particular reason. i'll be happy to get back with you on that. >> thank you. go says you can use it as authorized by law. if you could look at it and get back to the committee the other thing is i know that because of the uj et, there's -- the budget doesn't ask for any new customs border protection officers. as you know, when you go down to the border, they're going to hit you again or tao you about long lines and not having enough. at the same time, we're opening up new ports of entry. the local folks are saying there's not enough customs border protection. i've always said we've done a good job with men and women in green but we need the men and women in blue. especially also since you're also cutting cbp over time by $20 million, how are we goipg to handle that -- that -- those lines that we have. i think that's an issue that

would be brought up to you when you go down there to the border. >> yes, in fact, that's one of the reasons i'm going back to the border is to talk with people who lived there about problems that they see. you know, problem with the lines is -- is two-fold. the overtime pay issue, the congress dealt with that last year by allowing us to use the leap system among other things. that will enable us, i think, to better manage the overtime situation, keep that under control better. secondly, we have in the budget, the president has annualized additional port officers that were put in in fy 12. those are being hired and tra trained now. so there should be relief in that direction as well. >> we'll be happy to work with

you especially i thank you all do a $9.1 million decrease in planned facilities management sustainment at the ports of entry. i think i got more bridges than any other congressman in the country. bridges are very important to me. i will look forward to working with you and work at alternatives. the private sector and local governments are willing to do that. to do a bridge is one perfect example where they want to step up and to that. want to put in some of the local income. finally, the last thing on overtime. there was a report that came out, an analysis that shows in the last six years we had $1.4 million in daily overtime by cbp. especially now that we have the lowest border crossings in the last 40 years, i want to see -- and i can understand.

i understand the whole argument. you never know whep to have to travel from one part. but it also included your 250 agents are assigned at the border patrol headquarters where they made overtime. i can understand porder ta troll at the border. to have 250 agents border patrol in washington, d.c. and to tay them overtime is something i just don't understand. i my time is almost up. i would like to follow that. i've been trying to get that information. i think members of congress want to see those border patrol at the border instead of having them rack up millions of dollars of overtime at headquarters. >> representative, i share that concern with the number of agents as 250. something i've begun talking about with the commissioner.

i will say, however, it makes sense to have border patrol agents get some headquarters rotation so they really get an appreciation of how the system works and what's going on. particularly those that are moving up the ladder. >> right. i'm in full afwreemt. but 250, i think we can work with you and we wapt to work with you. again, thank you for the good job you've doing. i know it's a difficult job, thank you and i look forward working with you. >> you bet. >> the gentleman's time has expired miss novavak, author of the bill. >> i've got a great staff. they were essential in completing that -- >> no one doubts that. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you, madam secretary, for being here today. the president's budget cut the flight deck program from $20 million down to $12.5 million. this is an approximate 50% decrease. this program comprised of

volunteers who ultimately pay more out of their pockets than it actually costs for them to be an ffdo, to protect our nation. in fact, to provide the protection for each flight deck officer, for each ffdo flight, costs the nation $15. that's how effective -- efficient the federal flight deck program is. i have to believe that is probably one of the most cost effective programs in the united states government. these guys basically volunteer their time and money to be a vital deterrent to our country. quite frankly, they're the last line of defense when it comes to air piracy for flying. my question for you would be, what would you -- what prompt -- did you make this cut? did it come from the president? where did it come from? >> the reduction for the federal flight deck officer program is predicated on the fact the

program the not risk based. you will have an ftdo whether somebody is on the flight or not. we are moving in the tsa to risk based systems. those are the ones that we're going to put money into. >> i fully agree with risk based system. but i also fully believe a $15 federal flight deck officer has the last line of defense on an aircraft is absolutely essential. would you aur gree that the federal flight tech officer would be the last line of defense on an aircraft. >> there are many layers of defense. >> yes, ma'am. >> before people eve p gn get t ticket. one of the thing is continue to emphasize is the check point at the gate which has caused some concern is only one of other many layers. so there's a lot of things. the ffdos have been useful. that's true. i don't know about the $15 figure. but it is a program as we look around the universe of things that we want to do in the

aviation environment, like i said before, given we have to find places to -- to cut, that was one of them. because it's not risk based that was put on the table. >> yes, ma'am. i fully understand risk based. again, i'll ask you the question. is a federal flight deck officer the last line of defense for our traveling public? >> i think the armed cockpit door probably is. >> speaking as a 17-year pilot, man, and also as a federal flight deck officer, i know about the cockpit door. and i will tell you, ma'am, speaking from the position i've flown as a pilot and also a federal flight deck officer, you may think the flight deck door is the last line of defense, but it's that armed pilot in the cockpit that will be the last line of defense. thank you for your comments,

though. is your intention that this program be phased out? >> i think as the budget request shows, it's our intention to reduce it, yes. but not -- we have not predicted its demise. we just think that we can do it with less. >> let me expound upon that. what kind of message do you think it sends to pilots willing to join this program on their own dime, take personal vacation days off at work, pay for their own lodging to train for the privilege and the honor of protecting their fellow citizens? how do you think it's going to affect that program? >> representative, obviously in a difficult budget, we had to make difficult decisions, and this was one. >> again, ma'am, going for the last line of defense for the most efficient program, i think probably that you have. in protecting the traveling public i would strongly encourage you to re-evaluate that position. also, it's come to my attention relatively recently in line with the president's budget request

norad has proposed two 24-hour air space control sights to loout and langley to be eliminated. the 148 bulldogs out of duluth were just chosen to be an active association, actually. where tactive duty combines with the air national guard there. now they're pulling a vital mission from these two fighter wings. how is this going to affect you in responding to threats? after 9/11 these goouys were flying 24/7. it's not only they protect the northern united states. they deploy in a lot of places. i see my time has expired. can you comment on that quickly? >> right. there are several other similar type things around particularly the northern border. but they have in -- in the analysis has been done is that those operations can be covered from a consolidated center

elsewhere. >> okay. thank you, mr. chairman, i'll yield back. >> the gentle lady from new york, ms. clark, is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. we forgot to add mr. turner to our discussion about upstate, downstate new york. mr. turner is also from new york city and one of our newest members here. let me say, madam secretary, that first of all there's no doubt in my mind and i think the mind of most new yorkers that your commitment to partnership and collaboration with our local law enforcement has been extraordinary, and we are truly, truly grely grateful for that. and we've had an opportunity through unfortunately from having been the number one terrorist target in the nation to have those partnerships

strengthened over time and built up certain capabilities that most emunicipalities would have no reason to, most of all. but out of necessity we've had to. i wanted to raise a couple of issues with you. and having the highest regard and respect for local law enforcement in the city of new york, whether, in fact, there is a point where the department of homeland security looks at -- looks at the implementation of various policies in the city of new york and its impact on the municipality. whether, in fact, dollars that we have provided for homeland security have been overreaching in terms of its usage, and what its impact is on the local municipali

municipality. why am i raising this? >> t i'm raising this because there have been a number of practices that have been highlighted most recently in our zealousness to apprehend the -- whether it's the lone actor or anyone who has been radicalized that may be in the population. and that has extended itself into the lives of average, everyday new yorkers who just don't fit any profile under any circumstances. or clearly they may. there's individuals whose mouths are now open to surveillance. where individuals sit there just to observe whether, in fact, there is terrorist sendtendencii suppose. we've even seen videos produced that have high ranking officers of our city and utilized in the training of -- of our police

officers that talk about the third jihadist. there have been some thinks that i think have just gone askew. and i'm just wondering what role it is in the partnership, in the collaboration, that we have the conversation about civil liberties and civil rights. and i hope that me raising this with you today is an indicator to you that there needs to be some discussions. there need to be some very serious discussions. we're new yorkers. a town of diversity. and to the extent where our police department has become so empowered that civil liberties become something that is secondary, then our nation is beginning to decline. i just wanted to share that with you and hope that you will look into that, madam secretary. but my -- my final -- my question, actually, is that when you testified between -- before this committee at the beginning

of this congress, you testified that the threat level was at the most heightened state since 9/11. your testimony was often quoted by members of this committee as a basis for many hearings on radicalization and recruitment within the muslim community. a recent report says concerns about a potential wave of home-grown terrorism have not materialized over the past two years and terrorist incidence by those within the muslim community have declined. i want to know, do we remain in that same posture at this stage given what we know, given all the intelligence that has been gathered and expertise? and are we still at the most heightened threat since 9/11? >> i think we live, representative, in a very

volatile world in a number of respects. as i said in my opening statement, we're dealing with evolving threats. they change all the time. they can be from al qaeda, al qaeda-related groups, islamic groups. terrorism is not limited by national boundaries and it's not limited to any one particular ideology. that requires us who are in the prevention business to really be looking at it in a number of ways in order to maximize our ability to minimize risk within -- and along with and incorporating the important protections that our nation has under the constitution. the bill of rights apd other statutes such as privacy act. so we want to make sure we incorporate those principles into how we do our work.

but we to live right now in a very volatile world. >> thank you. recognize the gentleman from illinois for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me yield to you for as much time as you'd like. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. i'd like to state for the record that general petraeus testified last week that the independent inspector general of the cia did a full investigation and found the relationship between the nypd and cia to be entirely legal and for the nypd to have acted lawful in every instance involving the cia. with that i yield back. >> madam secretary, thanks for being here today. we've seen a wide range of reports from the gao as well as a recent report from the house of inspection and infrastructure committee identifying hundreds of millions of dollars in annual

waist and insishtsys at tsa. yet in your proposed budget, you're seeking to triple the $2.50 passing your security tax to ultimately $7ul generate, i $25 billion over the next ten years. the president's budget also proposes a $100 user fee for every single time an airplane takes off. it seems to be costing more and more for americans to fly, which affects all sectors of our economy. right now government taxes make up around 20% of an airline ticket. so $61 on a typical $300 domestic round trip ticket. that's more than any other item out there right now being taxed, cigarette liquor, firearms, all are taxed less.

we seem to be reaching a point where especially in the difficult economic times we're in right now where we're singling out the airlines and airline customerseven discourag. how do you that with -- with the need for security? >> well, you have to do both. travel, trade, tourism are importantom values to keep this economy moving, to propel the recovery and the like. so war travel and trade and maintain a security posture, particularly in the aviation world wherees remain ao can substantiate target. so we're doing it a couple of ways. one way is as we move to a more risk-based approach, expanding the kind of trusted traveler type programs, global entry for international travel, it's

called tsa precheck that we are going to be expanding to the 28 largest airports in the united states over the course of the year. o'hare being among them. so -- and as we do that, that in a us to increase green passengers before they get to the airport. so they go in a separate line and we can processing and takes pressure off of the other -- other parts of the line for others. as we go on in the months andco intention to be able to do more and more in that direction. we're going carefully and slowly because we don't have room for mistakes. but our pilot projects in this area have been very productive. >> i've heard numerous concerns from folks the industry and just airline customers in general concerned with the -- the exorbitant taxes on flying these days.

quickly, with my remaining quickly, when and how are you looking at the other aspect of the equation, the millions of potential wastes and inefficiency right now, identified within tsa? >> well, as i said earlier, we've already identified department-wide $850 million worth of administrative efficiencies we believe we can take that money, redeploy it into operational activity and that's along with a $3 billion worth that we have found already. we are constantly looking for ways that we can meet our obligaon more cheaply. so any avenue we have of doing that, we listen to our employees, they have ideas, sometimes the customer base, they have ideas. we have nooo ideas. so if people have them, we will

listen. >> thank you. i yield back. >> the gentleman from new york is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and secretary napolitano for being here. in my home community of buffalo, one is beyond the borders action plan announced by the president and prime minir of canada which sets forth one preinspection pilot project for commercial vehicles across the united states. that's a very important border crossing for commerce, for our shared communities in the united states and canada, and i just wanted to urge you in the strongest possible terms to consider the peace bridge for that project. it's very important. the other issue is the urban security -- urban area security program. in fy-2011, your department

removed 32 high-risk urban areas, including buffalo, new york. and these communities didn't choose to be on that program. they met a criteria that indicated that the unique circumstances of those communities posed a considerable threat. therefore, were given the resources to work a collaborative way for other law enforcement agencies to protect these urban areas. you have a new program, the allocation for sustainment of capabilities in high-risk areas. and i would ask that those 32 communities be considered for that funding as well. the unique situation with respect to buffalo is that -- well, it's buffalo. but also toronto is in close proximity, niagara falls a destination for eight million people from all over the world.

the cleanest, cheapest electricity in all of new york state, all of which becomes high-impact targets for potential terrorism. i think it's very, very important that the department consider allowing these communities the resources they need to sustain the capabilities that they've established under this program. i just want to echo something that the chairman had made reference to and that's the threat of hezbollah. hezbollah is a group committed to violent she haud and they have a presence that's pervasive and growing in latin america. they also have a presence in at least 15 american cities and for major cities and working with the fbi and intelligence

community hezbollah's presence in the western hemisphere and in north america is really limited to fundraising activity. i don't much see the distinction. i think that presence is a very severe threat and i think it needs to be addressed. so any comments that you may have? >> well, as i indicated to the chairman, i believe we are constantly monitoring hezbollah as -- and we are in touch with working with the fbi and we have provided intel where appropriate and we're also conducting a lot of outreach to targeted community and we're right there with you with respect to the peace bridge. we are working with canada on

the identification of staff to do the preinspection pilots. i think we envisioned and the decisions have been reached. >> finally, i want to soib ate myself with the prospective comments with my client in asking to replace the outdated border patrol station with a new facility at the niagara falls air reserve station. i'm sure my colleague is going to talk about that later on. but the two centers of joined for a lot of reasons. thank you. i yield back.

>> with that, the gentleman from the subcommittee is recognized. >> thank you, chairman and madam secretary. i want to thank you in advance for your agency tomorrow will be preparing an ib inquiry into the social media. i'm grateful for the work that you've already done in helping us to work with that. i want to take a moment and follow up on some issues that mr. mccall raised and it comes back and i'm involved in looking at some of the issue with the fast and furious. he testified today that fast and furious was an atf operation. what does that mean with respect to the cooperation or coordination with dhs? >> i think just as it says, this was an atf-led and organized

operation. and that's where it is. >> well, that's where it is but i know from your experience as the united states attorney you understand the significance of what that means, a multi-agency case. we've established the testimony in other committees and that implies -- not implies but requires that there be collaboration among other agencies. fast and fewer yos has been identified as that kind of case. for the participation of your agents on osadef cases? >> well, if you're asking is there a reporting requirement that any participation in any matter at the ultimate field level has to be reported all the way up to and including washington headquarters, no.

there's way too much action for that to be feasible or wise. if you are asking how our interagency issues are handled within the context, my understanding is, as is yours, there is a lead agency that is running the operation. in this instance, it was the atf. >> but there is a lead agency but there is participation. to what extent with respect to what your agency intends to do and participation? >> again, i don't know what you mean by participation, we have agents who are out out working on matters and should never be

repeated. >> that is an operation that included the participation. do you know who lane france is? >> i do not. >> lane france was an i.c.e agent and a co-case agent. >> i did not know this was a fast and furious hearing. >> mr. mccall opened the door. i didn't come to get into it. >> right. because i think we are not running gun walking cases with unsupervised deliveries and the policy to do so, we have reemphasized those policies. we don't want that kind of thing happening. >> do you know if there was a report from a co-case agent on this case up the chain with respect to the anticipated