doing to prevent terror attacks and secure airports. from the from the wilson center in washington dc this is an hour. >> very quiet. good morning. good morning. i am jane harman president and ceo of the wilson center in the front rows we have the wilson center next counsel corporate councilmembers. i think we have general keith alexander. we do not. where is he? >> he is right there. >> zero, there he is. [laughter] >> he used to have a really big job.

>> you don't recognize him because he is wearing a suit. >> i saw that the last time i saw him and he said he had rented it for the occasion. we're supposed to have walter isaacson but we we will have them later former dhs secretary. i am the other cochair. is he here yet? no. members of the aspen homeland security group, members of the aspen security advisory council. i am a dhs groupie and many current and former moment security and many dear to me from past lives. when secretary johnson was 1st nominated some did not no what to expect expect, did not no how coming from the defense department he would approach the broader homeland security mission. today, more than a year later no one would think twice about his.

more than one the trust of washington, washington, law enforcement around the country end of his department staff. he is a rock star of this job and has led dhs through challenges focusing on major strategic priorities like cyber addressing the child migrant crisis and 1st and foremost protecting the homeland against a very sophisticated terror threat. the threat that we face today is very different from the one that we confronted on september 11. less hierarchical, more diffuse, in many ways more innovative. that is the new danger. they collaborate opportunistically. some have cyber skills, some have social media savvy many are young, many tragically our western. they are making dangerous connections in syria and yemen.

we face the most talented bomb maker al qaeda has ever had in this targeted western aviation before. the threatened by radicalization here at home. radical bullies protected by our constitution can become violent action. very difficult to find that gray area to intervene. our society protects freedom of thought including radical thought inspiring how to build a bomb a bomb in the kitchen of your mom is not free speech. stopping the digital spread of dangerous ideologies in partnership with faith communities in law enforcement is as crucial and difficult as it has ever been.

immigration, disaster response just to name two. it is a lot of. one of his 1st trips was to the port of los angeles which with the port of long beach is the nation's largest container port. surely the challenges there are huge. i joined him on that visit and we did a helicopter flyover. then the then the marine layer role then and we were unable to land. what a metaphor. navigating through the fog. of course we persevered and so has dhs ably led by j johnson. j johnson. it is our honor to have them at the wilson center for the 2nd time to address the state of homeland security.

please join me in welcoming the secretary of homeland security. [applause] .. >>

>> end part with no prior notice just a few feet from the building. this is the same spot today. the public parking lot is gone replaced by police vehicles and heavily armed members of the capitol police. sadly there are threats to our homeland security today that did not exist in 1966. the secretary is responsible for addressing those threats. one year ago i filled up my vision for the department of romance security. i was then new to the job not legislator i can give a progress report with the benefit of the year's experience. i think the wilson center and jane harman for right providing a forum. her wide support in this

town people like her be the lot to people like me. on new year's day i set out new year's resolution of the hms. on top of the list with the manner of romance security. the reality is dhs is so large conglomerate f-22 components we are a large bureaucracy still finding our way. we have filled almost all the senior level vacancies just prior to the time i took office one year ago the department of fall plan security had no secretary or deputy secretary and senior

level positions are now have a secretary in the new deputy secretary and the undersecretary an undersecretary in the new undersecretary for science and technology, new commissioner and a new director for citizen of immigration is services and assistance secretary for customs enforcement, and new chief financial officer, new deputy director, a new deputy administrator of the nut and assistant secretary for legislative affairs and a new assistant secretary from public affairs. we are actively working to

fill the vacancies that has arisen this past year as a permanent director of the secret service and administrator, tsa. the last one is sitting back there. john. we are restructuring the whole manner that we make decisions within the department of romance security and in april i directorate a community effort initiative that has brought about a more centralized and integrated process to make budget decisions acquisition and strategy and other functions we are moving away from decisions made. as part of the initiative to have the joint requirement consisting of senior leaders to identify and maximize efficiency. also several major functions to promote deficiency.

we are committed to greater transparency that brings credibility and conference one of our executive actions from november 20 is to direct statistics to collect and maintain an report consolidated data on the number of people we apprehend remove or repatriate every year. in a manner that could be made public. this is how we collect and report. i applaud the chief to make public the of border patrol yusupov policy last year to make public the recommendations about use of force by the border patrol that which is sought by the

media. as an aggressive multi faceted campaign to improve routes with the opponents of teach us. we had the secretary of ford's program to recognize those who had made outstanding achievements in one of 16 department said agencies of the high risk less beer on a path to get on that list and indeed we have been informed of the market direction serves as a model for how other federal agencies can work to have said gao designation. we have to improve the responsiveness to congress despite the challenge of 92 committees and subcommittees of congress to claim those oversight rules.

members of congress saw ample size of the ideal including some of the biggest critics have taken note of our increased responsiveness. finally earlier this week in the judgment for center of plain language the department of romance security has gone from worst with federal agencies with the ability to communicate and play in the anchorage. one of my personal passions. in these challenging times ministry reform is a whole man security imperative. here is very are in the substance of some important issues. one year ago i said as long as i am secretary counterterrorism will remain the cornerstone of the department of the homeless securities mission. 13 years after nine above and it is still a dangerous

world and in 2015 we must recognize we have the fault for to a new phase in a global terrorist threat. to day it is more decentralized and more complex to be concerned about those who leaves the home country to take up the fight to link up with a terrorist extremist and may return his home whether this country or one of our allies with the terrorist extremist purpose. we are concerned rand terrorist organizations new skills use of the internet to publicly recur within their own homeland to no longer build bombs in secret it is well-publicized in the instruction manual and calls for people to use it. we are concerned about the domestic threat of the so-called loan wolf who may

be inspired by the extreme propaganda on the internet and who could strike with little or no notice. first we take the fight to the groups like iraqi and syria. our intelligence community has terrorist plots at the earliest stages. domestically the fbi investigates and prosecutes terrorist plots in the homeland. in response with the public calls by terrorist organizations of attacks in the west the federal protective service will the federal buildings in the united states and continues to taylor's security to every appropriateness said. for example, the of these the waiver program is a valuable tool for international commerce in

this continue but there is ways that it can be improved to enhance security while maintaining integrity. last november we identified added information to the electronic system for travel authorization to learn more about those who travel to the estates for which we do not require a visa we are considering further enhancements to the program. using our allies to maintain and share travel information about individuals of suspicion in sharing or intermission of training state and local law-enforcement given the manner of the threat is evolving the cop on the b must me as vigilant as our department. ths along with the justice

department are engaging communities and organizations and institutions here at home and it in 2014 there was over 70 roundtable meetings in cities around the country. i personally participated in the meetings in chicago, of -- ohio and boston and los angeles. doubling down on the if you see something say something campaign yesterday at a press conference in phoenix i rolled out the new enhanced program and thus be more than a slogan. our efforts has the vigilance of aviation security i directed we enhance security with slates directly to is the united states. tsa made further enhancements in we are

reviewing is more is necessary. i made it a priority to establish clearance by personnel before a passenger gets on the plane bound for the united states. those we have screens 60 million power -- passengers before they arrive to open early last year since that time in of a job be alone we have screened 364,000 passengers in that year and denied boarding to 571 individuals including a number that were in the terrace to database. we want to build more of these overseas airports from the homeland security pointed you last year we put

out a solicitation and taking steps some saving sheave waited for congress to act. but congress did not the president continues to urge to finish the job with the comprehensive bipartisan bill and willing to work with democrat or republican independent but in the meantime we must improve the system with existing legal authorities. the president announced the reforms of the 20th of last year. those to of committed no serious crimes since jaime. >> guest: in those who are

eligible to be citizens. user not enforcement priorities. to be accountable and paid taxes. so we know who they are. with the removal of felons and to discontinue the secure communities program replaced with another. to promote naturalization. to enhance the options of the foreign-born high skilled workers. >> a number of steps to further secure it with the public misperception of the

facts. and assigned in june 2014. just your best guess you think the number of immigrants entering illegal today is higher or lower or about the same? but the reality is in the year 2000 with a direct indicator of with the apprehension on the southern border with 400,000 per year in recent years the apprehensions are in fact, at the lowest rate since the 1970's. these numbers are no doubt partially due to economic conditions and trends in the estate's but also to the

large investment this nation has made of border security over the last 15 years. the portable shot as large as department of people aircraft and equipment along the southern border in its 90 year history. the total of 20,000 border patrol agents. without a debt -- without a doubt we have a challenge with the unprecedented number of unaccompanied children who across an area of the border into the rio grande valley. we responded aggressively and beginning in mid june those across the southern border are now a far lower levels of the year not declaring mission accomplished. we are committed to build a

more secure border in a smart strategy to get there. much migration is seasonal with those that still exist but there is still more that we could or should do. this means to focus resources to tell us that the threats exist. this is a smart and effective use of taxpayer resources. there with other equipment experts have determined we need for fiscal year 2015. in december we opened a new family facility that will house up to 2,400 individuals. we are continuing aggressive

messaging in central america and elsewhere to though the campaign was launched jaime wary fifth. one january 21st wrote an open letter in spanish-language to repeat the message. finally be launched of border campaign plan doing away with the stove type approach instead putting to use in a coordinated way with the goal of porter security. we have established three new task force her to head the resources of the coast guard the first joint task force is responsible for the ports and port -- and

approaches. the joint task force is responsible for the southwest landholder year california in third is the standing joint task force for investigations so a key part of the mission is to facilitate travel and trade this is vital to our commerce. the president is committed last year tsa continues to expand the pre-check program to enroll new participants but at the same time screening 653 million air passengers 14 million more than in the year before or 43 billion checked banks or carry-on bags i did not give them much existed with those

passengers of landor see or airports is an increase of 4% so those with the various trusted traveler program to bring total enrollment down. in 2014 reprocessed 2. $4 trillion in trade from the year before through the ports of entry from the year before. we're working with canada and mexico with initiatives to facilitate with glitz of people between our countries. teeeight chess as an effort to create national electronic single windows for importers and exporters to do business with united

states to modernize travel and to make strides is cybersecurity through the integration center ths is responsible to share information with the private sector or threats or to secure their networks. dash please lacher congress provided bipartisan support with passage of legislation that codifies the authority to assist the private sector to assist other federal agencies and legislation to enhance the ability to higher cyberchallenge. we need to go further per our january 14th the president announced his administration support for more legislation to ensure our economic prosperity and

national security and individual civil liberties. to encourage the private sector to protect the private sector with civil and criminal liability when they do. but then to notify victims' it is known as said data breach and enhanced criminal penalties for cybercrime. the secret service is the finest protection service in the world no other agency will could protect 135 worldbeaters all at once at the u.n. general assembly. the secret service does this each year without incident. they continue to enjoy the president's trust and, confidence but it is the capability to pursue several financial crimes wherever recent events have highlighted the need for

change. in december those recommendations were thorough and fair and a number of enhancements have already been made by acting director clancy but it also must commit to longer-term and more systemic change. for my part i am committed to sustain and encourage oversight to ensure it has when it needs to get the job done. last year our federal law-enforcement training centers trained over 59,000 officers and agents from tribal and international law enforcement. the coast guard to ensure it has what it needs to get the job done. these are exciting times for the coast guard as it is

replacing the fleet with new vessels and to be commissioned this summer new cutters are delivered to make a difference every day in south florida. more than halfway to complete the replacement of aging patrolled meanwhile it is in the design phase of the offshore patrol cover i and insuring that it is affordable cooling for word. fema is a premiere emergency management agency in the country has turned of confidence of leaders throughout. the year i have been in office have had the opportunity to observe this at recovery sites for could teach us cannot pursue these important missions alone. i cannot print money or

appropriate money reedy day continue partnership of congress a fiscal year 2015 appropriations bill. teeeight jazz is operating on a continue real resolution so we are restricted to last year's spending levels and cannot engage in any new spending or activities. this means we cannot pay for added border security that i talked about or invest in the things the independent panel recommended to improve service. we cannot hire secret service agents for the upcoming election or non disaster grants for state and local governments for police chiefs or fire chiefs for what they depend on for aviation security airtime