force structure. and so when i -- i look at things that we're doing, i worry about what it is that we can do to, from your department, and from others. what can we do to help these communities? state budget cuts that cause newark, camden and other cities in new jersey to cut their police force at alarming rates. a third of the police force in camden. over 100 terminations of police officers in newark. in december i wrote asking if you would provide federal resources, could provide federal resource to assist our ailing cities, and i am pleased, general, to see an increase in the budget for cops' grants. is the department of justice planning other steps that we can use to help protect new jersey

from violent crime? >> we're certainly making sure in terms of cops grants to do the best that we can there. i think we have a substantial amount of money in the budget. i note that, for instance -- i just spoke to the mayor of camden, i was at a reception. we certainly with regard to camden in 2011 made available moneys to hire 14 officers,s 3ds.79 million. 2010, 19 officers, $4.2 million. and we'll be looking at that kind of unique situation again this year. we certainly are putting into new jersey and in other places task forces so the dea, acf, fbi are helping to the extent that we can, as well. there are a variety of ways in which the federal government can help, given the economic situation that many cities around the country are facing, and we want to be good partners in that way, but camden is a place that i think is, deserves

special attention given the unique problem that we see there. >> can i ask, ask your view on whether or not you think we're doing enough between your department, fbi, our state and local police -- police people. we are doing enough based on what we see with the statistics? do you think that we're doing enough to say honestly that we're protecting our people appropriately? >> well, i think that we are -- you know, we have prime rates that are historic lows. 40 and 50 year lows yet i'm still troubled by the number of police office, for instance, killed in the line of duty in the last two years. 16%, 20% increase there and that i think is something we have to work on. i'm concerned about the fact although the numbers of murders are down, 67% of them occur by

people who are using firearms. that's an issue we have to deal with. too many of the wrong people have access to guns and use them in inappropriate ways. and the tart targets of many oe people are law enforcement officers, sworn to protect us and we have to do everything that we can to try to protect them. >> well, the wrong people, or wrong laws. the men who shot congresswoman giffords last year used a gun with a high capacity ammunition clip to kill six people, wound 13, was only when he fired all 31 rounds from his clip that people were able to subdue him. and these high-capacity magazine was banned by congress until 2004. last year you said that you thought reinstating this ban should be examined. what's the result of that examination? >> well, we are still in the process of working our way through that. i mean, i think there are measures that we need to take. we need to be reasonable,

understanding that there is a second amendment right with regard to firearms, but even the dissent in the case indicates reasonable restrictions can be placed on the use of weapons, and i think what this administration has tried to do is to come up with ways in which we are respecting, respecters of the second amendment and yet come up with reasonable, appropriate firearms laws that will ultimately protect the american people. >> madam chairman, your indulgence for one more question, please. over the past several years, the new york police department has been engaged in surveillance of new jersey's communities and universities. searching for those who might accused of terror. governor christie, yusnewark ma booker, how can law enforcement

agencies spy on another state's residents without notifying the authorities jt governor, the maybe even knowing about it? >> i don't know. we are in the process of reviewing the letters that have come in expressing concerns about those matters, they're various components within the justice component that are actively looking at these matters. i talked to governor christie and he expressed to me concerns he had, now publicly expressed his concerns as only he can, and i think at least what i've read publicly, and, again, just what i've read in newspapers, is disturbing, and these are things that are under review at the justice department. >> thank you, general holder. thank you, madam chairman. i assume the record will be kept open? >> the record will be kept open for questions, and we then ask the department to respond within

30 days. senators may submit additional questions. we ask the department to respond within 30 days. before i recess the committee, i want to conclude the hearing the way i began. as i listened to the question, the answers, we looked at the budget in the short time that we had to review, i'm going to end the hearing the way i began. which is to thank the men and women who work at the justice department. i've been on this subcommittee a long time. it's been a great blessing and a great honor, and when i think about it, the way the scope and complexity of what our citizens and our country face and what our justice department faces, it's an amazing job. from community safety to national safety, just the, in the last decade, the expansion and the national security portfolio, and the transformation of agencies, the

fbi is not, you know, your j. edgar hoover's fbi anymore, you're not. so for everybody who works. everybody who's out on the street. everybody's tracking sexual predictors, everybody who's doing their jobs, the prison guards and all the wonderful support staff. the paralegals, the secretarial staff, the admin staff, et set virginia. we ju ra. we just want to say thank you. i think our country is safer because of your work and we have to look out for our civil service, because we need an independent judiciary. we need a justice department that functions with absolute integrity, but we who fund the appropriations need to know that if you're going to have a crackerjack civil service, we have to also support that crackerjack civil service. so thank you, and god bless you, and god bless america. the subcommittee stands in

recess until march 15th, next thursday, at 10:00. we will take the testimony of the director of the fbi, and both open and then ultimately classified hearing. the committee is in recess. >> thank you, madam chair. >> thank you. may the force be with you.

later today here on c-span3, the senator indian affairs committee looks how the president's proposed 2013 budget will affect indian tribes. we'll hear from the assistant interior secretary foreindian affairs the heads of the indian health service and bureau for endian education and a cherokee chief and other organizations of tribal organizations getting under way at 2:15 live eastern here on c-span3. not fighting and dying because they're al qaeda, not fighting and dying and sacrif e

sacrificing their lives because their muslim extremists. they're fighting and dying because they want the same universal rights and freedom that we guaranteed in our constitution. >> i think if we don't get the international community together in a coalition of the willing soon we're going to look back and say we not only didn't do the right thing morally to stop innocence from being killed we missed an extraordinary strategic opportunity. >> i want to make the point that the concerns that senator mccain and you and others have expressed are exactly the concerns of the administration. we're not divided here, and we are not holding back. this administration has led in iraq, we've led in fc afghanistan, we've led in the war on terrorism and led in libya and are leading in syria. we are working with those elements to try to bring them together. if the agreement is we ought not to go in simply unilaterally then we have to build a

multilateral coalition. we've got to be able to work at that. it's not that easy. to deal with some of the concerns that have been out there. watch this week's hearings and news conferences whenever you want online at the c-span video library. search events from today, from this year and earlier. with over a quarter century of american politics and public affairs on your computer at c-span.org/videolibrary. the obama administration's 2013 budget request for fema is $10 billion. that's a 6% reduction over the current year. fema administrator craig hue gait testified before a house operations subcommittee yesterday.

>> good morning. today we welcome the administrator of the federal emergency agency fema, to discuss his agency's budget request for fy 13. after the conclusion of discussion with administrator fugate we convene an additional panel of stakeholder organizations. i'm going to make a brief opening statement in order to allow more time for members to ask questions, and to proceed with our second panel as well. administrator fugate, first of all, thank you for the work that you do and the hundreds of personnel who were deployed in my home state of alabama last april and beyond, and after the devastating tornadoes that impacted us. they are still there helping our communities pick up the pieces today and we very much appreciate all the work that fema and your agency has done. as recently as this past weekend, we again saw devastation that was brought by severe weather and once again

looked to fema to help as needed. we thank you that the folks are on the ground and for all their hard work. before we begin, i will touch briefly on several issues which we'll discuss at length later in the hearing. with respect to disaster funding, we want to know, will the disaster relief fund are solvent through the remainder of this year and the next, and will fema complete all recovery projects for disasters that happened last year before the end of fy 13? a grant reform. we want to know how will grant reform work and how will fema allocate funding under the new framework? will you provide funding to high-risk urban areas, port authority's and transit agencies as you have in the past, or will it be provided solely to states for distribution? further per more, if allegations are dependent upon a state's threat and risk assessment, will you provide data on the process that you announce over a year ago. these questions and others must

be answered as you're proposal is considered. and as you continue to engage congress on this matter i strongly encourage you to reach out to the states and the local stakeholders that will be impacted by these proposed changes. mr. fugate, these are some issues which you're very familiar. you have seen these issues from the local, state and now federal level. i look forward to your thoughts and your, on these issues and problems, and what progress you have made in the last year as well as the challenges that remain. i'll -- as your written testimony will be placed in the record, i would ask to check five minutes or so, summarize it for the committee, but before i begin that i would like to call upon the ranking member, mr. price, for his opening comments. >> thank you, mr. chairman. administrator fugate, i'm glad to welcome you back to our subcommittee today. the work that the federal emergency management agency does is critical to helping our country prepare for and mitigate against and recover from disasters.

in 2011 alone we had 99 major disasters. so that's a hefty job, and one you've performed admirably. when you arrived at fema the agency was in a rebuilding mode trying to recover not just lost capacity, but the lost confidence of the american people. your lewd adership brought us f circle. the contrast between the nearly universal acclaim fema received in the wake of hurricane irene and the heartbreaking images of americans left stranded in the wake of hurricane katrina could not be more striking. this confirms that much of the lost capacity we witnessed following hurricane katrina has been rebuilt. i commend you for these efforts. at the same time, fema was spread thinly, responding to a record number of spring disasters, and your agency was and is facing significant financial challenges. your chief financial officer should be complicaemented to closing out disasters and better track expenditures to keep the

disaster relief fund in the black throughout the end of fiscal 2011. as we both know, this was touch and go. right up until the end. hopefully with the new disaster funding mechanism congress passed as part of the budget control act we will now have more long-term stability to fund critical disaster relief needs. principally, we're here today to discuss your 2013 budget. the request for fema is $10.2 billion of which sides 6.1 billion is for the disaster relief fund. that request is 5% less than 2012, largely reflecting a $1 billion reduction in the disaster relief fund based on your reduced estimate of catastrophic and non-catastrophic needs for 2013. within your budget request i'm pleased to note significant increases for fema grants. albeit against a base significantly reduced in the last two years. this funding is tied to a significant resorgs organizatio the state and local program. your national preparedness grant

proposal raised many questions as to how it will work, how you will award funds to maintain core capabilities nationwide while also bolsters and who may. today i hope you'll be able to provide more clarity on how you envision this block grant to work if approved. also worries me that your request substantially reduces funding for the emergency food and shelter program. we all know that flooding is the most frequent and costly natural hazard in the united states. and it eliminates funding for predisaster mitigation efforts even when this program continues to receive far more requests for funding and mayor torous requests than has been

appropriated. so, mr. chairman, i hope we can work together to address these problems as we develop our 2013 funding recommendations and i want to thank you for your service to our country. i look forward to a productive discussion today and to continuing to work together to build a more resilient nation. thank you. >> thank you, mr. price. i look forward to your comments. and, again, thank you for being here. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. and ranking member price. first -- this year i think is the fourth time i presented the budget for fema. and based upon the work done and the budget stabilization act, we're requesting the funding for the drf based upon what we estimate our total costs will be including the previous catastrophic disasters as well as the activity that we would expect in fy-13. the overall budget request again is a reduction.

part of that is reflected in what we have looked at is to reduce cost of the fy-13 response. that doesn't do much in that we see the costs expended in the last year for tornado and other large-scale disasters are those expenses that we have to expect will be paid out in this year and therefore, there will be further reductions. so we're pro rating this out based upon what we expect permanent work to continue in these open catastrophic disasters as well as factoring in the cost for the response that's we would expect. the caveat is there may be requirements for additional funds. this is based upon the known universe of open disasters and the expected reoccurring work load that we would see in a typical year. so those are rather significant milestones in that area. the other part of our budget does show reductions including reductions in our base budget which is actually reflected more

in the efficiencies that we've been striving to achieve. we've had to make decisions about programs to reduce or eliminate. we took an approach that said rather than taking percentage cuts across all programs, when you look at those programs that would either be eliminated and entirely or significantly reduced while keeping other programs funded to accomplish their mission. and this will result in some people saying that their programs got cut. but an scam example in predisas mitigation, we currently have a backlog of $174 million in open projects that are still yet to be completed. that does not count the dollar that's are out there in mitigation on disasters in section 404 which is also rather significant investment in mitigation. so it was not an easy choice to make. but in looking at those areas that we felt that we had the need to make reductions, given

that much of the activities are still moving forward on that backlog as well as the dollars that are out there, we made that recommendation. as far as the consolidation grants, mr. chairman, i'm not going to spend a lot of time here. we want to do this as q&a, we are recommending an increase in that from last year. what we are looking at consolidating the grants and looking at more flexibility. i think we are trying to move a program that oftentimes was put into various identified areas of funding that didn't always necessarily coordinate well or look at what was the needs as the nation? and the president is issuing some presidential decision directive, a national preparedness in establishing a goal. we're looking at how do you fund not just jurisdiction by jurisdiction in the threats they face but how do we build capability to serve the nation? how do we build capability that is a shared responsibility all levels of government to respond

to catastrophic incidents? and we've seen examples in the recent tornadoes this year and last year that much of that response was contributed to by previous investments in homeland security that meant that teams were available closer to their neighbors that could respond to their mutual aid. urban search and rescue teams, communication vehicles, incident manage am teams that previously had to come from the federal government or further away, both speeding up the response. so our strategy here is to change the dialogue from funding each jurisdiction based upon threats, each state based upon threats and going we recognize that. but how does that contribute to national capability? because we can look at various scenarios that will overwhelm even the best prepared state, the best prepared city. where is that help coming from? are we making investment strategies targeted towards national preparedness goals and those areas that are capabilities that we see as

necessary to be -- in a position to prevent or in the event something happens rapidly stabilize that event. and so by combining the grants and putting more emphasis on the outcomes and using threat-based and hazard-based recommendations to look at what capabilities we have and where gaps occur and the best strategy to fund that. it doesn't lend itself to each jurisdiction trying to determine this itself. we need to look at this more collectively. how do we build that capability among our shared resources and utilize the tools that state governments already have and many local jurisdictions participate in which is the emergency management assistance compact between states as well as in state mutual aid. so this change is really, you think, starting that dialogue of how we build against a national picture versus jurisdiction by jurisdiction. and in doing that, by consolidating the grants, putting more emphasis on the outcomes and the measures to

support those investment strategies, that would be more directed by national preparedness goal w that, mr. chairman, i'll stop. i know we have a lot of questions. i want to make sure we have the time as you requested. >> your budge has been mentioned, $6.1 billion for disasters including over $3 billion for the cost of zasters that already occurred. such as the tornadoes that struck my home state of alabama just this past april. i was thinking back a few minutes ago. little did we know a year ago when you were before this subcommittee and given your presentation that we would be in store for such a difficult year especially for many members on this subcommittee but members overall and the devastation that

would occur. so i didn't know what i'd see quite as much after that hearing. but we actually saw each other a good bit after that hearing and talked on the phone many times. but before we turn to the fy-13, are you sufficiently funded for fy-12 to complete the year without implementing funding restriction that's limit funding to immediate needs? >> mr. chairman, based upon what we know now, again, the caveat is always be future disasters, based upon our planned recoveries of about $1.2 billion and what we estimate will be expended in the previous disasters, we are still projecting to end the fiscal year on september 30th at approximately $200 million. now this again means that we have to still continue to be aggressive and close out all the zast che disasters which i got here in 2009 was impressed upon me. we had a lot of open disasters and not closing them out. since i've been here, we about

did $4.7 billion in recoveries from open disasters. we are projecting our budget $1.2 billion in recoveries this year from all the disasters. obviously, if we can find more, we will do that. the other thing we're doing is driving down the cost of response. in many case weerz finding that by using such techniques as uching visual presence, we're driving down the cost of the administration of the disaster. and all of these are pressures on the grant itself. so we look at and are holding our self accountable not only in the recoveries but reducing the cost of administering the disasters an finding ways we can perform the same level of performance with our state and local partners without the overhead we may have incurred previously. >> also included in the budget justification for fy-13 is an estimate for anticipated cost in the outyears for a catastrophic events which allows you t