have on the second panel, but also it impacts the humanitarian element quite frankly. not having to deal with someone out in the desert 80 miles north who is on the verge of dehydration and death because you are intercepting them at the border. all the things that are being referenced and then les would be needing to be picked up the checkpoint in theory. we have a number of narcotics coming to checkpoints but if we were able to push the line of scrimmage to the border, then last would be actually making it around the border and into the community and going into the checkpoint. does that make sense? the part of our discussion is what can we do, what resources do you need to have intelligence driven operations like you talks about, threat -based, nimble, on your feet and shifting your tactics. what we do to make sure you have the resources of policy and the manpower which is a win-win for everybody. :

the time i was running and now that i've been in this position as the subcommittee chair. based on all that i wanted to get in this place, which i think we have become interest. i'm trying t to get to displacee keep the communities safer. we see more, give more, give more, give tools they need and pushed that line of scrimmage closer to the border. what else do you need in order to do that? what else do you need from us to provide resources? we are not just going to throw money at the problem. is it more man than an ayn rand

aspects? is a tactical drones? what is it you need in order to push this into the border so that if we were to do that you would see less and less coming through checkpoints, less and less public safety issues because we will push that line of scrimmage self to the international boundary? >> first of all i agree with everything you just said. specifically on the situational awareness. i completely agree. that can a ghost exactly what i'm saying about the confidence level. i also want to challenge the leaders that when they tell me what the situational awareness is, tell me about what your confidence is with respect to that, let's have those discussions. i think you are spot on. i think we do of losing goal. the goal is absolutely let's try to interdict everything that we can right at the border. absolutely that's the goal. it's a challenge in a complex thing that it's also an exciting

as well because it's about strengthening our counter network ability. it's about reaching out to our partners, not just within the united states but our international partners, canada, mexico, et cetera. it's not just being in a position to interdict when they the border. it's about bringing the fight to them before they get to the border. it's about identifying and dismantling those tc is to a threat-based intelligence process it's about setting up solid infrastructure a whole of government approach whether it's through quarter of initiatives, what is this a joint task forces to make sure we're working together, we are gathering intelligence, sharing intelligence and doing joint operations based on that intelligence to utilize our limited resources. sl apparatus about let's take the fight before they get to the border. then once they get to the border, as you laid it out i agree.

it's totally how you laid it out. you are right, we may, our goal would be is if we are that effective we don't need additional stuff. i would say from a position i think, i don't know, it could be unrealistic to say that no matter how good what aren't we going to catch everythineverythin g at the border. i will always say part of the city should always be something in place that prevents us from having a single point of failure. unless he checkpoints will always be the issue but i think you understand what it meant. we have to continue to do that. the last part, what do i need, i need to continue that threat-based intelligence driven operation and focus approach. i need to make sure that we have the resources to drive intelligence, to gather intelligence, to disseminate intelligence, to continue to drive hi those operations to hopefully as a counter network

approach take the fight for the get to the border. so deadly looking at our intelligence resources. 132, two we need more? my gets as we do. what the rest of the resources, i don't think there will ever be achieved a said before you said we would need more resources i'm not going to be any different in that area but i think i need to more time. so that we do take care of the precious taxpayers money to be able to really tell you what it is we need with respect to the ever structure, the technology and the manpower. on the humanitarian side absolutely. don't get me wrong. what i want updated no, i was there. they were treating these kids with dignity and respect and passion like they were their own. and we will do that absolutely but i'm just saying that maybe an alternative. like, for example, when i was a police officer for the loss and just push department, i would be in south-central l.a., i would catch a fellow.

i would have him off to a jailer to process. i would go back out on the street. so i don't know, can maybe we do something similar so that when we get one of the unaccompanied children that we turn them over to someone else that into the processing? and in the get the agents back on the line faster. that's something i'm taking a look at. i would ask for your support for that because that will take some funding and some push to do that. the technologists, that's the olympic image and any prefix towers. you know that will. that's going to be a great resource in some areas. it does work in other areas. you go to the buffalo sector, the technology as i could work. we need to constantly look at additional technology and so it probably would be looking for support when they come up for additional technology. >> great, thanks to i do want to go back to the agents and other agents are used. we heard from a couple of different sources in the tucson sector, we keep hearing the

number 25% of agents are not assigned to patrol the border. assigned to do another thing, vehicle officers. just other things, inspect what you just talk about. we trained them to do a job and got to make sure we keep the vast majority of the doing that job, right? because that's what they're responsible for. that's what's going to build their morale. they're out there doing the job they're trying to do and not all these additional duties and details, other things that stop their core responsibilities. is that 25% across the board or do you have better clarity on how many are what% of the agents are not patrolling? >> i have not seen or provide 25% number, so what i would say is it depends on who you're talking to and their perspective. for example, we talked about that process. i am pushing folks, leaders out in the field to put more people into task forces, leverage and

the whole governor approach. we should be integrated into the best teams, into the dea led strike forces. we need to be in the west and east et cetera so we do need to push resources out there. another thing that could be seen is sometimes the sector to i believe the tucson sector was impacted by this when another sector is getting slammed with an increase, we will mobilize the mobilization team and they will go to another sector to assist. so some people have a perspective they see that and think they're being taken off the line when really they're just being reallocated to a line somewhere else i would have a prior higher authority threat. economic event. i'm questioning the special units, to have the right allocation? how many people do we have off the line and what are they specifically doing? absolutely asking those questions.

that's a fair question that should be asked. >> i know this is a snapshot in time but could you get back, of the agents you have, just with basic percentages of numbers how many are generally out there on the line, how many are part of other castings and other things are just percentages. i get that from me in a military. unique people in the operation said and also to push that information but if we could get a good sense from you and an answer back where we are on those and to continue the conversation of where it needs to be adjusted to. >> yes, ma'am. actual those numbers for myself. >> one last question related on the second panel will hear from doctor philip about the 2014 study they did with jesus of recommendations to enhance really into question in determining the success of whether the checkpoints are working and whether they are manned correctly and what things can be done to improve that. had any of those recommendations been implemented? do you agree or disagree with those recommendations?

>> i do know in part, to do something still need to do a little bit deeper dive but it has improved dramatically. we are tracking a number of seizures, tracking the number of apprehensions, tracking the number of man hours spent at checkpoints, et cetera. there are numerous data points that are being collected so that we can try to get closer to coming up with a really solidly to measure the effectiveness of the checkpoints spirit but specific recommendations, i do know differently with him off the top of it but can you follow up on whether, they put a lot of effort, taxpayer money into studying the follow-up from the 2009 gao study about how can we improve our understanding of effectiveness of the checkpoint? can you follow up with us o on e specific recommendations like do you agree or disagree and am and have been implemented or how many are in the process of being implement it? >> yes, ma'am.

>> great. >> i really to have another question. i just wanted to tell the chief i apologize if not more active participation today. we've got ogr with hillary clinton's e-mails, just a lot going on on the upper ideological leader going cali, there's only two memos of congress and had and all the chairwoman's questions, and think there is not interest in the topic because i can assure you that there is. mr. hurd came briefly, barletta is are interesteintereste d in these overstays. of course, all the way around with the former chairwoman and others. even on the democrats side. there's interest in this issue, and i think at some point i'm having another drink, you come back would be awesome. i just did what you did leader going there's not any interest in congress about what i'm doing. absolutely is. it's just the way things go on the hill sometimes. and just know that folks from a

state of south carolina are very interested in this. we don't have the border. we have an international order i guess, you fly them. but anyway, thank you so much. god bless you, godspeed. thank you to your men and women are serving the country in the capacity and i look forward to meeting with you again. wouldn't mind setting up something probably to get to know your a little better because we want to work going forward. >> the gentleman yield back. this wraps up this portion of our hearing. thanks, chief, for testimony. there is potentially some questions are going to come out of the second panel that we need to follow up with you on. there may be other members of the committee that have questions for you and so we would ask when we submit those if we get those back in writing, and thanks for testimony today, and you dismissed. the clerk will prepare the witnesses for the second panel. thanks, chief morgan. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> all right, ready? i would like to thank the witnesses of our second panel today. first introduced in and then you start with a testament. mr. gary brasher, fifth generation arizona residing in arizona ballot he is establishing a local businesses including full service brokerage company, and water and this recovery, communications company and grocery store. mr. brasher is past president of the citizens council, chamber of commerce answers as the vice chair of the green valley chamber of commerce. good to see. is negative is a rancher and farmer from the southern border area of arizona where she has resided for over 40 years. secretly served as a clerk for the whitewater trial natural resources conversation district which assist local farmers and ranchers on project to keep informed of the most current

methods and technology available to sustain the farms and ranches for future generations. increasing should become active in bringing a greater awareness to issues in her community associate with border security and illegal immigration. dr. elyse golob is the executive director of the national center for border security and immigration, or borders had good at the university of arizona. funded by the department of homeland security, borders provide crosscutting technology and basic research to enhance the nation security. dr. golob's expertise includes cross-border trade, economic development and border management policy. she's conducting a joint research initiative with the european union border security agency based in warsaw where she organized a two-day workshop for european border guard on artificial intelligence for string and decision support of border crossing. mr. christian ramirez is a direct of southern border communities coalition and also serves as human rights director of alliance san diego. since 1994 he has been active on issues relating to the

immigration policy and its impact on southern border committee. 'tis nasa recognized spokesperson of immigration and border enforcement issues. the witnesses forward statements will appear in the record. the charter recognizes mr. brasher for five minutes to testify. >> if you to put your microphone on. >> debacle. thank you chairwoman mcsally, ranking member vela and members of the committee. my name is gary brasher, i will not go into a lot of detail on my background simply because the congressman has touched on briefly. my written test and, of course, will be in the record so i have offered the opportunity for you to look at it in detail. i've lived in santa cruz valley for 34 years as a businessman. as the chairwoman expressed by the bright the businesses. it didn't opportunity to be in the community and to really listen to what people are saying not just my own itch bridge that

takes parents of others. i can take the defense in depth strategy has had come jus just a moment ago where the chiefs as a multilayered approach to the defense of our border. it's also have th ever right of layers of impact on our communities both south and north of the checkpoint. i can tell you that when the checkpoint is moved 25 miles north of the actual border, or as we prefer to order, the line of scrimmage, is moved it creates instead of to assist you in my border to defend you can quickly see the math, it creates a 6500 square mile area that the chief and his officers have to navigate defend. that exponentially increases the manpower needed and the area that they have to defend exponentially. its created unfortunately for those of the check but what we call kind of a no man's land, nary south of the fixed checkpoint north of the actual border.

once individuals involved in the illegal, bringing illegal immigrants are bringing illegal contraband into the united states, once they get across the actual border, they for the most part have a pretty free run within the 25-mile area. and the unfortunate thing for those of us that live it is that's where we live, that's where we work, that's for our children go to school. so that every that we call the no man's land is where we live every single day of our lives. as was pointed out earlier, there is without question the flanking of the checkpoint takes place in the santa cruz valley, without question. there are a number of routes, and to put a map of my testimony so you can look at those, these are not formally, but there's a gas line that runs north and south around the checkpoint. there's a power line that runs north and south around the checkpoint.

there's the santa cruz river which provides a great deal of canada income for anybody involved in illegal activity to circumvent the checkpoint, to get around it. again, that's for our communities are the that's or subdivisions subdivisions are. that's why businesses are in people live in those areas. so this policy of actually putting people in direct contact with those who were involved in illegal activity is frankly mind-boggling to me. we have to deal with it every day. i've had people show up at my home. i live in a subdivision just west of the checkpoint. little bit west of the gas line. i've had individuals show up at my front door were bleeding all over, who had been shot. they were apparently in some kind of altercation with rival gangs trying to steal the drugs they were bringing across. i've talked to businessmen time after time of the people are just simply concerned about coming south of the checkpoint. in many cases, and i know this

sounds, it might be some that are skeptical about this, but there are people who will not come down to our particular area because they think they need a passport to get quote back into the united states, or they are afraid to go through the checkpoint so because they are not used to that level of come out use of the term militarization. someone from wisconsin it comes down to the golf resort as an example to play golf or play an alternate route for lunch or go to a convention and had to go back to the checkpoint for the first time for most of them in their lives. they're exposed to drug-sniffing dogs. been exposed to people with semi automatic weapons strapped across their chests. they're exposed to be having to go to secondary and have the car looked at more carefully. and so when they're making a determination on where to go for an event, where to go for a conference, even for a wedding, and to think about having to go back through the checkpoint, or

the gusts, many of them are opting not to come down. they're just going to stay north of the checkpoint at some point. i fully recognize what the chief said earlier. they have a tough job, and want to reiterate that the vast majority of people in the santa cruz valley fully support our border patrol. fully support the tough job that they have to do. they have a very difficult job and one that carries with it a lot of risk. however, having said that, this multilayered, multitiered checkpoint strategy has had tremendous negative impacts on those communities both north and south of the border. the staging that takes place once they get across the border, meaning staging up to decide how they're going to flanking that particular facility, put them in our communiticommuniti es on oftentimes a long-term basis. not minutes or hours not days. in the activity of flanking the checkpoint puts them oftentimes in direct contact with those of

us who do business or who live there, another risk. and i don't want to miss our friends to the north of the checkpoint. day, too, have an impact. windows involved in illegal activities like the checkpoint, come around, then they reload in those communities. that's what they reengage with the rights going further north, and that connecting puts people at risk. i know one hotel you're in the green valley area to set example was lost amidst announced a business. unfortunately, there's a large wash directly behind his hotel that's one of these we connection points. you can imagine as people are sitting in the hotel room looking down of serving all of this activity going on, you begin just decided not to come to that particular facility. the high speed chases that oftentimes are the result of border patrol trying to do their job, trying to catch those

involved in illegal activity, circumventing the checkpoint. so whether you're in the area south of the checkpoint come into everywhere things are staged, whether you're in the area immediately surrounding the checkpoint where those involved in illegal activity are flanking, or whether you are north of the point -- the checkpoint with those that have gotten past the checkpoint then reconnect with the rise, it has created tremendous number of consequences for those of us that live in that community. i had said earlier, or sit in my written testimony -- >> if you could wrap it up. we are overtime. >> absolutely. i'm sorry. i will solicit appreciate the opportunity to be here today to speak with you. index was intended or not i very real for those who live in the area. thank you. >> we'll get more into the discussion but thanks for the test with. that chair that recognizes ms. davis for five minutes. >> yes, chairwoman mcsally, members of the committee --

>> yes, try again. spent chairwoman and members of the committee, i thank you for the opportunity today. border checkpoints are not always staffed and they're not always open. if the resources used to staff them were drug of the border then they would interdict illegal activity for a chilling reaches the interior. our range is 25 miles north and our family has been in cochise county since 1867. we've always had some illegals but in 1986 we saw hordes of them a change in attitude. it began to be destructive. banquette fences, drained water lines, killed animals, rob holmes, stalled vehicles, trampled grass and left tons of trash. in the trash we found plastic, backpacks, blankets, diapers, hypodermic needle, medicines, human waste and pregnancy tests. trashed for my secrets answers to us and it is killed cows because they eat blankets and plastic bags. by 1995 the trash was out of

control so the county hauled away 16 to -- dump truck loads just makes more area on our ranch, and that's just one example. environmental damage is extensive on the border illegals came through by the millions. they trampled grazing land, destroy foliage, drained millions of gallons of water use by wildlife. the damage has changed the landscape. footpaths caused soil erosion when the rains came. wildlife waters were destroyed because of human waste. the tucson sector chief at the time was the architect of a defense in depth strategy to in 2000 he came to our home and explained that the operation, that operation hold the line in el paso focus on intercepting and preventing illegal entries at the border, and operation gatekeeper and send it approved to be very effective. this force the illegal act of a into the rural areas of arizona. the plan was designed to secure the cities where they have

seconds or minutes to get illegals. but instead of putting a just do the border in the rural areas, they would be deployed 25 miles or more north of the border to allow hours or days to catch them. if the el paso plan worked so well, then why doesn't the border patrol do the same thing in the rural areas, i asked. residents along the border have begged for agency on the border for over 15 years. even of the success of hold the line and gatekeeper were due to stopping the flow of illegal traffic directly at the border, we have been told that it wouldn't work or that it was too dangerous. if the border is too dangerous for ages, and why is it not too dangerous for residents. the chief made the following statement to the "arizona republic," the border is not a defined line by the corridors between the u.s. and mexico. this corridor is at least 30 miles inside the interior. a pentagon official state that the border is not a boundary box

we repeatedly that agents are on the border but when border patrol prefers agents on the border they are actually referring to the 30 plus mile corridor instead of the international boundary. in 2010 our friend was murdered in his own property 30 miles north of the border. he stopped to help in illegal preventing, pretending to be injured. as he stopped, the man shot in the checkpoint shot in the that checkpoint near sydney is 15 miles north and is open only if weather permits. another is rarely open. being that checkpoints cannot be manned 24/7, the agency should be deployed very close to the border instead. john's rant is on the border with 10 miles a 13-foot metal wall fencing at $42 million of government infrastructure. drug cartels quickly cut defense and drive their loads three miles north to the nearest highway. then drive back through the opening and defense. sometimes the even weld it back in place.

in a 26 month time period, 54 trucks have accomplished this task and only one was caught. the brian terry station was only four miles away. brian terry was also inside the corridor when he was killed. cartel scouts camp unknowns within the corridor and report border patrol activity to the drug cartel. the san pedro river runs out of mexico into the u.s. and across the river in a three-mile strand barbed wire fence. occasionally one agent is watching this quarter mile area. for three to four months in the summer, floodgates are raised in the border fence to allow floodwaters out of mexico into the u.s. border patrol covers the holes in defense with just three strands of barbed wire, and anyone can walk in. sciences such as this one are not uncommon in the corridor. i am aghast that our borders are so poorly protected that besides

unnecessary. diversionary fires and transcends corridor has been set by drug runners. they had destroyed hundreds of fires of acres of force, grassley and wildlife at home, also lend funds have dropped to about half of the previous value. in closing, checkpoints would not be necessary if agents were on the border. and i have additional comments and examples in my written record and i thank you for your time. ..

from 2008 - 2016 we were designated as a center of excellence, office of university programs. since that time we continue to receive funding for from dhs for dod as well as other international agencies to conduct this work and we are a proud member of the new center of excellence headquartered at the university of houston. in 2009, they came out with a report assessing interior traffic checkpoints and recommended that border patrol implement improvements in four different areas. the first area is data quality and integrity, the second was to

examine the impacts these checkpoints have on local communities third, determine how effective these checkpoints actually are, what is their performance effectiveness, and fourth, to develop a managerial tool for better managing the number of lanes, hours and resources allocated to these checkpoints. the university of arizona was provided with $500,000 to conduct this study. during the course of the study we worked closely with border patrol, specifically the office of strategic planning policy and analysis, we submitted by monthly reports, we were assigned a point of con tact in the agency and provided regular brief rings to headquarter personnel. we did not operate in a vacuum, we walked hand-in-hand with border patrol throughout this process. to conduct this study, we paid

site visits to seven sectors, six on the southern border and one on the northern border to observe the checkpoint operations. at these check checkpoints received briefings from the chief and observed operations and interviewed agents. we also were provided with apprehension data from the system, cleanse data without identifying factors for a period of 2008 - 2011 as well as checkpoint activity reports. for community impacts, we conducted interviews with local community members near the borders, specifically local law enforcement, resort owners, business owners, owners, school officials as well as citizens.

we did a review of various strategies for measuring effectiveness and for the managerial tool we developed a checkpoint simulation model. to our findings, specifically in the area of data quality and integrity, the gold standard for data quality is accuracy, consistency and comprehensiveness of the data. the apprehension data, we determined there were still a lot of errors and inconsistencies and data that was entered incorrectly. we were assured by border patrol that measures have been taken to improve data collection and we provided a list of recommendations including refresher courses, drop-down menus and other measures to present these data issues in the

area of community impacts, we found that interviewing community members fell into three general areas. the first area was inconvenient factor, weight times, checkpoints, missed meetings and so forth. the second factor was circumvention impacts because of illegal activity trying to circumvent the checkpoint, neighboring communities boys they experienced public safety issues and high-speed chases through their neighborhoods and finally economic harm, we found there was a wide spread perception that there was, foreign to the local community based on tourism and depressed housing prices because of a

public perception that the border was a dangerous area. in terms of recommendations for community impacts, we analyze circumvention data behind the eye 19 court or which we used as our case study and found that indeed, communities south of the checkpoint had more circumvention apprehension then communities north of the border. this was one area we recommended border patrol continued to monitor the circumvention. we looked at housing prices for communities south of the border and south of the checkpoint and north of the border in green valley and found that while the data indicated there was some loss in the prices south of the checkpoint, they were not

statistically significant enough to definitively say that the checkpoint was also the difference. this was complicated by the fact that our real estate data collection overlapped with housing collection prices in the general u.s. prices of 2008, 2010. further research is needed on the area. i will conclude with talking about the effectiveness of checkpoints since this is an issue. right now they are measured by their apprehension and seizures. i can't stress strongly enough this is an activity measure, not an effectiveness measure. if you don't know how much a licit activity is getting through you don't know how effectively you are performing. if 100 apprehension were made

today and 101 people tried to get through, you're doing pretty well. if 100 apprehensions are made a day but 1000 people are trying to get through, then you're only 10% effective. we provide with specific recommendations to border patrol that the most nonbiased way of measuring is by conducting red teaming efforts which refers to a team of agents from different agencies that would play roles of smugglers attempting to get through a checkpoint, carefully trained. then an evaluation could be made about how many members of the red team they catch a checkpoint this interdiction data can

provide a proxy for what the denominator of illegal activity is getting through. >> if you don't mind wrapping up and then we can get to that in the q&a. >> certainly. in terms of performance models we develop a simulation model predicting traffic flows and resource allocations at border patrol they can use to determine the adequate levels. i would be happy to answer your questions - thank you. we now recognize mr. ramirez for five minutes. >> thank you very much. thank you for allowing me the opportunity to text testify. i represent the coalition that brings together 60 community organizations in the four

southern border states print i was born in the borderland. they are my home. they will agree that this is one of our nation's most vibrant, beautiful and unique region. several metropolitan areas and thousands of acres of sensitive habitat protect species. [inaudible] agent rinse are now dissected by modern borders. nearly 12 million people people call our precious borderlands home. the southern border is also an economic engine for north america. fifty-six crossing points provide gateways to our trading partner. we are getting 300,000 vehicle crossings occur daily. u.s. trade with mexico is $583 billion in 2015. the portal -- borderland, in the

year 208,600 border patrol agents. by 2014 that number more than doubled to almost 21000. spending increases sevenfold from 1980 - 1983 and then tripled from 1995 until now. however, this dramatic increase of personnel and equipment has not been accompanied by accountability, oversight and transparency leading to capital mistrust between southern border residents and edp. the largest law-enforcement agency in our nation. based on those rules created with out significant debate, they interpret the section of

the nationality act to allow border patrol to operate interior checkpoints and other enforcement. virtually everyone that i know has been subjected to questioning at checkpoints. in some communities, residents must pass the border patrol check point in order to reach school, work, medical facilities, places of worship or this has an enormous impact on our community. perhaps what is most hurtful is that my son must also have a u.s. passport whenever we drive east to visit his grandparents for if we go north. my family must show our passports to prove citizenship. as you know we are not required to carry citizenship but we do so because they treat us as

second-class citizen. for the land of the free that most enjoy, the borderlands have been turned into checkpoints. and no other area are people required to prove who they are as they go about their daily lives. i see and experience firsthand the great impact this footprint has on residents all along the border. in the small town, hundreds of community members have rallied against racial profiling of their neighbors. in southern new mexico, my good friend grew up commuting through government checkpoints from his hometown in salem to grocery shop and see a movie and most recently to obtain a masters degree from new mexico state university. he has always respectably confirmed his citizenship to an agent but agents have interrogated him about where he was born and detained him because he refused to consent to

a search. other residents refuse to evacuate their home in weather-related emergencies for fear they will be apprehended by border patrol. my colleagues contend with hundreds of migrant death as the checkpoint is placed 50 miles north of the actual border. cdp fails to pay attention to the human and civil rights and our quality of life has border residents. our friends along the northern border has also endured similar practices. border residents experience excessive use of force, racial profiling and unconstitutional searches and seizures. no one is more concerned about the security of the homeland than border residents, but we are equally concerned about our quality of life. congress should reduce cdp

operations and reduce the area where agents can enter private property without a warrant to 10 miles. they must immediately ban racial profiling. we urge cdp to implement the transparency and account ability reforms including cameras with a strong policy framework and an effective response system. ultimately border residents want what our fellow residents already enjoy, the ability to move from point a to point b without excessive intrusion. i remain hopeful that one day my son will be able to visit his grandparents without the indignity of armed agents at a checkpoint interrogating him about whether he belonged in this nation or not. thank you for your time. >> thank you, i recognize myself

for five minutes for the first round of questions. i appreciate the testimony of the second panel and i will just share that my perspective as chairwoman of the subcommittee is often times in washington d.c., people are looking for areas of disagreement and divisiveness so people can take their corners and put their jerseys on and figure out where we can find the biggest controversy. my intent in this leadership position and with the subcommittee hearing is to look for areas of agreement, look for areas where across the spectrum and from different perspectives we can find some understanding and common ground which needs to be based on facts, the experiences of the people that all of you are representing and the makeup of the studies that you have done related to the impact of the current strategy on our community. i appreciate all of your

testimony, both written and summarized and verbal. in order to present and highlight for the record challenges that communities are having with the defense in depth strategy which include the checkpoint. i believe we can, between border patrol leadership, border patrol agents and those that are residents in the border region, we can find where those diagrams overlap, as all americans to identify solutions that are going to have the objective of keeping our country safe, keeping our community safe, preserving our civil liberties and making sure that our border communities are not being impacted negatively. these are things that are not in contradictory with each other. i do appreciate the perspective that the second panel has shown where we can come to places of agreement that there are

negative impacts that need to be addressed and people across the political spectrum would agree that there are things we need to be doing better and differently in order to secure our border, protect our civil liberties and provide opportunity for individuals, small businesses, communities to be able to grow and prosper and meet their economic potential and not have negative impacts from the strategy that we currently have. i really appreciate the different perspective from everybody on the panel today. follow-up questions, i know you didn't all get to some of the things that were in your written testimony. i'll start with mr. [inaudible] we've had conversations about the impact in southern arizona specifically about the checkpoints. you are now chief morgan. you are now responsible for the mission of keeping these communities that you are advocating for safe, based on, i know you have had multiple

conversations and studies, but we want to make sure we also have solutions. if you are in charge, what would you shift the strategy to be. if today we just got rid of checkpoints but we didn't address the strategy, then if you look at the numbers, that's not necessarily making us safer. that's not stopping the cartels. that will actually have a negative implication. if you are in charge, what would would you do differently and how would that happen in order to address the issues that you have been able to address today in your testimony? >> thank you. again, i agree with your comment. just a moment ago, i think we are looking for that overlap. for this point specifically that you asked, i think there are a variety of things that can be done and some are already being employed by the border patrol through one level or another are ready. i think rebuilding the port of entry was a huge first step so there is more technology available at the border as

trucks and others are coming across. i think that was a big first step. i also think, it was referred to earlier, i think the use of aerial vehicles, whether their drones are helicopters, i think there is technology that can be giving real-time technology to our agents on the ground about what is happening right now. i think that's another technology that can be used. i think, in addition, the vehicle barriers that have been used with the great deal of success in areas that are likely for those involved in illegal activity to cross. i think the drones, the vehicle barriers, i also think for those areas that are very rough and somewhat in assessable along the border, i understand that the border patrol has used with a believe are the f ob, or the forward operating bases where they have some on horseback monitoring those areas. i think sharing intelligence with local law enforcement.

the sheriff department and things of that name nature. i think there has been some holed up in the communication element so that these people can talk together on the radio in real time because they use different bandwidth and things. i think that's an area that could be looked at. i think, some time ago, a virtual sense was looked into and i think that had some challenges to it. now we are far enough down the road that i think some of those challenges have been overcome and the use of virtual technology would play a more significant role. i think there's no civil silver bullet but using all those things in common nation would help. >> great, same question for you. you are now in control representing the ranchers and people, what would you recommend we do? >> i think chief morgan is

making a really good first step. i think what he's doing right now in that he's going to every single sector and finding out what their individual needs are because, i have friends all along the border from san diego to brownsville texas and every sector is really different. i spoke with mr. morgan this morning briefly and i said i understand that each sector, it's bad bad all across the border, but it's different bad which is not a very grammatically correct statement but it is different bad. he has got to find out what works better in that particular sector. really, just reaching reaching out and building a relationship with with all those sector chiefs.

i think there is a disconnect sector to sector along the border from 40 years of history, i see that just in arizona. there's not any cohesiveness or it's not run the same way in each sector so what happens in santa cruz county is not what happens in the douglas sector and in the galang texas. there needs to be continuity along the border. i don't know how we accomplish that, i know i'm him right now, but i don't know how we accomplish that other than to communicate, communicate, communicate and just really outline the problems of each specific sector and how they relate to each other because they all neighbor each other along the border. you have to become good neighbors with those people and decide what is acceptable in this sector and what's acceptable in this one and make them cohesive.

>> not a one-size-fits-all but also being adaptable and nimble because the bad guys are going to be as well. >> right, they're going to move, they're going to do their thing. like where there's the little dutch boy with his finger in the dike. wherever you stop it up they are going to go around. let me just say that i do agree with mr. murder ramirez that none of us like to be profiled. none of us do. i don't necessarily appreciate having a police force presence either, but i know we have to have some strong leadership and backup and i can see that happening if there's more communication. >> i don't know if you find yourself in a position to be able to answer that question, not just for this study on the checkpoint but all the research that has happened at the university with the borders and center of excellence. do you have any perspective you are in charge?

>> certainly, if i was wearing the green hat, i think there are some low-lying issues that would be relatively easy for border patrol to implement, specifically the data integrity and quality issues are fairly straightforward, any smart masters or doctoral student could implement them in a short amount of time. i know getting the funds for technology change isn't as easy as it may sound in dealing with an agency a jet but those are relatively quick and easy changes that can be made as well as the simulation model for managing resource allocation. the harder level issues to address, it's difficult for an

agency to undergo an evaluation of how well they are performing. there are people that all have us in a high sense of nervousness but it's ultimately to border patrol and the nations and the objective assistance, we as the citizens need to know how well checkpoints are doing before we can decide what to do about them. finally community impacts, that's a much messier issue to address. from my perspective, trying to

see what data can be analyzed and put into a quantitative form such as housing prices and school lockdowns and issues of profiling, by gathering that data border control can present a more accurate and transparent image. >> thank you, i would agree with the doctor. one of the things we need to know is how effective are these checkpoint. without that transparency and oversight, what has created has been amiss trucks between local residents and cvp. i think that should be our biggest concern. we enjoy wonderful relations with local law enforcement. we know the best way to provide safety is knowing that local residents can call the police and say i see something of

suspect, can you check about. i will tell you, when it comes to border patrol, that's not the case. we have serious problems with corruption. we have a perception in public at this agency operates with impunity and lacks transparency. we have been engaged in a robust conversation with the commissioner i think chief morgan previous capacity when he was heading internal affairs -- without those transparency and urgency methods that are needed, it's very difficult and people need to be able to call border patrol if they see something going on. we have all been mistreated and

what makes me suspect is the color of my skin. unless we reverse that and follow and force them to follow the same. i do want to reiterate that they are taking wonderful steps in the direction of oversight but we need to make sure we implement those reforms as soon as possible so that we can narrow the gap between communities and. [inaudible] >> we now recognize the gentleman from texas. >> thank you very much. let me specifically say to witnesses, i appreciate very much the testimony. i was delayed because i was in a meeting on criminal justice reform but i wanted to make sure i had an opportunity to at least hear some of the very important testimony. i want to say to ms. davis, that

is the reason that we have what we call the people's house for you to petition your government. i have heard you, i am from texas, i've spent a lot of time on the border, walking the border, traveling the the border, traveling over the border to mexico and looking at the resources. i've been on the homeland security committee where in the few days after 911, i came on this committee when we formulated a homeland security committee and if there was anything embedded in my heart, it was to protect the american people. i want to just add some comments , when i cochaired this committee, the ranking member, candace muller from michigan, the northern northern border, we wrote the 1417 border results act of 2013 and it was a bipartisan comprehensive border security bill. it consisted of 90% operational

control and i'd be eager to raise that number but that was its initial writing of the border crossing. that is certainly far from where we are today. we are not at that. i think what was good about it is that it directed the secretary of the department to develop and report to congress the approval of a national stick strategy to gain and maintain operational control and the border. that's what i'm hearing you sang. i just want to ask a brief question about that. to live your lives and have operational control would be great if you could know what was going on and contain those who are illegally crossing. it also gave the direction for advanced technology and from existing taxpayer on the department of defense technology being back. we have a lot of overlap to use talent. i think what was important about

this is that it required oversight agencies, that's the numbers guys to do an independent investigative team on congress to verify the viability of the strategy, where they meeting their goals. that's when i hear all of you saying let's get something that works. i just want to ask a brief question and i want to thank the doctor because we need academics dealing with this issue. you want something that works at the border. is that my understanding? there is discussion about moving the line of scrimmage and certainly i think we need to listen to you. my point would be, in making that determination is the data, do you want us to listen to you, but to do that pilot and implement, going forward on

enhanced border security, but getting the data and make sure were getting it right. would that be helpful to you? >> absolutely i'm not suggesting we go out willy-nilly and then sitting down and having a discussion about where the over lap is. ms. davis, listening to you articulate, i want to immediately give you solutions. is the data important to you so you get the results that you need to have to continue your business in your life? >> data is important, of course, i think it always is. it's an important thing to know and when you see a change over the years, you know something is either being helped or hindered. i think as we lived day-to-day, those of us who live in the

borderlands, we feel it. more than anything we feel it. i think it's important to note that it's not just about my safety or my family safety. i feel like this is my country and national security is at risk and i think you would have a more humanitarian approach if you stop the traffic at the border. i don't think you would have the depth. every rancher i know has found dead bodies. it's disheartening. when you find that you feel for these people. i don't want people to think that were not humanitarians because i've taken care of a lot of illegals that have come through over the years with medicine and help and water and food and all of the above, and while figures are important, i can see and feel on a daily basis whether it's working or

not. >> that was the underlying premise of the legislation that we drafted a year or two ago which is actually action. it was called the border results act of 2013. we want to do that as well. let me go on. the former commissioner, and eyes i understand mr. morgan's testimony that he's been here for a while, he has to get his hands around the issue, he wants determine whether the resources are being read used in the right place. the previous commissioner agreed to reviewing cap point data dashed checkpoint data. [inaudible] would that be a good methodology for the government to do to make sure these resources tell us what scrimmage line we should be

a? >> yes with the caveat that we need to understand what data is being provided to us and what is actually measuring. as we discussed before, apprehension data data in and of itself is only giving you a snapshot in time of what's happening. we have to understand how much activity is going through and what percentage of that level of back activities the data is capturing and only until we know that and develop a proxy data can we know how effective apprehension data is. otherwise the apprehension data and other similar snapshots can

be analyzed over time. >> i was on this committee at a time when border patrol agents were at a very small number. we collectively, in a bipartisan manner enhance those numbers but also i was out on the border with border patrol agents at night and we gave simple things like night goggles, laptops. [inaudible] we want to make sure if we get the information we don't violate this civil liberties of individuals and citizens. i want to move to mr. ramirez if i can and acknowledge the point of what you spoke and that is of

course people who reside along the southern border, especially those americans and mexicans or of his dissent that have resided in the united states for eons and certainly those border states, they are iconic families and we have worked together with the mexican american community for decades ongoing. it is important that those generational linkages but those upon them there civil liberty. i'm pleased with the great work that you are doing and the question that i hope you can answer, they previously reported a component of the strategy for

checkpoint is to cause a legal insurance to use less traveled secondary roads on which they are mold visible. moreover, they they report that the border patrol officials stated that other party sometimes precluded. have they taken steps to minimize the danger to migrants who may seek to circumvents the checkpoint as it tries to minimize the impact on surmounting neighborhoods, ranches and communities. what more must be done? >> thank you very much for your comments and your question. the last two years, he and his team have been diligent about meeting with southern border communities, however there is a huge mistrust. there are some commitments that

the commissioner has made in terms of deploying body worn cameras to ensure that the largest law-enforcement agency in the nation complies with 21st century police best practices. we made this several years ago and we have not yet seen the implementation of body worn cameras. we urge homeland security to follow the example of the department of justice on racial profiling and dhs still is behind. without having those basic policies in place, it is very difficult for cvp to continue to do it's important mission without gaining the trust of families, as you mentioned, who have been there even before the border was there. it is about time that the largest law-enforcement agency

in this nation leads by example and the important conversation we are having this country about policing reform. without those basic components i would say that it would be difficult to gain the trust of not only residents but of our local state and elected officials. in order for us to reevaluate the checkpoints are also part of the conversation to look at what is in pact of checkpoints in our daily lives. we haven't had that conversation ever. the time to have that conversation is now and that's why appreciate very much the subcommittee having an opportunity for us. >> let me wrap up and make this point.

first 1i think the chairman knows i am a strong supporter of comprehensive immigration reform that is a holistic view of access to the citizenship but also a strong handling of the border. i'm not a person to run away from that issue and i don't think you run away from it. i just noticed that the border patrol had us strategic plan and probably the previous commissioner now going on border community liaison program which i hope they have been involved in. it's not something we want to encourage because this is how they hear about the concerns on the ground. i want to pull these questions because i don't hear any adverse viewpoint from you about the responsibility of the government securing the border, but you are looking at the way to do it and the way to respect all of the citizens that travel. would you share with me some of your civil liberties, challenges

and concerns with the stopping that is going on. might i qualify this by saying having worked with them and spoken to them in large numbers. able hard-working agents have to leave their family and let me publicly thank them for their service. if you would share that and share as well the comment that you would make about racial profiling, maybe you have an anecdotal assessment and you can look at how we use border patrol checkpoints to make them effective for the law-enforcement duty but also with the very basic. you could talk about the civil

liberties that you see an issue of racial profiling. >> perhaps the biggest travesty in the border region and one that regardless of where we stand is the moral obligation we have as a nation to stop our brothers and sisters across the border. more than 20 years later the time has come to reevaluate. addressing that is an important topic. when folks are in distress they can push a button and we can deploy all of us have seen the

ill effects that has on our communities. when it comes to the issues of racial profiling, i mentioned earlier, i can't leave my home town of san diego without going to a checkpoint. i have to go to checkpoints to visit my relatives and i have to carry my passport with me and my child has to carry his with him to visit his grandparents but if we want to go to disneyland to the north it's the same thing. it's time to end the shameful practice of racial profiling. the entity that must lead by example is the largest law-enforcement agency in the nation which is customs and border protection. the department of justice has issued guidance in that regard. the white house has issued guidelines for 21st-century policing. that is the number one civil rights violation that we are

facing as u.s. citizens. we are facing it in our own country. i have to show proof of citizenship when i want to take my child to visit his grandparents in the united states. we have never left the nation. that is perhaps the most needed. i will conclude by saying. we still have unresolved issues in our communities. are talking about children and mexican nationals standing on side of the neck skin border who have been killed and those cases remain unresolved.

in order for us to protect the homeland, we must protect the asic values that we hold dear to our nation and those are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. i will tell you, we will be happy today i am able to take my kid to see their grandparents and i don't have to be pulled over to question a 2-year-old nationality. that is a shameful practice in this country and i must come to an end. >> i want to thank the witnesses and the chairwoman. she has been enormously kind. this is a passion of mine and i'm excited that i got to hear the real important people that were here on this panel. i just want to conclude by saying that when we had developed from 2012 - 2016 this outreach program, hiding get a chance in town hall meetings but

maybe we'll have another hearing where we bring additional representatives out of new mexico, texas and hear how those meetings are working. then i do think, ramirez, i've had no contrary testimony but it is very much listening to the racial profiling matrix to try to deal with those citizens traveling about and i think he specifically, since he's from san diego talking about going up north, going up north in his state of california and having not crossed any border and then having to be subjected to that. from ms. davis wanting results, i think we have a meeting of the mind that we need to be

reasonable members but i encouraged to look again at hr 1417 and however it could be updated, coalesced with our colleagues on both side of the aisle. we drew bipartisan support. there were some bumps in the road about the 90% versus 100. i don't know if anybody can reach that number but certainly, in keeping with mr. ramirez admonitions, we can look at those questions again and find reasonable, ground. i don't know whether i can encourage you with a smile to join me on comprehensive immigration reform which is certainly still there. i think our work is about border security and i think these have been these have been helpful

testimonies. thank you each and everyone of you for being here today. i will get to work on the great suggestions you have made. i yield back. >> thank you. okay. i want to first, that we don't have the voice of agents at the table today and i think it is important to reiterate that we have men and women out there that are putting on the uniform every single day us safe. many of them are veterans and it's a continuation of their service. we recently lost one in the tucson area because of the dangers that they do. we recently had a shooting incident at our port of entry. although that wasn't border patrol, it is a dangerous job. we have men and women in our

community that are saying, send me, i want to to help keep our community and country safe. when we see challenges of any issues related to mission execution, we can always ask as leaders, have we given them the guidance, resources and training that they need in order to do the job and do it well. we should be asking ourselves on this committee, guidance, resources and training for them to be able to do the job. none of them get up in the morning and say let's not secure the border. these men and women are doing what they're told to do with the training and resources that they have been given. we are here to look at the bigger picture of what needs to

change as far as the guidance and the resources and the training and policies and equipping them. when i was out with them on a no notice right along, they talked about how many of them are out by themselves patrolling at night without any nightvision goggles. it's the right amount of manpower to execute the correct strategy to make sure that we are being effective. we need to make sure the compensated for their service and not focused on the strategies that don't work. that gets to the effectiveness

we talked about today. we must be able to measure well and then adjust the strategy to get to the objective that again we can all agree on. keep country safe, keep the community save, protect civil liberties, don't impact the daily lives in the economic situation of our community. those are all things we can agree on. >> i apologize. can i just put into the record, moving the line of scrimmage, your name? >> absolutely. even with that conversation we have had, our intent needs to be to find where we can better equip these men and women that are out there serving with the guidance resources and training they need, with the context of the information that were presenting today, and i know there's been many conversations at the local levels, at the meetings, we have an chief of border patrol so this is our

opportunity again to take a fresh look with new leadership to find common ground where were providing the resources to the men and women who are serving and doing a very dangerous job. we're having the right strategy to go out and execute on a daily basis in order to keep us safe. i feel compelled to provide that context as we are moving forward in our discussion. i will also say we've got two bills, two of my bills that passed unanimously in the house that relate to this. one of this is the border control account ability act which simply says let's make sure if there's an investment in technology that it has for cumin guidelines and oversight and accountability to make sure it's not wasting taxpayer resources. we have another one that is addressing the full threat assessment of the southern border.

we can have a common understanding of what we are dealing with as we are addressing, now that we understand what were dealing with, what what is the best way to adjust our strategy. i look forward to those bills passing through the senate so we can move forward on these important issues. i want to follow up with the second round with everybody of, again we don't have chief morgan at the table with you, so last round i ask you to be chief morgan. now we can follow up with questions from us to him related to the strategy. what questions would you have two chief morgan that you would like us to ask him related to your testimony and related to it dressing the checkpoint that we have today. >> thank you. i think in terms of a question, maybe i would would say the question and an invitation.

i recognize, as you said earlier, you you have a tough job. i'm focused more on areas, i think he's on the right track by getting out in the communities and frankly, with respect to he and his leadership team i think it would be wonderful if he would come and sit down with people such as ourselves in these actual communities hunt just start a dialogue. the the question i might come up with could be similar or totally different to the question other people in our communities would bring up. i know that's easier said than done. i know that often times when people in leadership travel, it's just not easy. you you travel with public relations people, et cetera. i applaud you going out with an agent one-on-one and watching what they experience, but i think it's those kind of experiences that will bring a lot of what we are sharing full circle. i would encourage him to abandon

his uniform for a moment and drive through the checkpoints. just observe, just watch how the interaction takes place. what happens with the dogs. what happens when someone goes over the secondary and often times. your car is being torn apart while you are waiting. i know it's a long-winded answer to a simple question, but i think there will be more questions that would come from something like that and i think they would be very valuable as he forms his strategic plan moving forward. >> great, thank you. miss davis? >> i have a million questions for him but he'll have to take a deep breath. i actually invited him myself to come down to the southern border in arizona and see that it is very different than texas.

i think that i would ask him one thing and that would be how do you plan to make that border cohesive? how do you make it the u.s. border, not the tucson sector of the border? i will reiterate more cohesiveness there. i just think that's really important. now i very forgot my second idea. >> that's okay, we have invited him and we will continue to invite him. he's just getting his feet on the ground. our subcommittee has oversight of the entire community so he needs to get out to mexico and california and talk to not just the dog and pony shows that often come with leadership visiting the field, but actually talking to residents and businesses and people, those that are seeing the impacts and the agent to get the unfiltered.

>> one of the things that concerns me and i know concerns mr. ramirez is that it's not unique for the hispanics. sometimes when you go through the order patrol check you feel like you're being interrogated. i've had to open my trunk for no reason and i think one of the things he has to do is make sure that those agents react and relate to the people coming through like they are really human people that assume we have a right to be here. i think it's an interaction between the public and the border patrol and you don't want to think of them as the enemy, you want to think of them as your friend. :

we have a balance where we are right now and start moving towards a strategy that addresses the issues today anyway that is stop all and not reckless and cream or vulnerability, but i think we can agree that the more we move the line of scrimmage and not have talked about today i think the better off we will be, so thank you. >> i would follow up on the question that you asked chief morgan, what have you done with the recommendations with university of arizona study because i do not have a good answer on that. the research team at the university put in a tremendous amount of brainpower and a time and ours and software mess and with the border patrol to make

sure we understood their issues we did not want to impose our framework on them. we wanted to use their framework to inform our research and we provided there a specific recommendations and i would greatly appreciate a sitdown with keith morgan to frankly discuss did these recommendations work for you and if not, why not. is there another way we could approach their problem. are there other restraints that you-- that prevents you from implementing some of the recommendations and if so what other measures can we take. i firmly believe in action oriented research and that oriented research and would appreciate the opportunity to help push these recommendations or other recommendations to be

useful to border patrol in protecting our nation. >> i agree in this goes back to being a limited-- good steward of the limited resources we have what are we doing with the information to make sure it's useful and the partnership of a follow-up, you know, what else we could do moving forward i think is important with all the expertise that your team has provided and so when we do invite the chief there we will make short includes a visit for a meeting to your team. again, i am always blamed by my experience in the military and if you are doing that job as a border patrol agent and you are spending two hours doing your job and eight hours processing information, i mean, that is important, but you have to make it usable for the ancient-- agent, so they are not spending eight hours putting data in a

system. that goes back to a morale issue of there is nothing worse than it is an use of our resource and if we are asking them to provide more data, but not giving them the system, let the back and figure out how to make it usable so we can assess it well as opposed to putting it on the front end and making the agents do more and more cumbersome bureaucratic processes. that has to be tuned in as we are moving forward in addressing and improving the data to make it usable. >> thank you, chairwoman. i think my fellow panelists push on something that is fundamental, which is to have ongoing conversations with folks who live there on a daily basis and who have solutions. we are not part of the problem here. we are part of the solution and the problem has been when the bureaucracy fails to understand and pick up the recommendations

that for several years we have been putting on the table before cbp in the department of homeland security, but i will point to an important issue, which is the issue of retention, border patrol agents. as i said i grew up on the southern border and a lot of my classmates from higher-- high school border patrol agents and they understand what the borders about and they understand by national character of our community and legal back-and-forth, but a lot of my good friends don't stay as border patrol agents because of the morale issues. if we don't have folks recorded from the communities that these agents worst sworn to protect it's difficult to understand the historic legacy that borderlands have had in this issue of recruitment particularly recruitment of women. we have to look into why are we not recruiting enough women for border patrol. if we look at how do we train

our agents better, how do we reach-- recruit agents from communities and recruit women come i think, that we will then develop a much better relationship with folks and guarantee that if someone is a border patrol and they are i know who you are, you're my neighbor, friend, our kids are in the same, you know, baseball league and it will be a different relationship that i think it's about toning down the way that border patrol carries itself in a communities and ensuring that we have a much better relationship. that has to begin at the top. the folks on the ground went to do that and unfortunately, the good folks who want to work for border patrol are not being retained by the agency. >> thank you. well, this is a robust discussion. i really appreciate the time and efforts of all of the panelists that came out today to testify before the subcommittee.

you will continue to be addressing and highlighting the issues and challenges related to this as chief morgan gets his feet on the ground and we will follow up with him and to work together to find is that we can make sure we're securing our border well keeping the community safe while taking into account the impact that have been shared today by those that are representing parts of the communities that are being impacted by this current strategy, so i appreciate all of your perspectives and time and effort you took to testify today glitzy, little bureaucracy here. members of the committee might have more additional questions, so please respond in writing. pursuant to committee rule 70 hearing record will be held open for 10 days and without objection the committee stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> this hearing is posted on our website at c-span.org and you can watch it there anytime. argentina foreign relations minister will talk about us latin america relations and we will have that lives starting at 2:30 p.m. eastern here at c-span2. also, first lady michelle obama will campaign for hillary clinton this afternoon in fairfax, virginia and a live coverage of that at 3:00 p.m. eastern on our companion network c-span. >> campaign 2016, c-span continues on the road to the white house. >> we are going to get things done, big things work that's who we are as americans. >> we will have one great american future. our potential is unlimited. >> ahead, live coverage of the presidential and vice presidential debates on c-span. the c-span radio app and c-span.org. monday september 26, is the first presidential debate live from new york.

on tuesday, october 4, vice presidential candidate governor mike pence and senator tim kaine debate in farmville, virginia. on sunday, october 9, got washington university in st. louis is the second presidential debate leading up to the third of final debate between hillary clinton and donald trump. taking place at the university of nevada las vegas october 19. live coverage of the presidential and vice presidential debates on c-span. listen live on the free c-span radio or watch live or anytime on demand at c-span.org. >> it's that time a year to announce our 2017 a student cam video documentary competition for to spread the word to middle school and high school students and their teachers. this year's theme, your message to washington dc, what is the most urgent issue for the new present in congress to address and 2017?

our competition is open to all middle school or high school students grades six through 12 with $100,000 awarded in cash prizes. students can work alone when a group of up to three to produce a five to seven minute documentary, include c-span programming and also opposing opinions to the $100,000 in cash prizes will be rewarded and shared between 150 students and 53 teachers and the grand prize, $5000 will go to the student or teen with the best overall entry to this year's deadline is january 20, 2017. mark your calendars and help us spread the word to student filmmakers purple more information at our website, student cam.org. >> looking at british politics today, diane james has been elected as the new leader of the uk independence party. the bbc writes ms. james has been regarded as the favorite to succeed nigel farage who quit as

leader following the uk to leave the eu. they one with 8451 votes. nearest rival lisa duffey received 4591. speaking about brexit, she warned we have only just won a heat in a 28 member state in olympic competition to lead the european union pick the threat to the referendum outcome are increasing by the day come she said, adding she would reject brexit lights. read more about this at the bbc's website and here are nigel farage in his farewell address followed by the remarks from the new uk chip leader diane jones. [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause]

>> thank you all for coming. [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] >> thank you. thank you. thank you.

[cheers and applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, thank you for that fantastic welcome. we did it! we got our country back. and we would not have done it without you, the people army and i am very very proud of every single one of you. thank you. [applause]. >> of the events of june 23, we realized we were going to win. felt like a fairytale, frankly, that had come true because this has been a very long journey indeed. 25 years ago i joined the anti- federalist league. not many people can say that. because there weren't too many

of us. in 1993, i said to myself it doesn't matter that all of my friends and family and business colleagues think i've gone mad, it doesn't matter to me the history that is impossible to get a new political party office land in this country. to meet with simple all those years ago. it was a matter of principle. i believe that we should govern our own country. [cheers and applause] >> six weeks after the party had been formed the conservative member of parliament that easily died over night and there was it election and i thought in for a penny in for a pound and i volunteered and i was the first ever adopted candidate of the uk independence party. i went out there and i campaigned and i did my best and

i can tell you on the night of the results by a crushing clear margin 164 votes i beat the late great. [cheers and applause] >> it was difficult to get more than about 1% in a by election back in those days, but things change in 1999, with the advent of the representation of the european election and no thoughts that we had a chance. i always did and i will never forget that night when three of us were elected and we were just beginning to get on in real terms the political map. i will never forget that feeling. i was interviewed, my first ever live interview. i think the interviewer is here in the room today. there was no media framing or

anything like that. it was a live interview, 1:00 a.m. in the morning. he said congratulations, nigel. you said you were going to do it and you have, but next week he said you will be off with the european parliament and you will find a never ending round of invitations to lunches, dinners, champagne receptions. do you, he asked me, think you will become corrupted by the lifestyle and i replied live on-air, no, i have always lived like that. [laughter] >> at least it was true. we went on the year after year being part of you kip. successes, dramatic failures, all the things that happened within any political party, but we first really got onto the

political big time early in 2013. early in 2013 when suddenly the british public realized what we had to say about the to do subject, the subject that we were not supposed to discuss in polite company. the subject the new labor made even raising it as if somehow people were committing a criminal offense. we were not frightened to talk honestly and openly about the need for sensible immigration into this country. we talked about it. [applause]. >> we talked about it and it was rapidly becoming the number one issue in british politics and no one else would even touch the subject. they couldn't because they were committed to membership of the european union, which meant the free movement of up to 500 million people. we suddenly got a big score. we went into the county

elections of that year and i remember i was doing though back i was due thereabout nine to do interviews. as i got a hundred yards away from the entrance i saw a big group of cameramen photographers and i thought, something really big must have happened. [laughter] >> i was quite oblivious to what we had done. we had gone on from there, guys, we won the european election in 2014. [applause]. >> the first party that wasn't-- to win a national election since 19 effect-- 19 a six. without us there would have been no referendum.

[applause]. without you, without you in the people's army, there would have been no ground campaign and together we have changed the course of british history. [cheers and applause] >> and we have brought down a prime minister. [cheers and applause] >> and we have gotten rid of the chancellor. [cheers and applause] >> i forget what i called him, now. [laughter] >> and we have got rid of a european commissioner. [cheers and applause] >> i said four years ago, i predicted that ukip would cause an earthquake in british politics. , we have.

we have. [applause]. so, the question is, what now lacks we having a prime minister who has said that brexit means brexit. a new prime minister who when she started looked to be very shortsighted on this issue, but i have a feeling that things are beginning to change. when i saw her at the g20, making a speech afterwards she said, that the british people voted in the referendum for some control of immigration from the european union. no prime minister, we voted to take back control of our borders , simple as. [cheers and applause] >> and we have cabinet ministers

like the home secretary still fighting the referendum, suggesting last weekend that it might cost us 50 to get a visa to go on a cruise to callie. half of this it did not only fail to support the winning side of the referendum, but it seems to me they want to do their utmost to keep us part of the single market. and there is going to be a great political battle ahead. my concern would be this, with labor in the mess that it is in and boy, it is in a mess, isn't it next in leadership election going on and yet it is no conversation with the half of labor voters or more that voted for brexit, but with labor in trouble and with conservatives perhaps heading towards 2020 in a very comfortable and easy position, but temptation on the

prime minister will be to go for a soft brexit as oppose to a hard brexit. we can be very proud of the fact that we won the war, but we now must win the peace and the dealing mechanism to put pressure on the government to keep the debate live and to make sure that the 17.4 million people get what they voted for is for ukip to be healthy and for ukip to be strong. [cheers and applause] >> we will find out who our new leader is and i wish them-- i'm guessing it will be a her, but we will see. i wish them the very best of luck and my job is not to meddle my job is not to try to influence, but my job will be if

that leader once any help and advice, then make no mistake about it, i am still foursquare behind this party and its aims. [cheers and applause] >> steve, who used in the height-- beside me for six years as chairman of the party and if you think being leader of ukip is difficult, you want to try being chairman of ukip and i had to say that at some point time if ukip does get recognized for the contribution to british political life and bearing in mind that the liberal democrats have over 100 here in the house of laws, if anything like that were to come our way, then i think steve, you really ought to be top of our list for everything you have done for this party. [applause].

>> stephen talked about reform. he talked about change. remember this, ukip was a grassroots political party. ukip did not have in the 1990s any well-known national pig-- figures. it did not even have any elected representatives until 1999. it was a grassroots party and we chose to manage ourselves three national executive committee of willing volunteers. that was fine then, but we have moved on, haven't we ask we are now the third biggest political party in this country. we have to change our management structures and we had to guard because one of the problems of success is that it brings people into the party who perhaps don't to do it for our true stick the country or its people, but perhaps are more motivated by their own professional careers

in politics. [cheers and applause] >> so, there are things that need to change, but in essence, in essence i know from the referendum campaign and since, i know this party is united. i know this party is strong. you really had to look to the by elections week after week to see that since the referendum ukip is winning and there are millions of people out there who now identify as ukip voters they believe in as. they trust us. they think we are speaking up for them. the fact that we have changed the center of gravity of british politics, the fact that many of the things we campaigned on whether its grammar schools or foreign aid or whatever it may be, the fact that others are talking about it doesn't mean they are going to deliver it. it is asked that have to keep

pushing all of those agendas. not only are there millions of people out there who feel loyal to us, but i don't think that the harvest of the boats that we could potentially get from the labour party is really even started yet. [cheers and applause] >> in many ways jeremy-- jeremy corbin is a decent and principled man, but he doesn't believe in britain. he doesn't even want to sing the national anthem. he flunked it to did he when he came to the referendum and i think we have fantastic potential in wales and the midlands and the north and elsewhere in picking up labor votes and believe me, if brexit doesn't mean brexit, then i think there will be a very large number of conservatives who will say there is only one party that

we can support and i think we would judge whether brexit means brexit for me on three very simple measures. for that time the next general election comes along, will we have back our territorial fishing waters around the coast of the united kingdom? [applause]. >> will we be outside the single market, so that 90% of our businesses that don't trade with europe it don't get regulated by europe and above all we have the test of brexit, the only time we will really know, you must have seen this before, actually. [laughter] >> the only time we will know that brexit means brexit is when that has been put in the bin and we get back a british parcel. [cheers and applause]

>> and i have a feeling they are not going to deliver all of that and i am certain they won't deliver it unless you keeps strong and fighting hard with every single constituency in this country. as i say, we won the war. we must now win the peace. today, yes, today closes a chapter on what has been a really extraordinary few years. i honestly, looking back could never really have dropped that we would achieve what we have. i have put absolutely all of me into this. [cheers and applause]

>> i literally couldn't have worked any harder or could have been more determined in a sense i guess it has been my life's work and to try to help get this party to this point. i frankly don't think i could do anymore. i think, folks, i have done my bit. [cheers and applause] >> and as i-- but, i'm not giving up on politics completely as i say, i will support the new leader. on going to continue to lead a group in the european parliament [cheers and applause] >> and making my constructive

contributions. [cheers and applause] >> and i intend this also to travel around to other european capitals to draw on independence the marker free-- democracy movements in those countries, also. [cheers and applause] >> and i-- who knows, i may even go back to the united states of america at some point between now, so i'm going to be engaged in political life without leading a political party and it's going to leave me for your. it's going to leave me less constrained. from now on, i'm really going to speak my mind. [cheers and applause]

>> i said as i toured the country on that wonderful time and met thousands of you come i said i want my country back and now, folks, i want my life back. i cannot thank everyone for the massive contribution that so many thousands of you have made to helping me do this job, to helping us change the course of british history. thank you. [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause]