live coverage on c-span3.

>> amassing over $36 trillion in debt that our children and grandchildren one day inherit. in washington's the default mindset seems to be just write another check as though each new dollar of debt somehow doesn't matter. in the last four years we have added nearly $6 billion a day or $241 million per hour to our national deficit for running total of 8.5 trillion in the last four years. the unchecked and reckless spending spree in washington over the last four years has put every american family on the hook for another $67,000 in debt. yet despite this, agencies 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administration along with the new department of government efficiency has been hard at work identify waste, fraud and outdated programs.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

but certainly look forward to looking into the issue and communicating with you about that and making sure information is readily available. >> in 2019, some of those agencies refused to provide opm with data. will you ensure all agencies are responsive to opm about information on taxpayer-funded union time? >> it is important congress receive the information it needs and there's a deliberative process i work with. omb, certainly want, subject to advice of counsel, the director of omb, to provide it. >> is there something we can do to make sure agencies are appropriately reviewing taxpayer-funded union time payments? >> can't make a specific commitment on that because the deliberative processes to follow but certainly it is an issue that needs to be front and center and we will look at

it hard. >> assuming your confirmation i hope we work together on this issue. it is a big one for our taxpayers. the time i have left, politicians and bureaucrats in washington seem to be a lot more upset the doge is finding waste, fraud, and abuse than about the nonsense that we have funded in the first place. you can hear all of 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 but there are 50 federal agencies right now that are not reporting there spending on usaspending.gov accounting for $5 billion each year. so congressman bishop, every american can be one of our doge deputies across the united states but they actually need

omb's help to do that. will you require all agencies to provide timely, accurate and complete reporting of their spending? >> i can tell you with the scope of usa spending and the items not on there is something i've learned a great deal about since being nominated and the research is a significant issue to me. i will be paying close attention to what should i be confirmed. >> thank you. my time is expired but thank you. we've got a lot of issues here and i look forward to working with both of you on these issues. thank you. >> thanks for being here. congressman bishop, we were neighbors for a short time in longworth when we were both members of congress. separate from eating good office mates, i am concerned about the view that you and director vought and the

president have expressed on the executive branch and the president having the unilateral ability to spend federal dollars despite what congress appropriates. and i will skip the ironing of a congressman who ran for office and was involved in appropriating dollars and voting on those things for years and years, now seemingly willing to give up that authority. it is a fundamental principle of the constitution, the supreme court starting in 1975 has said is the constitution says, this body which republicans now control both houses of, appropriates the dollars and the federal government spends them accordingly. is this has been reiterated by the courts. can you tell us your position as deputy director of omb do you believe donald trump has the ability to spend appropriated dollars in different ways and appropriated?

>> donald trump has run on the issue of impoundment and there will be a process in the administration, decision-making involving lawyers. i will not be serving as deputy director in a legal capacity but folks will be looking at legal issues you described. >> i understand lawyers but your personal view. be open with it. vought was very open about it. do you believe this chairman appropriates dollars that are voted on by this senate that you and donald trump have a ability to spend those dollars in different ways than your republican chairman has appropriated. >> i support the views donald trump and director vought conducted. >> mister vought owned it you should just own it. 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 you have

the right? >> the president made clear -- >> it is not -- >> you are speaking to hypotheticals. i would say i don't think -- >> it is not a hypothetical. every michigander i talked to is worried about you cutting their social security benefits, their medicare benefits, their veterans benefits, the post office. i was just up in very red conservative upper peninsula of michigan now the only democrat there, and they are happy, there are people who are perfectly happy with cuts that are going on but they are desperately worried that you are going to cut their social security, medicare, veterans benefits and the postal service, and despite everyone saying they are not going to touch it, you know the big cuts you are calling for, in these programs. >> i do not believe that the president can stop social security benefits being paid. i don't think so. >> you don't think he can pull

money out of social security, medicare, veterans benefits and the postal service some? >> i don't. the reason i said he's not going to is that if you what he has consistently declared. i don't think it is an issue. >> if you look behind the numbers and you're looking for $6 trillion, you've been open about it which i appreciate, $6 trillion doesn't come from a million here and a million there but from cutting big programs. despite what everyone says here, you are working, you proudly support this ideas that you can move money even though it has been appropriated for certain reason. i don't think any american, red, could be, purple should trust that these programs they have worked their entire life for our safe if you believe you can do anything you want. >> there are distinct and to be made. to the point you suggested, hypocrisy about serving in congress, harry truman exercised impoundment power to cancel a squadron of bombers

that he had vetoed and these things have happened across history i presidents. >> i feel very strongly it is not about red america or blue america, i am from a purple state. people watched this chaotic coding, let's be fair. you fire people and higher than the next week, that is an discriminant. that is acknowledging you made a mistake, that's not some review that's normal private sector companies would do. a don't know a damn private sector companies that would fire someone on friday at higher them back on monday because what's they made a mistake but let's be honest that this approach is scaring the crap out of people on the benefits they've worked as their entire life or and i'm out of time. >> probably we should try to criticize some of the fear mongering. to my knowledge no one in the trump administration has advocated taking social security money and using it for another purpose so that the hypothetical that is not only untrue but it is promoting fear.

we should be telling everyone in america no one is asking for that. there are some debatable points, nobody is advocating it for the post office either, plus the post office has no money, they are 9. 5 billion in the whole every year now but there are real questions. the other side has called these illegal funding freezes. i don't think pausing spending for a month is what we've had so far will be interpreted even as impoundment. there is a debate when something is impounded, to the end of fiscal year you haven't spend money, it's going to be classified by anybody as impoundment. it will be a legal discussion in this is a separation of powers issue. it is an important one. i actually voted against repurposed thing money for the wall last time because i thought it was congressional perspective so i share some of the concerns but i think it is

unfair to leap to conclusions that this is illegal or this is being done and democracy is in turmoil in the world is going to end. when they stop the money flowing at usaid they found $2 million for sex changes in guatemala. the other side wants to stand up and argue that is really wrong, we are going to stop $2 million for sex changes in guatemala, they can but instead they just say everything is illegal and elon is terrible at elon has all this data and elon wasn't elected, these gentlemen weren't elected either, their bosses won't be elected, trump was elected. is appointing them. nobody's administration is elected other than for president, they are all appointed but there's a question when you elect a president, should they get to execute their policy, did reelected changeovers there is some sort of bureaucracy if it is so huge and dinner that we can to move it and that is what many of us have complained about. some, the deep state, the other

side says they are all conniving, the deep state is essentially the bureaucracy that 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 funds on girl centric climate change in brazil, $30,000 on a trans operate in colombia, $25,000 on a trans comic book in peru, 660,000 on micro aggressions among obese latin x. most don't even know what that means. most are hispanic are offended by the whole thing whatever it is supposed to mean. all these racial sort of things and sort of left-wing sort of causes, we can debate that whether we should keep spending

money but we wouldn't know it had elon musk not stopped things, we wouldn't know what is being spent so i for one thing scrutiny is good but i'm not a blank check. i've told both of the nominees today and i told russell vought, the money being impounded, i'm probably going to be saying send it back on but congress vote on it. it's also a way of making permanence. i love the stuff he's finding, the waste, i wanted to be permanent. i want it to have real value and we get that through rescission. it can be done through simple majority. my guess is the minority party while squawking about elon looking at their social security numbers, they are probably not any of them interested in cutting the $2 million for sex changes in guatemala, that will be part of a rescission package and my guess is it won't be anybody who will vote for rescission. if we give them one billion dollars for an aircraft carrier they can do it for 800 million,

and do a rescission package. giving it back to the taxpayer when we have a $2 trillion deficit, let's fill up a whole over $2 trillion deficit and then talk about sending some back to the people but it is premature to send that money back or to say it is saved until we have a spending bill. next in line we have senator va go --villego. >> concerns from numerous law enforcement officials including elected republican sheriffs about the deep strain these ambitious operations have on their resources and ability to keep criminals off their streets weather here legally or not and department across the country are already operating on a tight budget and facing personnel shortages trying to get new cops to come in.

can you commit dhs will not deputize state and local law enforcement and personnel the ability to combat violent crime, the concern is they don't mind if dhs says there is this criminal, whatever cartel member, could you come help us? they are fine with that because that helps but what they are not fine with is being deputized and made to do every day deportation for people that are nonviolent offenders or overstayed visas or things of that nature. in terms of fiscal dollars in time they don't have time for that nor do they want to engage in that. that's what these police officers and sheriffs are not engaged in that day-to-day stuff the federal government should be focused on. >> first of all the program you're talking about, 2807g which would deputize state and

local law enforcement officials is voluntary. the sheriffs organization, different county sheriff sign up for that. and largely, they are in the prisons so that way there's ice checks and ice will come and do that, that doesn't put strain on the police because the person is already in custody. what they are worried about is a program where they have to actively be doing street enforcement of immigration and that is what they don't want to do, they don't have the money. may even have the will but don't have the money in time to do it. >> part of the process, went with the major sheriffs of america and national sheriffs association and talk about this issue. we are at mixed purposes here. the president's perspective and stephen miller who helps us coordinate across law enforcement and across the government, 287 g and the

relationships with the sheriff are important. what you're you are talking about his discretion early whether it is in prisons or jails, but if you start to look at whether we are looking at 300,000 lost children in america, that partnership will be critical and important not only with immigration but helping locate and find 300,000. >> they are worried they are going to be deputize to go after a local offender, they don't want to go into farmers to look for undocumented migrant workers, it's not worth their time or the public citizens money to do that if you want to go after these hard-core criminals, that's where there's alignment with the arizona citizen, to go after the rapists or horrible people. when you're going after the guy who's been here for 10 years and has kids in the united states. into the same vein, a lot of fear about question about our

students in schools being questioned about their status or family status. give us a commitment we are not going to turn our schools, principals, teachers, into deputized ice officers by asking status of these students under the age of 18. >> i don't see that being a situation. i see what donald trump put in place or executive order, to allow law enforcement to go to school and churches, i grew up in southern california, i grew up in an area that had a game problem and i would have welcomed, to make sure i was safe in my school and as my kids grow up to make sure they feel safe so -- >> this is why you should support local police officers which is why am for police officers in school but a lot of kids are good innocent kids, not all gang members are illegal in case you are wondering so being able for them to go to school and receive services, learn. a lot will eventually become

citizens one way or the other legally and by making a place it is not safe to go you will have kids skipping school which we are already seeing all over this country where kids are skipping school, even some that are here legally that were born in the united states because they are afraid they will be followed home by ice and their parents will be taken away. i am concerned about our schools not being in a safe zone for kids, not drug dealers or anything like that but actually kids. >> mister bishop, good to see you, we serve four years to gather. if confirmed you will serve alongside director vought who said he wants federal employees to be traumatized and we have seen that. i'm hearing horrible stories especially from veterans i serve within the iraq war, they do feel traumatized, they have served their country, they are trump supporters, they have been doing different types of work for the government, some have been laid off so mission

accomplished along that route. can you explain the thinking behind targeting people dedicated to serving their country? how can we trust that you will have the best interests of the american people at heart when the stated goal is to traumatize the people who provide often life-saving services to the public and my concern for some of these veterans is they are not going to come back and work, we will not be able to recruit these veterans to work the federal government when we need to have more support? >> one of the things that's interesting is federal workers say in the surveys they have frustrations that low performers can't be moved out. they see problems in their own workplace as a result of the way the bureaucracy operates. this quote director vought talked about, putting workers in trauma, it is taken out of

context and i watched the way he works with folks at omb. he has the greatest regard for the professionals at omb who are really stellar. change is difficult. there's going to need to be changed to the federal government. we can all look at it and see the $36 trillion of debt, spending that $2 trillion a year going in the wrong direction, it has to be dealt with that is going to require change to the federal government including federal employee situations but i disavow and don't believe the idea as many said that it is indiscriminate or designed to harm anybody. it is designed to put the federal government back on the side of the american people. >> when you are firing employees -- it clearly is indiscriminate. senator scott. >> congratulations to both of you for your nominations. i know you will both do an outstanding job.

what success, what do you want to get done? >> i define success in supporting donald trump, he ran the agenda of the seal border and to make sure interior enforcement, we deport over a million people and as chief operating officer i think there's two things, be able to execute that agenda but also 22 other components within dhs that have missions that need to be executed and we to make sure we are responsible whether it is the coast guard, the secret service, tsa, et cetera, we need to walk and chew gum so my opportunity will allow us to make sure we get the most for the taxpayers money for the amount they are paying here. >> what would you like to accomplish? >> i think you would say to implement donald 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 out-of-control spending under control, to begin making headway on the massive debt we otherwise will be handing to our children and grandchildren and 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 stagnants vote we both experienced in our service in congress where we know we've got to solve these problems but something, nothing ever seems to happen, donald trump means to make it happen and omb is going to be a critical tool in seeing to it that it does. >> congressman bishop you are a staunch supporter of getting rid of wasteful spending, you think we can balance the budget? >> it can be balanced, when and under what circumstances and how that comes out is the president's decision, not mine. my priorities don't way in this balance.

i certainly think, i know that we can bring the federal leviathan under control so that the american taxpayer can afford it again. >> if you spent much time with regard to fema? i can tell you fema wasted billions of dollars. there was no logic to it and they are involved in so many things that was never anticipated they would be involved in so how would you try to fix fema? they are wonderful people. my experience, i dealt mostly with the southeast with fema, wonderful people but they are involved in so many things that don't make sense. >> the president came out and said what his first directives is we need to rethink fema and when you start taking a look at that a couple different mechanisms, the funding process, i started my public service, corporate guy in local

government, and if you talk with secretary christine noem she knows how it is related at the state level and she would tell you she was here. a lot of the success done by local governments and what ends up happening is fema gets in the way of the process, they don't know the priorities and that is what the president sees. it will require legislative fix. i look forward to not only working on one side of the aisle but both sides, look at it very systematically, look what was given to fema in 2002 and evaluate the best way. i would love to work with you to do that. >> inflation is out of control. how much of that is tied to wasteful spending? >> i think what americans are seeing now revealed every day frankly unfortunately to the

consternation of some is there is jaw-dropping waste in the federal government. i think what you did as governor of florida, you sat down, took your budget, went through it at great pain line by line and began moving to solve it and the fiscal results you achieve it, we can do the same thing in the federal government and what donald trump has demonstrated in the first several weeks in office, with the help of doghe is there's action on multiple fronts all at the same time. there's going to be significant change. i think americans are enthusiastic to see someone finally take hold of it the way you did when you were governor of florida. >> i look forward to voting for your confirmation. >> senator hassan. >> thanks,ing welcome to both

of you and congratulations on your nomination. i want to start with a question to both of you. 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? >> i would follow donald trump because i know he is advised that is doing a lawful job. i would follow the president. >> that is disappointing because no one is above the law in the united states and your obligation and the oath you will take is to the constitution and the law, not to donald trump. mister bishop? >> i'm confident donald trump will issue lawful orders. it would not be up to me as serving in a nonlawyer capacity to decide what is lawful or not lawful. >> excuse me. if you are advised by a lawyer in your agency that it is against the law or clearly against the constitution as some of the things donald trump has already done in his term and in his last term where i would expect you to follow the

law and your unwillingness to say that, other members of the administration who i voted for have come forward and said we will follow the law so disappointing. if a court issues an order requiring the department of homeland security or the office of management and budget to take or refrain from taking specific actions will you follow the court order? >> yes. >> yes. >> that is great. >> and i will turn to another question now. this is to you, congressman bishop. last month the president unilaterally cut off nearly all federal grants before 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. a small rural hospital, it applied for the grant, it got it, it was a contract with the

federal government and while the funding cut was in effect, this hospital was stuck with a $300,000 outstanding bill that was do to contractors and the job was halfway done. so if you are confirmed, what will you do to ensure federal grants are reinstated and omb and the trump administration follow the law? >> i will follow deliberative process and its outcome and omb and in that case there was the memo random of the said some items that were implicated by the president's exec in order were paused and what you are describing i don't think was. there was a media reaction. >> it wasn't as the media reaction. 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 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 impounding funds. that was before the impoundment control act was passed in the 1970s, an act that was deemed constitutional by the supreme court of the united states. what previous presidents did the empowerment control act is one thing but if you're going to control the law, you follow the impoundment control act and it is highly disappointing to hear you do this sleight-of-hand, previous presidents have done it as if it is if the law was never passed. i want you to understand the freezes have real impact, they are not hypotheticals and they are impacts on money that not only was appropriated by this body, article 1, congress of the united states, but signed into law by a president of the united states. mister edgar. i will follow-up on fema. fema is responsible for coordinating the federal response to disasters and recently fired hundreds of employees. reporting suggests the 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 am concerned that these inches, not firings done in a really sloppy manner will harm of the ability of fema to do its job. mister edgar, can you explain how these firings will do anything other than destabilize an agency that the american people rely upon when disasters strike? >> my current role, i am senior advisor, i didn't make the decisions to fire people in fema, i will continue to work with fema and make sure we get an operational posture that will be successful to carry out the mission to the american people. >> we stop and does cabinet firings? >> i will go through and see what the data is we are looking at, what our objectives are, what i would do in any situation whether in federal government or the corporate world. >> to a couple others points which i'm a former governor, i worked with fema closely and i have had this discussion with the secretary whose nomination

i supported. it is really important to understand, when you say local government to do, i have 200 through 4 towns in new hampshire, some are fewer than a thousand people, they don't have the staff or the budget to handle major disasters. it is going to be really important that you are all talking about rightsizing fema and making sure it can do its work that the investments in resilience continue so we don't have the same natural disasters impacting the same infrastructure over and over again and it is going to be important to have people on the ground who can do the mission working hand in hand as they do with local government 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 work with fema come to us with concrete plans and actually do some analysis before you start firing people because it is destabilizing and it is going to take -- it's going to be hard for the agency to recover. know what is going to want to work there.

>> senator hawley. >> thank you very much. congressman bishop, mister edgar, congratulations on your nomination, thanks for being here. let me start with you. the agency you are going to be the deputy director of and i believe you will be confirmed, look forward to supporting your confirmation is a key agency that includes among its many components a very key component of the office of information and regulatory affairs, that mouthful does a lot as you know. it reviews every agency regulation, provides recommendations, does cost-benefit analysis, every agency regulations that comes through the federal government, that office is a key note in the federal government for assessing regulations. with that in mind i want to ask you some questions i also asked director vought that i think are important. for those of us who are pro-life serving in an

administration that is avowedly pro-life on title x, this is the grant program that currently provides money under the biden administration for abortion providers. i talk to director vought about this and rfk about it, rfk committed he would end title x funding for abortion providers. let there be a rule that is necessary for that. my question to you is will you be an advocate within omb for saying rfk's commitment which is the president's commitment is carried through, we stop title x funding for abortion providers? >> my role as deputy director's temperament the president's policy, not my own but certainly i have taken note of what you articulated on the subject, it has been the source of discussion and so there's a deliberative process that it would be inappropriate of me to get ahead of or foretell or

forecast the result of but thank you for articulating it, it is something i will take back. >> this is very important, i don't think this is in doubt, the hhs secretary now confirmed and sitting has set under oath that he will overturn the current rule, put back in place donald trump's will in title x funding, he said he does not support title x funding going to abortion providers so another way to ask this question is do you support the president's policy articulated again by his current hhs secretary the title x funding should not flow to abortion providers? >> the purpose of omb and my purpose as deputy directors to implement the president's policy. >> let me ask about the hyde amendment, will you work to ensure that all federal agencies fully comply with the hyde amendment which is statutory law and has been since 1977? >> omb does play a role in

ensuring consistency in observing law across federal agencies and certainly is an issue we will give attention to. >> that includes the hyde amendment which is in place and has been governing law since 1977. >> it is. >> the weldon amendment permits does, nation against healthcare providers who have a conscience objection to abortion, the last administration ignored it. it is the law. in your post addition, you review these regulations and advise on implantation of the law will you advise every component of the government to comply with the law? >> it will be my purpose as deputy director of omb to comply with the law and see to it other agencies do so to the extent of my response ability. >> that includes the weldon amendment. >> yes, that's part of the law. >> it is part of the law. the last administration seem to forget this.

when it comes to pregnancy resource, pregnancy care center, providing many cases completely care, and unexpected presidency, everything from health screening, diapers, baby food, consultation, often completely free conducted an incredible effort to attempt to persecute, the president and his first administration, to do that again, if you look at these grants, would you be an advocate for the president's policies allowing federal funding to flow to pregnancy care centers? >> i will be an advocate and i would say one advantage my service in congress alongside you and working with you on some things provides, i did witness the evidence you are

describing about the official posture, neglect, hostility toward pregnancy resource centers in the past administration and carry that experience with me in the role i seek to be confirmed. >> to put a fine point and that you know these statistics as well as i do and the next administration after the dobbs decision hundreds of pregnancy care centers were vandalized, firebombed, the subject of collectively. the last administration abused federal statutes to 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 be firebombed. it is outrageous. denying grants for which they qualified under federal law. your experience will be important. i look forward to you being a strong advocate. my time has expired and i always adhere to my time limits.

some questions for the record for you and a few more for you. i look forward to supporting your nomination. >> i am four weeks in and don't know which way to go. >> didn't know which way to go. >> what we need to accomplish to get this country on the right track and a lot of it because i served in the free state of florida and saw the ramifications of the policy choices of the last administration and how it affected the stability and safety in our communities. i'm glad to be with you today, a chance to speak about your upcoming duties and i don't have a ton of questions for you. i know you very well. we both thought he would be in a different position as attorney general in north carolina.

you're going to do a great job and as i can attest god has a way of -- >> i am thankful for it. >> congratulations on your nomination. i would like to turn my attention to mr. edgar. when i first was attorney general in florida and president biden got in office one of the first things he did was rescind the long-standing practice of democratic and republican administrations of deporting serious felony offenders that were here illegally committing crimes back to their countries of origin. that was never something argued. in the first month and they said we won't do that anymore. issued different directives to law enforcement, started canceling detainers sheriffs were using to hold people who committed felonies but were in our country illegally and needed to go back so you can

imagine the outcry from law enforcement when those detainers were being canceled by the biden administration was one of the first things i did was sue on that practice. that was one of the most dangerous things they could have done. one of the things that put our citizens at risk. it was not necessary. what they started doing was taking prisoners in federal prisons that were brought here from other countries are picked up in the middle of the ocean for federal prosecution and put in our prisons because they were prosecuted here only, sending them back to places they were prosecuted within the united states and releasing them, their only connection to the united states was they were prosecuted. those practices have to stop immediately. many of those groups and organizations will be under your purview. we had time to talk about this. do i have your commitment to go

back, much information to see who was being released into the state of florida because they weren't telling us. do i have your commitment to look at both of those practices and make sure state and local law enforcement can detain or be deported and those federal prisoners are deported to their country? >> donald trump came out of the chute very hot with not only making sure all of the law enforcement we focus on is trying to get this back on track but also started through diplomatic relationships through state to get countries to receive those migrants back into the country and, folks. to get those folks out of the country, almost a nonstop method. a significant part of the process, to get 1 million people deported.

>> to correct course. digging down through the directives, guidance memos. all the things that were done to make sure, all those relationships and agreements, everything the president is doing can be promoted and crossed out by what you are doing, truly awful things you do, getting people known to commit crimes against our citizens out of here as fast as possible that has to be our number one priority and in that vein the 280 g program, one of my prior colleagues ventured that they don't want to do that or be part of it. do i have your commitment to look into additional funding for salary training, equipment, for those agencies that either want to cooperate with you or maybe in states like florida where we have supported them statutory early, we want them

to be partners. >> you have my commitment and you will hear in the next week or two, secretary noem has been working on a pretty major initiative and have an opportunity to meet with secretary and staff and looking forward to working with the state of florida. >> we talked a little about our records request, we've done these both with minority and the chairman when we were in reversed roles last year to letters, then finally sent subpoenas in january. my hope is you will show the subpoenas to the career officials who have been obstructing us and let them know there are repercussions for resisting a court order. you will be very helpful but you need to make sure the bureaucracy is obeying the law. we are interested not only in

all the dual use research that could be gain of function or might be dangerous, classified or unclassified. we need to look at it. there are certain things that shouldn't be done. i give the example of ebola, it spread like aids through bodily contact and fluids. if you're doing an experiment to see if you can get it to spread through the air i don't think we should be funding that, too dangerous and we need to look at that research to make sure people are not doing things like that, we want to re-create the spanish flu, there are things we probably shouldn't be doing that we can do now but we probably shouldn't be doing. we also want to meet with the scientists, the national bio defense analysis and countermeasures center, not for a public hearing, the head of that agency or laboratory to talk to us. be prepared to tell us about all the different gain of function or dual use research, things that go on.

we know the government does a little bit, the nih coordinated and sent it to the office of science and technology policy. this is not the atomic secrets, not personal data. this is the deliberation over this, we should have a role, you can assign somebody in the department that their job is to look for information concerning dangerous type of research. it was coming out of nih primarily, the state department had some of this, looking around. another area we are interested in and we sent letters and subpoenas if necessary, i am pleased you announced you won't do it, no more government

officials showing up, take this down. they wrote a lot about it in twitter files, when elon musk gave access to the private half. everyone in twitter files was talking to someone in the government, i hope you will assign someone to look at that because if you have people in government discussing, to take down politically protected speech like cloth masks don't work which i don't think they do. it is a disservice to tell people something works if it doesn't work and it is an opinion, a politically protected statement, shouldn't have the government on the other side. there are people working within government still, they are firing everybody, maybe we could get rid of people who don't respect to the first amendment.

one final thing from mr. bishop on the impoundment, i hope you will bring constitutional scholars, it is not your job but the omb will look at that. we really want to send the message that we are going to cut spending, i predict the public will be disappointed come september. every day we have the news of firings and savings. we haven't structurally done something. people say it is hard. congress isn't good at their job. in the majority and research and, sending back money you say we won't spend, simple majority vote. simple majorities, we got to try, the administration should lobby us and get those who are equal on this.

many of them are saying and many over here are saying here's doing it improperly, will they vote to cut spending? not one will vote to cut spending through research and, almost all of us will vote. it is an important d debate. d bait. i think for a couple months, it is not an impoundment and the judges are overreaching, trying to stop you from firing people, within the realm and it's a jump to say they are ill legal, you can find one judge to stop stuff, ultimately decisions between our power and the executive power probably are going to work to the supreme court. appreciate both your willingness to serve, i wanted to give you some advice.

appreciate your willingness to serve. the nominees have filed responses to biographical and financial questionnaires, they have their financial statements reviewed by the office of government ethics. 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. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> here's a look at what is

coming up live today on c-span at 10 am eastern, the house will begin work on several measures incdi resolution to overturn the biden administration's policy on methe ste emissions for oil and gas producers. then on c-span2 at 10 am the senate will be holding a nfirmation vote on donald ump's pick to be us trade representative, jamison greer. on c-span 3 at 10:00 am supreme court oral arguments in a case in wch heterosexual woman algeher employer just committed against her because ofer sexual orientation and sex. following the argument, we join a house oversight committee hearing on the department of government efficiency, foreign aid d ter bring you a senate banking subcommittee hearing on digital aetwhich include crypto currencies. you can watch live coverage of these events on the c-span now apps or online, c-span.org. >> saturdays, watch american history tv's 10 week series 1st 100 da.