some cases it doesn't come and particularly in chicago and new york city as an example, the need for the legislation. senator leahy. >> thank you. you know, we've talked about executive orders. i mean, we had the supreme court couldn't reach a decision in u.s. taxes. that's one of the reasons we now have a quandary concerning expanding daca, a 4-4 split. ..

jamaica chartered to buy a gun in this country. it is a weapon of an instrument

of terrorism and those determined to commit terrorist attacks are taking advantage of that. i believe it's a matter of homeland security that we address this. >> i am told at least one al qaeda member has pointed to the u.s. gun show loophole to encourage their sympathizers to acquire and use firearms. from your experience, is it pretty clear that terrorists in other parts of the world are aware of weak en masse? >> i believe they are. i have read such literature that you refers to as recently as this week. we know from past days that the literature put out by al qaeda and isil that is disseminated is at it upon and followed. there are examples of that.

>> i have spoken before on the floor. i am appalled with the rise of the poor and rhetoric that they do demonize suspicion on the muslim american community. i am still so attached by a note that my wife's received from another country comments saying how she and her family were praying for the people in florida during the month of from the dawn and they were in their prayers because of this terrible that. you work closely with the muslim american community and patriotic muslim americans and your agent the pier this kind of anti-muslim rhetoric, does it make if safer or less safe?

>> you are correct that i've spent a lot of time at the american muslim community and major metropolitan areas across this country to build bridges to these communities because i think it is a homeland security imperative that we do so to encourage members of muslim communities in particular than if they see something, say something. it bases him someone self radicalized and, it's imperative and law-enforcement right community leader perhaps. i think that rhetoric that vilifies muslim communities, rhetoric that vilifies new religion is contrary to the assessors and i said so publicly in the past. given the nature of the existing threat to our homeland security, which involves homegrown, home or violent extremists, it is essential that we keep at our absurd.

>> thank you. my last question here, but people were here in the audience. i see and hear some of the stories of families of slain violent central america, trying to get their children out of there before they are forced into a or murdered or raped or trafficked. sometimes detaining them for months in solitary confinement. frankly, secretary, i think it is wrong to use these teenagers to send a message, which the house has not shown much attention to the rules that allowed immigration bill to

pass. i think you've done great work to build trust. i worry about some of these days, especially targeting youngsters to push immigrants deeper into the shadows and it's not going to stop a parent is trying to protect the life of their child when trying to plead the violence of some of our so-called allies in central america. that is just my opinion. >> secretary john said, would please stay where we are? we are going to recess the hearing just a minute. i called the executive session to order. we have 11 members present on today's agenda we have one bill, which will be held over in one nominee whose rights were a boat. ms. ringtone, nominee for u.s. attorney in the northern district of ohio is at least ported by senator portman and senator brown. i understand we can then move

now by voice vote. turning to the agenda of s. 247, that will be held over and i believe that we can do u.s. attorney by voice vote. there is a quorum here. those in favor of the nomination to be u.s. attorney for the northern district of ohio's dignified by saying aye. opposed say no. and so, she will be reported to the floor. the executive session is adjourned and we will now reconvene the hearing and i will call and senator session. >> thank you, mr. chairman. in the chairman, at least wanted to be a u.s. attorney. didn't work out that way. assisting, i know.

>> that's the best job. >> does the best job i've ever had. >> mr. chairman, we need to understand where we are. the problem of the violence we are having today is not of the gun law in any significant way. we've added tax in ireland i'm in texas, chattanooga from san bernardino, orlando, all in the past year, maybe 13 months. these are unusual attacks. now it had europe and turkey. we have a serious problem here. there is no way to look around it. we need to confront a come and talk about it honestly and hear with that. amnesty bill that failed in the congress would have more than doubled the number of people given legal status in the country, created a very large permanent increase in legal immigration at a time when we

don't have enough jobs for american people here today, immigrant and nativeborn. we don't have that. the wages in america have dropped since 1999 median household income by $4000. one of the reasons for that is we have a loose labor market as a result of more. that is just fine. american people didn't like the bill and it did not pass. we've had multiple opportunities since that failure that tighten up and make our country more here and not one being a significant impact and he agreed not even been able to pass the bill that would fix the entry exit visa system on the books for over a decade and has never been accomplished. american people aren't happy. they have a right not to be happy. a great nation should have a lawful system of immigration that establishes who should

answer and they should comment and then affect your play. people who are here lawfully should be removed and people who attempt to enter immokalee should be deported. brushes the basics of the system. when people say not one more deportation, what are they saying? this value have to do is get into america unlawfully and you get to stay in no matter be removed. i was disappointed that the former secretary of state recently in a debate said nobody should be deported from america unless they commit a terrorist act on a violent crime. that is just an open invitation to lawlessness. so we've got a problem and i worried about it. i don't think this country is doing the right thing. president obama is taking extreme positions -- taking extreme positions.

mr. johnson, you're in a difficult position. this is a huge agency of god. a number of critically important department and i have to say i remain concerned about the morale and it continues to decline every single year according to the survey of the best places to work and federal government, a private group, homeland security ranked 1908 t. major agencies. the employee viewpoint survey, the government data when asked if they believe senior leaders generate high levels of motivation and commitment to the workforce, only 25% have said yes. i just think we've got a problem here and part of a is they go out and risk their lives to capture people illegally

entering the country. some of them are violent and could be dangerous. i'm sure you knowledge and respect their options. when they release into the country by mapping hotbeds, i think it impacts the morale of the workforce. are you concerned about that and what steps have you taken to help restore that? >> several things come a senator. i am concerned about morale. we've been on an aggressive campaign to improve morale across dhs and the 22 components of secretary. faster defense survey revealed that morale and fruit somewhat to various component like the headquarters, for example. this year, we just completed our participation rate though we won't know the results probably until september. our participation rate went up significantly. our rate was low last year, but

i know for a lot of effort we increase the participation rate this year and i think it's about the government lied average. that is one thing. number two, one of the things that i first became secretary is our immigration imports and personnel are not on the same pay scale as law enforcement personnel. we revise the pay scale for our folks and we are looking for help from congress to make the leap available for immigration enforcement personnel. >> i hope we can make sure we are paid properly. the frustration is the border patrol official testified a few weeks ago. they catch about half the people by 330 some odd of them are

captured and those that are captured by release before being deported. i don't know what there's numbers are. we would like to have official numbers from you. mr. secretary, one of the problems we face is how to make -- is to develop a good plan to see how we can make the country safe for. senator cruz and i had than four letters to you beginning last august requesting information on the terrace that have been captured where they were born, how they got here in a series of very rational question. we've not received an answer. we've received an answer from the department of justice to partly answer their question, which is a convicted 580 people of crimes since 9/11. and it appears they said you

have the information on where they were born, what their citizenship data says, where they were refugees are illegal entrants are wet. you failed to give us that information. do you think the information would be valuable to congress in assessing the problem in passing legislation that would be affect you then why haven't you given it and when will you give it? >> i'm happy to look into correspondence. i read every letter that i get a member of the senate, member of the house. we have, i'm sure you are aware of some 90 committees and sub committees of congress that exercise overs a jurisdiction. we have reduced the time it takes to respond to those letters to some 14 days on average. >> last august we have three times written about it, the same

letter. the last letter, the fourth one went to the president of the united states. i ask you direct to the answer. >> i am happy to look into the letters you have sent me and ensure you receive a response, as there appeared to >> thank you. >> senator clover chart. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here, mr. secretary. we've had a major issue in the twin cities feminist out of for the extremists recruiting and a lot of this is either issa server for that al-shabaab. we had a dozen indicted and we had the first man killed fighting with isis came from our state and our u.s. attorney have been very aggressive working with law enforcement and our somali community in which we are very proud of in the country. there are dozens of police officers that have come out of that community and there are

many, many ways to attack this and it's a multipronged approach are growing after the base of where they are in iraq and syria and other places and then of course go in after this extremism at home. my first question is i know that we've talked about this several times, but the grants, the dhs funding that came out of the appropriations vote this year, 50 million for violent extremism, 10 million has been allocated for communities. what he think the the timetable is for that. recent rains have gone out. obviously we are very focused on that. >> as you know, senator, i have had time with the somali community in your state. my visit there i think you are president. i was very impressed. i met with decent hard-working

people. i was very pleased that this year in response to my call we got money from congress. the idea for doing that originated with me after the visit to minneapolis when i heard that need for grant money resources at the local level to help counter violent extremism. following the phone call you and i have some weeks ago, and i had pressed our folks to know when it is that the money for this year would be made available. i am told it should be made available in the next several weeks. this should be the first time and i would like to see the congress appropriate more money in the future. 10 million is a good start. 10 million nationwide to this very important effort in my judgment not get us very far and we do need more.

i hope congress will consider that for 17 and beyond. in direct answer to your question is in the short-term and our people are working very hard to get this money available. >> thank you did i also note we had issues with the tsa talking about this before the meeting. we appreciate the tsa administrator coming out to minnesota on this issue. the ballots we have seen this week, a balance of security and also efficient they hand in hand. i'm glad you are focused on adding this dog teams which help with security and efficiency and i will put some questions on the record. syrian refugee admissions, senator durbin and i have read a letter recently asking what the status is about.

obviously a major vetting process. we all know that. at the same time, we have made a commitment. the administration has to bring in 10,000 is not even as much as they are doing. i wonder what the status is of that and how many have been admitted. >> yes, as you noted, we have increased our commitment from 2000 this year in terms of serious refugees. we have also added security checks to the process, where they are warranted but the surge of resources and a lot of effort among our refugee purse no, this is at the same time we deal with central america or an increase worldwide commitment of 85,000. >> i don't mean to interrupt. i completely understand the numbers. i think we had a couple thousand

that were 1736 and i think we stepped it up. >> actually, we're just about crossed the 5000 mark in terms of serious refugees in approximately 5000 has been approved for resettlement and just have not been physically resettled in the united states in another five or 6000 conditionally approved subject to the security check. i believe will make 10,000. >> i appreciate that. i last? still enforcement. i would like to thank you and the customs and border patrol team who worked at the commerce department to enforce penalty who were dumping steel into our market. we know that there's been about 10,000 workers laid out because of illegal dumping from china. this week i've added after with the members of the u.s. senate

to send a letter to president obama asking them to discuss this canada is experiencing similar problems and in minnesota, we raised by because of the higher tears that have been assessed which is under your jurisdiction, we actually have a pack a couple thousand workers. the work for cleveland cliffs. we appreciate the effort that union leaders and the president of cleveland on the business that is both attributed this change to the fact that there is more enforcement from the administration, but was ill have a lot on the way to go. it is the enforcement. >> i have to get back to you on that, senator. sorry. thank you, mr. chairman. good morning.

i thought for a minute congress proved a staffing level. well in excess of what we have on the ground now. we are assured about 950 officers. we are told where we are trying to get to the bottom of why it is taking so long to hire summer or am told that for every 100 applications, every 100 applicants to applied, only one is hired and a lot of people identify the polygraph that was taken for a lot of the false positives and concerned that one false positive is a scarlet letter for any employment opportunity that might come up elsewhere in government. i know there's an issue there. do you want to comment?

>> well, i have asked our folks to take a hard look at exactly what you just said. does they really need to be the case that one false positive disqualifies you from federal service, federal law enforcement airbase? i'm aware of the statistics you cite, one and 100 the length of time it takes to hire somebody for the border patrol, for ebp. as i'm sure you know, we have searched our efforts to hiring aggressive recruitment among our military personnel at military bases. >> we did pass a job or better in fact. >> i think we are closing the gap so we can hire up to what has been appropriated and not the rest. you are correct that we are currently 950 sure. i ask every time i see the

senior leadership had we do on the hiring, redoing it much as we can and we seem to be closing the gap. but i do think that we have to take a hard look at whether we are shooting ourselves in the foot by this lengthy commerce on process that it takes to recruit and hire people and get them throughout the vetting. >> when you combine this with the high attrition rate, we would have to accept 100,000 application. we are not even going to get close to that, just to get the numbers they made one out of 100. i would encourage you to look at some options here and figure how we can change the process because it is not working and we are severely understaffed at some of the ports of entry. a lot of people see the borders, something that maybe we ought to put a wall or send in to stop

illegal entries. we have to have a secure border in arizona it is also the hub of commerce and that commerce can't take place if we have too few agents they are in this ports of entry as you know. we've made a lot of investments in infrastructure there that if we don't have them stacked, it doesn't do us much good. habitat for a minute about the rodriguez decision in the ninth circuit that require somebody who has been held in detention should be released. i sent a letter on the very 12th of 2016 and came back to me with some data. the numbers are staggering for those criminal aliens released from detention and a 40% abstention rate. since that time the supreme court has agreed to hear this case again. can you comment on not and can

you commit to continuing to provide us with these numbers that will be hopelessly guide decisions here because this is certainly on except the bowl. or the 5% readdress reappeared for a 1% in absentia rate, yet we continue to let his people go. >> yes, we will provide the numbers, senator. and yes, i am pleased that the supreme court granted in the rodriguez case. i don't believe -- well, the six-month requirement on those prior to a final order of removal was making it very difficult for us to hold onto people and news contributed the number of releases though the number of criminal releases has gone down since i've been secretary year-to-year. the rodriguez case is problematic for enforcement personnel and i'm pleased the supreme court to assert.

>> when they talk about the process for a minute with so-called otm's or other than mexicans who were apprehended at the border. it's a different case of children. we understand some of them are resettled in have to be handled differently. for those who are not children, we can't repatriate them back into mexico so another process has to take place. can you talk about that process a bit. there are reports that they are simply put on a bus from the border were taken to the bus station and let go with just a request to appear in court with not much more than that at some future date. can you talk about the process? >> well, as you know, a year and a half ago we expanded upon our family unit detention capability and we sat up a number of frc, mostly in texas and that too is

in litigation in los angeles. but i believe expanding that capability with a good day if for no other reason to process these individuals do we know who they are and we can address us who should be bonded and who should be not. we can release them on condition they have a reasonable likelihood of returning to court. im can earn that we not just simply take somebody to the nearest bus station. those apprehended at the border are a priority. we have conduct that a number of operations, interior imports and of those who were apprehended at the border. it was controversial. a lot of people as you saw don't like that, but we have to enforce the law consistent with priorities and one of those is border security.

i don't believe we should send a message that if you come here you will not be as aback. i was personally in central america last month to deliver that message. i did two press conferences. and when there were some 60 news organizations they are to cover my remarks about our borders are not open to illegal migration and we were sending people back. i greeted flights of those who had been repatriated to el salvador and honduras while i was down there. i am pleased the number of apprehensions on the southwest border in june look something like around 33,000, which is a decrease from may. there was about 40,000. may and june are typically the month of the seasonal increases. we are going to continue at this. we are going to make people apprehended along with those who are thread to public safety.

when we release people, i want to make sure we are releasing them on conditions that will guarantee that they return to court when they're supposed to. we have some capabilities to hold onto people and right now, our best face is something like 36,000, which is a little higher than usual. but this too is an issue that we have to wrestle with in litigation. as a district court order that we appeal to the ninth circuit, makes it harder for us to manage frc. don't know what the ninth circuit is going to do in that case it will have to see. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. chairman. secretary john said, welcome back to the committee. before i start, i just want to join many of my colleagues in expressing our profound disappointment at the supreme court inability to issue a final

decision on the merits of the united states first texas governor challenge to president obama's executive action on immigration. in our view, that challenges about marriott and i was pleased to join 38th of may senate colleagues in signing an amicus brief explaining the deferred action programs represent a lawful exercise of the president's authority. unfortunately, the supreme court was unable to answer the questions posed by the parties in litigation and that should come as no surprise that the immigration case, just one of five other cases in with the shortstaffed court is deadlocked, handing down ties and in two cases where the court was unable to reach consensus, essentially punted sending cases back to the lower court.

but the legal uncertainty that will persist as a court deadlock in the immigration case doesn't just underscore the need for the senate for the vacancies on the suspension. failure means fear uncertainty will continue to hang over the heads of millions of families living in our country are right now. families that came here seeking a better life should serve as a reminder to all of my colleagues that we must recommit ourselves to our broken immigration system and finishing the work that we started when the senate passed the comprehensive reform in 2013. we need to do our job in many different ways. i would like to start by focusing on how this uncertainty impacts children as you know,

i've long been concerned about our broken immigration system affects children. to help separated children act, would've laid down some basic protections for children in immigration eating. when they took up comprehensive immigration reform in 2013, the bill was included as an amendment that passed unanimously. i wrote the bill in response to something that happened in worthington, minnesota in 2006. that year i carried out a series of raids that read to an arrest of 1500 undocumented workers in six days. unfortunately, the rate left many children, most of them citizens without their parents in with no way to find them. one second-grader in worthington came home from school to find his 2-year-old brother alone and his parents gone. for the next week, he cared for

his 2-year-old brother while his grandmother drove from texas i believe to meet them. .. twice now i've joined my colleagues in expressing concern about enforcement actions targeting families from the northern triangle region, el salvador, guatemala's and honduras. by and large the mothers and children have fled incredible

violence in their home countries and it seems to me the fear generated by the most recent series of raids could exacerbate the trauma that many of these kids have already experienced. secretary johnson, what steps can the department take as a matter of policy to limit the harm to children's mental and physical health? what steps are already being taken? >> let me answer it this way. the priorities that we announced in november 2014 for immigration enforcement were sharply focused on threats to public safety and those apprehended at the border, border security. public safety, national security and border security. we are also encouraging our immigration enforcement supervisors in the field to exercise prosecutorial

discretion when it comes to individuals they encountered. one of the bases for doing that is the family unit situation. so if taking somebody away would leave a dependent or child in jeopardy, that is something that i would hope and expect our immigration enforcement personnel, the case you refer to in 2006, but today i hope it's something our immigration enforcement personnel would take account of. i would encourage them to do that. but going back to your original point, senator, there are an estimated 11 million undocumented in this country, and the president and i wanted to provide deferred action for an estimated 4 million or so who have been your for years who have kids who have citizens or

lawful prominent residents simply so we can account for these people. they are not going away, and give them an opportunity to be accounted for and to get on the books. instead of working off the books like we know they do, and we are disappointed in the court decision. and at some point it's going to be up to congress to wrestle with this issue. we have to account for these people. they are here. they are not going away. contrary to the rhetoric of some, we are not going to deport a population of people the size of new york and chicago put together. we don't have the resources and it's not the best use of our taxpayer dollars. and so we have to account for these people, and give them an opportunity to come forward, submit to a background check and be accountable, who have families here. it's my hope at some point congress will finally take us up and deal with it in the legislative branch.

we tried in the executive branch. to help his congress will recognize this problem finally and deal with it. >> tried to do the intro and -- 2013. i know i'm out of time, mr. chairman. want to submit a question for the record about countering violent extremism which i think was a bad name for that. i think the choice of the name, we have a very vibrant somali american community in minnesota as senator klobuchar talked about. etiquette i would like to continue talking with you about our approach on the. because i think that we need buy-in i this community, and to think there's some of the approaches been counterproductive. i'm sorry to go over my time, mr. chairman. apologized to my colleagues. >> if i may we actually don't use the term in the field.

it's an inside the beltway term but out in the communities i know -- >> building community is something we are referring to in minnesota now, but thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. secretary, for being here. it sounds like a day is going to be even more difficult after you leave this committee. hopefully not too bad. i want to go back to border security. in your professional opinion, what an open border, let's just tell border security to move on, keep a few counters, the more helpful or less helpful to you keeping the homeland safe speak with an open border? >> yeah. >> obviously a secure border helps to the homeland safe. >> and so now i assumed as much by want to picture because it's a small booklet are some people here who say we should not have borders and that we should move

freely between nations to our north and south. it would seem to me no one who is here and with the backgrounds are as a helpful piece of information for you to do your job. if we start talking about what a fully managed border looks like, what in your opinion should read as a matter of congressional policy due to ease the pressure on the border, to make the border security effort easier? what do we do? i, for one, think that if we had a better job, did a better job cooperate with mexico and trying to seal their southern border, that's one example of how we take the pressure off of your job. and you think of other things we should be looking at and prioritizing to make them was sensible? >> in fact we have cooperated, worked in the spirit of cooperation with the mexicans to secure their southern border with the northern triangle.

over the last two years or so, they have not released up to those effort and we've seen that reflected on our southern border in addition to what we are doing. i think the answer is more technology, more surveillance, more eyes on the border, and we can always do a better job i think of identifying the hotspots and the trends. the intel that i get from, i will speak candidly. the intel advocate from central america very often is not that good in terms of emerging trends. i would like to see us do a better job in terms of our intel collection capabilities of there. >> i think i've spoken with southern command, and i think some of the sources of

intelligence would come from them. they seem to be sort of the last command that we think about as a priority but, in fact, if you look at 400,000 plus people who died of which refer to as narcoterrorism, it seems like we've got to appoin to a point e with getting better situational awareness. can you go and, i think one thing i would like to do when you start talking about securing the border, the rhetoric is about building a wall but i don't think anybody here thinks we're going to build a 20-foot wall from one side of the mexican border to the other. can you talk a little bit about what a wall that gives us 90% of situational awareness would look like in terms of technology and people? >> if i may let me just finish, and to the prior question you asked. one of the things that we have built this off the arizona model our joint task force for border security which we have deployed

in the southeast and southwest, which i think have been a good thing because it brings to bear all the resources -- >> with local on force to? >> with opponents of my department, better coordinated. we've asked or explicit congressional authorization to do that to remove some of the legal limitations that i've encountered in this effort. it's been pending in various different pieces of legislation. we tried to get this into the ndaa. >> i want to be clear because that was the question asked would ask. is this into agency for interagency task forces? how well are you working with other -- >> what i'm referring to is intra- spent to what extent are you going to be on that in terms of working within other federal agencies and local law enforcement? >> since i've been secretary and given my familiarity with the dod we stepped up our relationship with both northern command and southern command. i work with joe kelley a lot.

-- general killey and his successor. we are always interested in doing more with the department of justice both in terms of border security and dealing with our counter-narcotics mission. dhs has a mission. >> and seven issue on so now you would use it all and then it evaporates pretty quick as i'm going to go to a completely different subject but i do want to submit for the record bigger the latest data on the number of people estimated come across board or other than mexican. it's my understanding its the majority of those coming across the border. i will submit those for the record. i want to talk about tsa for a minute from the perspective of a customer. i fly through afford segments a week. it seems the customer experience has more to do with the inherent personality of the person i encountered that a culture of customer service. or if they happen to know who i

am, which is very seldom. i'm wondering, it may be think about it. i didn't plan it asking the question speed i hope you a total airport you are using. >> the concern i have, we are at a very stressful time now. when people go to airports, even with his temple and others you will see more. the best thing you could do that somebody that says good morning am good afternoon, thank you, have a nice life. i've never had, i had good morning once over the last year nfib traveling to d.c. what concerns me is that customer experience should be extraordinary. it should be, they are all about, i think $25,000 a year, they get over $30,000 a year. you could indeed experienced employees, they're making 30, $40,000 a year. the people that are on the line, supervisors, much more. it seems to me we need great a culture of customer service that

thank those customers who are paying 400, $500,000 for come into that airport. we do not exist for their sake. they exist for the sake of our security. i would really like to see, if you could respond, efforts you are creating that make the tsa employees think that they are the top customer service organization, thankful that there are people willing to fly and appreciating them for buying their service. because they are ultimately paying for it. i think right now i don't have a consistent experience unless i happen to get, every once in a while, a person with a great attitude. i think that needs to change because it helps calm people's nerves and make that experience better. i think that's what the tsa and airport should be all about. i will submit questions for the record about what specifically you are doing to create that coulter. i know you want it but i don't see it as active and consistent

on the ground. thank you, mr. chair. >> senator blumenthal. >> welcome to the committee, mr. secretary. and i want to just agree with one of my colleagues that serving as united states attorney is probably the best job there is. next to serving as state attorney general. and i want to commend you for the extraordinary work you've done in your present position. also your exemplary record of public service and many other positions in the federal government. and thank you for emphasizing the very outset of your testimony, the increasing threat of isis inspired and supported terrorism around the world, including the threat in this country and public spaces and events.

as we approach the july 4 weekend, the need for caution in many of our communities, and heightened vigilance and greater resources to agencies like yours that protect us in the face of the threat. and i know with great regret that the administration proposed budget for 2017 and its slashes funding for many transportation security related programs, all too often in this place as well as in the administration. we fail to match rhetoric with resources. and i think that, for example, the reductions in the transit security and program, the urban area security initiative, the state elements of a program, these programs are probably unknown to most americans but they are vital to protecting our

homeland. and i want to thank also for supporting the initiative that senators markey, durbin and i have begun to try to persuade more airlines to reduce or eliminate their fees for checking baggage which would reduce the burden on tsa and thereby, enable us to devote more resources to the work of tsa that is so vital. and i want to focus for the moment on priorities and practices. my experience is that there is all too often failure to follow the stated yorty's and practices that are articulated in the highest levels. the administration has said that

it wants to deport felons, not families, but the actual enforcement record often belies that statement. all too commonly the stated priorities are inconsistent with the actual practices and enforcement of those priorities and practices all too often simply stinks. i know that's a nontraditional term, and i applied it to the area that is most familiar to me because of personal experience in our state with a violent, convicted felon who should have been deported, was convicted of attempted murder, was permitted to remain in our state by ice,

and then brutally murdered at 25 year old woman named casey chat with the ice repeatedly declined to investigate until i insisted. equally repeatedly that it do so and the ig report that recently was completed showed an abject failure of enforcement. i think that's the only way to turn it, repeated failing to deport the killer of casey chadwick before she was murdered. jean-jacques have been convicted of attempted murder, and was thought to be reported by i.c.e. overcame the resistance and refusal of haiti to take them back. i recognize that i.c.e. can't alone overcome that resistance

or refusal, but the report shows that i.c.e. failed to seek the proper documents from the family or from john jock himself. failed to enlist or elevate this issue with the department of state, failed even to go to the haitian consulate in miami to seek its cooperation. in short, failed to deport a violent convicted felon. illegally in this country. i've asked i.c.e. how many others are there that are in the same position, and it has been enable to give me a number. so i would like to ask your commitment that you will join us in seeking specific changes in state department policy that will sanction those countries that refuse or resist taking back their nationals here

illegally after they commit crimes, continue to pose a danger to our nation. >> yes, you have a commitment. in fact, we've been working on that. i have been working on that. i have had conversations myself directly with my foreign counterparts about the repatriation of those who have been ordered removed from our country. senator, in general, in response to my new priorities, an increasing percentage of those in immigration detention today, something like 99.4%, fit our immigration priorities, that are priorities for removal. an increasing percentage of those that are deported are within our priorities for removal. i read the ig report you refer to.

we work -- we were strained by the decision which has after six months if there's no clear indication that the country to issue the setback is going to take a back, we have very limited authority to keep that person in immigration detention. i'm aware of the efforts to get haiti to take him back. i've read the ig report, and i agree that we need to continue to pressure countries to take people back when they are deported. >> we have points of leverage that we can use. it doesn't have to rely simply on our persuasive power. we can deny visas. we can suspend aid, and i'm asking for more than just you're contacting your counterparts. and when i say you, i don't mean you personally. i mean the federal government, the administration, people in

positions of authority who can say to these countries, we are simply not going to permit you to deny this person belongs back in your country because he or she as a danger to our country. and has been convicted of a crime, a violent crime. i recognize that 99% may fall into different categories, but that 1% constituted casey chadwick's murder, and a 25 year-old woman is not alive today. and i've met with her family and i've seen that heartbreak. and that's a failure of law enforcement that both of us -- so i hope that the second part of the ig report will be done as quickly as possible. it's still outstanding at the first part has been done and released. the second part still is under way. and i welcome your commitment

and look forward to working -- >> i'm sure none of this will be satisfactory to the chadwick family, but as you know, there are a host of considerations that go into the relationship we have with the number of countries, including some very big populated countries. we have over the last two years step up our efforts and, frankly, our pressure on a number of these countries. we've entered into m.o.u.s to take back more of their people but very clear this is a work in progress and at some point i'm going to advocate that we use the ultimate sanction was available to us, which is to deny visas to these countries if we don't see more progress. >> i am way over my time and i apologize, mr. chairman, but i hope that point is not that some definite point in the future because neither you know i want to look of the families in the i

can't express our regret again. thanks, mr. chairman. >> mr. blumenthal, i think it very much for the question you asked and the discussion yet because i had the very same discussion earlier, a few days ago with the secretary. and the secretary, i don't know what, he ought to recommend the ultimate that he can recommend. but whatever he recommends will not be carried out unless the state department does it and the law says the state department shall do it. and i don't know whether that is based upon what level of recommendation he might make but i would surely back up your effort that he make the strongest recommendations the law allows them to make, and in a sense that dictates he makes, and we've got to get to the state department to make sure it is carried out and we've got to forget about the sensitivities of our relationships with china and the contras like that that are the biggest abusers of it. senator hatch. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i always enjoy seeing things

being worked up, which he does with regularity and i appreciate it. also appreciate the work you've been doing. i watched your a fine man, doing the best you can and you have some severe limitations without question. so i just want to express that to you. i would also like to just note personally that the supreme court has split 4-4 in only four of the 61 cases since justice scalia's death. a lot of people don't realize that. it's a functioning court and we'll just have to see what happens but let me get into something that i thought interesting. i read ted koppel's book, entitled lights out. it's a very interesting book. it says you were interviewed in october 2014 about our nation's preparedness and aftermath of a successful cyber attack on the

electrical power grid. what asked what would happen in the that the several transformers were knocked out, and whether back to exist and you respond i'm sure in the mac has the capability to bring up backup transformers. yet when the fema administrator craig fugate was asked the same question he responded quote most people expect somehow we have enough tools in the tool just to get power bac turned back on quickly. the answer is no. it's been two years since her meeting with mr. koppel and i'll ask you the same question. what would happen in the event several transformers were knocked out? how would you go about replacing the public eye the backlogs exist? >> first of all i remember that interview well. mr. koppel seem to a thesis that he wanted my interview to fit within, and beyond what was his

thesis didn't seem to interest him much else i had to say. we dove in incident response plan in the event that generated were knocked out. that calls for the prioritization of assets, moving generated from one region to another. this is a partnership with private utilities, the private sector. the book over all i think is useful for i believe the book is useful in highlighting an issue. i think since the earthquake in japan but not out their utility, it's been a bit of a wakeup call, and we have stepped up our efforts in terms of training, in terms of exercises. we have better coordination now in this regard, but in the event of a specific incident both we and the private sector would swing into action to determine

where assets need to be moot, where generators need to be moved to prioritize addressing the public need if there's a blackout. >> i recently read a "wall street journal" op-ed by former senator tom coburn about the stockpiling of arms and ammunition spy number of federal agencies. i would ask unanimous consent to insert "the wall street journal" op-ed into the record. >> without objection. >> like many who read this i was taken aback by how many federal agencies such as the internal revenue service and small business administration and department of education have armed personnel and weapons stockpiles. one report estimates since 2004 the department of homeland security purchased 1.7 belgian bullets and has an estimated inventory of reserve -- billion -- 160 million rounds. people would not be surprised if

the army was doing this but what is dhs doing with 1.7 billion bullets? the irony is not lost as this administration is arming itself, is pushing gun control for law-abiding americans. these are things that are getting under people's skin. if you could answer that quickly i would like to ask if you were questioned. >> it's been a while since i looked at that particular issue. my recollection is the reporting on it wasn't very good and the number that people cite is the number of the total authorization for the acquisition of ammunition to it wasn't necessary for number that was actually acquired. that's my recollection of the issue but it's been about two years since i've looked at it closely. >> do you agree with us to bring court that the second amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms and that right is a fundamental right? >> yes, sir. >> do you agree to ought to be

due process before a government takes action to prevent an individual from exercising that fundamental right? is the antidote to note of the fundamental rights you believe government can properly denied without prior due process. >> my view is this. senator, i think, i studied the feinstein bill, and they studied the bill sponsored by senator collins and others. i think that if someone is denied the ability to purchase a gun, there ought to be some form of process involved in that. now, if you're dealing with a pending national security investigation, there may be some sensitivities that can't be addressed in an open proceeding, and we ought to figure out a way to account for classified

information, information that is law enforcement sensitive. my overall sense is that feinstein bill makes a good effort at that. and i think it's imperative that we try to wrestle with this. >> let me just say, the due process is critically important. it seems to me to liberty and to protect our constitutional rights do i think it is irresponsible to suggest that somehow that the due process is less important in certain contexts or with regard to certain rights. all constitutional rights are important and they deserve full protection and especially fundamental rights and expressed rights in the constitution. let me conclude by saying this one thing. in april for the fourth year in a row h-1b visa -- the first five days of the filing period. that was a record-setting two of 36,000 applicants for the 85,000

available visas. i remain committed to fixing the system so works for both employers and american workers and i hope dhs will finally be willing to put partisan considerations aside and work to alleviate this glaring problem. i know you feel, at least i think pretty much the same idea. we've got to solve this problem and we can do it. we can do it with some reasonability it seems to me. i just wanted to make that comment. >> i would like to take a question for the record. >> senator whitehouse. >> thank you, chairman. for what it's worth i would add to senator hatch's conversation that the freedom to travel is also a fundamental constitutional right, and that's a freedom that we don't seem to have the same concern about inhibiting by people people from flying when the on the terror watch list. my question to you, mr.

secretary, has to do with something quite specific and outside have to raise it to your level, but you oversee theme, as you know. one of their responsibilities is flood mapping, very important responsibly particular for coastal states like rhode island it affects people's ability to purchase the property or decisions they make about that affects their decision and their inability to build and it affects the insurance that they can and/or must have. rhode island is actually pretty good at flood mapping. we have a coastal resources management council that is delegated federal power for that, and i think they are one of the best anywhere. we have a university -- >> i'm listening.

i'm listening. >> the situation i talked about earlier seems to resolve itself. that's all i wanted to let you know. excuse me, i'm sorry. >> that's okay. we have university, the university of rhode island that is also very expert at this. our coastal resources management council and our expert at the university of rhode island tell me that the fema mapping for rhode island is wrong and, indeed, not wrong but a little. really badly wrong with obvious errors like assuming that flooding can't go above levels that we actually saw flooding go above during sandy.

so if, in fact, the fema mapping is wrong for rhode island, we are coming into hurricane season in august and september and october. and it's really important we tried to get this right. so here's the problem. i was asked to set up a meeting with our coastal resources management council folks and with our flood mapping experts to meet with fema and go through what is happening. and try to get an explanation of the differences between fema's mapping and but we are showing with our state mapping. we've been unable to get to that meeting. one of the demands has been that there be a pre-meeting before the fema regional administrator would meet with us. and we haven't even been able to schedule the pre-meeting because it evidently requires so many

different people from different parts of the bureaucracy that we can't get them to have that meeting scheduled. so time is ticking away. hurricane season is approaching. we have with the experts in the state are telling us are dramatically flawed federal math and we have a federal bureaucracy that will not meet with us. could you please clear that traffic jam for us? >> yes. >> thank you. >> i will make that happen. >> second, by way of kudos, i was at the airport in providence a few i guess months back and now window was a power outage. not just at the airport but in the locality. as a result of the power outage, tsa had to stop what they're doing because there was no longer power going to the magnetometer and you got a very, very big backup as the front end

stopped and everybody who was coming to just piled up in line. your tsa folks inrhode island responded to that by deploying themselves in such a way and getting everything ready to go to when the power came back on, they had every line going. they had people at all the different security positions that were there. and the result was that when the power did come back on and the line was cleared extremely rapidly. so i think you probably hear a lot of criticism about tsa. they had a problem that was unexpected. they lost power. they figured that i would come back on at some point. they deployed themselves be ready for when it did to really accelerate everybody to the line, and it succeeded. and one instance of a job well done. last point.

your organization manages the framework process for critical infrastructure, protecting our critical infrastructure elements from cyber attacks. i'm interested in finding out what efforts have been made to read team that framework effort and make sure that is really achieving the goals of providing robust cybersecurity for our critical infrastructure. i am hearing good reports from the industries involved, but what i can't tell is whether everybody is happy because they're being asked to do so little. or whether everybody is happy because this really is creating robust security across her infrastructure. it would seem to me that some sort of an outside read team type analysis of what is going

on would be the way to make that determination. do you have anything to that effect going on? >> let me have assistant secretary caitlin her coverage who owns this exact issue -- berkowitz -- give your response to your question, a full response than i can give sitting here. it's a good question, and i want her to give you a fully complete answer. >> i fully appreciate -- >> i will make a blog for something that we've asked congress to do, which is to reorganize our national protection and programs directorate into a cyber and infrastructure protection agency. we need an agency for cybersecurity that directly aligns the cybersecurity function with the critical infrastructure function. so that's what this concept is

designed to do, more streamlined effort to align cyber with the critical infrastructure. we've asked for every organization from congress of that. i know the house homeland committee is considering it and possibly drafting language. and if this is something the senate would consider i think it would go a long way to addressing both cyber and the protection of critical infrastructure. >> we've had good bipartisan work on cybersecurity industry and medicine in the past. thank you. >> good morning mr. secretary. good to see you. i believe that the supreme court decision and the prejudice executive actions on immigration was entirely predictable and, of course, due to the split nature of the court decision by the court in brownsville asia and by the fifth circuit, the worst part of it is i'm frankly to my mind, not to overreach by the president.

i know you advised him, the legality of the scope of his orders, but it is that the president essentially poisoned the well for any bipartisan bicameral efforts to actually reform our broken immigration system. he mentioned and senator blumenthal mentioned the case would require you to release dangerous people into our communities after six months if you can't place the. that's exactly come it's one of the types of things i think we should and could address through immigration reform, legislation. but our friends across the aisle say that because the house didn't fall in line and rubberstamp the senate legislation, that somehow this is a problem only with congress. frankly, the president was warned before you issues executive action order in 2014 that this would poisoned the well. and effect i do believe that's exactly what's happened. there would be no immigration reform during the course of this

president's remaining time in office. but let me turn your attention to orlando and the terrible tragedy where 49 people lost their lives, 50 others i believe it was was injured by the shooters there. was that a case of terrorism was that an example of lax gun laws speaker i would have to say, i would have to say it was a case of active terrorism and i would say a little differently than you said it. i would say one of the ways in which we can make it harder for terrorists to acquire guns like the weapons used in orlando are more effective gun laws. >> you are aware of the fact that she did have a license to own -- shooter had a license to own firearms, correct? he was a license security guard to what additional loss do you think could have or should be

passed to prevent someon some lo shoot in orlando from obtaining firearms? if he had a license to own them. >> i believe that, and we can't always just respond and make policy in reaction to the last event. we've got to think about the next event, senator. >> we also need to pass legislation that will solve the problem and not just pursue a preordained ideological agenda. let me ask you a little bit to opine something about due process of law. you are a very accomplished lawyer -- >> i used to be. >> you are still. and served with distinction to the department of defense and i admire your skills as a lawyer. i realize you're in a different role now, making policy and serving and administration. but i understand your role. i just wonder, i want to ask you to revisit your comment earlier about whether a constitutional right can be deprived without due process of law.

we are not just talk about the second amendment we are talking about the fifth amendment and the 14th amendment of the constitution. senator whitehouse asked you about the constitutional freedom to travel and, of course, it is a constitutional right but there's no constitutional right to fly on an airplane, is there? >> i suspect there are legal opinions are bound to answer that question. i haven't read one lately, so -- >> are you aware of any legal opinion respectable legal opinions that would say there's a constitutional right to get on airplanes because i know there's a freedom to travel and to freedom to associate which is regarded as a right in this country spent freedom to travel but there is no court decision, no respectable legal opinion message of right to get on an applet or i suspect people would have successfully challenged the watchlist to rent people from getting on airplanes. >> the supreme court in the

1930s said the okies had a right to travel to california and california didn't want them spent but not on an airplane. >> no, obviously. [laughter] >> actually -- >> if you'd let me ask my question. is my question, my real question. it really concerns me very deeply when people come and this isn't a partisan issue, but where people can say we can do not an american citizen and enumerated constitutional right based on their presence on a classified watchlist. and no more. and the idea that you can somehow provide due process of law on the back end by saying if you been denied her constitutional right you can come back, you can go to court and then insist that right be enforced. that consumes a lot and i agree with the question i think those posed by senator grassley or the senator hatch where he asked if

you can do for the second amendment why can't you do it for the other constitutional rights of american citizens have? there is a process on the backend but i doubt any court would say it's due process of law. if it didn't occur on the front end. let me ask you, who's on the no fly list? >> who? >> who was on the no fly list for these watchlist? is are classified, writes because i didn't hear your question, sorry. >> who is on the no fly list speak with would you like a list? i don't have it with me spent how many of them are american citizens? how many are based in part at least of the identity as muslims? >> i don't believe we put people on the no fly list based on religion. >> well, i hope not. i hope not because i believe discriminate against people based on religion is wrong and we both agreed that.

but there is no requirement that the government come forward and provide any evidence in order to an independent third party to put someone on a no fly list, is there? >> no, not the private sector. >> is this a case where people are being profiled based on religion, based on where they live, based on their travel habits? or what is the presence of a person spent on the no fly list based on? >> this criteria spelled out -- there is criteria spelled out. i don't recall sitting of whether that criteria is public, but there is criteria that is spelled out. >> i believe that is why, it is not public and it is secret and so it's on a classified list. if you had evidence that somebody on one of those lives have committed a crime, probable cause, they could be arrested,

correct? >> hopefully, yes. >> so something less than proof of probable cause a crime has been committed will permit somebody's name to be on the no fly list? >> is not just based on conviction of a crime. it's based on effective today pending investigation based on a number of things that don't necessarily amount to conviction of a crime or some judicial judgment. >> based on suspicion that somebody might commit an act of terrorism in the future. >> is a little more complicated than that but yes. >> more complicated? >> is criteria spelled out as you point out is that public. >> i think it's really important because we don't profile people based on religion. that the basis upon which people are being denied their constitutional rights because their name happens to be on a secret no fly list, that that be

presented to an impartial magistrate who can then make the decision whether that prohibition of the constitutional right or do not have a constitutional right is permissible or not. because i think we are on a very slippery slope if based on secret lives the government maintains. people can be denied their constitutional rights without due process of law. thank you, mr. chairman. >> chairman, may i respond? [inaudible] if you don't mind, senator. [inaudible] >> senator, i believe that in this environment, that includes terrorist inspired attacks on our country, that includes homegrown violent extremists, we owe it to ourselves to figure out a way, short of a criminal conviction or any of the other statutorily enumerated criteria that truly exists to give the

attorney general the discretion to say no to a gun purchase under particular circumstances, along with some form of process so that that individual can challenge that decision. i think this is a matter of homeland security, that we try to wrestle with this issue. a lot of smart people in this congress, including the job i'm looking at right now, though i think if you came together with some of the other very smart gentlemen i'm looking at right now could figure this out. i think we owe it to homeland security to try to do this. and i can't do this in the executive branch. we need the congress to russell with this issue. including as congress has done, sal some pretty sloppy schlecks have is clearly a cheaper i think in this environment we owe it to the public to try to take this on spirit that would include freedom of speech,

freedom of religion, freedom of association. what other constitutional rights would you say to be denied unilaterally by a government based on their presence on a secret watchlist? >> well, i think there are circumstances where, if we, through law, provide a process for denying somebody the ability to acquire an assault weapon or an assault like weapon because they are about to commit an act of terror, that it should come if properly constructed, provide any sort of course challenge. i have a lot of confidence in the congress to double the figure this out. spirit there is a bill that does that, it's called the corn and in the. thank you -- cornyn and in. >> it's great to be. i'm sort of amazed at the conversations of my colleague and dear friend from texas.

all of a sudden, when it comes to the fourth amendment we have emergency powers. police officers in danger, they don't have to go through a process. and my colleague and i have agreed, we tend to be a little more on the hawkish side of those kind of things. on the probe on for this site. when all of a sudden when it comes to guns, this data becomes absolutely ridiculous. if we are saying that the only time you should be prohibited from buying a gun are going on an airplane in this new world of terrorism is if the criteria exists a law enforcement has they can't convict, that is a path to oblivion to the people will be laughing at that are the leaders of isis and those that inspire that is absolutely way beyond what i ever heard. and we don't have that argument say on search and seizure in the

fourth amendment from my colleague. and let's treat them all the same i believe there's a right to bear arms. i believe that before hello to every law-abiding americans the right to have a gun, and they don't agree, some advocates for gun control, with the people who believe the first amendment and the fourth on the liberal side, on the first amendment and the fourth amendment and all these other should be expanded to a huge extent of, second amendment should be seen through the pinhole of malicious. but it's the opposite here. there is a balancing test, and guns are more dangerous than walking down the street. and to say we should have the same standard that we can resend, does that make any sense in the world of terrorism. and my guess, 95%, i know, 95% of americans and 90% of the gunowners agree with me. that there should be, you should get a gun if you're on a no fly

list. he should have the right to appeal. he outlined a very well. i would say to my dear friend, looking at for his self-interest and don't keep walking down that path. it's a path to real problem for america, it is hardly the right political path that either party should walk down. with that money could a separate questions. i was going to welcome you. i was going to welcome you because not only are you a great, great secretary, but you are one of the least at my count, one of five new yorkers. don't say this in new jersey. we have loretta lynch and we have you and we have jack lew and we have secretary pairs and secretary king, so we are very proud of all of you change the subject. i don't know how many taxes that are on the committee. ..

demonstrated fully implementing the program could save significant time at the border across them. additionally, locating booths on the canadian side of the border can help resolve some of the logistical challenges we face on the u.s. side. as you know, mr. secretary, a flow site has less room. i understand fully implementing this program will require legislation in congress. i'm working with my colleagues including ranking member leahy.

yes canadian border, too. in addition to the legislation, which i hope will pass this year, we need a specific mo year with canada at the peace bridge. where your negotiations with the new canadian government to make this happen? will you commit to getting an mo new permanent inspection completed for the peace bridge by the end of the year? >> senator, it has been a while since i've checked in on progress concerning the peace bridge. i should've done that before i know it's going going to have this hearing. >> even after all that nice praise peers did not guess i know. i have to check and see where we are in the status of our discussion. >> would you make every effort to get this done by the end of the year? >> i will make every effort to do the right thing and get this done. >> at the end of the year. >> the end of the year is rapidly approaching. the end of my time is rapidly

approaching its >> that is wednesday in the end of the year. he may have "the new yorker." >> senator, let me check in on this. i really urge you to work as quickly as you can to get this done. but i'm not much pretend to me. this has been a long process. government changed twice in the price of that process. we are in a good place now. this is really important to western new york beginning to grow in the toronto area in terms of commerce and everything else. it imports union to spend a little time on this and get it done. i have a little more time so i would like to follow up on senator clover chars question -- klobuchar on wait times. it is time to get worse in the travel season.

i appreciate your efforts to one toward additional agent stationed in an high-priority airport site that high-priority airport that victory may have been in the new york metropolitan area, one of the miniatures game might add. the eight passenger screening us another way, proven ways to improve airport throughput because the dogs can check the luggage, check everything. they almost never make a mistake. can you give us any indication when tsa will be able to fully fill the recommended k-9 team members for each new york airport. they are mobile obviously. you take them to the place was the longest line to make speed things up. >> i know it wrought on additional k-9 teams in response to the increased travel volume and the k-9 teams have made a huge difference. there is no better technology than a dog's nose.

we have a plan to bring on more. the exact timetable for the new york area airports. i don't know sitting here right now. i want to take the opportunity to thank congress for responding so promptly to my reprogramming request to them are part-time to full-time and expedite the hiring of new people. it has made a huge difference and i think that earlier today, 99% of the public has an average wait time of 30 minutes last. 92% has an average wait time at the teen minutes or less. i just checked and jfk before i came here. i think it may be something around 10 or 12 minutes at jfk. this is something we will continue to work on through the summer. summer in general has a lot or air travel. we are not out of the thick of it yet and longer term i want to use via build back the tsa workforce.

we downsized over a number of years and i think it is time to reverse that trend and start building this back up out. >> are grew if you would like to help rebuild. >> senator lee. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here come the secretary johnson. last week they informed decisions of the u.s. court of appeals for the fifth circuit upholding a nationwide preliminary injunction halting the implementation of the above administrations program applicable to certain qualifying undocumented immigrants. in the lower federal courts, and the district court the administration argued that the scope of the preliminary injunction at issue should be narrowly confined to texas. alternatively, even if it shouldn't be narrowly confined to texas, he should at a minimum be nearly come time to the total of 26 states including texas that were part of the lawsuit.

the fifth circuit significantly rejected that position, rejected the argument right on its merits among other things that the fifth circuit held the partial implementation would detract from the integrated stream of regulation by congress for the fifth circuit reasoned that there is a substantial likelihood that a geographically limited injunction would be in effect at because dapa officials would be freed to move amongst a period given the fact fifth circuit opinion and order upholding the preliminary injunction has not helped by not held, what is your position on whether a ths has any legal authority to selectively implement the program, you may need to selectively implement

outside of texas, outside the fifth circuit or outside of those 26 days. >> there is no plan to do that if that's what you're asking. we can abide by the court's injunction as affirmed by the fifth circuit and the supreme court. >> you are willing to honor the nationwide effect of the fifth circuit's opinion? >> we don't have a plan to do other with senator and we plan to honor the court order. going back to my days as general lead dod, a district judge in california enjoying "don't ask, don't tell" in 2010, one district judge and reinterpreted by as a worldwide injunction and i directed that the field respond accordingly, though it was one district court.

so, -- >> you don't see any reason to do differently here. >> sitting here i don't have a plan to try to implement in some places and not others. i am hope is not congress will wrestle with this issue itself. that is not happen unfortunately. to have been in the senate. hasn't happened in the house. it's an issue in to reckon with the senator corning said we poisoned the well. we waited for congress to act. >> i understand your position. i've got limited time. i'm grateful for your representation it when you update us at the position changes? >> yeah, we don't have a plan. >> you update us if that changes? >> some form or fashion, yes, sir. >> i'm interested in your answer to the last question of the deeply troubling action the

department of justice lawyers and the representation to the courts in this case. last month, the federal district judge assigned to this case held that counsel was intentionally deceptive in its egregious representations -- misrepresentations to the court into the 26 plaintiff states. according to the court, quote, doj admitted that they did a three-year renewals are being printed a ths as early as december 24th and pursuant to the 2014 ths direct it. despite the department of homeland security is preempted limitation, the department of justice assured judge hayman, gave judge came in absolute assurance and also gave an assurance to opposing counsel representing these 26 states including texas in december 2014 and again in january 2015 that the agent he would not begin

implementing the 2014 ths directive until at least february 2015. that turned out not to be the case. unsurprisingly, this representation characterized as intentionally deceptive, a lawyer with run around turned out to serve the agencies that act is. according to the core, these are material this representation satellite ths attorneys to effectively misplacing is forgoing a temporary restraining order or an earlier hearing to try and stop implementation of this program, other presidents unilateral executive action on immigration. in the meantime, during the period in which we talk about coming ths granted or renewed over 100,000 modified daca.

when did the agency told the department of justice that it had begun implementing the 2014 dhs directed. >> senator, this is a matter of litigation before judge hayman, as you noted. so i don't know that it would be appropriate for me to comment on it, except to say that the timeline for granting three-year versus two-year deferred action pursuant to the new policy was evident on the face of the new date, which was in the court record. we laid out in the policy the timetable are beginning to grant the three-yearersus two-year tad spirit that was not a secret

so beyond that matter. >> you disagree with the characterization that are material misrepresentation made to the court entered a 26 states including texas governor planets? >> there, it's of litigation. if it litigated matter and it will be addressed by the department of justice and sure. >> i do think it is important to be addressed and i would love to get to the bottom of it. i hope and expect that any time our countries lawyers are representing the united states government, that they will tell the truth and they will not misrepresent, especially materially misrepresent dates to the court and opposing counsel. as time has expired. thank you under-secretary johnson. thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, welcome. thank you for testifying. >> good morning your >> good morning.

on to. on tuesday of this week, we conduct a hearing on the systematic scrubbing of law enforcement and intelligence materials. your department was invited to attend and the department of homeland security refused to attend the hearing. at that hearing, we heard testimony that described a systematic effort as one compares the 9/11 commission report. the word jihads appears in the report 106 times. the word islam appears in that report 322 times. since the 9/11 commission report, different policies have come into effect benefit under systematic policy, those terms under longer allowed to be used. the fbi counterterrorism lexicon uses the word jihads zero times. the national intelligence strategy of 2009 uses the word

jihads zero times. the strategic implementation plan to prevent the violent extremists and uses words zero times. the national intelligence strategy in 2014 uses the words zero times. we also heard testimony from former employee of the department of homeland security. phil haney, died in october october 2009, more than 800 customs and border patrol document were ordered, modified, scrubbed or deleted to remove references to jihads or the muslim brotherhood or other similar references. as mr. haney's testimony that the department of homeland security had ordered over 800 documents altered or deleted, was that testimony accurate? >> i have no idea. i wouldn't know him if he walked

in the room. >> so you have not investigated whether your department ordered documents to be modified in 2009 to remove reference is to jihads radical islamic terrorism, muslim brotherhood. you have not investigated that? >> now, if not taken the time to investigate what a sad. >> when the united states senate judiciary oversight committee conducted a hearing on that, did you or anyone in your staff inquiry into those issues? >> now, but you have a right here right now to ask questions. >> your answer is you don't know. in 2009 and again in 2012, mr. hanetestified they were to purchase, that's the word he used at the department of homeland security to remove references to radical islamic terrorism. is that accurate that the records were changed? >> same answer that i gave you before. i have no idea.

>> no knowledge. >> same answer. i have no idea, sir. >> would it concern you if that was accurate? >> senator, i find this whole debate to be very interesting. i have to tell you what i was at the department of defense given the legal signoff on a lot of drugs strikes, i did particularly care whether the baseball card that islamic extremist. i think this is very interesting, but it makes no difference to me in terms of who we need to go after, was determined to attack our homeland. the other point i would like to make, sir, and i have to think in practical terms of homeland security. this is all very interesting, makes for good political debate. in practical terms, if we in our efforts here in the homeland start giving the islamic state the credence that they want to be referred to as part of islam

or some form of islam, we look at nowhere in our efforts and to build bridges with muslim communities, which we need to do in this current environment right now that includes homegrown violent extremists. >> my time is limited. >> hold on just effective. >> they all tell me that isil has hijacked my religion and it's critical we bring these people to our side. >> you are entitled to give speeches other times. my question is you're aware of the information has been scrubbed. the title of the hearing onto as willful blindness in your testimony to the full committee now as you have no idea and have no intention of finding out whether dhs materials have been drugged and you suggested just a moment ago that it's essentially a semantic difference. i don't believe it is a semantic difference that when you erase references to radical jihads, it

impacts the behavior of law enforcement national security to respond to red flags and prevent terrorist attacks before they occur. let's take nidal hasan. the obama administration was aware he was communicating with a non-radical islamic terrorist. the obama administration was aware that nidal hasan had inquired the permissibility of waging jihads against his fellow soldiers. and yet, the administration did not act and walked through fort hood in my home state of texas murdering 14 and a sent souls. do you think it was a mistake not to respond to those red flags ahead of time and prevent a terrorist attack afford it? >> i disagree with your factual predicate. >> what you disagree with? what specifically? >> in one minute i couldn't possibly answer your question. >> it was wrong in a number of respects.

>> pick one thing. >> first of all, you are assuming that the federal government in advance of the attack on fort hood saw these different red flags. that is not correct. >> so are you testifying to this committee, let's take the fax i introduced one piece at a time. you are an experienced attorney number one. true or false the obama administration knew before that nidal hasan with communicating? >> how are you defining the obama administration? >> a federal drug investigation. >> i can answer that question sitting here. >> the answer is yes but attend public record. let's take another example. we have similar examples of red flags. russia can find the united states they were affiliated radical islamic terrorism. the department of homeland security mess with the tsarnaev

brothers were missed when there was a posting at the tsarnaev brothers calling for jihads instead of pressure cookers murdering three people and wounding roughly 180. was it a mistake not to respond more effectively to those red flags and prevent the act of radical islamic terrorists? >> i do believe that there is some lessons learned from the episode and i believe that as a result we are doing a better job of connecting the right dots. >> mr. secretary, my time has expired, so this'll be my final question. my concern of this pattern failing to connect the dots keeps occurring over and over again. it occurred in san bernardino in the female terrorists give a fake address and pakistan in the administration failed to

discover that occurred in orlando or the terrorists have interviewed three times, pledged his allegiance to al qaeda, hezbollah -- had what was an associate of the first american suicide robert in syria and yet we didn't act to prevent it and what concerns me and i believe should concern the department of homeland security is that because of this effort scrubbing your line for his materials of any acknowledgment of radical islamic terrorism when you see the red flags of radical islamic terrorism, you do not follow up on them effectively and we had terrorist attack after terrorist attack after terrorist attack that could have been prevented but for this administration's willful blindness. >> may i respond? >> please do. >> they will go to senator

perdue appeared to notify everybody when we have that demonstration, i for .5 minutes of my first seven minutes. i will take that when senator perdue is done and then we'll go to senator clover charred. first of all, virtually every day i read about the good work of our law enforcement personnel, our homeland security personnel in our intelligence community connect the dots to identify potential terrorist plots, terrorist plots on our homeland, irrespective of the label you want to put on it. people are smart enough to identify somebody who is a violent extremists who is self radicalizing, moving towards violence when there are some warning signs like somebody who see somebody buying a gun or

training or buying weapons of explosive material. everyday i see people connect enough dots against our communities. either lessons learned? could we do a better job? the answer is probably yes. everyday i see this happening and i think we are doing a better job and i think that our people are smart enough to identify potential terrorist behavior, whether you call it islamic or extremist or anything else. the labels frankly are less important except where we need to build bridges to american muslim communities and not vilify them so they will help us help them. that is my answer to your question, sir. >> big senator perdue. >> thank you, mr. secretary. a year ago in april you were here and the preliminary parts like fidelity and then the reporter showed 500,000 vsat

overstays of non-immigrant workers. in 2015 alone. last year in testimony before the senate, disclosed they were investigating 3000 vsat entry of overstays. but 40% of the illegal aliens in this country estimated to be vsat overstays. and i'm not that this time around i thousand people affected have not. with that in mind, what is dhs doing to increase the number of the says it's investigating and what are you finding out how many deportations did we manage last year? >> i don't know that the number 40% is accurate. the report that was issued in january revealed our estimate that there is somewhere between

40,500,000 is a overstays. that is a rolling number because people enter mnp believe. >> over some period of time, there reports that show 40% are here due to vsat overstays. >> i don't know if i testify. >> i'm not asking about the accuracy of that. >> let me answer your question. >> i'm asking you the question. in response to that report, i directed our immigration enforcement people to more specifically prioritize vsat overstays so that we identified those who would focus resources on who overstayed their visa beyond a certain period of time, not just two, three, four days who came to this country after a certain period of time and represent threats to public safety. we are developing priorities right now.

in the meantime, we put in people who have overstayed visas, but with the benefit of this report, which starts with these, we are prioritizing piece of overstays to get at this population. >> is the 3000 numbers still corrected the number of investigations that any? >> i'm not sure of the accuracy of that. >> i would like to get a response to that. also, how many deportations? i would love to see that wasn't in the report. the biometric -- in 1996, congress required the implementation of the system. 20 years later and the 9/11 commission called for it as well for a tool in our country. exit tracking from places like u.k., france, saudi arabia. i know atlanta has been one of

those. i would love to get your take on early indication and are there will out plans to expand it nationwide? >> yes. >> what is the timetable? >> congress does he know appropriated a billion dollars for biometric exit. i say to my people at the beginning of the year, this has been a congressional mandate since 1996. we have the pilot in atlanta as you noted and i put our books on a timetable where we will have begun this, started this by 2018. we want to have gotten to full nationwide, but we will have this in place, at least pieces of it by 2018. biometric exit in particular is a best case and we need to move toward it. >> the early indication our pilot.

>> i believe so. >> directional plan is something -- >> i believe so, yes. >> when we get to the serious refugee issue, how many syrian refugees have entered the country in the last year? >> so far this fiscal year, we settled -- we just crossed the 5000 mark. last year was about 1600. this he researched resources resources to deal with this population and that had around 5000 right now. for this fiscal year. >> of the vsat overstays, about 2000 or 3000 people from watch countries like pakistan, iraq, afghanistan, syria. do they keep track of those people once they are here? is dhs have any information about what they're involved in at all?

>> we do, but often when they go to look for them in the information is outdated, somebody has moved on from that address and so we have to come after investigative means, track them down. >> how many cases should we be investigating given the high number of vsat overstays? 3000 can be adequate. >> outside to prioritize within this population goes to represent public safety threats, those who have overstayed their visa for a long period of time and that probably means the number investigation should go. >> the last question, when you look at the idea about who won this watchlist, we debated that relative to the terror attack in orlando. somebody's on the watch list and someone on a no-fly list and they are here illegally. why are they still here illegally?