>> on tuesday march fourth, watch c's live coverage of president trump's address to congress, first address of second tomorrow and less than two months since taking office. c-span live coverage 8:00 p.m. eastern which follows by the president's speech at 9:00 p.m. eastern. we will take your calls and get your reaction on social media, over on c-span2 you can watch simulcast of coverage followed by reactions from lawmakers live from capitol hill, watch president trump's address to congress live tuesday march fourth beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, our simulcast live on c-span2 or c-span now, also online at c-span.org, c-span, bringing you your democracy unfiltered. >> c-span, democracy unfiltered. we are funded by these television companies and more

including media com. >> nearly 30 years ago, media com was founded on a powerful idea where cutting-edge broadband to underserved communities from coast to coast, 850,000 miles of fiber. delivered 1 gig speed to every customer has led the way in developing a 10g platform and now with media com mobile it's offering the best and most reliable network on the go, media com, decades of dedication, decades of delivering, decades ahead. >> media com supports c-span as a public service along with the other television providers giving you a front-row seat to democracy. >> nominee to be deputy homeland security secretary and former republican representative dan bishop the nominee to be the deputy white house budget director. they both testified at a confirmation hearing before the senate homeland security and governmental affairs committee. during the hearing senators and

the nominees addressed federal funding and government workers, this runs about an hour and 35 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> the hearing to consider the nomination of troy edgar to be deputy secretary of the department of homeland security and dan bishop to be deputy director of office of managing budget will come to order. for far too long federal spending has increased unchecked

amassing over $36 trillion in debt that our children and grandchildren will one day inherit. here in washington the default mind set seems to be just write another check as each new dollar of debt somehow doesn't matter. in the last four years we have added nearly $6 billion a day, worked $241 million per hour to our national deficit for running of 8.5 trillion of the last four years. unchecked and reckless spree in washington over the last four years has put every american family on the hook for another $67,000 in debt. ask for more funding, more staff, while doing less and less for americans. unsurprisingly americans across the country have taken notice and voted for a change in the status quo. one month ago president trump behind the wheel with a clear

mandate from the american people to steer this country in a different direction. and he has not let off the gas since. the trump administration along with the new department of government efficiency has been hard at work identify waste, fraud and outdated programs. their efforts revealed just how many billions of taxpayer dollars are slipping through the crack's and they are moving fast to identify flagrant waste, fraud and abuse across the federal bureaucracy. that is good news. the bad news is i don't think -- battling waste is only half the battle. a complete disruption of washington and how washington operates including congress and ultimately an affirmation of the savings by congressional vote. accountability cannot be outsourced. real lasting change demands leaders who aren't afraid to push back against business as usual. leaders who will stand up and say we cannot spend our way out of every problem. each moves us to the two

nominees here before us today. first we have mr. troy edgar, who's been nominated to serve as the epi-secretary department of homeland security. if confirmed he will take on the role of deputy secretary, serving as the department's chief operating officer. ds -- dhs is a massive agency employing 260,000 people across more than 20 components. having previously served as dhs chief financial officer he has firsthand knowledge of where the department can make cuts and streamline operations. second we have represented of dan bishop nominated to be deputy director of omb. omb is mostly the bulwark against overspending. we rely on omb to scrutinize agencies budgets and identify redundancies. it is omb's job to ensure federal agencies are not rubberstamping costly new programs subsidized by the american taxpayer. if confirmed, representative

bishop will have a front row seat to the entire federal budget process and a chance to say no as agencies continue to demand endless expansions of authority and unchecked spending. both of these nominees have come forward at a time when americans are fed up with government overreach and runaway debt. mr. edgar and represented of bishop i appreciate your willingness to serve and the experiences you bring to the table. if confirmed, you will each wield influence that can truly shape how this government operates and how it spends the public's money. the american people deserve an honest efficient government that respects our hard earned dollars per think of joining us to share how you plan to meet these responsibilities. i don't yield to the rink member because he's not here. the committee has received several statements in support of the nominees. without objection these letters of support will be made part of the hearing record.

it is the practice of this committee to swear in witnesses. mr. edgar and mr. bishop lee stand and raise your right hand. do you swear the testimony will give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god. mr. bishop is being introduced by senator budd. senator budd you are recognized for your introduction. sen. budd: it's my honor to be here to introduce a good friend and my colleague dan bishop. long before i was in congress i lived in charlotte north carolina everyone would tell me if you want to be a great leader get to know county commissioner dan bishop. at that time i was helping them use run a landscaping and janitorial business and i was probably a little too nervous. it was a big county.

who knew then that years later i would have the privilege to serve with dan in the house of representatives. i've seen firsthand his thoughtfulness, his deep understanding of the issues. his love for our country, his care for people and his commitment to stopping runaway spending in getting the federal budget under control. i have no doubt that dan will bring the same tenacity to the job at omb he is shown throughout his career as a litigator and his time serving the people of north carolina. dan, godspeed and best of luck and to the member's of committee, be nice. >> represented of bishop you are recognized for a few remarks. mr. bishop: thank you chairman paul, renting member peters and members of this committee. it's my first time on this side of the dais after five years in

the house of representatives where i had the pleasure of working with several of you. if i am confirmed it would be an honor to serve our nation in a new capacity to implement president trump's vision and agenda. i want to thank my wife jo, my life partner and my son jack who's working hard in law school today for always seen in the last decade including my tenure in congress and now this nomination process. it is a testament to joe's much greater popularity than a number of congressional spouses here today, my thanks to them for their kindness. and thanks also to my former congressional office staff several of whom have come today is my dear friends. it is a tremendous honor to be nominated by president trump to serve as the deputy director of the office of management and budget. unknown by name to many, it does with the name implies pride craft presidents budget, manage

and coordinate among federal agencies, implement the president's regulatory agenda and so on. it is a critical part of ensuring that the government response to the democratically elected president in order to respond to the will of the american people and not to entrench washington interests in the political establishment. something i always noticed in congress when i was out meeting folks in north carolina is the american people are way ahead of us, they know what is going on. they are smart, resourceful, resilient and hard-working. they want accountability, transparency and an end to the waste in the washington status quo. they recognize this past election that our nation was at a crossroads on the precipice of either greatness or ruin. in that precarious moment, they place their confidence in president donald trump to usher in a new golden age for america.

i am here on behalf of that mission and the trust placed in president trump by the people. our children and grandchildren are being crushed under the massive burden of an out-of-control federal debt. for too long we have been spending money we do not have on things we do not need. our government has been self absorbed, inefficient, unaccountable. the good news is we can fix all of those things and if confirmed, i will be laser focused on doing so along with director russ vote and the superb public servants at omb. it is finally time for a government accountable to the people. i fought to deliver that my entire public service career. on the county commission to state legislator to congress and it will continue to be my northstar. whether elected or appointed, we must never forget the right of the people to decide. i know that i will never forget

and i will rector. -- director vought. i can assure you he is the man to get management of the federal government act on track. if confirmed i look forward to serving as his deputy. thank you for considering my nomination and i look forward to your questions. chr. paul: thank you representative bishop. also want to recognize our current secretary of the department of health secretary kristi noem thanks for joining us today. at this time i will recognize the ranking member you're kind of going out of order because we had another committee. >> thank you mr. edgar and congressman bishop for being here today. the apartment performance security in the office of management and budget where you have each been nominated to fill very key positions plays a critical role in strengthening

our national security, ensuring the federal government is operating effectively, efficiently and in accordance with law. mr. edgar as the committee considers your nomination there several questions about recent actions the administration has taken with respect to the department of homeland security where you are already serving. i understand as a senior advisor to the secretary. i am concerned about the troubling reports of key dhs personnel getting fired indiscriminately, including staff at fema, cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency as well as the u.s. coast guard. i will want to know more about the individuals who have been terminated and those who have been placed on administered of leave and the reasons for the departments action, specifically i want to know what impact these terminations will have on the dhs ability to execute its vital national security missions

including disaster response and efforts to prevent cyber attacks. i am also alarmed that elon musk and personnel have been given access to sensitive dhs data which affects cybersecurity and privacy laws. dhss some of the most sensitive data about americans and american companies. including biometric information as well as private companies proprietary information. congress, of the american people need to know what data was accessed, how the data will be used and why. we need to know what kind of legal and security analysis was discussed before accessing this information. and if the data was properly managed and if not it had a risk of being stolen. mr. edgar i hope you will address these concerns and demonstrate how you will work with congress, the secretary and administration to rectify these

issues if confirmed. today we are also considering the nomination of dan bishop to serve as the deputy director of the office of management and budget. the office of management and budget is a critical office. with significant responsible is ranging from bidding and executing to improving agency performance as well as renewing regulations. this role not only requires expertise in budgetary processes fiscal policy and government management but a fundamental understanding of the aunts -- constitution and the law. including spending laws on a bipartisan basis. congressman bishop given your record and your views on allowing omb to withhold federal funds i certainly have serious concerns about your ability to carry out this very important role. as we saw recently with the funding freeze order,

communities across the country are counting on the funds appropriated to upgrade the roads and bridges, pay their first responders and provide a host of other services. we need leaders at omb who are committed to following the laws on the books which includes the control act. i'm concerned if confirmed you will not carry out the laws in congress that we pass, that is funding our communities and that is simply unacceptable. i also have serious questions about your positions on the federal workforce. as i said before a nonpartisan civil service employees play a vital role in protecting national security, caring for veterans and ensuring safety of our transportation system. your record of use include support for legislation that would make all federal employees at will gives me serious pause about how you will manage the federal workforce. we finally have questions about your record of disregard for

independent oversight including retaliatory actions by revealing the name of a whistleblower. i appreciate you being here today both of you to answer these questions and how you intend to manage the operations in the budget of federal government if you are confirmed to the role. chr. paul: mr. edgar is being introduced by senator johnson. senator johnson you are for your introduction. sen. johnson: it is my pleasure to introduce mr. troy edgar, mr. president trump nominee for -- is from loss alameda's california, and serve as a mayor and county official for years. is also a u.s. navy veteran with executive experience providing leadership and advisory services to companies across a range of industries including aerospace and defense, high-tech software,

in -- and telecommute occasions industries. troy first came before the committee when trump served -- asked him to serve in dhs. he was responsible for fiscal management, integrity and accountability of the department's budget supporting 240,000 employees. prior to dhs he was an executive at ibm working in part with the federal consulting business. a letter of support from the ceo and chairman of ibm arvin krishna. true spent nearly a decade with the aerospace industry at boeing where he was the cfo at the logistics decision -- division. in procurement. which makes him an ideal fit for a position of the act -- sector of dhs. he has a bachelors of science in mba and is joined by his wife betty.

his business in government work experience will help troy find success i encourage all on this committee to swiftly confirm him. thank you mr. chairman. chr. paul: mr. edgar your recognize your opening statement. mr. edgar: chairman paul, ranking member peters, members of the committee, i want to also recognize the things in that introduction. i am grateful to president trump and the secretary for the trust and confidence they placed in me. i think -- i think the committee for considering my nomination. i am honored secretary gnome has taken time out of her desk secretary noem has taken time out of her day to be here. the process has enabled me to appreciate the high honor bestowed on me to serve the american people and better

understand the critical expectations in the committee -- the committee may have for me if they confirm me as the deputy secretary. my family is very important to me. but they are not here, i would like to recognize them. matt, tyler and ethan are my sons. my brother is tracy and i honor the memory of my mom and dad. i would like to introduce my precious wife betty. betty embodies the american dream in a manner that enables me to understand the hopes and aspirations of millions of people who come to america. her story helps me understand the true weight of public service. i have not only come to this nomination with technical skills and business experience but with the conscience informed through my experience in life. betty is an immigrant from iran, her family fled to the united states after the shah was

overthrown in 1979. when she arrived she learned english and spanish and maintained bachelors and masters degree in french. she has been a french teacher at la quinta high school for over 25 years. betty rises every morning believing she has the ability to change another students life for the way that this country has changed hers. thank you for being here to support me. i have had the honor previously working with this committee in the first trump administration in my senate confirmation for being the chief financial officer of dhs. and i left on january 20 i was managing $90 billion budget of two or 50,000 employees. that allowed me to learn and resource the entire department. not just the important border security immigration components. it is with this unique knowledge and my significant business experience that i confirm i will intend to honor early --

honorably serve to the best of my ability. the dhs deputy secretary serves as the chief operating officer as rand -- senator rand paul had said. if confirmed i will stay focused on supporting the secretary and ensure we are effectively and efficiently using the policies and resources provide to meet the president's goal on immigration, border and other national security issues at dhs. furthermore a bull fully support the hard-working professionals at dhs by helping provide the resources they need to fulfill their critically important missions. if confirmed i look forward to working with this committee and other members of congress to assist you in the important role of oversight in support of the department. i am committed to investing the time to build a working relationship needed to help dhs. i finally would like to thank the chairman and ceo of ibm, the national sheriffs association

for letters of support for my nomination. i look forward to answering your questions. thank you. chr. paul: we will now proceed to questions where each member will have five minutes, i want to be clear from the outset the committee will not tolerate any disruptions, directing the capitol police to remove anybody audience member. do agree to comply with any request for summons to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of congress if you are confirmed. >> yes. >> while the secretary is still here i want to put in one plug for both of you. dhs is a national bio defense analysis and countermeasure center they do gain a function research and us was to be very safe. we want more oversight as to what's going on there and we hope you will keep complying. we don't us early need an answer for that.

and with that i will pass my time over. sen. -- >> to have heard be able to take charge of this as well. very kind for both of you to be able to come in. secretary noem, thank you for being here. let me walk through a couple of things as quickly as i can. you've done a lot of the work behind the scenes. this committee in the days ahead will work a tremendous amount on trying to get the funds to dhs that they need to actually implement the border security that's expertly wanted by the american people. without question additional dollars are needed without question there is also waste. we talked about $1 million a month on the south -- on the

soft side of the facilities. in millions a month for giant tent that are there. we talked about gsa and the frustration in facilities that organize where gsa has put in a $14,000 urinal where they have sold a parking lot for a dollar to the local community only to a couple years have to buy it back. the challenges they had where they said we need more lanes and the gsa designs a building that has fewer lanes. we've got to be able to figure out waste but also to implement policy quickly. what would you do to be able to help the communities on the ground and the leadership on the ground efficiently be able to do the mission? >> thank you senator. first of all having the opportunity and looking at all 23 components that ones were talking about i think right now

the organization is very focused on immigration border security mission. and i think if confirmed to be the debbie secretary i would work not only with cbp but i think the facilities were talking about could potentially be leveraged in the same vein that ice will need, cbp has potential availability. my job if confirmed as the debbie secretary is to make sure we are not being wasteful that we are being responsible with our spending and we are leveraging the contracts that allows the government to get to our mission. really executing president trump's agenda. sen. lankford: we don't mind allocating the dollars as long as they are spent wisely so the american people can say that's where my tax dollars are going. hsi, dea and fbi, they are a challenge at times to be able to cooperate together on it and keep from mission creep.

your oversight in this process with the coast guard, over fema, secret service, there is a lot of tasks that are out there. what needs to be done in your view at this point to make sure we are on mission and that we are working with other agencies to make sure secret service is doing what it can do well in knocking into other areas, hsi doing what it can do well and not getting into dea areas. mr. edgar: he greeted the executive order the greater the home and secured a task force. we follow the leadership of secretary noem in lead with the department of justice that you're talking about and within hsi, er of, ice will have the whole of government that will bring to them that task force they will take on cross government type of activity not

only just being able to do border security but bring the full power of enforcement out to law-enforcement. a committee that will appoint people chaired by the attorney general bondi that will follow their direction. >> we look forward to that coordination and make sure we are cooperating together. mr. bishop it is good to see you. thank you for the sacrifices you've already made. you talked about the federal agencies, federal law already i should say the requires we verify for federal contracts. we have learned that is not being enforced. so we don't know how any people are not legally present in the country that are also executed effective contracts or work for the federal government on this. that is federal law already. you and i have already spoken on this and your assurance to me was we will actually make sure that we are doing the oversight. is that true?

mr. bishop: i know you are a student of all the details but omb is in command of and we will certainly use that office as tools to see the consistency we have. sen. lankford: with the federal program inventory that is one of those areas six years ago called the taxpayer's right to for the ability to see for the full into -- implementation. chr. paul: senator peters. sen. peters: i've sent numerous oversight requests to both dhs and omb and since the start of this administration and unfortunately i've received little or no response or responsive documents or information as a result of these requests. for example two weeks ago i asked omb about the administrations illegal funding freezes. this committee is responsible for oversight of all of these

agencies. so my question for each of you is if confirmed, do you commit to ensuring omb and dhs properly answer request for information as we fulfill our oversight role here in this committee, information from me all of my colleagues as well as my staff and i hope this is not a hollow promise. >> if confirmed i will follow any lawful request from you sir. senator peters: we need to work together on that and have information. mr. bishop: subject to counsel and the directors are to made clear we want to maintain transparency the office of management and budget and you'll be aware of every request made by member of congress and i will see to that i am as well. >> can you commit to providing the information within two weeks

of assuming your office? mr. bishop: i'm not certain what the process at omb will permit. it will be provided an expedited way and work to that end with the department according to its processes. >> if it can be done for two weeks. mr. bishop: i would commit following the processes at omb to that effect. mr. edgar: i will follow the processes the we will maintain a very transparent relationship. sen. peters: good. i am now hearing from several agencies that this administration has instructed its staff to not communicate with members of congress and our staff. my question for each of you, or either of you aware of this directive from the trumpet administration to not talk to member's of congress. that should be pretty outrageous to you. mr. bishop: i am unaware of that.

i did not encounter such instruction for the prior administration. but i cannot speak to it. as a i'm serving as a senior and haven't been involved in anything that. >> have you pushed back against anything? >> i certainly wouldn't want to ask questions about and learn the reasons in the process. >> same thing, i'm not familiar with what you are specifically talking about but i would be open to taking a look at that. >> you understand how long that is? and how that kind of direct it would be wrong? >> i'm not familiar with that directive. that was a directive, we will look at it. >> look at it and say that is wrong. >> i don't know what the directive is specifically. >> a trump administration is currently indiscriminately firing civil servants across the federal government. these actions in many ways are harming public services across the country. but it appears the administration has not done any analysis about how this impacts

customer service and even more importantly, national security. congressman bishop, this is just a yes or no answer, pretty easy, do you support the recent efforts to indiscriminately remove civil servants from their positions? mr. bishop: i can't answer yes or no because i believe the premise is wrong. i don't believe they are proceeding in an indiscriminate way to terminate employees. sen. peters: so you see in the analysis for each employee as to why they been terminated? mr. bishop: i certainly haven't. sen. peters: so how can you make that statement? mr. bishop: because i know that president trump and the folks working hard in the white house every day to do the will of the american people are not proceeding in a way that is indiscriminate. sen. peters: so if we ask for information as to why particular individuals were, he would be able to provide it to show it was not indiscriminate? mr. bishop: certainly the deliberate processes and advice of counsel. >> same thing. i think the process we are going to go through, i also believe it

has been a lawful process that is followed by president trump and i look forward to continuing to work with president trump and secretary gnome. sen. peters: so we know we have layoffs that can definitely impact national security operation, firings of personnel and fema at tsa. are these indiscriminate or have you actually seen detailed analysis before each individual is fired? mr. edgar: i've not, i'm serving as a senior advisor so i've not seen that. i would say that these are legal orders coming through the executive order process and i'm sure the president's duly informed and knows exactly what he is focused on. sen. peters: so if confirmed, you will then be in a position to analyze both the impact as well as the criteria. will you do that, and will you be transparent about that? mr. edgar: yes, i will work with the secretary to make sure we can continuing out our mission while you're trying to also get to the objectives of trying to save money, fraud and abuse. sen. peters: we all want to save

money, everybody here is all about that. we don't want to jeopardize national security. we want to make sure thousand positions are being made before folks terminated. not indiscriminately, and clearly, you could meet the objective of fraud, waste and abuse in a thoughtful manner and not indiscriminate but need to be transparent about that in order to have trust in the process. i look forward to working with you if confirmed. sen. peters: senator johnson? senator johnson: mr. edgar, mr. bishop, were both aware of the fact that i've been talking quite a bit about returning to some pre-pandemic level of spending. mr. edgar, you've obviously experienced the ca -- private sector experience. what drives me nuts around here is coming from the private sector, nobody seems to use a budget the way families use a budget and the way businesses use a budget.

i use the analogy of i don't think any family they have a serious illness has to borrow $50,000 to pay for medical bills , that family member gets well, they continue to borrow $50,000 to spend at that level. that is exactly what we've done here. averaging $6.5 trillion over the next five years. this year we are on course to spend $3.5 trillion. so first of all, do you think is any justification for us to be spending after the pandemic? $7.3 trillion, 61% above where we were in 2019? >> first of all i think that what we are going through right now is the reconciliation bill that spending up to a higher level than we spend. the charter and the focus for the agenda for president trump, this is truly money that is needed to be able to make sure we can make good on the promises of sealing the border and

interior enforcement. over the long-term my commitment to you and this committee at the previous cfo is that spending level is nonsustainable and my focus would be to work with and our staff to look at the longer-term once we are able to get through the agenda and understand the deal dibu gateway spending profile, long-term more sustainable and responsible. sen. johnson: we had a number of conversations along this line, you are smiling. as a candidate, you ever talk about zero-based budgeting by any chance? >> i certainly did. sen. johnson: you know others have? mr. bishop: absolutely. sen. johnson: you think they are serious about it? mr. bishop: the result has not gotten there. you struck a consistent theme in making this point which is i would say somewhat inescapable that there's no reason for the government to of grown permanently in the coven era.

sen. johnson:sen. johnson: i look at a number of pretend every -- preventing baselines, wonders bill clinton will be actually had a surplus. that was voted for by people like senator durbin and schumer and mcconnell and lastly and collins and john thune in the house. very bipartisan bill. if we increase that by population growth and inflation, today's social security, medicare and interested place, that would give us $5.5 trillion for baseline spending. that is what president biden projected as revenue. that is how close we are to balancing the budget. if you go to clinton, 2014, the same thing, population growth, inflation, 6.2 trillion. i don't even like talking about 2019 the that gives us a figure of 6.5. 5.5 to 6.5 trillion dollars is a

pre-pandemic baseline spending. my question, how do we return to that? i appreciate their efforts, the house has a really hard time. i keep talking about death by a thousand cuts. can't cut back, can't cut that. but it's entirely reasonable to save its return to pre-pandemic level baseline for population growth and inflation. if you have to add some for defense or border security, trying to do this first reconciliation package, utterly, is this? how do we turn what doge -and i don't necessarily agree that we all want to prevent waste, fraud and abuse the way they are howling about the outrageous waste, fraud anddoge are real about eliminating it, but having translate what doge is finding into real spending savings? how do we return that

pre-pandemic reconciliation? mr. bishop: certainly it is something that requires actions in congress, and some of the. what you guys have begun in the budget committee here in the senate, and i appreciate the point that you made a lot about this fundamental idea about getting spending back to pre-covid concept, i would say that over at oncd, there is a process going on, very serious about the topic you're focusing on here. about how the president weighs in on the process here in congress toward reconciliation. sen. johnson: i count on both of you working closely with me to return some reasonable pre-pandemic baseline of spending. >> mr. bishop, i want to start with you.

i was concerned about what i just heard in terms of the previous response. you believe that the firings that happened, who say they are not indiscriminate? mr. bishop: i don't believe that president trump or the people at ppo for the folks in the white house policy making operation would proceed in a way that is indiscriminate. >> we're seeing firing based off of status being probationary, both in terms of new hires as well as probationary also includes those recently promoted , and they are new in that position because they've been promoted into that. we see mass layoffs at status because frankly, i guess it is easier to be able to fire them. you don't consider that in the indiscriminate? mr. bishop: i do not. the folks were advising the president, the president have made points and unbelieving that the federal employee workforce is not the right size and needs to be the right size.

>> so when we are seeing the national nuclear security administration, hundreds fired, later to be reinstated, vented not seem like that was indiscriminate initially and then they realized look, probably the nuclear functions of the united states is important? 11 language this is happening, you think that was an appropriate move to initially fire then? mr. bishop: i think the president has spoken directly to that of people speaking for the president have in the course of making changes, you may find that you need to then move in the other direction and to make an adjustment acting is made first change. in my view, senator, that doesn't make it indiscriminate. sen. johnson: mr. edgar, i guess i like to get a sense, what with the reasoning for the firing of one hundred 30 employees at the cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency's? mr. edgar: as a senior advisor i was responsible for that. when i would say just as he was on as if you look at this outside of the government, the process were talking about about

whether giving discriminate, this is something that all fortune 500 companies do. you normally go to reflect a more junior people if you needed to go through a process to be able to get that. to me, this is totally logical. >> we having fairly important procedures going forward. cyber safety review born under dhs was revoked. the membership revoked. you think that was a good idea? mr. edgar: a great idea. >> even though that of the board overseeing the investigation on saul typhoon? mr. edgar: i didn't make a decision but i think it is a great idea. it has overstepped its boundaries, i think it needs to be reeled in, i think they need to be reconstituted. >> so who is conducting investigation right now? so they taken over the review of the cybersecurity, sorry, the safety review board? mr. edgar: at this point that

review board will be reconstituted at the right time as an organization continues with his priorities. >> why was it decommissioned to start with? >> is decommissioned because it was going in the wrong direction. it starts with the leadership there. >> i want to switch gears here. i guess i wanted to state your response, to tabular and record when it comes to the temporary protected status receipt of the revoking for haiti, for venezuela. i guess i just want to ask you do not believe that consideration of safety of individuals is something that we as the united states should take into account when we are thinking about how to proceed with legal pathways to immigration? >> i think temporary protected status is just that, temporary. the secretary reserves the right and the opportunity to look at what different policies are either for venezuela or haiti. i think the secretary has taken appropriate action to make sure she reserves her opportunity that have really pushed up and

really overdid what his authority was and putting more options on the table for the secretary to make her decision. >> 20 comes to fema in the past you call it a great organization, great people, their mission drives their mission drives the organization at all levels. what we are seeing at usaid, she we expect that at fema, are we going to see a rapid abolishment of fema? mr. edgar: i would agree with the president, we need to reevaluate what the direction is that we are going to go with fema. it's got a lot of issues that need to be dealt with structurally. it is structured into different ways, the disaster recovery fund and non-disaster recovery. >> i guess i just want to say, and we talked about this, everyone here understands the needs to be reforms of,. what has been having hasn't been working. new jersey, crushed by hurricanes, problems on that front. but i really do urge you and the secretary, try for us to have a

bipartisan approach to dispute work with this committee. if we see a quick gunning of it, is just going to leave the american people unsafe, unsecure when it comes to disasters that in fact every aspect of this country. with that, i yield back. >> senator ernst. >> thank you mr. chair and thank you to the nominees for being here today, we truly do appreciate your service. congressman bishop, i'm going to start with you, sir. as chair and founder of the summit doge caucus i am very laser focused on making sure our government is responsive to our taxpayers in ensuring our federal workforce is actually serving the american people. today, i want to focus on taxpayer-funded union time. which requires federal agencies to pay employees for time spent working for their union, not the

american people. the biden administration took several steps to hide the cost of taxpayer-funded union time from the american people including rolling back president trump's executive order to prevent union time abuses and increase agency oversight, pulling down annual report on the cost of taxpayer-funded union time off of opm's website, and hiding annual reports opm had previously published. meanwhile as part of my investigation into telework, i learned telework in hud employees were reportedly paid for performing union duties despite one being in an oklahoma jail for drunk driving and another in puerto rico vacationing during duty time. even more alarming, hud told me it wasn't even aware of this because there was no way to verify when or even if employees

are engaging in union duties. so congressman bishop, will you commit to working with director vote and opm to restart this annual reporting requirements? mr. bishop: i follow closely the work is done in that area and also concerning the back to work issue with federal employees, so thank you for that. omb and opm to have a close working relationship. i am coming to learn about them as a senior advisor, not yet confirmed, but certainly i will take an active director vote and i think the issues you are speaking to are quite significant and of course i will be debye director into bloom and the policies that the policies of president trump and follow the direction of director vo ught. certainly look forward to communicate them with you about that and making sure the information you need is readily available. sen. ernst: a 2019 some of those

agencies refused to provide opm with data. we you ensure all agencies are responsive to opm when it solicits information on taxpayer-funded union time? mr. bishop: it's very important congress received the oversight information it needs and there is a deliberative asset that i will work with, but certainly want subject to the advice and counsel on the director of omb to provide everything we can. they. sen. ernst: briefly, is there something we can do to make sure agencies are appropriately reviewing taxpayer-funded union time payments? mr. bishop: i can't make a specific commitment on that because there are processes to follow, but certainly i think it is an issue that needs to be front and center and we will look at it hard. sen. ernst: assuming your confirmation i hope that we work together on this issue. it is a big one for our taxpayers. so when the time that i have left, politicians and

bureaucrats in washington seem to be a lot more upset that doge is finding ways, fraud and abuse them about the nonsense that we have funded in the first place. you can hear all these big spenders squealing all the way from iowa, and every taxpayer should have the ability to look and find the same waste doge is exposing, there are nearly 50 federal agencies right now that are not reporting their spending on usa spending. goes, accounting for more than $5 billion each year. so congress bishop, every american can be one of our doge deputies out across the united states, but they actually need omb's help to do that. will you require all agencies provide timely, accurate and complete reporting of their spending? mr. bishop: i can tell you with

the scope of usa spending any items that are not on there, it is something that i learned a great deal about. it is a very significant issue to me. i will be paying very close attention to it, should any confirmed. sen. ernst: my time is expired but i think he got a lot of issues here and i look forward to working with both of you on this issue. thank you. >> senator slotkin. senator slotkin: thanks for being here. we were neighbors for a short time in longworth when we were both numbers of congress. separate from being good office mates, i'm really concerned about the view that you end director vote and the president have expressed on the executive branch, and the president having the unilateral ability to spend federal dollars despite the congress appropriates. and i will skip the irony of a

congressman who ran for office and was involved, deeply involved in appropriating dollars and voting on those things for years and years now being seemingly willing to give up that authority. it is a fundamental principle of the constitution, the supreme court starting back in 1975 has said that the constitution says, this body which republicans now control both houses of appropriates the dollars, and the federal government spends them accordingly. this has been reiterated by the courts. can you tell us your position as deputy director of omb, do you believe that president trump has the ability to spend appropriated dollars in different ways than they were appropriated? mr. bishop: thank you for the question senator slotkin. president trump has run on the issue of impoundment. there will be a process in the administration that

decision-making involving lawyers, i will not be serving as deby director in a legal -- legal capacity there are folks looking at the legal issues you describe. sen. slotkin: i understand lawyers, but your personal view. the open with it. voght was very open about it. do you believe that if this chairman appropriates dollars that are voted on by the senate, that you and president trump have the ability to spend those dollars in different ways than you republican chairman has appropriated? mr. bishop: i support the views of president trump and director -- sen. slotkin: so yes. he owned it, you should just own it. so let me ask this question. if you believe that to be true, do you believe that you have the right to unilaterally take money out of social security? not that you will, but that you have the right. mr. bishop: senator, the president has been very clear -- sen. slotkin: it's not -- mr. bishop: you are speaking to hypotheticals. i would say i don't think -- sen. slotkin: it's not a

hypothetical of every single machine andder that i talk to is worried about you cutting their social security benefits, their medicare benefits, there veterans benefits, the post office. i was just up and very red, conservative offer that other peninsula of michigan, i am the only democrat there and they are happy. he said there are people personally happy the cuts going on, but they are desperately worried that you are going to cut their social security, their medicare, their veterans benefits and the postal service, and despite everyone saying they are not going to touch it, you are smarter than that and you know that the cuts were calling for the big chunks out of these programs. sen. slotkin: senator, i don't hesitate to say that i do not believe that the president can stop social security benefits paid i don't think so. sen. slotkin: you don't think he can pull money out of social security, medicare, veterans benefits and the postal service? mr. bishop: i don't. the president said he is not going to because that is what he has consistently planned so i don't think it is an issue. sen. slotkin: but if you look

behind the numbers, you guys are looking for $6 trillion, doge is looking for that. $6 trillion to succumb from $1 million here and $1 million here. it comes in cutting big programs and what you're saying is despite what everyone says here, you are working for and proudly support this idea that you can move money even though it has been appropriated for a certain reason. i don't think any american, red, blue, purple, the whole thing, should trust that these programs they worked their entire life for our sake if you believe anything that you want. mr. bishop: there are distinctions to be made. you suggested hypocrisy about serving in congress and taking this position. harry truman exercised impoundment power to cancel a squadron of farmers that he had vetoed. these things that happened across history by presidents. sen. slotkin: i would just say i feel very strongly that it is not about red america or blue america or any of those things.

i am from a purple state. people watch this chaotic cutting. this just be fair, you fire people and then higher than the next week, that is indiscriminate. that is acknowledging you've made a mistake. that is not some review that a normal private sector company would do. i don't know a damn private sector company that would fire someone friday and hire them back on monday. but let's just be honest that this approach is scaring the crap out of people on the benefits they've worked their entire life for nno and out of time, i yield back. >> probably we should try to put aside some of the fear mongering. my knowledge, no one in the trump administration has advocated for taking social security money. so that is a hypothetical that is not only untrue, it is promoting fear. we should be telling, and america know what is asking for that. there are some debatable points, though. nobody's advocating for the post office either, plus the post office has no money, they are

9.5 billion dollars in the hole every year, but there are some real questions. the other side has called these illegal funding freezes. i don't think pausing spending for a month which is what we had survival be interpreted even as impoundment. there is a debate when something is actually impounded. i think we mentor a fiscal year, and you get beyond a fiscal year, it's going to be classified of anybody as impoundment. there will be a legal discussion, and this is a separation of powers issue, an important one. i actually voted against repurchasing money for the wall, for building the wall last time because i thought it was national perspective, so i share some of the concerns. but i think it is unfair to link to conclusion that this is legal or this is being done or democracies in turmoil, the world is going to end.

iced -- they stop the money flowing at usaid, they found $2 million for sex changes in guatemala and the other side wants to argue that that is really wrong that we are going to stop $2 million for sex changes in guatemala, they can. but instead they just say everything is illegal, elon is terrible and has all this data, and he was elected, these gentlemen were not elected either, their bosses won't be elected. trump was elected and he is appointing them. nobody in the administration is elected other than the president, they are all going to be appointed. but when you elect a president should begin to execute the policy? to be like a change or is there some sort of iraq proceed that is so huge and inert that we can move it? that is what many of us have complained about for a long time. some call it the deep state and the other side says they are all conniving. the deep state is unmovable and has a perspective. and their perspective is skewed toward spending more money, not less.

we should debate not whether elon musk is satan, but maybe whether or not we should spend $3 million out-of-state department funding on girl- centric climate change in brazil. we spent $30,000 on trends opera in columbia, $25,000 on a trans comic book in peru. $660,000 on micro-aggressions among obese latinx. most people don't even know what that means. most people who are hispanic are frankly just offended by the whole thing. these racial sort of things, left-wing sort of causes, we can debate that, but we wouldn't know it had elon musk not stop things, we wouldn't even know it was the extent. so i for one thing scrutiny is good, but i'm not a blank check. i've told both nominees today that it comes down to a year

from now, if money is being impounded, i'm going to be saying send it back and let congress vote on it. it's also a way of making permanence. i love all the stuff he is finding. i wanted to be permanent and have real value and get the decision. it won't be easy but it can be done through simple majority and my guess is that the minority party, while they are squawking about elon looking at their social security numbers or something, they are probably not any of them interested in cutting the $2 million for sex changes in one imola. the part of a precision package in my guess is it won't be anybody on the democratic party that will vote for rescission of any kind of cutting. if we give them $1 billion for an aircraft carrier and they could do it $300 million, shouldn't we be happy to get the $200 million back? i will say publicly that giving it back to the taxpayer when we having to clean dollars deficit, but still of the whole of the $2 trillion deficit and then we can

talk about sending some back to the people that i think is premature to send any of that money back and it is also premature to say is saved until we actually have a spending bill. i think we have saturday --. -- senator. >> concerns in arizona including elected republican sheriff's the deep strain some of these deep rotation operations have on their resources and the ability to keep violent criminals off their streets, whether they are here legally or not, and the state and local enforcement department across the country are already operating very tight budgets and are facing personnel shortages just trying to get new cops to come in. so can you commit at dhs not deputized state and local law enforcement and personnel devoted to combating violent crime? essentially what they are concerned about is that they don't mind if dhs says we are

going to go and there is this criminal, whatever gang or cartel member, could you come help us save face please, everything else like that? they are fine with that because that helps them. but they are not fine with is being deputized to everyday deportation processes for people who are nonviolent offenders, they of that nature. these in terms of physical dollars and time, they just don't have time for that nor do they want to engage in that. so that is what is police officers, police unions as well as sheriffs are asking, but they are not engaged in that kind of day-to-day stuff that the federal government should be focused on. mr. edgar: first of all, the program that you were talking about which would go through and basically deputized the state and local law enforcement officials is voluntary. sheriffs organizations, the different county sheriff's sign up for that. >> i'm aware, and as long as it is voluntary it is one thing.

most of them are in the prisons, that way there's ice checks so that ice coming back. that doesn't actually put a strain on the police to get the person is already in custody. but they are worried about is a program really has to actively be doing street enforcement of immigration, and that is what they don't want to do. they just don't have the money. they may have the will, they just don't have the money and time. >> part of this process i went pregnant with major county sheriff's american did talk about this issue. i would say navy we are a little bit of nick's purposes here, as i know from the president's perspective, and stephen miller who helps us coordinate across all law enforcement and government, 287g in a relationships are very important. but you're talking about is whether it is just prisons or jails were we are serving in that sort of function, detention, but if you start to look at where we are looking for the 300,000 left children in

america, i think that partnership with the sheriffs will be really critical and important only just on immigration, but in helping locate and find those 300,000. >> to 300,000 is not of the sheriffs are worried about. they're worried they're they are going to be deputized go after the local taco vendor. they don't want to be going into funds to look for undocumented migrant workers. it is not worth their time, is not with public money to do that. if you want to go after these hard-core criminals, that is where there is alignment with the arizona citizen who is willing to pay the money to go after the rapists, the drug dealers, these horrible people. but it is when you're going after the nana, they don't look -- month a lot of the cop doing that. there's a lot of fear also about the question of some of our students in schools, public schools being questioned about their status or the family status. could you have some commitment that we are not going to essentially turn our schools, our principals and teachers into

deputized ice officers by asking the status of the students under the age of 18? mr. edgar: i don't see that being the situation, i see what president trump has put in place through executive order to be able to allow law enforcement to good schools and churches, but i grew up in southern california, i grew up in an area that had a gang problem and they would have welcomed that to be sure i felt safe at my school and as my kids grow up, to make sure they feel safe. >> and this is why you should support local police officers in school. but there's also a lot of kids were actually good kids and not all gang members are illegal just in case you were wondering. so being able for them to go to school and receive services, learn, because a lot of them will eventually become citizens one way or the other legally, by making a place that is not safe to go, you're going to have kids skipping school which we already see all over this country. kids are skipping school, even

some that are here legally, that were born in the united states because they are afraid they're going to be followed home by ice and their parents are going to be taken away. this is why i'm concerned about our schools not being a saison for kids. not for drug dealers or anything else, but for kids. mr. bishop, good to see you, i think we served at least four years together for a little bit. if confirmed you will serve alongside director vought said he wants federal employees to be traumatized. we are seeing that, especially from veterans i served with in the iraq war who do feel traumatized. they serve their country, these guys are supporters, they been doing different types of work for the government, some of them have now been laid off, so mission accomplished along that route. can you explain the thinking behind intentionally targeting people dedicated to serving their country? how can we trust that you're going to have the best interest of the american people at heart stated goal to traumatize the

very people who provide often some lifesaving services to the public and my concern for some of these veterans is that they are not going to come back and work when or we're not going to be able to recruit a lot of these veterans to come back and work for the federal government at some point when we need to have more support. mr. bishop: one of the things that is very interesting is that federal workers say in surveys that they have frustration that low performers can't be moved out. that they see problems in their own workplace that is the result of the way the bureaucracy operates. this quote that director vought is often talked about as putting workers in trauma, it is sort of taken in context. i watched the way he works with folks at omb. he has the greatest regard for the professionals at omb who are really stellar, and so change is

difficult. there is going to need to be changed to the federal government. we can all look and see that $36 trillion instead, the spending that is $20 trillion a year: the one direction, it has to be dealt with and is going to require change the federal government included federal employee situations, but i disavow and don't believe the ideas when you said it is indiscriminate or it is designed to harm anybody. it is designed to put the government, the federal government back on the side of the american people. sen. gallego: when you are firing in places, it is clearly indiscriminate. >> first off congratulations to both of you for your nominations. i know you're both going to do an outstanding job. mr. edgar, what is success? what do you want to get done? mr. edgar: i think i define success in supporting president trump. he ran on the agenda to seal the border and to make sure to the

interior enforcement that we are able to deport over one million people. as the chief operating officer, i think there's two things, be able to execute that agenda, but there's also 22 other components within dhs that missions that need to be executed, and we need to be making sure we are responsible, whether it is the coast guard, the secret service, tsa, we need to be able to walk and chew gum. opportunity of being the previous chief financial officer will allow us to make sure we get the most of the taxpayers money for the amount they are paying here. sen. scott: what would you like to accomplish? mr. bishop: i think you would say to implement president trump's vision to put government back on the side of the people, to get government to function more efficiently and effectively. certainly to get the attic control spending under control to begin making headway on the massive debt that we otherwise will be handing to our children and grandchildren.

and i think talking about elon musk and what elon musk is seeking to accomplish, they want to see actual change, not the same status quo, the same stagnancy that you would i both experience and air service in congress or we know we got to solve these problems and yet nothing ever seems to happen. president trump means to make it happen and omb is going to be a critical tool in seeing to it that it does. sen. scott: congress and bishop, you're a staunch supporter of getting that way for spending. do you think we connect with balance the budget? mr. bishop: i certainly do. when and under what circumstances, that is the president's decision, not mine, and my priorities. way in this balance, i'm serving his program, but i know that we can bring the federal leviathan under control so that the american taxpayer can afford it again. sen. scott: mr. edgar, had he

spent much time with regard to fema? i was governor so i can tell you, fema wasted billions of dollars. there is no logic to it, and they are involved in so many things that it was never anticipated they would be involved in. how would you try to fix fema? in my experience, i've dealt with mostly the southeast of fema, and they are wonderful people, but they are involved in so many things, it doesn't make any sense. mr. edgar: president came out and said one of his first directives as we need to think about fema. a couple different mechanisms. i think the funding process, i started my public service but i was a corporate guy in the local government. if you talk with secretary noem, she definitely knows how disasters are related at the state level. she can tell you that she was

here and a lot of this is best done by the local government. and i think what ended happening his fema gets in the way of the process, they don't know the priorities anything that is with the presidencies. it's also going to require legislative things. i look forward to the opportunity working on both sides of the aisle. i think we need to take them look systematically and look at the authority that were given to fema during 2002 and evaluate will be structurally the best way. i would love to be into work to do that. sen. scott: congressman bishop, inflation is attic control, impacting the poorest families in the country. how much is that type too wasteful spending? > what americans are seeing now revealed everyday to the consternation of some is that there is jaw-dropping waste in the federal government. i think what you did as governor of florida, he sat down, took your budget, went through it

line by line and began moving to solve it. and the fiscal results you achieve, we can do the same thing the federal government. what president trump is demonstrating in the first several weeks in office with the help of doge is that there's going to be action on multiple fronts all at the same time. there's going to be significant change, and i think americans are enthusiastic to see someone finally take hold of it the way that you do when you were governor of florida. sen. scott: your -- you're both going to be great. i look forward to your confirmation so you can get to work. >> thanks mr. chair and welcome to both you and congratulations on your nominations. i want to start with a question to both of you, and it is a simple one. if directed by the president to take action that would break the law, would you follow the law or follow the president's directive?

mr. edgar? mr. edgar: i would follow president trump because i know he is doing a lawful job so i would be following the president. >> that's disappointing because no one is above the law and the united states of america and your obligation and the ovi will take this to the constitution and to the law, not to president trump. mr. bishop? mr. bishop: i'm confident that president trump will issue lawful orders. it would not be up to me serving in nonlawyer capacity to decide what is lawful and not lawful. sen. hassan: excuse me, if you are advised by a lawyer in your agency that it is against the law or it is clearly against the constitution as some of the things that president trump has already done in his term ending his last term were, i would expect you to follow the law and your unwillingness to say that, other members of the administration by the way i have voted for have come forward and said yeah, follow the law. so is disappointing. if a court issued an order requiring the department of

homeland security or the office of management and budget respectively to take or refrain from taking specific actions, will you follow the court orders? mr. edgar: yes. mr. bishop: yes. sen. hassan: that's great. i'll turn to another question now. and this is to you, calm his condition. last month the president unilaterally cut off nearly all federal grants for multiple federal courts determined that doing so illegally harmed americans all across the country. this funding cut created chaos and disruption in my state of new hampshire. for example, one of our hospitals had a federal grant to replace its sewer system. it is a small, rural hospital that apply for the grant, it was a contract with the federal government. while the funding cut was in effect this hospitable stock with a $3000 outstanding bill that was due to contractors, john job was halfway done. so congress condition, if you

are confirmed, will you do to ensure that federal grants are reinstated and that on the and the trump administration follow the law? mr. bishop: senator i follow the deliberative process and its outcome at omb, and i think in that case, there was a memorandum that said some items that were implicated by the president's executive order were pause. that thing that you are describing i don't think was. that was a media reaction. sen. hassan: kit wasn't a media reaction because when i talk to people on the ground in new hampshire, the money wasn't flowing because the freeze was overwhelming because nobody understood the executive orders which by the way, were very poorly drafted. they were so general and so imprecise that everything stopped. and i will just note that you talked about president truman impending funding. that was before the impoundment control act was passed in the 1970's. an act that was deemed constitutional by the supreme court of the united states. so what previous presidents did

before the impoundment control act is one thing but if you're going to follow the law you are going to follow the impoundment control act and is highly disappointing to hear you, mr. vought, as if the law was never passed. i just want you to understand that the freeze had real impacts, they are not hypotheticals, and their impacts on money that not only was appropriated by this body, article one, the congress of the united states, but signed into law by a president of the united states. mr. edgar, i'm going to follow up on fema. fema is responsible for coordinating the federal response to disasters and it recently fired hundreds of employees. reporting suggested fired employees included not just new employees, but also some longtime employees who had recently been promoted, including some with more than a decade of experience. i'm concerned that these indiscriminate firings done in a really sloppy manner will harm

the ability of fema to do its job. mr. edgar, can you explain how these firings will do anything other than destabilize an agency that the american people rely upon when disasters strike? mr. edgar: i'm the senior advisor, i didn't make the decisions to fire people in fema. my commitment if confirmed, i will continue to work at fema and make sure that we get to an operational posture that will be sick thus: carry out the mission for the american people. sen. hassan:. discriminate firings? mr. edgar: i will see what the data is that we are looking at and act like i would in any situation whether it would be federal government. sen. hassan: i would just note into a couple of other points, i'm a former governor who has worked with fema closely and i've had this discussion with the secretary, his nomination i supported. it is really important to understand that when you say a local government should do it, i have 234 towns in new hampshire, some of them fewer than 1000 people. they don't have the staff or the

budget to handle major disasters, so it is going to be really important that if you are all talking about rightsizing fema and making sure that it can do its work, that investments in resilience continue so we don't have the same natural disasters impacting the same infrastructure over and over again, and it's going to be important that we have people on the ground who can do the mission of working hand-in-hand, as they do, with local governments. so i look forward to trying to work with you on that but i hope very much that you will find out what actually happens and works with fema, come to us the concrete plans and actually do some analysis before you start firing people because it's really destabilizing and it's going to be hard for the agency to recover because who is going to want to go work there? thank you. >> senator hawley. senator hawley: thank you very much. congratulations on your nomination, thanks her being here. congressman, let me start with

you. the agency that you're going to be the deputy director of, i believe you will be confirmed and i look forward to supporting your confirmation is a key agency as you know, and it includes among its many components the cheops of information of regulatory affairs. that little agency, that mouthful does a lot, as you know. it reviews basically every agency regulation. provides recommendations on it, it does cost benefit some cases. every regulation they come through the federal government. that office is a key note of the federal government for assisting regulations. that in mind, i want to ask is in question but i also asked director vought that i also thought was so important for those of us were pro-life serving in administration on title x. this is the type of grant program that currently provides money on the biden administration, has been providing money for abortion

providers. i've talked about this, rfk committed to me that he would end title x funding for abortion providers, there would be a rule that would be necessary for that. my question to you is will you be an advocate within on the for seeing that rfk's commitment, it is also the president's commitment is carried through that we stop title x funding for abortion providers? mr. bishop: as you know, merrill as deputy director is due, the president's policy, not my own, but certainly i have taken note of what you've articulated on the subject. it has been a source of discussion, and so there's a deliberative process at omb and a lyra that it would be appropriate for me to foretell or forecast the result of, thank you for articulating into something that i will take back. sen. hawley: i just want to drill down on this because this is very important and they don't think this is about the secretary now confirmed in city

who has set under of that you will overturn the current rule put back in place president trump's role in title x funding. the president himself is that he does not support title x funding going to abortion providers. another way of asking this question, do you support the president's policy implemented into law and his first term, articulated again since then and again now by his current hhs secretary that title x funding should not flow to abortion providers? mr. bishop: in my view, my purpose as deputy director will be to employ the president's policies. sen. hawley: will you work to ensure that all federal agencies fully comply with the hyde amendment, which as you know is statutory law and has been since 1977? mr. bishop: on the does play a role in ensuring consistency of observing law across federal agencies, so certainly that would be initially given attention to. sen. hawley: to be clear, that includes the hyde amended which

is in place and has been governing lawson's 1977, is that fair to say? mr. bishop: of course. sen. hawley: the weldon and then the princess kate nation against health care providers who have conscious objections to abortion. blasted ministration essentially ignored it. it is the law. in your position as you review these regulations, as you advise on the mentation of the law, will you advise every component of the government to comply with the law which includes that amended? mr. bishop: it will be my purpose as debited director to comply with the law and see to it that other agencies and personnel within the government do so to the extent of my responsibility. sen. hawley: that includes the weldon amendment. mr. bishop: yes sir, that is part of the law. sen. hawley: it is, the last administration seemed to forget this. when it comes to pregnancy resource centers, so important. provide in many cases completely free medical care to mothers, many of whom are facing an unexpected pregnancy. everything from health screenings to diapers, baby

food, consultation. again, often completely free. the last administration conducted an incredible effort to attend to persecute and shutdown these pregnancy care centers. the president and his first administration allowed federal funding to be available and federal grants to pregnancy care centers he said he wants to do that again. my question to you, you look at these grants, as you look at these regulations, will you be an advocate for the president's policies allowing federal funding to flow to the centers? mr. bishop: i will be, and i would say one advantage that my service in congress alongside you and working together get a review some things provides is i did witness the evidence that you are describing about the official posturing neglect or hostility toward pregnancy resource centers in the past administration, so i carry that experience with me into the role i seek to be confirmed to. sen. hawley: cap fantastic.

you know these statistics as well as i do, and lasted ministration after the dobbs decision, hundreds of pregnancy care centers were vandalized, firebombed, the subject of criminal activity, and while they lasted ministration of used federal statutes to go persecute pro-lifers who demonstrated peacefully according to their religious beliefs, they did nothing to protect pregnancy care centers, nothing. hung them out to dry, allowed them to the rest. all while denying them in many cases grants for which they qualify under federal law. so your experience on this will be important, i think, and i look forward to being a strong advocate for the administration. i see my time has sadly expired and i always a huge my time limits. i have some questions for the record for you, mr. edgar, maybe a few more for you, congressman. i look forward to supporting your nominations. >> thank you, chairman rand, and greatly with you. as you see, i am four weeks in

and still don't know which way to go in my committee room. mr. edgar: i was five years in and didn't know which way to go. >> i will tell you what i do know, and that is what we need to accomplish under this administration to get this country on the right track and a lot of it is because i served as the attorney general and the free state of florida and saw the ramifications of some of the policy choices of the lasted ministration and how that affected the stability and safety in our communities. so i am glad to be here with you today and grateful that i'm given the chance to speak to you about your upcoming duties. i don't have a ton of questions for you mr. bishop. i know you very well. i know we both thought that you would be in a different position right now is attorney general in north carolina, and i will pray for you and your new goal. i know that you were going to do a new job and as i can attest, god has a way of messing up our plans that we mix it diligently. mr. bishop: no doubt, i'm thankful for it. sen. hawley: congratulations on

your nomination. i would like to turn my attention to mr. edgar. when i was attorney general in florida, and president biden first got in office, one of the first things he did was rescind the long-standing practice of both democratic and republican administrations of deporting serious 70 offenders that were here illegally committing crimes back to their countries of origin. that was never something that is argued. and in that first month they said we're not going to do that anymore. issues completely different directives to law enforcement. in fact, started canceling detainers that sheriffs were using in jails to hold people who had committed felonies that were in our country illegally and need to go back. so you can imagine the outcry from law enforcement when they were being canceled by the biden administration. one of the first things i did as attorney general was sue on that practice.

i believe that was one of the most dangerous things they could have done. one of the things that put our citizens at risk, and it is not necessary. but they also started doing was taking prisoners that were in federal prisons that were brought here from other countries or picked up in the middle of the ocean for federal prosecution and put in our prisons because they were prosecuted here only, they were sending them back to the places they were prosecuted within the united states and their only connection to the united states whether they were prosecuted here. those practices have to stop immediately. many of those groups and organizations within dhs will be under your purview. i know he hasn't time to talk about this, do i have your commitment to go back? of course they weren't telling us. do i have your commitment to look at both of those practices and make sure that state and

local law enforcement can detain, pass over to iced so they can be deported, and that those federal prisoners are deported back to their countries? mr. edgar: absolutely and as you can see, president trump came on this issue very hot not only making sure that ice, the ero group, that all law-enforcement that we would focus on is really trying to get back on track, but he's also started through his diplomatic relationships to get countries to receive those migrants back into the country. we started to unlock a lot of different types of capabilities to the post office and the country and almost nonstop methods, so is a really significant part of our process within dhs to be able to get a million people deported. sen. moody: so much of that to correct course is going to be someone in your position going back, digging down through the directives, the emails, the guidance memos, all of those things that were done to make sure that everything is

rescinded so that all of those relationships, all disagreements, everything the president is doing so well can be promoted and propped up by what you are doing. truly, in all of things that you do, getting people that are known to commit crimes against our citizens out of your status possible, that has to be a number one priority. in the program, i know one of my prior colleagues mentioned that mason sheriffs were saying they don't want to do that, they don't want to be part of it. do i have your commitment to look into additional funding for salaries, training, equipment for those agencies that either want to cooperate with you or maybe in states like florida where we have supported them and statutorily, we want them to be partners with you. >> you absolutely have my commitment and you will probably hear in the next week or two secretary know has been working aggressively to be the first one coming out with us. some pretty major initiatives,

sheriffs avenue, naturally had the opportunity to meet with us, and we are really looking forward to working with the state of florida. >> we talk a little bit about a records request. we've done this with both minority and chairman when we were in reverse roles last year through letters, and we finally sent subpoenas in january. our hope is that you will show these subpoenas to the career officials who we believe have been obstructing us, and let them know. there are repercussions for resisting a court order. i think you will be very helpful but i think you need to make sure that all of the people that are obeying the law and we look at that information to us, we are interested not only in all the dual use research that might bethere are certain things that probably should not be done. i give the example of ebola.

it spread like aides through bodily contact and fluid. if you're seeing if you can get it to spread to the air, i don't think we should be finding that. when you to look at the research to make sure people had to make things like that. you want to re-create the spanish flu? there are things we should not be doing. that we can do but probably should not be doing. we went to meet with the scientists. like at the national bio defense analysis and countermeasures center. we would like to, not for public hearing but have the head of the agency or laboratory talk to us. be prepared to tell us about the different functions or dual use research in the things ago one. we know the government does a little bit of this to the executive branch. the nhs coordinates and send it to the office of science and technology policy. we have not been privy to any of it. this is not the atomic secrets.

this is not personal data. this is the deliberations. we should have a role. we are sending the money. i hope you will help us. i think you could actually assign somebody within your department that their job is to look for information concerning dangerous types of research. i don't think dhs was involved with funding the wuhan research. it was involved with nih primarily. state department had this, looking around and being inquisitive. another area we are interested in and have sent letters and will probably resend letters and mixer subpoenas -- and maybe subpoenas as necessary is the cisa. no more government officials showing up at publications and saying take this down. i think that was offensive to the first amendment. i wrote a lot about it the twitter files when elon musk had access to the private half. everybody in the twitter files

was talking to somebody in the government. i hope you will assign somebody to look at that, because if you have people in government discussing, conspiring, colluding to takedown politically protected speech such as cloth masks don't work, which i don't think they do and it's a disservice to tell people something works when it doesn't. even if you disagree, it is my opinion. it is a politically protected statement. we shouldn't have the government on the other side. i hope you will look at the other side of the twitter files and see that there are people working within government still. they say they are firing everybody. maybe we can find the people that don't appreciate the first minute. -- amendment. one final thing for mr. bishop on the impoundment versus rescission. i hope you will bring in constitutional scholars. there are a bunch of scholars. it is not particularly your job

but they will look at that. we really want to send the message to the public we are actually going to cut spending. i'm already predicting the public is going to be disappointed in september. what is going to happen is everyday we have the news of firings and savings, but the deficit is still going to be $2 trillion. we have not structurally done something. people will say it is hard. congress is not good at their job. all that is true. yes, we have to try. we are in the majority. you sending us back money we say we are no longer going to spend, sending it back to treasury with a simple majority vote. we have simple majority in both houses. we are really trying and the administration should lobby us and those that are equivocal on this unless know how important it is to the country. many are saying -- many over here are saying you were doing it improperly into legal. will they go to cut spending? not one of them will cut any spending.

we have to work hard of the majority -- almost all of us will vote. we have to get everyone to vote for rescission. i think you will have a window of it being a pause. i think the judges are overreaching that are trying to stop you from firing people or pausing things. all those are the realm. it is a jump to say you can find one liberal judge to try to stop stuff. decisions about -- between our power in the executive power will work its way up to the supreme court. i appreciate both of your willingness to serve and we will conclude it there unless you have -- my questions were pretty general. i wanted to give you some advice . i know know you wanted some advice. we appreciate your willingness to serve. ok.

the nominees have filed responses to biographical and financial questionnaires, answered prehearing questions submitted by the committee, had financial statements reviewed. without objection, this information will be made part of the hearing record with the exception of the financial data which are on file with the committee. the hearing will remain open until 5:00 p.m. today for submission of statements and questions for the record. with that, the hearing is adjourned. [crowd talking. which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [crowd talking] --

[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] [crowd talking]